Coming soon. 20+ of the board regulars will be submitting their poll weekly and the results will be posted here for debate and pontification. Bleedpurple from the WIAC board is coordinating and results will be posted on his blog (www.uwwfootball.blogspot.com) as well as here on the message boards.
The first D3 Top 25 Fan Poll is due to be released Thursday morning, October 21!
First poll is up, and I'll tell you, it was fun putting my ballot together.
The thing that sticks out to me is Linfield at #11. I had them, Pacific Lutheran, and Cal Lutheran much closer-together, and while I won't readily disclose where I put each unless other pollsters do the same, I think #11's a little high for a team that has a loss to a team lower in the top-25.
I was surprised at Wartburg, both in the D3football poll and especially this one.
D3 Top 25 Fan Poll
Team Pts
1. UW-Whitewater (16) 400
2. Mount Union 381
3. Wesley 361
4. St. Thomas 346
5. North Central 332
6. Mary Hardin-Baylor 328
7. Delaware Valley 262
8. Wittenberg 261
9. Hardin-Simmons 252
10. Ohio Northern 240
11. Linfield 218
12. Thomas More 216
13. Wartburg 213
14. Wheaton 187
15. Montclair St. 183
16. Trine 171
17. St. John Fisher 164
18. Bethel 136
19. Coe 123
20. Central 99
21. Pacific Lutheran 88
22. Hampden-Sydney 85
23. Cal Lutheran 46
24. Ursinas 36
25. Case Western Reserve 17
Also Receiving Votes:
Wabash (15), Franklin (12), Rowan (12), Willamette (12), Illinois Wesleyan (6), Cortland State (6), Augustana (5), Depauw (4)
Quote from: CardinalAlum on October 21, 2010, 09:25:38 AM
I was surprised at Wartburg, both in the D3football poll and especially this one.
I will say Wartburg slid up my ballot simply because I couldn't find anyone to put ahead of them. I have them at #17. My poll is pretty close to what is posted here. Only 2 teams are in my poll that did not end up in the top 25. I have Franklin and Wabash instead of Central and Cal Lutheran. The main outlier for me was I have Trine in my top ten. I think they get a bum rap for playing in the MIAA (which has been atrocious as a conference lateley) but I beleive they will breeze through that league and make some noise in the playoffs. I also have Bethel ranked higher in my poll (#10) than is listed here. I just can't justify much separation with St Thomas (my #6) and Bethel, which will sort itself out Saturday. My other outliers (albeit by only 3-4 spots) are Montclair St (I have them 3 spots higher at #12) and Thomas More (I have them at #15)
I had a hard time with Linfield. I had them lower but as I looked at them vs other teams they kept getting better. I look at week 1 games on the road differently and their loss to Cal Lutheran in week 1 (the first game for both teams) doesn't mean as much to me if they had the same loss later in the season. I think it is really tough to go on a long road trip to start the season against good competition. The only thing tougher is playing on the road in your first game against a team that has 1 game under their belt already.
Teams that didnt' make my ballot but were next in line were Central and Depauw.
This is a fun excercise. I went through the kickoff preview of each team and created a spreadsheet with everyones results, def and off rankings as well as schedule. I am sure I will learn more each week, particularly about those teams not in my region (north).
IMHO, once you get past #1, it's open for discussion. Mount is a clear #2 in most people's mind (but not mine) because of history. The last time they failed to reach the Semi-Finals was 1994 and even that year was a 34-33 loss on the road to the eventual champion (Albion). So it's really hard to place MTU anywhere except immediately behind Whitewater, but this isn't your normal, dominant Mount team yet.
They start sophomores at QB, TB and at the #2 WR position, and the defensive line rotation consists of 1 senior (who was a back-up last year), 4 sophomores and 2 freshmen. As a result they have been very inconsistent and not nearly as physical up front as we've been used to seeing the last decade. With Shorts' injury their one true difference maker is removed from the field and it shows. At this point in the season, I believe Mount is a really good team. Not great, just really good. Very capable of making a run to Salem if they play well and stay healthy, but hardly a lock to make the Stagg like they've been recently with Micheli & Kmic.
If there was ever a time for someone to beat Mount in the regional bracket, this is the year.
Quote from: HScoach on October 21, 2010, 11:11:36 AM
IMHO, once you get past #1, it's open for discussion. Mount is a clear #2 in most people's mind (but not mine) because of history. The last time they failed to reach the Semi-Finals was 1994 and even that year was a 34-33 loss on the road to the eventual champion (Albion). So it's really hard to place MTU anywhere except immediately behind Whitewater, but this isn't your normal, dominant Mount team yet.
They start sophomores at QB, TB and at the #2 WR position, and the defensive line rotation consists of 1 senior (who was a back-up last year), 4 sophomores and 2 freshmen. As a result they have been very inconsistent and not nearly as physical up front as we've been used to seeing the last decade. With Shorts' injury their one true difference maker is removed from the field and it shows. At this point in the season, I believe Mount is a really good team. Not great, just really good. Very capable of making a run to Salem if they play well and stay healthy, but hardly a lock to make the Stagg like they've been recently with Micheli & Kmic.
If there was ever a time for someone to beat Mount in the regional bracket, this is the year.
I would guess North Central/Wheaton to be the most likely candidates to step up to the challenge in Alliance, but there's still time to get the young Purple Raiders coached-up some more before we get to that point.
I agree about Trine, they look like a solid team this season. I put them at #12. Even though Linfield had that early loss, I still consider them one of the better teams in the country, I posted them at #8. they are a better team than Harden Simmon and D. Valley I believe.
I left Wabash out of the top 25...they lost to a very mediocre team two weeks ago. So I put Case Western at 25.
Quote from: 108Vincent on October 21, 2010, 11:44:37 AM
Quote from: HScoach on October 21, 2010, 11:11:36 AM
IMHO, once you get past #1, it's open for discussion. Mount is a clear #2 in most people's mind (but not mine) because of history. The last time they failed to reach the Semi-Finals was 1994 and even that year was a 34-33 loss on the road to the eventual champion (Albion). So it's really hard to place MTU anywhere except immediately behind Whitewater, but this isn't your normal, dominant Mount team yet.
They start sophomores at QB, TB and at the #2 WR position, and the defensive line rotation consists of 1 senior (who was a back-up last year), 4 sophomores and 2 freshmen. As a result they have been very inconsistent and not nearly as physical up front as we've been used to seeing the last decade. With Shorts' injury their one true difference maker is removed from the field and it shows. At this point in the season, I believe Mount is a really good team. Not great, just really good. Very capable of making a run to Salem if they play well and stay healthy, but hardly a lock to make the Stagg like they've been recently with Micheli & Kmic.
If there was ever a time for someone to beat Mount in the regional bracket, this is the year.
I would guess North Central/Wheaton to be the most likely candidates to step up to the challenge in Alliance, but there's still time to get the young Purple Raiders coached-up some more before we get to that point.
The only chance that they will lose in the region is if they end up in the North...no way they lose to anyone out east
Thanks HSC, subject to the ire of OAC poster's I'll admit I have Mt Union 3rd on my ballot behind Wesley. The reason is similar to the ones you cite but its much simpler for me. In their championship runs they have played dominant defense throughout the regular season and been very effective running the ball. I don't see them handling the LOS the same way they have in the past. Here is a run down of an interesting stat on Mt Union that I view as somewhat telling:
Yds per play average by Mt Union since 2001:
year off def National Champ
2010 6.7 3.9 ?
2009 7.1 3.5 UWW
2008 8.2 3.5 Mt Union
2007 7.5 2.8 UWW
2006 7.5 3.2 Mt Union
2005 7.2 3.5 Mt Union
2004 6.7 3.4 Linfield
2003 7.4 3.8 St Johns
2002 7.4 3.5 Mt Union
2001 7.2 3.5 Mt Union
Quote from: USee on October 21, 2010, 11:55:37 AM
Thanks HSC, subject to the ire of OAC poster's I'll admit I have Mt Union 3rd on my ballot behind Wesley. The reason is similar to the ones you cite but its much simpler for me. In their championship runs they have played dominant defense throughout the regular season and been very effective running the ball. I don't see them handling the LOS the same way they have in the past. Here is a run down of an interesting stat on Mt Union that I view as somewhat telling:
Yds per play average by Mt Union since 2001:
year off def National Champ
2010 6.7 3.9 ?
2009 7.1 3.5 UWW
2008 8.2 3.5 Mt Union
2007 7.5 2.8 UWW
2006 7.5 3.2 Mt Union
2005 7.2 3.5 Mt Union
2004 6.7 3.4 Linfield
2003 7.4 3.8 St Johns
2002 7.4 3.5 Mt Union
2001 7.2 3.5 Mt Union
Not sure if that means anything, b/c they also lost the championship game (2007) when they had the best defensive year (according to your chart), while their offense had their second best season since 2001.
No way UMU should be lower than two...they are closer to UWW than Wesley in my opinion.
Being dominant on offenes and defense doesn't guarantee you a National Championship but it gives you the opportunity to compete for one. I think what we know is that in 2005-2010 Mount was dominant but not the ONLY dominant team. They lost 2 championships to UWW teams most would consider their equal. Prior to 2005 they were a category of 1. What I see is that Mt Union doesn't average less than 7 yds per play offensively or give up more than 3.5 yds per play defensively very often.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 21, 2010, 09:51:26 AM
D3 Top 25 Fan Poll
Team Pts
1. UW-Whitewater (16) 400
2. Mount Union 381
3. Wesley 361
4. St. Thomas 346
5. North Central 332
6. Mary Hardin-Baylor 328
7. Delaware Valley 262
8. Wittenberg 261
9. Hardin-Simmons 252
10. Ohio Northern 240
11. Linfield 218
12. Thomas More 216
13. Wartburg 213
14. Wheaton 187
15. Montclair St. 183
16. Trine 171
17. St. John Fisher 164
18. Bethel 136
19. Coe 123
20. Central 99
21. Pacific Lutheran 88
22. Hampden-Sydney 85
23. Cal Lutheran 46
24. Ursinas 36
25. Case Western Reserve 17
Also Receiving Votes:
Wabash (15), Franklin (12), Rowan (12), Willamette (12), Illinois Wesleyan (6), Cortland State (6), Augustana (5), Depauw (4)
Due to the short week, we had 16 pollsters this week. With the other four ballots submitted next week, plus another weekend of data to draw from, there will likely be some shifts next week, maybe significant ones. What strikes me is the narrow margin between some of the ranks.
5. North Central 332
6. Mary Hardin-Baylor 328
7. Delaware Valley 262
8. Wittenberg 261
11. Linfield 218
12. Thomas More 216
13. Wartburg 213
14. Wheaton 187
15. Montclair St. 183
21. Pacific Lutheran 88
22. Hampden-Sydney 85
Team Pts
1. UW-Whitewater (16) 400
2. Mount Union 381
3. Wesley 361
4. St. Thomas 346
5. North Central 332
6. Mary Hardin-Baylor 328
7. Delaware Valley 262
8. Wittenberg 261
9. Hardin-Simmons 252
10. Ohio Northern 240
11. Linfield 218
12. Thomas More 216
13. Wartburg 213
14. Wheaton 187
15. Montclair St. 183
16. Trine 171
17. St. John Fisher 164
18. Bethel 136
19. Coe 123
20. Central 99
21. Pacific Lutheran 88
22. Hampden-Sydney 85
23. Cal Lutheran 46
24. Ursinas 36
25. Case Western Reserve 17
D3football.com poll
1 UW-Whitewater (23) 6-0 623 1
2 Mount Union (2) 6-0 602 2
3 Wesley 7-0 566 3
4 St. Thomas 7-0 548 4
5 Mary Hardin-Baylor 6-0 530 5
6 North Central (Ill.) 6-0 475 7
7 Wittenberg 7-0 438 8
8 Hardin-Simmons 6-1 401 10
9 Delaware Valley 5-1 358 12
10 Thomas More 6-0 352 11
11 Ohio Northern 5-1 345 13
12 Linfield 4-1 303 14
13 Wartburg 6-0 298 --
14 Montclair State 6-0 287 16
15 Trine 6-0 285 15
16 Coe 5-1 276 6
17 Wheaton (Ill.) 6-0 272 17
18 Central 6-1 233 9
19 St. John Fisher 7-0 215 18
20 Bethel 6-0 128 24
21 Hampden-Sydney 7-0 113 22
22 Pacific Lutheran 5-0 108 25
23 Cal Lutheran 4-1 95 21
24 Ursinus 6-0 39 --
25 Wabash 5-1 36 --
Dropped out: No. 19 Alfred, No. 20 Randolph-Macon, No. 23 Cortland State.
Others receiving votes: Case Western Reserve 35, DePauw 31, Rowan 29, Illinois Wesleyan 28, Franklin 17, Willamette 14, Springfield 12, Randolph-Macon 9, Alfred 8, Amherst 7, Cortland State 3, UW-Stevens Point 2, Williams 2, Baldwin-Wallace 1, Lycoming 1.
Let's see how the Raiders finish the year and what the numbers tell us. Assuming that the Raiders are a #1 seed with home field advantage, they will be tough to beat at home during the playoffs. Can it be done, yes, I would not bet against them.
A thought to consider, they are getting better. only giving up 5.6 pts per game since first game against UW-OSH, and the running game is back. Maybe it good that many do not expect to see them in championship game after all the great Mount teams. If they do not make this year, the have a ton returning for the next 2 years with all those sophomores now! :)
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 21, 2010, 12:17:00 PM
No way UMU should be lower than two...they are closer to UWW than Wesley in my opinion.
I wouldn't disagree with anybody that wanted to rank Wesley ahead of Mount Union based on what's been done in 2010. Wesley has a win over Delaware Valley and a roadie over Capital which are a pair of wins better than pretty much everybody else in D-III. If you wanted to lean on the "who have you played and who did you beat" philisophy of balloting, Wesley has a good case to be in the top two. BTW, that is the philosophy I used when ranking these teams, although I suspended my own rules for UWW and Mount Union because the rules just simply don't apply to them anymore. Until they lose to someone other than each other, they get the benefit of the doubt against every other team in the division.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 21, 2010, 01:49:18 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 21, 2010, 12:17:00 PM
No way UMU should be lower than two...they are closer to UWW than Wesley in my opinion.
I wouldn't disagree with anybody that wanted to rank Wesley ahead of Mount Union based on what's been done in 2010. Wesley has a win over Delaware Valley and a roadie over Capital which are a pair of wins better than pretty much everybody else in D-III. If you wanted to lean on the "who have you played and who did you beat" philisophy of balloting, Wesley has a good case to be in the top two. BTW, that is the philosophy I used when ranking these teams, although I suspended my own rules for UWW and Mount Union because the rules just simply don't apply to them anymore. Until they lose to someone other than each other, they get the benefit of the doubt against every other team in the division.
yea, you're right...those are some good points. Wesley has looked good this year, and against some solid opponents. It's just for some reason I can't see them beating Mount or UWW. In the two meetings against UWW over the past 5 years, Wesley hasn't come within 37 points of them. And against a QB-less UMU last year, they still lost by 3 scores. but then again...this is a new year, and that was the past.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 21, 2010, 11:46:47 AM
I agree about Trine, they look like a solid team this season. I put them at #12. Even though Linfield had that early loss, I still consider them one of the better teams in the country, I posted them at #8. they are a better team than Harden Simmon and D. Valley I believe.
I left Wabash out of the top 25...they lost to a very mediocre team two weeks ago. So I put Case Western at 25.
Quote from: CardinalAlum on October 21, 2010, 09:25:38 AM
I was surprised at Wartburg, both in the D3football poll and especially this one.
I can't speak for everyone, but strength in recent games (Wartburg vs Coe) and recent losses (or close calls) to unranked teams weighed heavily in my choices
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 21, 2010, 12:17:00 PM
Quote from: USee on October 21, 2010, 11:55:37 AM
Thanks HSC, subject to the ire of OAC poster's I'll admit I have Mt Union 3rd on my ballot behind Wesley. The reason is similar to the ones you cite but its much simpler for me. In their championship runs they have played dominant defense throughout the regular season and been very effective running the ball. I don't see them handling the LOS the same way they have in the past. Here is a run down of an interesting stat on Mt Union that I view as somewhat telling:
Yds per play average by Mt Union since 2001:
year off def National Champ
2010 6.7 3.9 ?
2009 7.1 3.5 UWW
2008 8.2 3.5 Mt Union
2007 7.5 2.8 UWW
2006 7.5 3.2 Mt Union
2005 7.2 3.5 Mt Union
2004 6.7 3.4 Linfield
2003 7.4 3.8 St Johns
2002 7.4 3.5 Mt Union
2001 7.2 3.5 Mt Union
Not sure if that means anything, b/c they also lost the championship game (2007) when they had the best defensive year (according to your chart), while their offense had their second best season since 2001.
No way UMU should be lower than two...they are closer to UWW than Wesley in my opinion.
I agree on Wesley as I have them 5th on my ballot. They weren't nearly as close to beating Mount last year as they think.
Usee will probably have a heart attack, but I have North Central #2. ;D
Quote from: HScoach on October 21, 2010, 03:31:04 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 21, 2010, 12:17:00 PM
Quote from: USee on October 21, 2010, 11:55:37 AM
Thanks HSC, subject to the ire of OAC poster's I'll admit I have Mt Union 3rd on my ballot behind Wesley. The reason is similar to the ones you cite but its much simpler for me. In their championship runs they have played dominant defense throughout the regular season and been very effective running the ball. I don't see them handling the LOS the same way they have in the past. Here is a run down of an interesting stat on Mt Union that I view as somewhat telling:
Yds per play average by Mt Union since 2001:
year off def National Champ
2010 6.7 3.9 ?
2009 7.1 3.5 UWW
2008 8.2 3.5 Mt Union
2007 7.5 2.8 UWW
2006 7.5 3.2 Mt Union
2005 7.2 3.5 Mt Union
2004 6.7 3.4 Linfield
2003 7.4 3.8 St Johns
2002 7.4 3.5 Mt Union
2001 7.2 3.5 Mt Union
Not sure if that means anything, b/c they also lost the championship game (2007) when they had the best defensive year (according to your chart), while their offense had their second best season since 2001.
No way UMU should be lower than two...they are closer to UWW than Wesley in my opinion.
I agree on Wesley as I have them 5th on my ballot. They weren't nearly as close to beating Mount last year as they think.
Usee will probably have a heart attack, but I have North Central #2. ;D
Where will you have NCC after my Titans shock the world on Saturday? ;D
(Actually, not even I am predicting that, though I'm taking the Titans against your spread. ;))
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 21, 2010, 01:49:18 PM
Wesley has a win over Delaware Valley and a roadie over Capital which are a pair of wins better than pretty much everybody else in D-III.
The win over Capital carries less weight than it would have over the last several years. Capital is 3-3 this year headed into the Mount Union game. They were fairly well dominated by #10 Ohio Northern 44-10, whereas Wesley didn't pull away from Capital until the last five minutes of the game. Also, the Del Val game was pretty tight. I'm not saying Wesley won't make another deep run in the playoffs, but #3 might be generous.
I saw Wesley play at UWW in their last meeting and they looked terrible. I remember wondering how they even made the tournament. But UWW does that to teams that visit the Perk sometimes.
I had NCC 4th on my ballot. #2 is generous because their offense is unproven against good competition and they havne't done well in the postseason IMO. I think they are very good up front on both sides of the ball and I think their defense is the real deal. We will see what they do against a good, balanced offense with a strong OLine. Right now I say they'll be favored in all of their remaining games but @Wheaton Nov 4 will tell us a bit. NCC has played extremely well against Wheaton the past 2 contests.
My initial reaction is that this is a cool endeavor, one that will give you guys a lot of insight into what it's like to do this week after week, but that your group of 16 produced a result not all that different from the official group of 25.
I'm not sure what it means, that the more people that vote, the more "righter" the result is, or that we're all victims of groupthink and influence each other into voting the same way.
Mount Union is the clear No. 2. I wouldn't say Wesley was completely outclassed when they played last year -- and I realize this is this year we're talking about -- and I realize this isn't your normal Mount Union team. But history has taught us that Mount Union teams get stronger as the year goes on, and I think they deserve to be the exeption to the re-evaluate-every-week rule until something drastic enough happens to show us they don't belong at No. 2.
That said, after this week, Wesley and MUC will have a common opponent, which is something we don't often have as a tool of comparison.
Also, the 2007 MUC team was definitely the most statistically dominant, and had it beaten UW-W, might have eclipsed 2002 or 1997(?) as the best MUC team ever. Probably another reason stats don't always tell the whole story. And also what made that UWW team one for the ages, because it had another team for the ages to beat.
I don't see what secret balloting accomplishes. I think you guys should list your 16 and openly discuss where you rank teams. That's basically the point, to generate further thinking/discussion, is it not?
K-Mack,
thanks for your comments. I agree with you (except the Mt Union part). I will certainly re-evaluate Mt Union after this weeks "common opponent". I am a toss up between Mt and Wesley at #2. In my opinion they haven't shown the dominance we have come to expect. That said, as they begin to do so I will respond.
I saw your ATN this week and your "overranked" list and meant to comment on the ATN board. On Trine, I think your arguement can be used the other way. THey may be under ranked because many are taking into account the atrocious performance of the MIAA in the non conference and post season. Trine has a good win at UWRF (I realize they are winless but that didn't hurt ONU and UWRF is likely the best winless team in the nation). I remember seeing them in the 2008 playoffs and they were the best team I saw that year. Their staff is putting it together and they haven't let up since then, accomplishing more in 2009 and I think their progression will continue in 2010.
I'm all for open ballots. I have freely thrown my picks out here for debate. I am just 1 guy and don't see all that many do so love to get the feedback. I should add that I tried very hard not to look at or recall the D3 top 25 while doing my ballot.
Quote from: K-Mack on October 21, 2010, 06:33:10 PM
My initial reaction is that this is a cool endeavor, one that will give you guys a lot of insight into what it's like to do this week after week, but that your group of 16 produced a result not all that different from the official group of 25.
I'm not sure what it means, that the more people that vote, the more "righter" the result is, or that we're all victims of groupthink and influence each other into voting the same way.
It's not too surprising to me that the two polls are pretty close to one another. The "fan" poll isn't comprised of coaches and SIDs and media, but we're all following the same teams and we all have access to essentially the same information. While different pockets of each polling group may process that data in different ways (some will take a "who could beat who on a neutral field" approach and eschew a lot of statistics, some will prefer statistics and actual results to the hypothetical...and either is right because this is, after all, an opinion poll), when you pile all of those ballots together, you'll probably wind up with similar results.
I will say that putting together the list was more difficult than I had imagined it would be...and I'm sure that I didn't do quite the same level of research that you or the other D3Football.com voters do. It is fun to do and I'm looking forward to seeing how the experience changes now that my "baseline" poll has been established.
And I'll post my top 25 when I get back to where I have it saved...at risk of getting totally skewered. :)
As promised...here's how I ranked the top 25 this week...
1 Whitewater
2 Mount Union
3 Wesley
4 UMHB
5 North Central
6 St. Thomas
7 Wartburg
8 Wheaton
9 Hampden-Sydney
10 St. John Fisher
11 Bethel
12 Montclair State
13 Delaware Valley
14 Hardiin-Simmons
15 Coe
16 Ohio Northern
17 Wittenberg
18 Trine
19 Pacific Lutheran
20 Cal Lutheran
21 Linfield
22 Thomas More
23 Ursinus
24 Central
25 Rowan
And for what it's worth...my next two were Cortland State and DePauw. I'm happy to field questions...later. Tonight I'm focused on watching the Giants try to get back to the World Series. :)
Will post mine later. Typing this from
my phone
I have to admit it was a time consuming and interesting exercise. I'm sure I agree that keeping the voters a secret isn't necessary since most of us have too big of ego's to "stay in the closet" . I'm not sure posting all our individual polls would be too smart either, cause then we get into second guessing everyone. I gave a lot of weight to strength of schedule and recent results, so I'm sure mine would ruffle some feathers. And yes there were some undefeated teams that got pushed down to 27 & 28.
Just so Wally doesn't feel like he's hanging in the wind here's my ballot this week...
1- UW-Whitewater
2- Mount Union
3- St. Thomas
4- Wesley
5- Mary Hardin Baylor
6- North Central
7- Hardin-Simmons
8- Delaware Valley
9- Wittenberg
10- Ohio Northern
11- Linfield
12- Wartburg
13- St. John Fisher
14- Thomas More
15- Coe
16- Wheaton
17- Central
18- Trine
19- Pac-Lutheran
20- Montclair St.
21- Bethel
22- Cal Lutheran
23- Ursinus
24- Hamden Sydney
25- Rowan
Bash away...
Quote from: seventiesraider on October 21, 2010, 07:37:04 PM
I have to admit it was a time consuming and interesting exercise. I'm sure I agree that keeping the voters a secret isn't necessary since most of us have too big of ego's to "stay in the closet" . I'm not sure posting all our individual polls would be too smart either, cause then we get into second guessing everyone. I gave a lot of weight to strength of schedule and recent results, so I'm sure mine would ruffle some feathers. And yes there were some undefeated teams that got pushed down to 27 & 28.
yeah I didn't think it was going to be this difficult to differentiate teams from conference to conference and then to take account head to head results, common opponents both in region and out of region, level of competition played and how impressive the victory was...
I have no fear. Here is mine.
1 UWW
2 Wesley
3 Mt Union
4 North Central
5 Wittenberg
6 St Thomas
7 Trine
8 Delaware Valley
9 UMHB
10 Bethel
11 Hardin Simmons
12 Montclair State
13 Ohio Northern
14 Linfield
15 Thomas More
16 St John Fisher
17 Wartburg
18 Wheaton
19 Franklin
20 Ursinus
21 Hampden Syd
22 Coe
23 Wabash
24 Pac Lutheran
25 Case Western
Quote from: K-Mack on October 21, 2010, 06:33:10 PM
My initial reaction is that this is a cool endeavor, one that will give you guys a lot of insight into what it's like to do this week after week, but that your group of 16 produced a result not all that different from the official group of 25.
I'm not sure what it means, that the more people that vote, the more "righter" the result is, or that we're all victims of groupthink and influence each other into voting the same way.
Mount Union is the clear No. 2. I wouldn't say Wesley was completely outclassed when they played last year -- and I realize this is this year we're talking about -- and I realize this isn't your normal Mount Union team. But history has taught us that Mount Union teams get stronger as the year goes on, and I think they deserve to be the exeption to the re-evaluate-every-week rule until something drastic enough happens to show us they don't belong at No. 2.
That said, after this week, Wesley and MUC will have a common opponent, which is something we don't often have as a tool of comparison.
Also, the 2007 MUC team was definitely the most statistically dominant, and had it beaten UW-W, might have eclipsed 2002 or 1997(?) as the best MUC team ever. Probably another reason stats don't always tell the whole story. And also what made that UWW team one for the ages, because it had another team for the ages to beat.
I don't see what secret balloting accomplishes. I think you guys should list your 16 and openly discuss where you rank teams. That's basically the point, to generate further thinking/discussion, is it not?
I've run the fan poll for basketball for its entire existence (4 years?) - I'm jealous that bleedpurple already has nearly twice the voters that I've ever managed! ;) (I almost signed up, but don't follow football nearly as obsessively as basketball - for much of the football season I'm still out in my RV! I'm available if you need another CCIW voter, bp.)
While bball fan poll voters do not routinely post their entire ballots, they have not been shy about revealing 'anomalous' votes (and defending them) - that IS indeed the whole point of the fan poll. :D
If any of you fball voters would like to join in on bball, I'd love to get it up to at least 15 voters a week. ;D
(And, yes, it is rare to have a team more than 2-3 positions different than the 'gold standard' d3hoops.com poll. We are all following the same stats and commentaries!)
Alright, bombs away:
Insert your own numbers:
University of Wisconsin Whitewater
University of Mount Union
North Central
Wesley
Saint Thomas
Mary Hardin Baylor
Ohio Northern
Saint John Fisher
Linfield
Delaware Valley
Hardin Simmons
Bethal
Wartburg
Willamette
Wheaton
Montclair
Pacific Lutheran
Cal Lute
Thomas More
Central
Augustana
Cortland St
Trine
Ursinus
Coe
Great Seventies, you just revealed where all 12 of Willamette's points came from! ;D
Quote from: seventiesraider on October 21, 2010, 07:37:04 PM
I have to admit it was a time consuming and interesting exercise.
I spend about 30 minutes a week on mine, unless it's a fairly straightforward nobody good played each other and/or lost week.
Each pollster was asked which conference he or she followed most closely. Here are the conferences represented among the ballots submitted this week:
WIAC
MIAC
CCIW
E-8
OAC
UAA
NCAC
NJAC
PAC
MIAA
Ranking all 25 is tough when there are large groups that are essentially the same. Not sure who came up with it first (Ryan Tipps??), but I think grouping teams by tiers is more accurate than a true ranking.
I never looked at the D3 poll when I did mine. Might not be the best opinion out there, but I bet it's the most usual with a Mount guy having the Raiders clear down at #4 ;D. I've added my reasoning so everyone can shoot holes in my list. Shoot away:
1. Whitewater - #1 by a wide margin
2. North Central - been impresses by their margins of victory
3. St. Thomas - solid team getting better each year
4. Mount Union - by week 12 or 13, Mount will probably be #2, but not yet.
5. Wesley - not overly impressed by them last year. Solid team, but not enough playmakers to push the big boys
6. Mary Hardin Baylor - good history and name recognition, but defense is worrisome
7. Ohio Northern - will be a tough out for anyone in the playoffs due to experience
8. Wartburg - impressive season so far for a historically average team
9. Linfield - assume early loss was an aberration
10. Wheaton - one of the few teams/coaches that LK fears having another good season
11. Central - last year's playoff run needs repeated to climb higher in my mind
12. Hardin Simmons - talented offensively, but defense is poor. Hard team to figure out.
13. Coe - solid
14. Delaware Valley - best of the east still not a threat. Where is Rowan of the 90's when you need them?
15. Thomas More - firmly entrenched into W&J's spot of being good, but not great
16. Bethel - could climb in a hurry if they keep winning
17. Montclair State - not sure what to think of MSU
18. Wittenberg - very surprising playoff run last year looks like a fluke. Struggling with some BAD teams
19. St John Fisher - impressive start, but still have to see more before I believe SJF is a true regional threat
20. Pacific Lutheran - #20 just felt right for someone I know nothing about
21. Hampden Sydney - see Pac Lutheran
22. Trine - not sold on Trine at all. I figure they're the '10 version of Mt St Joe?
23. Case Western Reserve - has improved over the years, but a LONG way away from being more than an afterthought in the North Region
24. Illinois Wesleyan - I give them a boost due to being competitive in the ultra-tough CCIW
25. Wabash - Probably could have went somewhere else, but the no one stands out this far down.
Quote from: K-Mack on October 21, 2010, 09:05:10 PM
Quote from: seventiesraider on October 21, 2010, 07:37:04 PM
I have to admit it was a time consuming and interesting exercise.
I spend about 30 minutes a week on mine, unless it's a fairly straightforward nobody good played each other and/or lost week.
Keith,
I'm sure the familiarity and knowledge base you have built up, being sure of the criteria you have developed in ranking, and staying current through all the work you have put in allows for great efficiency in putting together your poll.
I have a couple question for you. How much time do you put in mining "below the surface"? In other words, how much time do you look at numbers 26-40 (or whatever number is applicable)? Also, for your personal records, do you actually rank below the top 25 for your personal records? I would think it would be helpful to continue to deepen your analysis a bit in case Saturday is one of those "any given Saturdays".
Quote from: HScoach on October 21, 2010, 09:20:27 PM
Ranking all 25 is tough when there are large groups that are essentially the same. Not sure who came up with it first (Ryan Tipps??), but I think grouping teams by tiers is more accurate than a true ranking.
Gordon Mann talked about this concept during the playoffs last year, maybe the year before. He might have been the first.
Here's mine (thanks to bleedpurple for sending it back to me via PM when I forgot to save it in my outbox!)...
1) UW-Whitewater
2) Mount Union
3) Wesley
4) North Central
5) St. Thomas
6) Wittenberg
7) Thomas More
8) Mary Hardin-Baylor
9) Wartburg
10) Delaware Valley
11) Montclair State
12) Hardin-Simmons
13) Ohio Northern
14) Pacific Lutheran
15) St. John Fisher
16) Trine
17) Wheaton
18) Bethel
19) Hampden-Sydney
20) Cal Lutheran
21) Coe
22) Rowan
23) Central
24) Linfield
25) Ursinus
I'll readily admit I probably stiffed Linfield, but I feel like they've got something to prove this week, and if they lose to a very solid Pacific Lutheran team (who topped the Cal Lutheran team that BEAT them), they could conceivably be the third-best team in the conference.
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 21, 2010, 08:42:51 PM
Great Seventies, you just revealed where al 12 of Willamette's points came from! ;D
Or more importantly, totally skunked the NCAC and UAA.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 21, 2010, 09:29:48 PM
Quote from: HScoach on October 21, 2010, 09:20:27 PM
Ranking all 25 is tough when there are large groups that are essentially the same. Not sure who came up with it first (Ryan Tipps??), but I think grouping teams by tiers is more accurate than a true ranking.
Gordon Mann talked about this concept during the playoffs last year, maybe the year before. He might have been the first.
It was Gordon, but I think it was more than a year ago. I think it was a board post that we could probably search down.
Tiers probably are more functional/useful than a top 25 for our purposes, since the criteria were like legit championship threat (MUC)/elite team that will lose to a lower team once in a while (Linfield)/team that has good season every so often & maybe could win a playoff game.
My D3 poll:
UWW
Mount Union
Wesley (still not at the same level as UWW and Mount)
St. Thomas
North Central (i like the CCIW this year)
MHB
Wittenberg
Linfield (totally different team from their opening game)
Harden Simmons
D. Valley (never been high on teams from the East...sorry)
Thomas More
Trine
Ohio Northern
Wheaton (see North Central)
Wartburg
Montclair St.
Coe
Central
Bethel
St. John Fisher
Hampden-Sydney
Pacific Lutheran
Cal Lutheran
Ursinus
Case Western Reserve
For what it's worth...Wabash was 26th :-[
Quote from: seventiesraider on October 21, 2010, 09:59:46 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 21, 2010, 08:42:51 PM
Great Seventies, you just revealed where al 12 of Willamette's points came from! ;D
Or more importantly, totally skunked the NCAC and UAA.
If you're going to get all dramatic and completely drop Wittenburg out of the poll for "non-impressive wins" (I agree they aren't Top 10, but not Top 25?), shouldn't you have also dinged Mount Union significantly for struggling against the always pitiful Marietta?
Quote from: jam40jeff on October 22, 2010, 10:20:44 AM
Quote from: seventiesraider on October 21, 2010, 09:59:46 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 21, 2010, 08:42:51 PM
Great Seventies, you just revealed where al 12 of Willamette's points came from! ;D
Or more importantly, totally skunked the NCAC and UAA.
If you're going to get all dramatic and completely drop Wittenburg out of the poll for "non-impressive wins" (I agree they aren't Top 10, but not Top 25?), shouldn't you have also dinged Mount Union significantly for struggling against the always pitiful Marietta?
I can't argue with that because I think there are some in the top five that would give Mount a game, but at least I didn't use that to justify BW. Witt, Wabash and Case were all on the list in the beginning (no so B-W)but ended up in a group of seven that got pushed out of the list. At least you can't accuse me of including them because they are Ohio related
If you have a week or two I'll explain my numbers but please start by looking where Witt is in strength of schedule (Not that Mount is very high either). The inter conference games between Wooster-BW and Case Western and JCU while impressive at the time really now shine some light on things.
But I am totally guilty of using the old tyme method of placing 1 and 2
And I ranked Wittenberg about nine places lower than HSCoach, but still in the top 32
How I ranked 'em:
1. UW - Whitewater
2. Mt. Union
3. Wesley
4. North Central
5. St. Thomas
6. Mary Hardin - Baylor
7. Wartburg
8. Wheaton
9. Hardin - Simmons
10. St. John Fisher
11. Wittenberg
12. Delaware Valley
13. Ohio Northern
14. Montclair St.
15. Bethel
16. Linfield
17. Thomas More
18. Pacific Litheran
19. Hampden - Sydney
20. Central (IA)
21. Coe
22. Ursinus
23. Wabash
24. DePauw
25. Trine
I have been enduring Seventies posts for years on these boards. I am telling you I could have submitted his ballot for him based on his stated views on the various regions, conferences and teams over the years. It can't have anything to do with current reality. Remember, his name ain't seventies because he's young!! ;D ;D :-*
A few tabulation tidbits about the first Top 25 Fan Poll:
Fan Favorite: Wheaton College was the team with the most variance UPWARD as compared to the D3football.com poll. (14,17)
Over-rated? Coe was the team with the most variance DOWNWARD as compared to the D3football.come poll. (19,16)
Ballot Variance: Two Pollsters ranked Wittenberg at 5. One left them off the ballot entirely. St. John Fisher was listed as high as 6 on one ballot and was left off another.
Faker's Dozen: Although Thomas More was ranked 12th, no pollster actually ranked them 12th.
I find it interesting how many people had Central ranked ahead of Coe, despite beating them 37-28.
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 22, 2010, 08:06:22 PM
A few tabulation tidbits about the first Top 25 Fan Poll:
Fan Favorite: Wheaton College was the team with the most variance UPWARD as compared to the D3football.com poll. (14,17)
Over-rated? Coe was the team with the most variance DOWNWARD as compared to the D3football.come poll. (19,16)
Ballot Variance: Two Pollsters ranked Wittenberg at 5. One left them off the ballot entirely. St. John Fisher was listed as high as 6 on one ballot and was left off another.
Faker's Dozen: Although Thomas More was ranked 12th, no pollster actually ranked them 12th.
Fisher at 6???
WOW
Quote from: Upstate on October 22, 2010, 08:34:13 PM
Fisher at 6???
WOW
Peter Wolfe (http://prwolfe.bol.ucla.edu/cfootball/ratings.htm#Division_III) has SJF at #2 in D-III.
Dave Rothman (http://prwolfe.bol.ucla.edu/cfootball/rothman.txt) has them at #5.
Massey has them at 7.
My computer (which only takes results between two D-III's into account) has them at 3.
There's something the computers see there that not many humans do.
Quote from: Kohawk Krazy on October 22, 2010, 08:16:21 PM
I find it interesting how many people had Central ranked ahead of Coe, despite beating them 37-28.
Although Coe ranked a spot higher on the poll and by a pretty significant margin of 24 points.
Quote from: altor on October 22, 2010, 09:17:25 PM
Quote from: Upstate on October 22, 2010, 08:34:13 PM
Fisher at 6???
WOW
Peter Wolfe (http://prwolfe.bol.ucla.edu/cfootball/ratings.htm#Division_III) has SJF at #2 in D-III.
Dave Rothman (http://prwolfe.bol.ucla.edu/cfootball/rothman.txt) has them at #5.
Massey has them at 7.
My computer (which only takes results between two D-III's into account) has them at 3.
There's something the computers see there that not many humans do.
Or is there something football loving humans can see that computers cannot?? ;D
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 22, 2010, 09:25:32 PM
Or is there something football loving humans can see that computers cannot?? ;D
I don't mean to get into a human vs. computer debate. I've done it to death. Nobody gets convinced.
My point was that a vote for SJF at #6 was not entirely without substance. Your point must be that such a vote did not come from a football loving human?
Quote from: altor on October 22, 2010, 09:35:49 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 22, 2010, 09:25:32 PM
Or is there something football loving humans can see that computers cannot?? ;D
I don't mean to get into a human vs. computer debate. I've done it to death. Nobody gets convinced.
My point was that a vote for SJF at #6 was not entirely without substance. Your point must be that such a vote did not come from a football loving human?
I'm a SJF alum and I don't even think they're #6...
That's just me though...
Quote from: Upstate on October 22, 2010, 09:45:37 PM
Quote from: altor on October 22, 2010, 09:35:49 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 22, 2010, 09:25:32 PM
Or is there something football loving humans can see that computers cannot?? ;D
I don't mean to get into a human vs. computer debate. I've done it to death. Nobody gets convinced.
My point was that a vote for SJF at #6 was not entirely without substance. Your point must be that such a vote did not come from a football loving human?
I'm a SJF alum and I don't even think they're #6...
That's just me though...
SJF at #6?
It is very simple to explain...
East Coast Bias. ;) :D ;D
Well I'm a Wheaton alum and I don't think they are top 10 like many of my fellow pollsters. I had them at 18 and thought that may have been high. It always depends on your perspective. I have a high view of St John Fish but could only jusify them at 16. We will know a lot more in the next 3 weeks as they face Alfred and then 2 weeks later Springfield (who has been on my radar as well).
Quote from: USee on October 22, 2010, 09:51:41 PM
Well I'm a Wheaton alum and I don't think they are top 10 like many of my fellow pollsters. I had them at 18 and thought that may have been high. It always depends on your perspective. I have a high view of St John Fish but could only jusify them at 16. We will know a lot more in the next 3 weeks as they face Alfred and then 2 weeks later Springfield (who has been on my radar as well).
Eh, Springfield doesn't do anything for me. They're a one trick pony that SJF has solved. It's Alfred that scares the crap out of me tomorrow...
Here's mine:
1. UW-W
2. Mt. Union
3. Wesley
4. St. Thomas
5. Mary Hardin Baylor
6. North Central
7. Ohio Northern
8. Hardin Simmons
9. Wittenberg
10. Linfield
11. Delaware Valley
12. Montclair State
13. Thomas More
14. Wheaton
15. St. John Fisher
16. Trine
17. Bethel
18. Hampden-Sydney
19. Pacific Lutheran
20. Cal Lutheran
21. Wabash
22. Wartburg
23. Coe
24. Central
25. Franklin
Springfield played Alfred pretty tough. I will be interested to compare common opponent with STJ tomorrow.
Quote from: USee on October 22, 2010, 07:29:14 PM
I have been enduring Seventies posts for years on these boards. I am telling you I could have submitted his ballot for him based on his stated views on the various regions, conferences and teams over the years. It can't have anything to do with current reality. Remember, his name ain't seventies because he's young!! ;D ;D :-*
Sorry USEE, but until you can convince me Wittenberg can beat any of the teams I ranked ahead of them, you just have to bear with it. Yes they are a playoff team but only by virtual of winning out in a very weak conference. The NCAC is so weak from 3 thru the end, that statistics mean almost nothing. Sorry, but the facts don't support them anywhere above 20. And anyway, isn't that why we have polls, to accommodate different viewpoints and biases? It is my personal feeling that Wittenberg is the most consistently over ranked team in D3.
Seventies, you don't have to defend your picks to me. That's what the poll is all about. All I said is I could have predicted your picks.....never said they were wrong. More power to ya.
Quote from: USee on October 22, 2010, 10:39:44 PM
Seventies, you don't have to defend your picks to me. That's what the poll is all about. All I said is I could have predicted your picks.....never said they were wrong. More power to ya.
Thanks, it's not like Witt, Wabash and Case Western weren't ever in my poll, they are just in the next ten. Every week it will become clearer and less of a crap shoot
Quote from: altor on October 22, 2010, 09:35:49 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 22, 2010, 09:25:32 PM
Or is there something football loving humans can see that computers cannot?? ;D
I don't mean to get into a human vs. computer debate. I've done it to death. Nobody gets convinced.
My point was that a vote for SJF at #6 was not entirely without substance. Your point must be that such a vote did not come from a football loving human?
Not at all. I was just posing a question to point out there are two sides to that argument.
By the way, I agree with the point you made. I do not believe SJF at #6 was without substance. That's higher than I would have ranked them, but I respect the fact that it was submitted by a fan who gave thoughtful consideration before submitting his ballot.
Quote from: Kohawk Krazy on October 22, 2010, 08:16:21 PM
I find it interesting how many people had Central ranked ahead of Coe, despite beating them 37-28.
Take the Kohawk blinders out of your eyes. If Coe and Central played many times on a neutral field, who would win the most times?
To me, Central's win against Oshkosh and especially at Augie outweighs a loss in a rivalry game.
But, your mileage may vary.
That's funny because centrals close game at Augie is what kept them out of my poll. Different strokes...
Quote from: altor on October 22, 2010, 09:17:25 PM
Quote from: Upstate on October 22, 2010, 08:34:13 PM
Fisher at 6???
WOW
Peter Wolfe (http://prwolfe.bol.ucla.edu/cfootball/ratings.htm#Division_III) has SJF at #2 in D-III.
Dave Rothman (http://prwolfe.bol.ucla.edu/cfootball/rothman.txt) has them at #5.
Massey has them at 7.
My computer (which only takes results between two D-III's into account) has them at 3.
There's something the computers see there that not many humans do.
Keith has them at 7, we learned in the podcast this week.
QuoteKeith has them at 7, we learned in the podcast this week.
I had them No. 13, but higher than any other East Region team (Del Val next at 14).
After Witt needed a missed FG by Carnegie-Mellon to just make it to overtime, I'm thinking 70's non-ranking of Wittenberg is spot on.
70's is smarter than the average bear. The luster is certainly off for Witt's D. CMU w over 300 yds rushing. Ouch.
And SJF loses, has the East region gotten even weaker this year?
Quote from: HScoach on October 23, 2010, 05:36:51 PM
After Witt needed a missed FG by Carnegie-Mellon to just make it to overtime, I'm thinking 70's non-ranking of Wittenberg is spot on.
I had them at #12 but it was painful. Looks like I need to listen to my gut next time . ;)
Quote from: altor on October 22, 2010, 09:17:25 PM
Quote from: Upstate on October 22, 2010, 08:34:13 PM
Fisher at 6???
WOW
Peter Wolfe (http://prwolfe.bol.ucla.edu/cfootball/ratings.htm#Division_III) has SJF at #2 in D-III.
Dave Rothman (http://prwolfe.bol.ucla.edu/cfootball/rothman.txt) has them at #5.
Massey has them at 7.
My computer (which only takes results between two D-III's into account) has them at 3.
There's something the computers see there that not many humans do.
Peter Wolfe's poll:
1 Hampden-Sydney III 7 0 243 131 0.979 xx
2 St John Fisher III 7 0 302 121 0.849 xx
3 Wesley III 7 0 321 82 0.821 xx
4 Wheaton III 6 0 237 90 0.818 xx
5 St Thomas III 7 0 315 91 0.783 xx
6 Wartburg III 6 0 181 48 0.756 xx
7 Mary Hardin-Baylor III 6 0 223 157 0.733 xx
8 North Central III 6 0 228 51 0.730 xx
9 Mount Union III 6 0 247 56 0.705 xx
10 DePauw III 6 0 201 97 0.635 xx
Whatever his computer "sees", is a mirage, a hallucination, or a bad dream. Is it inappropriate of me to be thankful he's not part of our D3 Top 25 Fan Poll? ;D
Next week's poll should be really interesting. Close wins by #4 St. Thomas, #6 UMHB, and #8 Wittenberg. What to do with Bethel and PLU after they lose to teams ranked higher? St. John Fisher goes down and Wheaton is in trouble during a 3rd quarter lightening delay. And each pollster will be working from their own ballot as a baseline from this week. Should be a fun couple of days sorting it all out the next couple of days!
Wheaton has come back from a 24-7 halftime deficit to lead 31-24.
With all the talk of SJF being horribly under-ranked, it will be interesting to see if they are ranked at all this week. ;)
Wheaton wins it! Very nice comeback! It will be really interesting to see the Fan Poll this week. A few teams may be really testing the patience of the pollsters.
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 23, 2010, 09:22:31 PM
Quote from: altor on October 22, 2010, 09:17:25 PM
Quote from: Upstate on October 22, 2010, 08:34:13 PM
Fisher at 6???
WOW
Peter Wolfe (http://prwolfe.bol.ucla.edu/cfootball/ratings.htm#Division_III) has SJF at #2 in D-III.
Dave Rothman (http://prwolfe.bol.ucla.edu/cfootball/rothman.txt) has them at #5.
Massey has them at 7.
My computer (which only takes results between two D-III's into account) has them at 3.
There's something the computers see there that not many humans do.
Peter Wolfe's poll:
1 Hampden-Sydney III 7 0 243 131 0.979 xx
2 St John Fisher III 7 0 302 121 0.849 xx
3 Wesley III 7 0 321 82 0.821 xx
4 Wheaton III 6 0 237 90 0.818 xx
5 St Thomas III 7 0 315 91 0.783 xx
6 Wartburg III 6 0 181 48 0.756 xx
7 Mary Hardin-Baylor III 6 0 223 157 0.733 xx
8 North Central III 6 0 228 51 0.730 xx
9 Mount Union III 6 0 247 56 0.705 xx
10 DePauw III 6 0 201 97 0.635 xx
Whatever his computer "sees", is a mirage, a hallucination, or a bad dream. Is it inappropriate of me to be thankful he's not part of our D3 Top 25 Fan Poll? ;D
I'm as loyal an alum as the next guy but even I know that poll's ridiculous.
Remember that the BCS neuters the computer rankings by making them eliminate all vestiges of margin of victory. HSC had a fair number of close wins early on.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 23, 2010, 10:11:46 PM
Wheaton has come back from a 24-7 halftime deficit to lead 31-24.
With all the talk of SJF being horribly under-ranked, it will be interesting to see if they are ranked at all this week. ;)
I wasn't sure about SJF to begin with, I didn't have them in my top 25 going into this weekend....
Wheaton on the other hand was in my top 15...
Quote from: HScoach on October 23, 2010, 05:36:51 PM
After Witt needed a missed FG by Carnegie-Mellon to just make it to overtime, I'm thinking 70's non-ranking of Wittenberg is spot on.
Cue Herm Edwards...
"YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME!" Hello!
CMU isn't a cupcake, and sometimes the non-conference non-rivalry road games are the toughest to get up for.
If it were just one game like that I would be willing to chalk it up to that.
MHB seems to be hanging on by a thread all season long...they are going to fall sooner or later. they don't seem as strong as years in the past.
So much for those who ranked SJF in the top 10 ;).
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 24, 2010, 06:41:23 PM
If it were just one game like that I would be willing to chalk it up to that.
(I can't believe I'm defending Wittenberg....)
Fact is they've won, and they won those nail-biters on the road. Other teams probably would have folded up. Survive and advance. And other cliches...
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 21, 2010, 09:28:04 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on October 21, 2010, 09:05:10 PM
Quote from: seventiesraider on October 21, 2010, 07:37:04 PM
I have to admit it was a time consuming and interesting exercise.
I spend about 30 minutes a week on mine, unless it's a fairly straightforward nobody good played each other and/or lost week.
Keith,
I'm sure the familiarity and knowledge base you have built up, being sure of the criteria you have developed in ranking, and staying current through all the work you have put in allows for great efficiency in putting together your poll.
I have a couple question for you. How much time do you put in mining "below the surface"? In other words, how much time do you look at numbers 26-40 (or whatever number is applicable)? Also, for your personal records, do you actually rank below the top 25 for your personal records? I would think it would be helpful to continue to deepen your analysis a bit in case Saturday is one of those "any given Saturdays".
Sorry I didnt answer this right away, but if it means anything, I remembered you asking while putting together my vote this week.
I always go past 25. I used to do a item in ATN called My 26-35, but it never really held at 35. Now I don't necessarily go that far, 28 some weeks, 32 other weeks, 37 other weeks. This year, I've just been going until I don't think there are any more teams I'd consider for top 25.
But yes, it definitely helps in figuring out which teams to move in the next week when teams play their way out.
Also I vote in the Lambert poll now, so having to go at least 10 East teams deep usually forces me to go beyond 25, which is good.
Quote from: smedindy on October 25, 2010, 12:43:38 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 24, 2010, 06:41:23 PM
If it were just one game like that I would be willing to chalk it up to that.
(I can't believe I'm defending Wittenberg....)
Fact is they've won, and they won those nail-biters on the road. Other teams probably would have folded up. Survive and advance. And other cliches...
That's all well and good when you're comparing Wittenberg to teams that are not winning. But when I'm staring at an 8-0 Wittenberg with three nail-biters and the No. 222 SoS and, say, 7-1 Delaware Valley ... well "fact is they've won" doesn't paint the full portrait.
Quote from: seventiesraider on October 22, 2010, 10:21:59 PMAnd anyway, isn't that why we have polls, to accommodate different viewpoints and biases? It is my personal feeling that Wittenberg is the most consistently over ranked team in D3.
Yes.
And
W&J
St. John's
Wabash
Rowan was for a while, but now they're actually underranked.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 23, 2010, 12:10:00 AM
Quote from: altor on October 22, 2010, 09:17:25 PM
Quote from: Upstate on October 22, 2010, 08:34:13 PM
Fisher at 6???
WOW
Peter Wolfe (http://prwolfe.bol.ucla.edu/cfootball/ratings.htm#Division_III) has SJF at #2 in D-III.
Dave Rothman (http://prwolfe.bol.ucla.edu/cfootball/rothman.txt) has them at #5.
Massey has them at 7.
My computer (which only takes results between two D-III's into account) has them at 3.
There's something the computers see there that not many humans do.
Keith has them at 7, we learned in the podcast this week.
7 on my ballot is a dangerous spot. I think I've seen more of my 7s lose than any spot in the 20s. :D
Quote from: K-Mack on October 25, 2010, 01:38:41 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 23, 2010, 12:10:00 AM
Quote from: altor on October 22, 2010, 09:17:25 PM
Quote from: Upstate on October 22, 2010, 08:34:13 PM
Fisher at 6???
WOW
Peter Wolfe (http://prwolfe.bol.ucla.edu/cfootball/ratings.htm#Division_III) has SJF at #2 in D-III.
Dave Rothman (http://prwolfe.bol.ucla.edu/cfootball/rothman.txt) has them at #5.
Massey has them at 7.
My computer (which only takes results between two D-III's into account) has them at 3.
There's something the computers see there that not many humans do.
Keith has them at 7, we learned in the podcast this week.
7 on my ballot is a dangerous spot. I think I've seen more of my 7s lose than any spot in the 20s. :D
Any spot is dangerous...What's that term, Any given Sunday? I would say it works for Saturdays too
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 24, 2010, 11:18:42 PM
MHB seems to be hanging on by a thread all season long...they are going to fall sooner or later. they don't seem as strong as years in the past.
So much for those who ranked SJF in the top 10 ;).
I don't think UMHB will lose during the regular season. There have been a lot of close games, mostly due to play in the defensive backfield which is really dangerous in the pass happy ASC, yet they have managed to win. I think what is interesting to note is how they are doing it. They are running the ball as always, but when teams come up and stack the box and say your only going to win if you pass the ball, this season they have thrown the ball successfully. They're by no means prolific at the pass, but they are averaging 147 yds/game, and that is something new.
That said, I think that HSU is the best team in the ASC right now, and if they get an at large bid they will be a force to reckon with. UMHB can still right the ship defensively, so maybe that changes, but barring injury between now and the inevitable rematch, I think HSU has the better chance of winning a second game right now.
Quote from: Toby Taff on October 25, 2010, 08:56:07 AM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 24, 2010, 11:18:42 PM
MHB seems to be hanging on by a thread all season long...they are going to fall sooner or later. they don't seem as strong as years in the past.
So much for those who ranked SJF in the top 10 ;).
I don't think UMHB will lose during the regular season. There have been a lot of close games, mostly due to play in the defensive backfield which is really dangerous in the pass happy ASC, yet they have managed to win. I think what is interesting to note is how they are doing it. They are running the ball as always, but when teams come up and stack the box and say your only going to win if you pass the ball, this season they have thrown the ball successfully. They're by no means prolific at the pass, but they are averaging 147 yds/game, and that is something new.
That said, I think that HSU is the best team in the ASC right now, and if they get an at large bid they will be a force to reckon with. UMHB can still right the ship defensively, so maybe that changes, but barring injury between now and the inevitable rematch, I think HSU has the better chance of winning a second game right now.
yea, you're probably right about MHB winning out this regular season. But still this isn't the MHB team I'm used to seeing. Usually they have a shutdown style defense.
As far as their passing game this season, I would describe it as "getting by" rather than "successful."
Cmp-Att-Int Pct Yards TD Avg/G
64-129-9 49.6 1030 6 147.1
K-Mack
Why do you think St John's is consistently over ranked. This year, they have lost three games by less than a TD, two to highly ranked teams, two in OT. The loss to UWEC was early in the season, when weird things happen, and some of those might have been in the officiating realm. (I know that they should not have been in the position where a "bad" call would hurt them, and you have to overcaome, yadda, yadda, yadda......).
Over the past few years, they have either gone deep in the playoffs, or lost relatively close games to the eventual #2 or Champion, in most instances. They were last blown out, when? Give your reasoning if you would. I think I made a fairly strong case for mine.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 25, 2010, 09:56:23 AM
Quote from: Toby Taff on October 25, 2010, 08:56:07 AM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 24, 2010, 11:18:42 PM
MHB seems to be hanging on by a thread all season long...they are going to fall sooner or later. they don't seem as strong as years in the past.
So much for those who ranked SJF in the top 10 ;).
I don't think UMHB will lose during the regular season. There have been a lot of close games, mostly due to play in the defensive backfield which is really dangerous in the pass happy ASC, yet they have managed to win. I think what is interesting to note is how they are doing it. They are running the ball as always, but when teams come up and stack the box and say your only going to win if you pass the ball, this season they have thrown the ball successfully. They're by no means prolific at the pass, but they are averaging 147 yds/game, and that is something new.
That said, I think that HSU is the best team in the ASC right now, and if they get an at large bid they will be a force to reckon with. UMHB can still right the ship defensively, so maybe that changes, but barring injury between now and the inevitable rematch, I think HSU has the better chance of winning a second game right now.
yea, you're probably right about MHB winning out this regular season. But still this isn't the MHB team I'm used to seeing. Usually they have a shutdown style defense.
As far as their passing game this season, I would describe it as "getting by" rather than "successful."
Cmp-Att-Int Pct Yards TD Avg/G
64-129-9 49.6 1030 6 147.1
I don't think D3 fans understand how good ASC passing offenses are. I think that UMHB will go a long way into the playoffs before they have as much trouble with offensive matchups as they are finding in the ASC. (Unless HSU beats them in the first round.)
Granted that we are isolated, but Howard Payne took Trinity to OT.
Sul Ross lost by a TD to D2 Western New Mexico.
HSU was strong versus NWC teams.
As for this weekend, the McMurry at HSU game will be big, but it will also be only the 18th game for Coach Mumme and his system at McMurry. It may only now be approaching its full potential.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 25, 2010, 09:56:23 AM
yea, you're probably right about MHB winning out this regular season. But still this isn't the MHB team I'm used to seeing. Usually they have a shutdown style defense.
As far as their passing game this season, I would describe it as "getting by" rather than "successful."
Cmp-Att-Int Pct Yards TD Avg/G
64-129-9 49.6 1030 6 147.1
They definitely do not look like the cru d of old, but for the Cru, historically, that is a successful passing game. ;D
And I'll echo Ralph that the passing game in the ASC is very good. Keep in mind the Cru d was designed to beat the perennial power of the day, HSU who always had a huge o line, a powerful running game and good passing. The Dline and LBs were central because if the QB is running for his life he can't throw the football so you had big and fast D linemen and fast athletic LBs. (That formula still worked against HSU this year by the way.) That defensive alignment isn't really the best for defending pass happy QBs, of which there have been many in recent years. Contrast that with defenses that can scheme for the running game by stacking the line and you have a less dominating UMHB that still rushes for 280+/game and almost 37 points and whose DBs have come up big against every team they've played when it mattered.
As I said I think HSU is probably the best in the league, but if the two don't have to play in round 1 or 2 the ASC will make a good showing in the playoffs.
This week's D3 TOP 25 FAN POLL has just been released!
www.uwwfootball.blogspot.com
My entry to the poll
UWW
Mount Union
Wesley
North Central
St. Thomas
Linfield
Wittenberg
MHB
Harden Simmons
D. Valley
Thomas More
Trine
Ohio Northern
Wheaton
Wartburg
Montclair St.
Central
Coe
Hampden-Sydney
Cal Lutheran
Bethel
Pacific Lutheran
Alfred
Ursinus
Case Western Reserve
Here is the actual poll
D3 Top 25 Fan Poll
1. UW-Whitewater (20) 500
2. Mt. Union 479
3. Wesley 453
4. North Central 435
5. St. Thomas 417
6. UMHB 394
7. Delaware Valley 336
8. Hardin-Simmons 318
9. Ohio Northern 305
10. Linfield 300
11. Wartburg 288
12. Wittenberg 269
13. Thomas More 264
14 Wheaton 242
15. Montclair St. 233
16. Trine 210
17. Coe 169
18. Bethel 167
19. Central 134
20. Hampden-Sydney 133
21. California Lutheran 90
22. Ursinas 84
23. St. John Fisher 56
24. Alfred 46
Pacific Lutheran 46
Dropped Out: Case Western Reserve
Others receiving votes: Case Western Reserve (36), Depauw (21), Rowan (17), Wabash (17), Franklin (16), Cortland St. (12), Willamette (8), Augustana (4)
What??? No IC Blueboys???!!! There goes the credibility of this poll... ;D
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 21, 2010, 09:51:26 AM
D3 Top 25 Fan Poll
Team Pts
1. UW-Whitewater (16) 400
2. Mount Union 381
3. Wesley 361
4. St. Thomas 346
5. North Central 332
6. Mary Hardin-Baylor 328
7. Delaware Valley 262
8. Wittenberg 261
9. Hardin-Simmons 252
10. Ohio Northern 240
11. Linfield 218
12. Thomas More 216
13. Wartburg 213
14. Wheaton 187
15. Montclair St. 183
16. Trine 171
17. St. John Fisher 164
18. Bethel 136
19. Coe 123
20. Central 99
21. Pacific Lutheran 88
22. Hampden-Sydney 85
23. Cal Lutheran 46
24. Ursinas 36
25. Case Western Reserve 17
Also Receiving Votes:
Wabash (15), Franklin (12), Rowan (12), Willamette (12), Illinois Wesleyan (6), Cortland State (6), Augustana (5), Depauw (4)
Here is the 1st release so we can compare results
My biggest outlier continues to be Trine. I have them at #6. I think they play in a horrible conference but are flying below the radar. They have a 3 yr starter at QB and their defense is very solid. If you look at their UWRF box vs UWRF's results vs UWW, ONU and ST Thomas, Trine held up defensively as well as offensively as well or better. That and their playoff progression from 2008 and 2009 makes me a believer, despite the lackluster conference they play in.
I also dropped Wittenberg about 6 spots in my poll (though not completely out yet 70's) and I have Bethel still at #10. If St Thomas is top 5 how can Bethel be much lower than 10?
Quote from: USee on October 26, 2010, 10:21:46 AM
My biggest outlier continues to be Trine. I have them at #6. I think they play in a horrible conference but are flying below the radar. They have a 3 yr starter at QB and their defense is very solid. If you look at their UWRF box vs UWRF's results vs UWW, ONU and ST Thomas, Trine held up defensively as well as offensively as well or better. That and their playoff progression from 2008 and 2009 makes me a believer, despite the lackluster conference they play in.
I also dropped Wittenberg about 6 spots in my poll (though not completely out yet 70's) and I have Bethel still at #10. If St Thomas is top 5 how can Bethel be much lower than 10?
I agree with you on both Bethel. If Bethel wins out, they have to be one of the first few selected for a Pool C bid. As far as Trine, I too have them a little higher than the Fan poll, but I don't know about putting them in the top 10. I don't see them being better than Linfield, Ohio Northern or HSU.
Trine beat UWRF AT RF more handily than ONU beat them in Ada. And Trine gave up 100 fewer yards. That doesn't mean Trine is better but it is an indication they are in the same zip code. I saw Trine in 2008 in the playoffs and they were a talented, well coached team. They didn't retreat from that with decent performance in the 09 playoffs. They have a 3 year starter at QB and a very solid defense, all of whom have 2 years of playoff experience now. I may be wrong but I see them as top 10 right now, despite their conference.
I agree that Trine is very difficult to get a handle on based on the competition they play this year. It's not their fault the conference is down anymore than it's Mount Union's fault the OAC appears to be weaker. Even River Falls is so poor that it's hard to use them as a comparison.
I did think that Wittenberg went out of their way to prove me right last weekend
I guess I would like my team to be overrated-a team that made the playoffs in 05, 06, 07, 08, and 09. Yes, got beat soundly by UWW twice-but who didn't? And, yes, a bad loss from SJU's point of view to Central in '07 in the second round. If the expectation is that SJU is going to the semi-finals or championship each year, then they have failed to perform. If the expectation is to win the conference and play in the playoffs, then not so much...
sju......Linfield doesn't get beat soundly by UWW. CATS take UWW to the wire each time they play.
Quote from: Lever Street on October 26, 2010, 12:20:50 PM
sju......Linfield doesn't get beat soundly by UWW. CATS take UWW to the wire each time they play.
same for Mount...but I think I see SJU's point though.
Little big of a stiff on Mark Speckman and the Willamette Bearcats. A close loss (and lets face it, that game was ours for the taking) to Hardin-Simmons and an unfortunate day against Linfield, (#s 8 and 10) leaves us out of the top 25? Hogwash, I say. Starting the season with four ranked teams in a row should speak for itself. With a few more challenging games coming up (PLU, Whitworth), expect the Bearcats to find their way back into the rankings.
Quote from: BearcatChatter on October 26, 2010, 06:21:21 PM
Little big of a stiff on Mark Speckman and the Willamette Bearcats. A close loss (and lets face it, that game was ours for the taking) to Hardin-Simmons and an unfortunate day against Linfield, (#s 8 and 10) leaves us out of the top 25? Hogwash, I say. Starting the season with four ranked teams in a row should speak for itself. With a few more challenging games coming up (PLU, Whitworth), expect the Bearcats to find their way back into the rankings.
If it's any comfort, Willamette was probably my #26. ;)
Quite a brouhaha over on the E8 board about SJF being ranked ahead of Alfred! (For the record, I had Alfred #22, SJF unranked.)
Here's my 25:
1. Whitewater
2. North Central
3. Mount Union
4. Wesley
5. St. Thomas
6. Linfield
7. Ohio Northern
8. Mary Hardin Baylor
9. Wartburg
10. Central
11. Wheaton
12. Delaware Valley
13. Hardin Simmons
14. Coe
15. Thomas More
16. Montclair State
17. Hampden Sydney
18. Trine
19. Rowan
20. Cortland State
21. Bethel
22. Alfred
23. Case Western Reserve
24. Cal Lutheran
25. Ursinus
Here's my entry:
1) UW-Whitewater
2) Mount Union
3) Wesley
4) North Central
5) St. Thomas
6) Thomas More
7) Wartburg
8) Delaware Valley
9) Mary Hardin-Baylor
10) Wittenberg
11) Montclair State
12) Hardin-Simmons
13) Ohio Northern
14) Cal Lutheran
15) Linfield
16) Hampden-Sydney
17) Bethel
18) Trine
19) Wheaton
20) Coe
21) St. John Fisher
22) Pacific Lutheran
23) Rowan
24) Central
25) Ursinus
Quote from: BearcatChatter on October 26, 2010, 06:21:21 PM
an unfortunate day against Linfield
Translation: An absolute butt whipping by Linfield. ;)
Quote from: BearcatChatter on October 26, 2010, 06:21:21 PM
Little big of a stiff on Mark Speckman and the Willamette Bearcats. A close loss (and lets face it, that game was ours for the taking) to Hardin-Simmons and an unfortunate day against Linfield, (#s 8 and 10) leaves us out of the top 25? Hogwash, I say. Starting the season with four ranked teams in a row should speak for itself. With a few more challenging games coming up (PLU, Whitworth), expect the Bearcats to find their way back into the rankings.
Starting the season 2-2, with the fourth game being a 28 point loss creates a perception that takes awhile to overcome. I agree with you, though. If the Bearcats win out the rest of the way, they will likely be back in the top 25.
Quote from: retagent on October 25, 2010, 09:59:04 AM
K-Mack
Why do you think St John's is consistently over ranked. This year, they have lost three games by less than a TD, two to highly ranked teams, two in OT. The loss to UWEC was early in the season, when weird things happen, and some of those might have been in the officiating realm. (I know that they should not have been in the position where a "bad" call would hurt them, and you have to overcaome, yadda, yadda, yadda......).
Over the past few years, they have either gone deep in the playoffs, or lost relatively close games to the eventual #2 or Champion, in most instances. They were last blown out, when? Give your reasoning if you would. I think I made a fairly strong case for mine.
Quote from: sju56321 on October 26, 2010, 12:14:28 PM
I guess I would like my team to be overrated-a team that made the playoffs in 05, 06, 07, 08, and 09. Yes, got beat soundly by UWW twice-but who didn't? And, yes, a bad loss from SJU's point of view to Central in '07 in the second round. If the expectation is that SJU is going to the semi-finals or championship each year, then they have failed to perform. If the expectation is to win the conference and play in the playoffs, then not so much...
It would take a little digging for the actual facts for me to properly state my case, but it's not something I just noticed.
It mostly has to do with where St. John's tends to begin a season ranked relative to its peers; in years when they've lost to Bethel or Concordia-Moorhead, St. John's appears at a place in the polls either in the same year or the following year where Bethel or C-M never would. St. Thomas seems to have crossed the respect barrier in a way Bethel really has not been able to.
On one hand, St. John's has earned a degree of respect with Stagg Bowl trips and a championship.
On the other hand, the Johnnies lose conference games more than any other truly elite team. They lost 2 in '04, 1 each in '06 and '07, and 2 in '08, and in that time, I don't think they really ever lost the bump in the poll that comes with having won a championship, even in seasons where other MIAC teams had h2h wins and deserved to be ranked higher.
Long story short, if Bethel or Concordia had the exact same season as St. John's -- undefeated in the MIAC, it was taking them longer to get the respect in the rankings than it was taking SJU, and SJU seemed to get more rope with losses.
In the past two seasons, it seems to have corrected. St. John's deserved its high ranking last season, though it was upset by Coe, it earned its place with wins over other good teams in the regular season, and with three losses this year, they have dropped out of the poll. Also, St. Thomas seems to be getting the respect (perhaps because of playoff success last year) that it took other off-brand MIAC teams longer to earn.
I mentioned earlier somewhere -- it might have been on the podcast, and I don't expect everyone to listen to it in its entirety -- where St. John's might be as strong as it was last year, and just have three close games vs. UWEC, Bethel and STU that it happened to pull out last year and failed to pull out this year.
Quote from: K-Mack on October 28, 2010, 09:36:53 PM
Quote from: retagent on October 25, 2010, 09:59:04 AM
K-Mack
Why do you think St John's is consistently over ranked. This year, they have lost three games by less than a TD, two to highly ranked teams, two in OT. The loss to UWEC was early in the season, when weird things happen, and some of those might have been in the officiating realm. (I know that they should not have been in the position where a "bad" call would hurt them, and you have to overcaome, yadda, yadda, yadda......).
Over the past few years, they have either gone deep in the playoffs, or lost relatively close games to the eventual #2 or Champion, in most instances. They were last blown out, when? Give your reasoning if you would. I think I made a fairly strong case for mine.
Quote from: sju56321 on October 26, 2010, 12:14:28 PM
I guess I would like my team to be overrated-a team that made the playoffs in 05, 06, 07, 08, and 09. Yes, got beat soundly by UWW twice-but who didn't? And, yes, a bad loss from SJU's point of view to Central in '07 in the second round. If the expectation is that SJU is going to the semi-finals or championship each year, then they have failed to perform. If the expectation is to win the conference and play in the playoffs, then not so much...
It would take a little digging for the actual facts for me to properly state my case, but it's not something I just noticed.
It mostly has to do with where St. John's tends to begin a season ranked relative to its peers; in years when they've lost to Bethel or Concordia-Moorhead, St. John's appears at a place in the polls either in the same year or the following year where Bethel or C-M never would. St. Thomas seems to have crossed the respect barrier in a way Bethel really has not been able to.
On one hand, St. John's has earned a degree of respect with Stagg Bowl trips and a championship.
On the other hand, the Johnnies lose conference games more than any other truly elite team. They lost 2 in '04, 1 each in '06 and '07, and 2 in '08, and in that time, I don't think they really ever lost the bump in the poll that comes with having won a championship, even in seasons where other MIAC teams had h2h wins and deserved to be ranked higher.
Long story short, if Bethel or Concordia had the exact same season as St. John's -- undefeated in the MIAC, it was taking them longer to get the respect in the rankings than it was taking SJU, and SJU seemed to get more rope with losses.
In the past two seasons, it seems to have corrected. St. John's deserved its high ranking last season, though it was upset by Coe, it earned its place with wins over other good teams in the regular season, and with three losses this year, they have dropped out of the poll. Also, St. Thomas seems to be getting the respect (perhaps because of playoff success last year) that it took other off-brand MIAC teams longer to earn.
I mentioned earlier somewhere -- it might have been on the podcast, and I don't expect everyone to listen to it in its entirety -- where St. John's might be as strong as it was last year, and just have three close games vs. UWEC, Bethel and STU that it happened to pull out last year and failed to pull out this year.
I think that is how close it is in D-III from #18 to #40. The 40th best team is not getting the "noise" votes that allow a team to get 30 points on 12 ballots (and being omitted on 13 others.)
I don't do the rankings, and the fact that a win over SJU doesn't seem to carry a whole lot of water is puzzling to me. You also only looked at recent years. Their entire body of work over your lifetime maybe actually means something to some people.
Quote from: retagent on October 28, 2010, 11:10:14 PM
I don't do the rankings, and the fact that a win over SJU doesn't seem to carry a whole lot of water is puzzling to me. You also only looked at recent years. Their entire body of work over your lifetime maybe actually means something to some people.
Well first off,
you asked
me to clarify a statement I made, using a word I used. By 'consistently' I meant for several years in a row after the Johnnies came down off their championship high. I didn't mean since they were in NAIA.
Second, I would argue that the farther back you go in history, the less relevant it is to this year. St. John was national champion the year I was born, but I don't know what that has to do with whether they should've been ranked 10th or 20th during a particular week in 2007.
Third, I think a win over SJU does carry weight, and teams that beat them should get bumped up the poll accordingly, assuming the rest of their results also cooperate (unlike, say, a UWEC this year).
In my opinion as a Mount guy, a win over St John's today carries about the same weight as beating Ohio Northern or Augustana. Good, solid, well coached team with a good name that will beat you if you play poorly, but not a true threat to beat you if you play well. The same of which could be said about 20 or 30 teams across the nation.
Quote from: HScoach on October 29, 2010, 07:55:51 AM
In my opinion as a Mount guy, a win over St John's today carries about the same weight as beating Ohio Northern or Augustana. Good, solid, well coached team with a good name that will beat you if you play poorly, but not a true threat to beat you if you play well. The same of which could be said about 20 or 30 teams across the nation.
Well, THAT won't go over so well HSCoach! ;)
I agree-I have sometimes wondered how SJU is ranked at the beginning of a year. I think all teams should be evaluated based on the players they lose to graduation-obviously, UWW and Mount are replacing those very well of late, or with Mount the last 15 years.
Unfortunately for us SJU backers, SJU is only a solid team this year, not an elite team.
As I posted earlier, not sure if SJU is one the consistently overrated teams if you look to winning the conference and making the playoffs. Now, if you are talking about the "ranking" in your poll, then you might have an argument, along with many other teams, except for UWW and Mount. Hasn't the thought always been that absent those two, any one of ten or so teams could win the championship? It is pretty much a guess, maybe educated, as to the remainder of the top ten, you could probably switch #3 for #10 and make a good argument.
Quote from: sju56321 on October 29, 2010, 09:23:49 AM
I agree-I have sometimes wondered how SJU is ranked at the beginning of a year. I think all teams should be evaluated based on the players they lose to graduation-obviously, UWW and Mount are replacing those very well of late, or with Mount the last 15 years.
Unfortunately for us SJU backers, SJU is only a solid team this year, not an elite team.
As I posted earlier, not sure if SJU is one the consistently overrated teams if you look to winning the conference and making the playoffs. Now, if you are talking about the "ranking" in your poll, then you might have an argument, along with many other teams, except for UWW and Mount. Hasn't the thought always been that absent those two, any one of ten or so teams could win the championship? It is pretty much a guess, maybe educated, as to the remainder of the top ten, you could probably switch #3 for #10 and make a good argument.
I agree in principle, but I think two or three of the 3-10 teams might be a bit above interchangeable with #10. However, given the "any given Saturday" possibilities, I also think those 8 teams have a shot at winning the Championship with UW-W and Mount present as well.
Let's hope the Montclair-Cortland game clears things up better than the Saint John Fisher-Alfred game did. To the Willamette remarks, I totally believe that they are capable of knocking off anybody in 15-25
Quote from: seventiesraider on October 29, 2010, 04:56:49 PM
Let's hope the Montclair-Cortland game clears things up better than the Saint John Fisher-Alfred game did. To the Willamette remarks, I totally believe that they are capable of knocking off anybody in 15-25
I don't think the SJF/AU game cleared anything up, if anything it muddled the picture even more...
Quote from: seventiesraider on October 29, 2010, 04:56:49 PM
Let's hope the Montclair-Cortland game clears things up better than the Saint John Fisher-Alfred game did. To the Willamette remarks, I totally believe that they are capable of knocking off anybody in 15-25
And if the East wants any hope of a #1 Seed, Montclair needs to win it.
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 29, 2010, 06:47:47 PM
Quote from: seventiesraider on October 29, 2010, 04:56:49 PM
Let's hope the Montclair-Cortland game clears things up better than the Saint John Fisher-Alfred game did. To the Willamette remarks, I totally believe that they are capable of knocking off anybody in 15-25
And if the East wants any hope of a #1 Seed, Montclair needs to win it.
Opps, now what? Mount packing it's bags and heading east? ;)
Quote from: footballfan413 on October 31, 2010, 05:59:55 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 29, 2010, 06:47:47 PM
Quote from: seventiesraider on October 29, 2010, 04:56:49 PM
Let's hope the Montclair-Cortland game clears things up better than the Saint John Fisher-Alfred game did. To the Willamette remarks, I totally believe that they are capable of knocking off anybody in 15-25
And if the East wants any hope of a #1 Seed, Montclair needs to win it.
Opps, now what? Mount packing it's bags and heading east? ;)
Nah - the #1 seed doesn't have to pack bags and travel anywhere! ;D
But east teams can just about start packing for Alliance. ;)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 31, 2010, 06:13:48 PM
Quote from: footballfan413 on October 31, 2010, 05:59:55 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 29, 2010, 06:47:47 PM
Quote from: seventiesraider on October 29, 2010, 04:56:49 PM
Let's hope the Montclair-Cortland game clears things up better than the Saint John Fisher-Alfred game did. To the Willamette remarks, I totally believe that they are capable of knocking off anybody in 15-25
And if the East wants any hope of a #1 Seed, Montclair needs to win it.
Opps, now what? Mount packing it's bags and heading east? ;)
Nah - the #1 seed doesn't have to pack bags and travel anywhere! ;D
But east teams can just about start packing for Alliance. ;)
LOL, I meant on paper, of course, Mr Yspi :D
Quote from: footballfan413 on October 31, 2010, 06:43:12 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 31, 2010, 06:13:48 PM
Quote from: footballfan413 on October 31, 2010, 05:59:55 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 29, 2010, 06:47:47 PM
Quote from: seventiesraider on October 29, 2010, 04:56:49 PM
Let's hope the Montclair-Cortland game clears things up better than the Saint John Fisher-Alfred game did. To the Willamette remarks, I totally believe that they are capable of knocking off anybody in 15-25
And if the East wants any hope of a #1 Seed, Montclair needs to win it.
Opps, now what? Mount packing it's bags and heading east? ;)
Nah - the #1 seed doesn't have to pack bags and travel anywhere! ;D
But east teams can just about start packing for Alliance. ;)
LOL, I meant on paper, of course, Mr Yspi :D
You never talk about what's on paper, cuz they don't play football on paper... ;D
Quote from: sflzman on October 31, 2010, 09:11:29 PM
Quote from: footballfan413 on October 31, 2010, 06:43:12 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 31, 2010, 06:13:48 PM
Quote from: footballfan413 on October 31, 2010, 05:59:55 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 29, 2010, 06:47:47 PM
Quote from: seventiesraider on October 29, 2010, 04:56:49 PM
Let's hope the Montclair-Cortland game clears things up better than the Saint John Fisher-Alfred game did. To the Willamette remarks, I totally believe that they are capable of knocking off anybody in 15-25
And if the East wants any hope of a #1 Seed, Montclair needs to win it.
Opps, now what? Mount packing it's bags and heading east? ;)
Nah - the #1 seed doesn't have to pack bags and travel anywhere! ;D
But east teams can just about start packing for Alliance. ;)
LOL, I meant on paper, of course, Mr Yspi :D
You never talk about what's on paper, cuz they don't play football on paper... ;D
Though paper might make a better surface than some fields I've seen! :D
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 31, 2010, 09:35:43 PM
Quote from: sflzman on October 31, 2010, 09:11:29 PM
Quote from: footballfan413 on October 31, 2010, 06:43:12 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 31, 2010, 06:13:48 PM
Quote from: footballfan413 on October 31, 2010, 05:59:55 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 29, 2010, 06:47:47 PM
Quote from: seventiesraider on October 29, 2010, 04:56:49 PM
Let's hope the Montclair-Cortland game clears things up better than the Saint John Fisher-Alfred game did. To the Willamette remarks, I totally believe that they are capable of knocking off anybody in 15-25
And if the East wants any hope of a #1 Seed, Montclair needs to win it.
Opps, now what? Mount packing it's bags and heading east? ;)
Nah - the #1 seed doesn't have to pack bags and travel anywhere! ;D
But east teams can just about start packing for Alliance. ;)
LOL, I meant on paper, of course, Mr Yspi :D
You never talk about what's on paper, cuz they don't play football on paper... ;D
Though paper might make a better surface than some fields I've seen! :D
Like right here in Alma! Thank god for the new turf next season!
The turf makes such a huge difference. Especially late in the year. If there have been a couple of "weather games" over the course of a season, grass fields can get pretty tore up by the end of the year. Before the Field Turf, I know in playoff games, I was always concerned with the D-Line's ability to get the traction necessary to rush the passer when a passing team would come to town. Now it's less of a variable.
Of course, it doesn't matter what turf is down if there are six inches of snow on top of it. :)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wabash.edu%2Fimages2%2Fphoto_album%2F1399%2Fmain_CPPorter1.jpg&hash=d9512a6052e21765bd130c7d42bf77a7648ba7ac)
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 01, 2010, 02:13:22 PM
Of course, it doesn't matter what turf is down if there are six inches of snow on top of it. :)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wabash.edu%2Fimages2%2Fphoto_album%2F1399%2Fmain_CPPorter1.jpg&hash=d9512a6052e21765bd130c7d42bf77a7648ba7ac)
that day I soon won't forget. a lot of fun!! (Then again, I didn't have to drive back to Indiana though ;) )
Quote from: sflzman on November 01, 2010, 07:39:51 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 31, 2010, 09:35:43 PM
Quote from: sflzman on October 31, 2010, 09:11:29 PM
Quote from: footballfan413 on October 31, 2010, 06:43:12 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 31, 2010, 06:13:48 PM
Quote from: footballfan413 on October 31, 2010, 05:59:55 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 29, 2010, 06:47:47 PM
Quote from: seventiesraider on October 29, 2010, 04:56:49 PM
Let's hope the Montclair-Cortland game clears things up better than the Saint John Fisher-Alfred game did. To the Willamette remarks, I totally believe that they are capable of knocking off anybody in 15-25
And if the East wants any hope of a #1 Seed, Montclair needs to win it.
Opps, now what? Mount packing it's bags and heading east? ;)
Nah - the #1 seed doesn't have to pack bags and travel anywhere! ;D
But east teams can just about start packing for Alliance. ;)
LOL, I meant on paper, of course, Mr Yspi :D
You never talk about what's on paper, cuz they don't play football on paper... ;D
Though paper might make a better surface than some fields I've seen! :D
Like right here in Alma! Thank god for the new turf next season!
True Story... my career ended partly because of Alma's crappy turf back in 1999. I got sacked by Justin Harris (can be verified by formerd3db who was the doctor that day) and between how hard he hit me and when I hit the concrete you call "turf", I sustained a grade 3 concussion and forgot who I was for a few hours. Because of my concussion history, the doctors never let me play again. This was week 5 in the 1999 season and Pat Coleman still has a picture of "the hit"... which was on Alma's program cover in 2000.
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alma.edu%2Frepository%2Fathletics%2F09dFBPurple3.jpg&hash=e1c8c3d494d3237b32775213ace0ad58ad29e6bb)
This probably wasn't much fun - Adrian @ Hope 2009
Quote from: SaintsFAN on November 01, 2010, 06:14:49 PM
Quote from: sflzman on November 01, 2010, 07:39:51 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 31, 2010, 09:35:43 PM
Quote from: sflzman on October 31, 2010, 09:11:29 PM
Quote from: footballfan413 on October 31, 2010, 06:43:12 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 31, 2010, 06:13:48 PM
Quote from: footballfan413 on October 31, 2010, 05:59:55 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 29, 2010, 06:47:47 PM
Quote from: seventiesraider on October 29, 2010, 04:56:49 PM
Let's hope the Montclair-Cortland game clears things up better than the Saint John Fisher-Alfred game did. To the Willamette remarks, I totally believe that they are capable of knocking off anybody in 15-25
And if the East wants any hope of a #1 Seed, Montclair needs to win it.
Opps, now what? Mount packing it's bags and heading east? ;)
Nah - the #1 seed doesn't have to pack bags and travel anywhere! ;D
But east teams can just about start packing for Alliance. ;)
LOL, I meant on paper, of course, Mr Yspi :D
You never talk about what's on paper, cuz they don't play football on paper... ;D
Though paper might make a better surface than some fields I've seen! :D
Like right here in Alma! Thank god for the new turf next season!
True Story... my career ended partly because of Alma's crappy turf back in 1999. I got sacked by Justin Harris (can be verified by formerd3db who was the doctor that day) and between how hard he hit me and when I hit the concrete you call "turf", I sustained a grade 3 concussion and forgot who I was for a few hours. Because of my concussion history, the doctors never let me play again. This was week 5 in the 1999 season and Pat Coleman still has a picture of "the hit"... which was on Alma's program cover in 2000.
I'll have to dig that program up...we have to have it somewhere. Earlier this summer I found a basketball program with Tom Crean as a coach here....
Was this our 48-28 win over Olivet on 10/9/99?
Quote from: SaintsFAN on November 01, 2010, 06:14:49 PM
Quote from: sflzman on November 01, 2010, 07:39:51 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 31, 2010, 09:35:43 PM
Quote from: sflzman on October 31, 2010, 09:11:29 PM
Quote from: footballfan413 on October 31, 2010, 06:43:12 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 31, 2010, 06:13:48 PM
Quote from: footballfan413 on October 31, 2010, 05:59:55 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 29, 2010, 06:47:47 PM
Quote from: seventiesraider on October 29, 2010, 04:56:49 PM
Let's hope the Montclair-Cortland game clears things up better than the Saint John Fisher-Alfred game did. To the Willamette remarks, I totally believe that they are capable of knocking off anybody in 15-25
And if the East wants any hope of a #1 Seed, Montclair needs to win it.
Opps, now what? Mount packing it's bags and heading east? ;)
Nah - the #1 seed doesn't have to pack bags and travel anywhere! ;D
But east teams can just about start packing for Alliance. ;)
LOL, I meant on paper, of course, Mr Yspi :D
You never talk about what's on paper, cuz they don't play football on paper... ;D
Though paper might make a better surface than some fields I've seen! :D
Like right here in Alma! Thank god for the new turf next season!
True Story... my career ended partly because of Alma's crappy turf back in 1999. I got sacked by Justin Harris (can be verified by formerd3db who was the doctor that day) and between how hard he hit me and when I hit the concrete you call "turf", I sustained a grade 3 concussion and forgot who I was for a few hours. Because of my concussion history, the doctors never let me play again. This was week 5 in the 1999 season and Pat Coleman still has a picture of "the hit"... which was on Alma's program cover in 2000.
Which were the best few hours of his entire life.
Quote from: HScoach on November 01, 2010, 07:30:04 PM
Quote from: SaintsFAN on November 01, 2010, 06:14:49 PM
Quote from: sflzman on November 01, 2010, 07:39:51 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 31, 2010, 09:35:43 PM
Quote from: sflzman on October 31, 2010, 09:11:29 PM
Quote from: footballfan413 on October 31, 2010, 06:43:12 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 31, 2010, 06:13:48 PM
Quote from: footballfan413 on October 31, 2010, 05:59:55 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 29, 2010, 06:47:47 PM
Quote from: seventiesraider on October 29, 2010, 04:56:49 PM
Let's hope the Montclair-Cortland game clears things up better than the Saint John Fisher-Alfred game did. To the Willamette remarks, I totally believe that they are capable of knocking off anybody in 15-25
And if the East wants any hope of a #1 Seed, Montclair needs to win it.
Opps, now what? Mount packing it's bags and heading east? ;)
Nah - the #1 seed doesn't have to pack bags and travel anywhere! ;D
But east teams can just about start packing for Alliance. ;)
LOL, I meant on paper, of course, Mr Yspi :D
You never talk about what's on paper, cuz they don't play football on paper... ;D
Though paper might make a better surface than some fields I've seen! :D
Like right here in Alma! Thank god for the new turf next season!
True Story... my career ended partly because of Alma's crappy turf back in 1999. I got sacked by Justin Harris (can be verified by formerd3db who was the doctor that day) and between how hard he hit me and when I hit the concrete you call "turf", I sustained a grade 3 concussion and forgot who I was for a few hours. Because of my concussion history, the doctors never let me play again. This was week 5 in the 1999 season and Pat Coleman still has a picture of "the hit"... which was on Alma's program cover in 2000.
Which were the best few hours of his entire life.
I'm sure they were after a hit like that!
You all see the hit Jacorey Harris took for the Canes on Saturday? Ouch!!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPFoTYmvNO0&feature=related
This week's D3 Top 25 Fan Poll has been released!
www.uwwfootball.blogspot.com
1. UW-Whitewater (20) 500
2. Mount Union 478
3. Wesley 444
4. North Central 440
5. St. Thomas 428
6. Mary Hardin-Baylor 392
7. Delaware Valley 343
8. Hardin-Simmons 324
9. Ohio Northern 312
10. Linfield 304
11. Wartburg 286
12. Thomas More 275
13. Wheaton 261
14. Wittenberg 240
15. Trine 227
16. Bethel 190
17. Coe 189
18. Hampden-Sidney 168
19. Central 151
20. California Lutheran 121
21. Depaw 62
22. St. John Fisher 54
23. Wabash 44
24. Cortland St. 41
25. Montclair St. 41
Also Receiving Votes: Franklin (36), Rowan (36), Salisbury (11), Willamette (11), Case Western Reserve (4), Washington University (3), Alfred (2), Ursinus (2), Baldwin-Wallace (1), Williams (1)
Quote from: HScoach on November 01, 2010, 07:30:04 PM
Which were the best few hours of his entire life.
easy there big fella..
No... it was Thomas More 1999.
1. UW-Whitewater (20) 500
2. Mount Union 478
3. Wesley 444
4. North Central 440
5. St. Thomas 428
6. Mary Hardin-Baylor 392
7. Delaware Valley 343
8. Hardin-Simmons 324
9. Ohio Northern 312
10. Linfield 304
11. Wartburg 286
12. Thomas More 275
13. Wheaton 261
14. Wittenberg 240
15. Trine 227
16. Bethel 190
17. Coe 189
18. Hampden-Sydney 168
19. Central 151
20. California Lutheran 121
21. Depauw 62
22. St. John Fisher 54
23. Wabash 44
24. Cortland St. 41
25. Montclair St. 41
Also Receiving Votes: Franklin (36), Rowan (36), Salisbury (11), Willamette (11), Case Western Reserve (4), Washington University (3), Alfred (2), Ursinus (2), Baldwin-Wallace (1), Williams (1)
some minor spelling corrections ;)
Quote from: USee on October 26, 2010, 09:21:10 AM
Here is the actual poll
D3 Top 25 Fan Poll
1. UW-Whitewater (20) 500
2. Mt. Union 479
3. Wesley 453
4. North Central 435
5. St. Thomas 417
6. UMHB 394
7. Delaware Valley 336
8. Hardin-Simmons 318
9. Ohio Northern 305
10. Linfield 300
11. Wartburg 288
12. Wittenberg 269
13. Thomas More 264
14 Wheaton 242
15. Montclair St. 233
16. Trine 210
17. Coe 169
18. Bethel 167
19. Central 134
20. Hampden-Sydney 133
21. California Lutheran 90
22. Ursinas 84
23. St. John Fisher 56
24. Alfred 46
Pacific Lutheran 46
Dropped Out: Case Western Reserve
Others receiving votes: Case Western Reserve (36), Depauw (21), Rowan (17), Wabash (17), Franklin (16), Cortland St. (12), Willamette (8), Augustana (4)
last week's poll for comparison
Bash away...
1- UW-Whitewater
2- Mount Union
3- Wesley
4- St. Thomas
5- North Central
6- Mary Hardin Baylor
7- Hardin-Simmons
8- Delaware Valley
9- Ohio Northern
10- Linfield
11- Wittenberg
12- Wartburg
13- Thomas More
14- Coe
15- Wheaton
16- Central
17- Trine
18- Bethel
19- Cal Lutheran
20- St. John Fisher
21- Pac Lutheran
22- Hamden Sydney
23- Rowan
24- Cortland
25- Montclair
Hi everyone!
-
I have redone the D3 Top 25 Fan Poll. I apologize for the two mis-spellings and for the team I left off the Top 25 ENTIRELY! I am going to have to change the brand of coffee I drink. ??? ???
So anyway, here is the accurate Top 25 for this week:
D3 Top 25 Fan Poll
1. UW-Whitewater (20) 500
2. Mount Union 478
3. Wesley 444
4. North Central 440
5. St. Thomas 428
6. Mary Hardin-Baylor 392
7. Delaware Valley 343
8. Hardin-Simmons 324
9. Ohio Northern 312
10. Linfield 304
11. Wartburg 286
12. Thomas More 275
13. Wheaton 261
14. Wittenberg 240
15. Trine 227
16. Bethel 190
17. Coe 189
18. Hampden-Sydney 168
19. Central 151
20. California Lutheran 121
21. Pacific Lutheran 66
22. Depauw 62
23. St. John Fisher 54
24. Wabash 44
25. Cortland St. 41
Montclair St. 41
Also Receiving Votes: Franklin (36), Rowan (36), Salisbury (11), Willamette (11), Case Western Reserve (4), Washington University (3), Alfred (2), Ursinus (2), Baldwin-Wallace (1), Williams (1)
How has Trine failed to crack the top 15 ???
Complaining about them being #15 while the D-3 top 25 has them at #14?
Sflzman doth protest too much methinks!
Quote from: sflzman on November 02, 2010, 08:56:58 PM
How has Trine failed to crack the top 15 ???
I apologize; probably my fault. :P
Despite my MIAA proclivities, I only have them 16th. The rest of the conference has GOT to step up - I have NO idea whether Trine is 6th or 26th.
Now if Trine had played Adrian's non-con schedule, and was undefeated, I'd have them #1! ;D
Quote from: sflzman on November 02, 2010, 08:56:58 PM
How has Trine failed to crack the top 15 ???
My guess is the conference they play in hurts them. I know D3football.com's Kickoff ranks the MIAC 23rd out of 27 conferences.
Mr Y posted as I was typing this. In other words, "What he said..." ;D
Quote from: sflzman on November 02, 2010, 08:56:58 PM
How has Trine failed to crack the top 15 ???
For the record, Trine was listed on all 20 ballots. Their high ranking was 6, their low was 24. Twelve of twenty ballots had Trine ranked in the top 15.
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 02, 2010, 10:04:33 PM
Quote from: sflzman on November 02, 2010, 08:56:58 PM
How has Trine failed to crack the top 15 ???
For the record, Trine was listed on all 20 ballots. Their high ranking was 6, their low was 24. Twelve of twenty ballots had Trine ranked in the top 15.
Wow, a range of 6 to 24 - almost the exact range I pulled out of my ass! ;D
Trine is like Thomas More (or CWRU until they got beat) - they are obviously good, but who the hell knows HOW good until they play somebody! :P
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 02, 2010, 10:00:39 PM
Quote from: sflzman on November 02, 2010, 08:56:58 PM
How has Trine failed to crack the top 15 ???
My guess is the conference they play in hurts them. I know D3football.com's Kickoff ranks the MIAC 23rd out of 27 conferences.
Mr Y posted as I was typing this. In other words, "What he said..." ;D
MIAA, not MIAC.
this was what I submitted:
UWW
Mount Union
Wesley
North Central
St. Thomas
Linfield
Wittenberg
MHB
Harden Simmons
D. Valley
Thomas More
Trine
Ohio Northern
Wheaton
Wartburg
Coe
Central
Hampden-Sydney
Cal Lutheran
Bethel
Pacific Lutheran
DePauw
Wabash
Willamette
Franklin
My week 9 ballot FWIW...
1 Whitewater
2 Mount Union
3 Wesley
4 North Central
5 St. Thomas
6 UMHB
7 Wheaton
8 Hampden-Sydney
9 Delaware Valley
10 Wartburg
11 Hardiin-Simmons
12 Coe
13 Ohio Northern
14 Cal Lutheran
15 Linfield
16 Bethel
17 St. John Fisher
18 Trine
19 Thomas More
20 Wittenberg
21 Central
22 Montclair State
23 Rowan
24 Cortland State
25 DePauw
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 02, 2010, 10:13:22 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 02, 2010, 10:00:39 PM
Quote from: sflzman on November 02, 2010, 08:56:58 PM
How has Trine failed to crack the top 15 ???
My guess is the conference they play in hurts them. I know D3football.com's Kickoff ranks the MIAC 23rd out of 27 conferences.
Mr Y posted as I was typing this. In other words, "What he said..." ;D
MIAA, not MIAC.
My mistake, thanks Pat. I knew I should have double checked Kickoff before posting the acronym!
In 2008 Trine made the playoffs and played Wheaton very tough but lost by 14 to the semifinalists. In 2009 they won their opening round handily and competed w Witt in round 2 before falling. They have many of that group back this year including their qb who played in both playoff seasons. If you believe Trine is a better team than they were a year ago and can win 2 playoff games, then they should be in your top 10. I have them at #6 on my ballot.
I had Trine at 9
1. UW-Whitewater
2. Mount Union
3. Wesley
4. North Central
5. Mary Hardin-Baylor
6. Delaware Valley
7. Mary Hardin-Simmons
8. St. Thomas
9. Trine
10. ONU
11. Linfield
12. Wittenberg
13. Thomas More
14. Coe
15. Wartburg
16. Wheaton
17. Central
18. Hampden-Sidney
19. Cal Lutheran
20. Bethel
21. DePauw
22. Pacific Lutheran
23. WashU
24. Ursinus
25. Walliamette
Quote from: USee on November 02, 2010, 11:55:14 PM
In 2008 Trine made the playoffs and played Wheaton very tough but lost by 14 to the semifinalists. In 2009 they won their opening round handily and competed w Witt in round 2 before falling. They have many of that group back this year including their qb who played in both playoff seasons. If you believe Trine is a better team than they were a year ago and can win 2 playoff games, then they should be in your top 10. I have them at #6 on my ballot.
That's definitely one line of thinking. The more skeptical view would be that Trine got shut out by a two loss (three eventually) Wheaton team in 2008. In 2009, they beat an equally mysterious Case Western Reserve before losing to Wittenberg by 17 points. The next week Witt lost at UW-W by 18. I was at the UW-W/Witt game and it was definitely more competitive than the final score might indicate. While you might be right about Trine this year, given the lack of data, 15th doesn't appear all that irrational. Another interesting note is that while Trine sits at 15, the teams that beat them the last two years in the playoffs (Wheaton and Witt) are #13 and #14 respectively. That doesn't seem out of line.
The good news is that Trine will have every opportunity to prove you right in November! ;)
"Also Receiving Votes: Franklin (36), Rowan (36), Salisbury (11), Willamette (11), Case Western Reserve (4), Washington University (3), Alfred (2), Ursinus (2), Baldwin-Wallace (1), Williams (1)"
There's an excellent article by Tom Haley on Williams in this week's "Around the Region". After reading it, it's really interesting to me that Williams got a vote before either SUNY-Maritime and Amherst. One of our pollsters must be doing a good job of flying "..Under the Radar" to find them. ;)
I was low on Trine at 24.
I have my reasons.
I still think of them as Tri-State. (OK, no, that's not it...)
Actually, I'm influenced quite a bit by the Massey ratings for teams in the lower 1/2 (but not solely, of course). Trine is 39th with a SOS rating of 180 there.
The main reason is that I think all of the teams ahead of them can beat Trine 6 times out of 10 at least.
1. UW - Whitewater
2. Mt. Union
3. Wesley
4. North Central
5. St. Thomas
6. Mary Hardin-Baylor
7. Wartburg
8. Wheaton
9. Hardin - Simmons
10. Delaware Valley
11. Ohio Northern
12. Wittenberg
13. Linfield
14. Bethel
15. Thomas More
16. St. John Fisher
17. Hampden - Sydney
18. Central (IA)
19. Coe
20. Montclair State
21. Wabash
22. DePauw
23. Pacific Lutheran
24. Trine
25. Baldwin - Wallace
I had Trine at 17. Playing Witt tough doesn't score any points in my book.
1. Whitewater
2. North Central
3. Mount Union
4. St. Thomas
5. Wesley
6. Linfield
7. Ohio Northern
8. Mary Hardin Baylor
9. Wartburg
10. Central
11. Wheaton
12. Delaware Valley
13. Hardin Simmons
14. Coe
15. Thomas More
16. Hampden Sydney
17. Trine
18. Rowan
19. Cortland State
20. Bethel
21. Montclair State
22. Case Western Reserve
23. Cal Lutheran
24. St. John Fisher
25. DePauw
HSC-
I'll play devils advocate here for a second. How do you have Bethel ranked 20 and St Thomas at #5? Bethel held them to their lowest pt total of the year and lost 10-6 AT St Thomas. Seems like too big a spread. Also, How do you have Case at #22 and Witt not ranked? 70's envy? Case lost to Chicago (who got thumped by Wabash and Elmhurst) and Witt is undefeated (albeit barely) and has a win over Trine from last years team (who beat case). As for Trine playing Witt tough, they don't have to beat Mt Union to be ranked in the top 10. I think Trine would easily beat at least 6 teams you have ahead of them.
You like apples?
maybe he'll give Witt some love if they beat Wabash this weekend.
I don't think one should take into consideration what teams did in previous seasons...but that's just me.
Quote from: USee on November 03, 2010, 12:20:22 PM
HSC-
I'll play devils advocate here for a second. How do you have Bethel ranked 20 and St Thomas at #5? Bethel held them to their lowest pt total of the year and lost 10-6 AT St Thomas. Seems like too big a spread. Also, How do you have Case at #22 and Witt not ranked? 70's envy? Case lost to Chicago (who got thumped by Wabash and Elmhurst) and Witt is undefeated (albeit barely) and has a win over Trine from last years team (who beat case). As for Trine playing Witt tough, they don't have to beat Mt Union to be ranked in the top 10. I think Trine would easily beat at least 6 teams you have ahead of them.
You like apples?
Just FYI Witt-Trine was 27-7 at the half. Wasn't all that close.
http://www4.wittenberg.edu/news/athletics/football/statistics/09statistics/NCAA2.HTM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 03, 2010, 12:40:02 PM
maybe he'll give Witt some love if they beat Wabash this weekend.
Smedindy mentions the strength of schedule stats from Massey. He ranks Wittenberg's "played" schedule 207 and remaining schedule 169.
I accept the fact that you can only play the teams on your schedule but as a newbie voter I can say having a very weak schedule leads us to talking about last year and other irrelevant topics. We can only judge the body of work that the team has displayed. Yes there are still certain intangibles to consider otherwise Mount Union could be anywhere in the top 10. It's those intangibles that even got Trine into the top 15, certainly not who they beat.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 03, 2010, 12:40:02 PM
I don't think one should take into consideration what teams did in previous seasons...but that's just me.
It's interesting to discuss the different philosophies people use in determining their ballots. I would think it would be hard to look at the current season in a complete vacuum. For example, it's hard to believe UW-W would be a unanimous #1 choice if Mount Union had won the Stagg Bowl last year! ;)
I agree you shouldn't consider what teams did in previous seasons but that cannot be an absolute. If you are considering how many players a team has returning isn't that, in a sense, about last season? The reality is you can't completely separate one year from the next. In an ideal world you can and we certainly try to but it's really not possible. But clearly it plays into everyone's bias. HOw else do you explain the difference in ranking between St Thomas and Bethel? Or the respect the poll gives St Johns every year? One of the reason's we know a team, or a conference, is any good is what they have traditionally done in the post season from past years. Now, for Trine, I happen to have seen them all Live and am very comfortable with my assessment of those teams. I understand why others have them ranked differently. I may be proven wrong but I am certain there are other teams who will lose early or win late that will prove each of us wrong. that's why we have this board and this process.
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 03, 2010, 02:41:10 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 03, 2010, 12:40:02 PM
I don't think one should take into consideration what teams did in previous seasons...but that's just me.
It's interesting to discuss the different philosophies people use in determining their ballots. I would think it would be hard to look at the current season in a complete vacuum. For example, it's hard to believe UW-W would be a unanimous #1 choice if Mount Union had won the Stagg Bowl last year! ;)
Ya got me there. So there are also a couple of "tangibles"
Quote from: seventiesraider on November 03, 2010, 02:19:32 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 03, 2010, 12:40:02 PM
maybe he'll give Witt some love if they beat Wabash this weekend.
Smedindy mentions the strength of schedule stats from Massey. He ranks Wittenberg's "played" schedule 207 and remaining schedule 169.
I accept the fact that you can only play the teams on your schedule but as a newbie voter I can say having a very weak schedule leads us to talking about last year and other irrelevant topics. We can only judge the body of work that the team has displayed. Yes there are still certain intangibles to consider otherwise Mount Union could be anywhere in the top 10. It's those intangibles that even got Trine into the top 15, certainly not who they beat.
I don't figure last year at all into the equation, especially now. It is the body of work. And I don't like Trine's as much as I like others.
I rate Witt higher because they won games that other teams without as many 'intangibles' would have lost.
Quote from: sju56321 on October 29, 2010, 09:23:49 AMI agree-I have sometimes wondered how SJU is ranked at the beginning of a year. I think all teams should be evaluated based on the players they lose to graduation-obviously, UWW and Mount are replacing those very well of late, or with Mount the last 15 years.
Yeah, one of the best tools our voters have is a spreadsheet with how many back at each position, key injuries returnees, all americans, HC/OC/DC changes. It's a great tool for getting a feel for who among last year's top 25 can and can't repeat. So is Kickoff. I mean we saw Albright not going back to the playoffs, and we saw Ursinus coming, for instance. Sometimes even we're suprised.
Quote from: sju56321 on October 29, 2010, 09:23:49 AMAs I posted earlier, not sure if SJU is one the consistently overrated teams if you look to winning the conference and making the playoffs. Now, if you are talking about the "ranking" in your poll, then you might have an argument
Well since this thread is the "Top 25 Fan Poll" thread, and the phrase in question is "overranked" and not "overrated," yes, we are talking about rankings.
Quote from: sju56321 on October 29, 2010, 09:23:49 AMHasn't the thought always been that absent those two, any one of ten or so teams could win the championship? It is pretty much a guess, maybe educated, as to the remainder of the top ten, you could probably switch #3 for #10 and make a good argument.
Not quite. There's the 1 and 2, and then there's maybe four or six more teams that could be semifinalists in a good year. For a while UMHB was a clear No. 3. Wesley seems to have assumed that mantle, even if some of us don't have the Wolverines at 3 in our individual ballots, they are the clear national 3 most of the past 2 seasons. And justified it.
Then after that, maybe from 8 to somewhere in the teens is another tier, and then maybe 16 to 35 are more interchangable. I don't think 3 and 10 are interchangeable by any means.
Certainly people could argue about where the tiers begin and end, and the arugments would probably be valid.
I really need to find and re-link Gordon's tiers post. Broke it down very well.
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 01, 2010, 09:27:40 AM
The turf makes such a huge difference. Especially late in the year. If there have been a couple of "weather games" over the course of a season, grass fields can get pretty tore up by the end of the year. Before the Field Turf, I know in playoff games, I was always concerned with the D-Line's ability to get the traction necessary to rush the passer when a passing team would come to town. Now it's less of a variable.
And, as teams have gone to it almost without fail over the past 10 years, it's less of a variable from field to field.
All 39 games in my career were on grass. These days, grass I think is the anomaly. And like you said, it (no pun intended) levels the playing field late in the season.
Quote from: seventiesraider on November 03, 2010, 02:19:32 PMWe can only judge the body of work that the team has displayed. Yes there are still certain intangibles to consider otherwise Mount Union could be anywhere in the top 10. It's those intangibles that even got Trine into the top 15, certainly not who they beat.
Wait, so you can only judge the body of work AND intangibles?
In other words, a team can be whatever you think it should be?
Because I agree that you should mostly focus on this year's body of work. And with regard to weak schedules, while you shouldn't penalize the Witts and Trines of the world, you are comparing them to other unbeaten teams who
have played good opponents, so that's why they don't stack up. In the playoffs they might prove to be better, but until they play someone good, how can you know?
Quote from: K-Mack on November 04, 2010, 11:33:35 PM
All 39 games in my career were on grass. These days, grass I think is the anomaly. And like you said, it (no pun intended) levels the playing field late in the season.
I know that Wabash will have played all 10 of their games this season without a single grass stained uniform. 10 games, not one single blade of natural grass. I feel like this shouldn't shock me given the trend, but for some reason it does. And I'm sure Wabash isn't the only school who plays every game on synth turf.
Quote from: smedindy on November 04, 2010, 09:40:48 PM
I rate Witt higher because they won games that other teams without as many 'intangibles' would have lost.
And that's where it comes down to the individuals own logic, I have Trine in and Witt out because I figured if Trine's opponents where uniformly better across the board they would probably have faired as well as far as victories. Applying that logic to Wittenberg's schedule, I perceive them losing 1,2, or 3 games.
I do have to say that who ever comes out as the victor of the Bash - Witt game pushes some of the outliers out of the top 25 at least on my spreadsheet
Quote from: smedindy on November 04, 2010, 09:40:48 PM
I rate Witt higher because they won games that other teams without as many 'intangibles' would have lost.
Was it an "intangible" that caused CMU to miss a 30-yard chip shot at the end of regulation that would have beaten Witt? ;)
Quote from: jam40jeff on November 05, 2010, 01:10:56 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 04, 2010, 09:40:48 PM
I rate Witt higher because they won games that other teams without as many 'intangibles' would have lost.
Was it an "intangible" that caused CMU to miss a 30-yard chip shot at the end of regulation that would have beaten Witt? ;)
Voodoo...
Lots of games today that could make for some Top 25 re-shuffling! Should be a fun day! :D
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 06, 2010, 09:26:54 AM
Lots of games today that could make for some Top 25 re-shuffling! Should be a fun day! :D
What day is not fun when there's football to play? ;D
Quote from: sflzman on November 06, 2010, 10:21:09 AM
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 06, 2010, 09:26:54 AM
Lots of games today that could make for some Top 25 re-shuffling! Should be a fun day! :D
What day is not fun when there's football to play? ;D
11/13 for LaCrosse football players... ;D
Quote from: smedindy on November 06, 2010, 01:05:17 AM
Quote from: jam40jeff on November 05, 2010, 01:10:56 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 04, 2010, 09:40:48 PM
I rate Witt higher because they won games that other teams without as many 'intangibles' would have lost.
Was it an "intangible" that caused CMU to miss a 30-yard chip shot at the end of regulation that would have beaten Witt? ;)
Voodoo...
I grudgingly allowed Witt into the Top 25 this week, or actually the Bottom of the 25
NOTE: The D3 Fan Poll will not be published till Wednesday this week
Quote from: seventiesraider on November 08, 2010, 11:27:54 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 06, 2010, 01:05:17 AM
Quote from: jam40jeff on November 05, 2010, 01:10:56 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 04, 2010, 09:40:48 PM
I rate Witt higher because they won games that other teams without as many 'intangibles' would have lost.
Was it an "intangible" that caused CMU to miss a 30-yard chip shot at the end of regulation that would have beaten Witt? ;)
Voodoo...
I grudgingly allowed Witt into the Top 25 this week, or actually the Bottom of the 25
NOTE: The D3 Fan Poll will not be published till Wednesday this week
Ur saying u haven't had Witt in a poll yet before this one? I had them at 7, then 9, then 12, and they stayed at 12 this week....
I had a tough time finding my 25th team this week. I ended up plugging in Muhlenberg, one of their two losses was to D. Valley.
Muhlenberg's resume:
Record: 7-2
SOS: 50th (very respectable)
Conference rank: 12th (above average)
Centennial Conference Champs
I was semi-surprised they didn't receive votes in D3's top 25....
This week's D3 Top 25 Fan Poll has been released!
www.uwwfootball.blogspot.com
In case people refuse to go into a Warhawk supported site ;).
D3 Top 25 Fan Poll
1. UWW (20) 500
2. Mount Union 478
3. North Central 453
4. Wesley 439
5. St. Thomas 418
6. UMHB 397
7. Delaware Valley 351
8. Hardin-Simmons 338
9. Ohio Northern 325
10. Linfield 314
11. Wartburg 297
12. Wittenberg 274
13. Trine 260
14. Thomas More 249
15. Bethel 223
16. Coe 206
17. Wheaton 186
18. Cal. Lutheran 149
19. Depauw 111
20. Pac. Lutheran 105
21. Central 86
22. Cortland State 75
23. Rowan 67
24. Montclair 54
25. Franklin 48
Dropped Out: #23 St. John Fisher, #24 Wabash
Also receiving votes: Hampden-Sydney (34), St. John Fisher (20), Willamette (19), Washington U (5), Salisbury(4),Wabash(4),Williams(4), Alfred (2), Illinois Wesleyan (2), Albion (1), Baldwin-Wallace (1), Muhlenberg (1)
Trine continues to climb, slowly but surely
Nice, i didn't realize you had a chat area setup for this. Much easier to comment although I'll still probably only check it once a week. Thanks for setting this up. Intriguing.
For the record, the lack of a complete poll is totally my fault. I've been totally swamped at work and forgot about this. My apologies to my fellow pollsters and those following.
Quote from: Old IC Voice on November 09, 2010, 05:56:56 PM
For the record, the lack of a complete poll is totally my fault. I've been totally swamped at work and forgot about this. My apologies to my fellow pollsters and those following.
Actually, the most responsibility you can assume is 25%. But I found a way to keep the points and differential in perspective. I calculated the ballots received and determined the top 25 from them. Then with the 4 missing ballots, I submitted ballots with those 25 teams in order. That way the results of the submitted ballots and the differential weren't compromised and the points total could be consistent from week to week. Hopefully, next week we can get all 20 once again.
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 09, 2010, 06:28:42 PM
Quote from: Old IC Voice on November 09, 2010, 05:56:56 PM
For the record, the lack of a complete poll is totally my fault. I've been totally swamped at work and forgot about this. My apologies to my fellow pollsters and those following.
Actually, the most responsibility you can assume is 25%. But I found a way to keep the points and differential in perspective. I calculated the ballots received and determined the top 25 from them. Then with the 4 missing ballots, I submitted ballots with those 25 teams in order. That way the results of the submitted ballots and the differential weren't compromised and the points total could be consistent from week to week. Hopefully, next week we can get all 20 once again.
I have a simpler solution. Let me know how many ballots you're missing, and I'll supply the remainder! (Yes, I grew up knowing the "Chicago mantra": vote early and vote often! ;D)
I'll even vary some of my ballots, since I don't always agree with myself! ;)
bleedpurple, while your solution has some good qualities for week-to-week comparisons, it does also have the downside of potentially inflating differential between teams. Looking at the closest margin in this week's poll, DePauw presumably beat out Pac Lu by two points. By submitting 4 'ghost' ballots with DePauw 19th and Pac Lu 20th, their margin rose to six points. Four actual ballots would have been unlikely to have that particular margin (and, being that close with 16 real ballots, might well have resulted in Pac Lu ahead of DePauw).
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 09, 2010, 07:10:29 PM
bleedpurple, while your solution has some good qualities for week-to-week comparisons, it does also have the downside of potentially inflating differential between teams. Looking at the closest margin in this week's poll, DePauw presumably beat out Pac Lu by two points. By submitting 4 'ghost' ballots with DePauw 19th and Pac Lu 20th, their margin rose to six points. Four actual ballots would have been unlikely to have that particular margin (and, being that close with 16 real ballots, might well have resulted in Pac Lu ahead of DePauw).
That's true, I know you don't want to vary the number of points each week, but I would have to agree with Mr Ypsi, you seperate each couple of teams....
However, since this isn't *gospel* and it's the last week before the playoffs, I'm not bothered.
Quote from: smedindy on November 09, 2010, 07:52:41 PM
However, since this isn't *gospel* and it's the last week before the playoffs, I'm not bothered.
I'm not bothered either. Just wanted to point out the mathematical downside to his solution. Personally, I think the solution in my previous post would be preferable! ;D
Linfield belongs in the top five easily....all well informed d3 followers should know that. But I guess they don't.
LOL I guess that is why they aren't ranked in the top 10 in D3Football's poll or AFCA's poll either.
Quote from: criswyly on November 09, 2010, 08:52:02 PM
Linfield belongs in the top five easily....all well informed d3 followers should know that. But I guess they don't.
Good points on the differential. Here is the Actual:
1. UWW (16) 400
2. Mount Union 382
3. North Central 361
4. Wesley 351
5. St. Thomas 334
6. UMHB 317
7. Delaware Valley 275
8. Hardin-Simmons 266
9. Ohio Northern 257
10. Linfield 250
11. Wartburg 237
12. Wittenberg 218
13. Trine 208
14. Thomas More 201
15. Bethel 179
16. Coe 166
17. Wheaton 150
18. Cal. Lutheran 117
19. Depauw 83
20. Pac. Lutheran 81
21. Central 66
22. Cortland State 59
23. Rowan 55
24. Montclair 46
25. Franklin 44
Dropped Out: #23 St. John Fisher, #24 Wabash
Also receiving votes: Hampden-Sydney (34), St. John Fisher (20), Willamette (19), Washington U (5), Salisbury(4),Wabash(4),Williams(4), Alfred (2), Illinois Wesleyan (2), Albion (1), Baldwin-Wallace (1), Muhlenberg (1)
Well, I must be reading this completely differently cuz I have 5 teams in my poll, not on the overall top 25 ???
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 09, 2010, 10:14:32 PM
Good points on the differential. Here is the Actual:
1. UWW (16) 400
2. Mount Union 382
3. North Central 361
4. Wesley 351
5. St. Thomas 334
6. UMHB 317
7. Delaware Valley 275
8. Hardin-Simmons 266
9. Ohio Northern 257
10. Linfield 250
11. Wartburg 237
12. Wittenberg 218
13. Trine 208
14. Thomas More 201
15. Bethel 179
16. Coe 166
17. Wheaton 150
18. Cal. Lutheran 117
19. Depauw 83
20. Pac. Lutheran 81
21. Central 66
22. Cortland State 59
23. Rowan 55
24. Montclair 46
25. Franklin 44
Dropped Out: #23 St. John Fisher, #24 Wabash
Also receiving votes: Hampden-Sydney (34), St. John Fisher (20), Willamette (19), Washington U (5), Salisbury(4),Wabash(4),Williams(4), Alfred (2), Illinois Wesleyan (2), Albion (1), Baldwin-Wallace (1), Muhlenberg (1)
It's interesting to group the teams based on point differential. It looks like #1 through 6 are pretty firmly entrenched (barring a loss), there seems to be some tightening in the 7-10 spots, 11 and 12 look firm, 13 and 14 are competitive, Bethel, Coe Wheaton, and Cal Lutheran seem solid at 15,16, 17, and 18. Depauw and Pacific Lutheran are neck and neck for 19 and 20. #22 Cortland State is within range of 21 Central, but barely holding off #23 Rowan. #25 is within 2 of Montclair.
In the "Also Receiving Votes" category, Willamette went from 8 votes two weeks ago, to 11 last week, to 19 this week. The two teams ahead of them in the category have descended from Top 25 positions over the past two weeks
Quote from: criswyly on November 09, 2010, 08:52:02 PM
Linfield belongs in the top five easily....all well informed d3 followers should know that. But I guess they don't.
Not sure about easily...I ranked them 6th b/c I believe they are still a very strong team. But putting them easily in the top five is stretching it. they'll be leap frogging too many good programs that have yet to lose a game.
Quote from: criswyly on November 09, 2010, 08:52:02 PM
Linfield belongs in the top five easily....all well informed d3 followers should know that. But I guess they don't.
I agree with you...in an undefeated season. However, in my opinion, the D3 Top 25 Fan Poll has the top 6 teams right. I do not fill out a ballot, but I think the top 6 are very solid. Do I think Linfield could beat some of them, should they play in a playoff game? Yes. But there are more to ranking teams than head to head prospects. It's pretty hard to reach Top 5 status with a loss unless a team has a dynasty-like resume' (Mount Union). Even the Purple Raiders may be sitting at 6 this year with a loss. While Linfield has been a winning program for forever and a day, they have not been Top 5 dominant year in and year out to be placed there with a loss. The Cats have lost 11 times in the last 4 plus seasons.
Am I missing something? North Central has the #25 SOS vs Wesley's #1, but is ahead of Wesley at #3. I'm not being sour, but I'm curious to know.
-Ski
Quote from: Teamski on November 10, 2010, 01:34:03 PM
Am I missing something? North Central has the #25 SOS vs Wesley's #1 and has yet to meet a ranked opponent, but is ahead of Wesley at #3. I'm not being sour, but I'm curious to know.
-Ski
you mean besides Wheaton?
As a fan of UWW...there's two teams that really scare me this year. one (as always) is Mount Union, and the other is NCC. They always have a had a great offense...now this year they have a very good defense to bring to the party.
After Wesley's 3-point win at home against Salisbury (who certainly isn't a bad team) on 10/30, I had decided that I would move NCC ahead of Wesley this week if NCC went on the road and handled Wheaton. They did, and so I did. I'm guessing that this line of logic wasn't unique to just me.
wally, if you are going to use that logic then make sure that the info is correct. wesley defeated salisbury at salisbury.
Quote from: wesleydad on November 10, 2010, 03:51:02 PM
wally, if you are going to use that logic then make sure that the info is correct. wesley defeated salisbury at salisbury.
You are right and I knew that. I'm an idiot. The location of that Wes/Sal game really didn't matter and I'm not sure why I mentioned it. The logic still holds though.
Just thought I'd stir it up......but not backing down on what I stated.
Quote from: criswyly on November 10, 2010, 07:32:47 PM
Just thought I'd stir it up......but not backing down on what I stated.
It would be
unLinfield-like to do otherwise, right criswyly? ;)
This is what I had:
1. UW - Whitewater
2. Mt. Union
3. Wesley
4. North Central
5. St. Thomas
6. Mary Hardin - Baylor
7. Wartburg
8. Hardin - Simmons
9. Delaware Valley
10. Ohio Northern
11. Wittenberg
12. Linfield
13. Bethel
14. Thomas More
15. Wheaton (IL)
16. Coe
17. Montclair State
18. Trine
19. DePauw
20. Pacific Lutheran
21. Central (IA)
22. Hampden - Sydney
23. St. John Fisher
24. Willamette
25. Cal Lutheran
Linfield is a fine team, but everyone ahead of them I thought would beat them 6 times out of 10.
Quote from: smedindy on November 10, 2010, 11:50:34 PM
Linfield is a fine team, but everyone ahead of them I thought would beat them 6 times out of 10.
Wow. Interesting perspective! I think Mount and UW-W would beat them 6 out of 10 times. I'm totally unsure if ANY of the others would. But that's whats fun about discussing rankings. ;)
Quote from: smedindy on November 10, 2010, 11:50:34 PM
This is what I had:
1. UW - Whitewater
2. Mt. Union
3. Wesley
4. North Central
5. St. Thomas
6. Mary Hardin - Baylor
7. Wartburg
8. Hardin - Simmons
9. Delaware Valley
10. Ohio Northern
11. Wittenberg
12. Linfield
13. Bethel
14. Thomas More
15. Wheaton (IL)
16. Coe
17. Montclair State
18. Trine
19. DePauw
20. Pacific Lutheran
21. Central (IA)
22. Hampden - Sydney
23. St. John Fisher
24. Willamette
25. Cal Lutheran
Linfield is a fine team, but everyone ahead of them I thought would beat them 6 times out of 10.
I too, had Linfield at 12. I had Trine at 9 though...
Am I correct that this weekend we will do our final regular season poll, then take a break until a final poll after the Stagg?
FWIW...here's what I did this week...
1 Whitewater
2 Mount Union
3 North Central
4 Wesley
5 St. Thomas
6 UMHB
7 Wartburg
8 Delaware Valley
9 Ohio Northern
10 Hardin-Simmons
11 Coe
12 Cal Lutheran
13 Linfield
14 Wheaton
15 Bethel
16 Trine
17 Wittenberg
18 Hampden-Sydney
19 Thomas More
20 Montclair State
21 Rowan
22 Cortland State
23 DePauw
24 Pacific Lutheran
25 Franklin
I guess I'll just copy everyone else and post mine too....
1. UW-Whitewater
2. Mount Union
3. North Central
4. Wesley
5. Hardin-Baylor
6. Delaware Valley
7. Mary Hardin-Simmons
8. Trine
9. St. Thomas
10. ONU
11. Linfield
12. Wittenberg
13. Thomas More
14. Coe
15. Wartburg
16. Wheaton
17. Central
18. Hampden-Sidney
19. Cal Lutheran
20. Bethel
21. DePauw
22. WashU
23. Pacific Luteran
24. Walliamette
25. Albion
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 11, 2010, 06:40:11 PM
Am I correct that this weekend we will do our final regular season poll, then take a break until a final poll after the Stagg?
I would assume so, but you know what they say about assuming ;D
Quote from: sflzman on November 11, 2010, 08:05:22 PM
7. Mary Hardin-Simmons
For the record, this is not the name of the school. The school is Hardin-Simmons; named for John Hardin because of the financial gift he gave that saved Simmons College during the depression. Mary Hardin-Baylor received money from the same family and renamed Baylor College for Women Mary Hardin - Baylor in honor of their donation.
Quote from: Toby Taff on November 12, 2010, 08:02:36 AM
Quote from: sflzman on November 11, 2010, 08:05:22 PM
7. Mary Hardin-Simmons
For the record, this is not the name of the school. The school is Hardin-Simmons; named for John Hardin because of the financial gift he gave that saved Simmons College during the depression. Mary Hardin-Baylor received money from the same family and renamed Baylor College for Women Mary Hardin - Baylor in honor of their donation.
Sorry, It was something on a "copy-and-paste" that I missed by accident...I will change it from now on...
Quote from: sflzman on November 12, 2010, 03:46:45 PM
Quote from: Toby Taff on November 12, 2010, 08:02:36 AM
Quote from: sflzman on November 11, 2010, 08:05:22 PM
7. Mary Hardin-Simmons
For the record, this is not the name of the school. The school is Hardin-Simmons; named for John Hardin because of the financial gift he gave that saved Simmons College during the depression. Mary Hardin-Baylor received money from the same family and renamed Baylor College for Women Mary Hardin - Baylor in honor of their donation.
Sorry, It was something on a "copy-and-paste" that I missed by accident...I will change it from now on...
no problem. just wanted to clarify
Albion sure didn't prove worthy of my top 25 vote :-\
And DePauw sure ain't getting a #19 vote again from me! :o
How about Hardin-Simmons & Delaware Valley?
Bad day for me, my #6, #7, #17, #21, #22,#24, and #25 all lost
The losses don't make you look bad. It's just what happens!
Yea, and it was rivalry week, so you know records are out the window, and everything's on the line...that's why I dislike Alma playing Albion so early...these guys are the big rivals and need to be that week 11 matchup.
Quote from: Toby Taff on November 12, 2010, 11:38:34 PM
Quote from: sflzman on November 12, 2010, 03:46:45 PM
Quote from: Toby Taff on November 12, 2010, 08:02:36 AM
Quote from: sflzman on November 11, 2010, 08:05:22 PM
7. Mary Hardin-Simmons
For the record, this is not the name of the school. The school is Hardin-Simmons; named for John Hardin because of the financial gift he gave that saved Simmons College during the depression. Mary Hardin-Baylor received money from the same family and renamed Baylor College for Women Mary Hardin - Baylor in honor of their donation.
Sorry, It was something on a "copy-and-paste" that I missed by accident...I will change it from now on...
no problem. just wanted to clarify
Toby, that would be a helluva team, if they could play as Mary Hardin-Simmons... think of the National Titles..
Quote from: SaintsFAN on November 14, 2010, 11:10:08 AM
Quote from: Toby Taff on November 12, 2010, 11:38:34 PM
Quote from: sflzman on November 12, 2010, 03:46:45 PM
Quote from: Toby Taff on November 12, 2010, 08:02:36 AM
Quote from: sflzman on November 11, 2010, 08:05:22 PM
7. Mary Hardin-Simmons
For the record, this is not the name of the school. The school is Hardin-Simmons; named for John Hardin because of the financial gift he gave that saved Simmons College during the depression. Mary Hardin-Baylor received money from the same family and renamed Baylor College for Women Mary Hardin - Baylor in honor of their donation.
Sorry, It was something on a "copy-and-paste" that I missed by accident...I will change it from now on...
no problem. just wanted to clarify
Toby, that would be a helluva team, if they could play as Mary Hardin-Simmons... think of the National Titles..
it would never work. too much inner turmoil. it would be like trying to get consensus at a Baptist business meeting. ;)
Quote from: SaintsFAN on November 14, 2010, 11:10:08 AM
Quote from: Toby Taff on November 12, 2010, 11:38:34 PM
Quote from: sflzman on November 12, 2010, 03:46:45 PM
Quote from: Toby Taff on November 12, 2010, 08:02:36 AM
Quote from: sflzman on November 11, 2010, 08:05:22 PM
7. Mary Hardin-Simmons
For the record, this is not the name of the school. The school is Hardin-Simmons; named for John Hardin because of the financial gift he gave that saved Simmons College during the depression. Mary Hardin-Baylor received money from the same family and renamed Baylor College for Women Mary Hardin - Baylor in honor of their donation.
Sorry, It was something on a "copy-and-paste" that I missed by accident...I will change it from now on...
no problem. just wanted to clarify
Toby, that would be a helluva team, if they could play as Mary Hardin-Simmons... think of the National Titles..
This week's D3 Top 25 Fan Poll has been released!
www.uwwfootball.blogspot.com
who was that again who was giving us sh!t for ranking Trine too high?!?! ;)
exactly.
I didn't say I was perfect. Of course, Wabash knocked the fight out of DPU and it made it easier for Trine to clean up on 'em! ;D
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 29, 2010, 02:51:51 PM
who was that again who was giving us sh!t for ranking Trine too high?!?! ;)
Who knew Whitewater was going to go out of their way to make them look good :D ;D ;)
I know I'm jumping the gun....but here's my final poll:
1. UWW
2. Mount Union
3. North Central
4. Wesley
5. Bethel
6. MHB
7. St. Thomas
8. Linfield
9. Trine
10. Alfred
11. Ohio Northern
12. Thomas More
13. Cortland State
14. Montclair State
15. Wheaton
16. D.Valley
17. Wartburg
18. Franklin
19. Pacific Lutheran
20. Cal Lutheran
21. DePauw
22. Coe
23. Central
24. Rowan
25. Hardin Simmons
02- Glad you got this started.
I like your top 3 (and I think there is room for discussion between #2 and #3).
I struggle with the following teams:
Wesley- I didn't see them at full strength, however against UWW, I did not see a #4 team- but I can't justify moving somebody else into this spot.
UMHB- Given the above, I have to move them down, below St. Thomas, Linfield and Trine.
Bethel- This is the toughest team to rank because they are so one-dimensional. They looked completely incapable against Mt, how did they get through St. Thomas and Wheaton? But they did, so I guess they stay at 5.
St. Thomas and Linfield are at 6 and 7.
Trine- I move them up to 8.
UMHB- 9
Wheaton- 10
I'd have UMHB at 5, Bethel at 6, unless Thomas More is grossly over-ranked at 12 (UMHB beat them 69-7). If UMHB is lower, TM has to be MUCH power.
I can't see DePauw in the rankings at all (especially if Wabash is not there). And how did Cortland and Montclair get so far ahead of Rowan? I think they have to be pretty much consecutive (in whatever order) - whether in the mid teens or low 20s is the question, but they never did separate themselves. My final quibble would be that I think Hardin-Simmons is 5-6 slots too low.
BP, did you still want us to submit ballots to you, or shall we just discuss here?
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 22, 2010, 02:39:58 PM
I'd have UMHB at 5, Bethel at 6, unless Thomas More is grossly over-ranked at 12 (UMHB beat them 69-7). If UMHB is lower, TM has to be MUCH power.
I can't see DePauw in the rankings at all (especially if Wabash is not there). And how did Cortland and Montclair get so far ahead of Rowan? I think they have to be pretty much consecutive (in whatever order) - whether in the mid teens or low 20s is the question, but they never did separate themselves. My final quibble would be that I think Hardin-Simmons is 5-6 slots too low.
They each won a game in the tournament...rowan didn't even get in the dance.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 22, 2010, 02:42:30 PM
BP, did you still want us to submit ballots to you, or shall we just discuss here?
he wants your ballots
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on December 22, 2010, 02:45:51 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 22, 2010, 02:42:30 PM
BP, did you still want us to submit ballots to you, or shall we just discuss here?
he wants your ballots
OK, it has been done!
This probably isnt my place but I think you could make a case for Wesley at #3 over North Central. Although Wesley's deficit to UWW is 20 and NCC is 10, Wesley is #1 in the Nation in total defense, NCC is #3. Wesley is also 16th in total offense, NCC 34th. Wesleys 14th in scoring offense, NCC 19th. I also think Wesley scores a bit more if Ellis Krout, the 6-4 reciever was 100% in that game, he tore his ACL against UMHB.
But thats all history now. Again probably not my place, and im probably nitpicking, but i couldnt resist. ;D
Happy Holidays!!
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on December 22, 2010, 02:44:38 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 22, 2010, 02:39:58 PM
I'd have UMHB at 5, Bethel at 6, unless Thomas More is grossly over-ranked at 12 (UMHB beat them 69-7). If UMHB is lower, TM has to be MUCH power.
I can't see DePauw in the rankings at all (especially if Wabash is not there). And how did Cortland and Montclair get so far ahead of Rowan? I think they have to be pretty much consecutive (in whatever order) - whether in the mid teens or low 20s is the question, but they never did separate themselves. My final quibble would be that I think Hardin-Simmons is 5-6 slots too low.
They each won a game in the tournament...rowan didn't even get in the dance.
But Rowan was probably the best team in the NJAC by the end of the season. They just got caught up in numbers and a three way tie.
Quote from: emma17 on December 22, 2010, 02:09:10 PM
02- Glad you got this started.
I like your top 3 (and I think there is room for discussion between #2 and #3).
I struggle with the following teams:
Wesley- I didn't see them at full strength, however against UWW, I did not see a #4 team- but I can't justify moving somebody else into this spot.
I think this is the problem when UMU fans and now UWW fans (I should say SOME fans...certainly not all fans do this) start to grade out teams that they walloped on the way to Salem. In your mind, you think that if UWW and UMU are 1 and 2, then 3 and 4 shouldn't be all that far behind. So when y'all thump a semifinal participant by three scores or more, it's natural to say "hmmm...they sure didn't look like a final four team." Guess what? Nobody does when they play Whitewater or Mount Union. Here's the deal...UWW and UMU
are that much better. That's the chasm that has been created.
That having been said, I don't think you can give anybody who didn't play and beat UMU the benefit of the doubt that they would be better than UMU...in this case NCC. North Central was an outstanding team this season, no doubt about it. And while I do think that poll voting should be done in a year-to-year vacuum, those rules don't apply to Mount Union. There's just too much evidence going back too many years now to not believe that year after year, class after class, Mount Union is going to be the best team in Division III (obviously, that tier now has two occupants, but UWW had to get there and beat them to earn it...nobody assumed UWW would do it until it happened). So with all due respect to North Central and the great season they had, I don't think you can make a reasonable case that they ought to have been ranked higher than Mount Union at any time this season. Basically, until UWW and UMU start losing games to somebody other than each other, they have to be 1 and 2 (in some order) in this polling.
I'll put my final top 25 up here later tonight. I'll save some suspense though...DePauw did not make the cut. :)
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 22, 2010, 03:45:14 PM
Quote from: emma17 on December 22, 2010, 02:09:10 PM
02- Glad you got this started.
I like your top 3 (and I think there is room for discussion between #2 and #3).
I struggle with the following teams:
Wesley- I didn't see them at full strength, however against UWW, I did not see a #4 team- but I can't justify moving somebody else into this spot.
I think this is the problem when UMU fans and now UWW fans (I should say SOME fans...certainly not all fans do this) start to grade out teams that they walloped on the way to Salem. In your mind, you think that if UWW and UMU are 1 and 2, then 3 and 4 shouldn't be all that far behind. So when y'all thump a semifinal participant by three scores or more, it's natural to say "hmmm...they sure didn't look like a final four team." Guess what? Nobody does when they play Whitewater or Mount Union. Here's the deal...UWW and UMU are that much better. That's the chasm that has been created.
Personally I think I ranked the five teams that Whitewater beat in the playoffs fairly high. Infact I ranked Trine and Franklin both in the top 18...then of course I put Mount, NCC and Wesley 2nd, 3rd and 4th....so I'm not sure where you're getting this. unless I fall outside your "SOME fans" category. :)
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 22, 2010, 03:45:14 PM
So with all due respect to North Central and the great season they had, I don't think you can make a reasonable case that they ought to have been ranked higher than Mount Union at any time this season.
I hear what you're saying I seriously thought about putting NCC in the #2 spot in my poll...but I couldn't pull he trigger on it. I think they were UWW's toughest game of the year...but Mount did run the table, only to lose in the Stagg Bowl. That in itself warrants a #2 spot.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on December 22, 2010, 04:11:52 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 22, 2010, 03:45:14 PM
So with all due respect to North Central and the great season they had, I don't think you can make a reasonable case that they ought to have been ranked higher than Mount Union at any time this season.
I hear what you're saying I seriously thought about putting NCC in the #2 spot in my poll...but I couldn't pull he trigger on it. I think they were UWW's toughest game of the year...but Mount did run the table, only to lose in the Stagg Bowl. That in itself warrants a #2 spot.
The downside of
automatically voting the Stagg Bowl loser as #2 is that that gives the bracket-makers too much power! ;) Hypothetically it is certainly possible that the second-best team happened to be on the Champ's side of the bracket. (If the selection committee DOES ever put UMU and UWW in the same half (or even quarter) of the bracket, I'll have to remember to dig up this post! ;D)
I think a plausible argument CAN be made for NCC #2 this year, but, ultimately, I couldn't pull the trigger either.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 22, 2010, 04:37:51 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on December 22, 2010, 04:11:52 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 22, 2010, 03:45:14 PM
So with all due respect to North Central and the great season they had, I don't think you can make a reasonable case that they ought to have been ranked higher than Mount Union at any time this season.
I hear what you're saying I seriously thought about putting NCC in the #2 spot in my poll...but I couldn't pull he trigger on it. I think they were UWW's toughest game of the year...but Mount did run the table, only to lose in the Stagg Bowl. That in itself warrants a #2 spot.
The downside of automatically voting the Stagg Bowl loser as #2 is that that gives the bracket-makers too much power! ;) Hypothetically it is certainly possible that the second-best team happened to be on the Champ's side of the bracket. (If the selection committee DOES ever put UMU and UWW in the same half (or even quarter) of the bracket, I'll have to remember to dig up this post! ;D)
I think a plausible argument CAN be made for NCC #2 this year, but, ultimately, I couldn't pull the trigger either.
I think the only way UWW and Mount end up on the same side of the bracket, is if they
don't finish #1 and #2 in the final regular season poll. With that being said, I think (and I hope) the committee with continue to put the #1 and #2 two teams on the opposite side of each other. Even if the #1 seed overall gets a #2 regional seed ;D
yea, it would of been interesting if Bethel would of beat UMU, but then lost to UWW in the Stagg Bowl. In that case, I can't see putting Bethel as #2 in the country for the final poll.
I saw that the final regular season poll only had 20 participants (of which I was not one... just had too many other things to do on other boards.)
If I may submit one for consideration as one of the "final five voters", then here.
1) UWW
2) UMU
3) NCC
4) Wesley
5) UMHB
6) Bethel
7) St Thomas
8) Linfield
9) Ohio Northern
10) Trine
11) Wheaton IL
12) Wartburg
13) Alfred
14) Coe
15) Delaware Valley
16) Hardin-Simmons
17) Pacific Lutheran
18) Wittenberg
19) Cal Lutheran
20) Franklin
21) Louisiana College
22) Cortland State
23) Montclair State
24) Central
25) Rowan
Wally, since you replied to my quote, I will assume you directed this comment at me "I think this is the problem when UMU fans and now UWW fans (I should say SOME fans...certainly not all fans do this) start to grade out teams that they walloped on the way to Salem. In your mind, you think that if UWW and UMU are 1 and 2, then 3 and 4 shouldn't be all that far behind".
Speaking only for myself and not the "SOME" fans you referred to, my opinion of the rankings has nothing to do with walloped teams.
I consider the individual characteristics of the teams I've seen or followed. I look for strengths and weaknesses that I feel would be material if the teams played head to head. In my opinion, Mt and NCC would be an excellent game and, therefore, discussion is warranted for the #2 and #3 ranking. I believe Mt's big play offense would be limited against NCC because of their excellent discipline and their d line speed. NCC would definately shut down Mt's run game. NCC would struggle to run against Mt because they don't really run a true power game, which plays into Mt's speed.
I think the Wesley that played UWW this year losses to NCC. Wesley is similar (in style, not ability) to Mt in their big play offense and their defensive statistics that were heavily influenced by the types of offenses they played. I believe NCC's discipline makes Wesley's offense ineffective. I believe NCC grinds out enough points against Wesley's d to win.
I believe UMHB showed again that although they are trying, they are still too one dimentional. A solid, disciplined run defense with speed gives UMHB all kinds of trouble. There are quite a few teams with defenses like that- including Bethel, St. Thomas and Wheaton. UMHB defense was decent, but certainly not great, so teams like Linfield and Trine put up lots of points- and probably enough to get the win.
Again, this is all my opinion based on strengths and weaknesses that I have seen or read about, but it has nothing to do with whether UWW or Mt walloped anybody.
That's all fine, emma. My point is simply that Mount Union has been so dominant for so long that even when a team seems to rise up and looks like they could give Mount Union a game, it's probably not appropriate to rank that team ahead of Mount Union until there is some empirical evidence, namely a h2h result, that they actually are better than Mount Union. Over the years there have been several such teams and without fail when that team gets a shot, they get squashed. Mount Union and now UWW as well have accrued that kind of benefit of the doubt capital with poll voters...they ought to be 1 and 2 until it is proven that they aren't.
Debating the ranking of NCC and Wesley on the other hand. That ranking could go either way based on how that hypothetical game plays out in the voter's head. I believe I moved NCC ahead of Wesley after NCC whipped up on Wheaton and in fact have NCC ranked ahead of Wesley in my final ballot as well. But I wouldn't even consider NCC ahead of Mount Union.
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 22, 2010, 06:55:31 PM
That's all fine, emma. My point is simply that Mount Union has been so dominant for so long that even when a team seems to rise up and looks like they could give Mount Union a game, it's probably not appropriate to rank that team ahead of Mount Union until there is some empirical evidence, namely a h2h result, that they actually are better than Mount Union. Over the years there have been several such teams and without fail when that team gets a shot, they get squashed. Mount Union and now UWW as well have accrued that kind of benefit of the doubt capital with poll voters...they ought to be 1 and 2 until it is proven that they aren't.
Debating the ranking of NCC and Wesley on the other hand. That ranking could go either way based on how that hypothetical game plays out in the voter's head. I believe I moved NCC ahead of Wesley after NCC whipped up on Wheaton and in fact have NCC ranked ahead of Wesley in my final ballot as well. But I wouldn't even consider NCC ahead of Mount Union.
I would (and did) for three primary reasons. Coppage against NCC: 107 yards; Coppage against UMU: 299 yards. The vaunted UMU offense was shut out by UWW for 56 minutes of the game (only a four minute explosion in the second quarter kept the game from a rout). UMU never led UWW in the second half; NCC led entering the 4th quarter.
Ultimately I kept UMU as #2, for reasons pretty much as you expressed them. But to not even
consider voting NCC #2 is placing way too much importance on past history and not enough on 2010.
Good comments, emma17.
You outlined exactly why I voted the way that I did.
The UWW band traveled to NCC, so some of the home field advantage was neutralized.
I want fans from outside the ASC to realize that UMHB got several tough games in the ASC.
Here is my post after the McMurry game, which UMHB won 43-31, but gave up 5 TD's.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 19, 2010, 05:09:47 AM
To be down 22-0 and then score 25 straight points to take the lead and the finally lose the game by a margin of a recovered fumble for a TD, a safety, a kickoff return and then an INT for a TD is exasperating.
The good side that I see from this is that we held Daniels and Bailey to "below average" production
Quote
Rushing No Gain Loss Net TD Lg Avg
-------------------------------------------------
Quincy Daniels 27 109 10 99 1 18 3.7
LiDarral Bailey 17 106 21 85 1 39 5.0
and we had this performance in only the 13th game of the new system.
We catch HSU in the 18th game of the new system. That game might be for a share of the conference lead.
UMHB lives inside HSU's head. The CRU always gets a hard game from HSU, but they just have the number of the Cowboys, (just as HSU has McMurry's number.)
Louisiana College was an INT in the end zone against UMHB away from getting the Pool A bid for the ASC. Louisiana College beat HSU in Louisiana this year.
I think that all three ASC teams deserve to be in the Top25. In the playoffs, UMHB just demolished the other 2 South Region teams, CNU 59-7 and Thomas More 69-7.
Final D3 Top 25 Fan Poll has been released.
www.uwwfootball.com
FWIW, here's my final top 25:
1 Whitewater
2 Mount Union
3 North Central
4 Wesley
5 Bethel
6 St. Thomas
7 UMHB
8 Linfield
9 Wheaton
10 Ohio Northern
11 Trine
12 Delaware Valley
13 Coe
14 Alfred
15 Wartburg
16 Franklin
17 Thomas More
18 Montclair State
19 Pacific Lutheran
20 Cal Lutheran
21 Hardin-Simmons
22 Hampden-Sydney
23 Wittenberg
24 Rowan
25 Cortland State
From the week 11 poll to this poll, Alfred moved in and Wabash fell out. The other 24 are the same with some requisite shuffling based on how they did in the tournament.
I want to know where everyone had Trine at in their polls...
I had them at 10...
I had them #6
#8.
Trine is my number nine... ;D
Here's my final poll:
1 UWW
2 Mt Union
3 NCC
4 Wesley
5 Bethel
6 Trine
7 UMHB
8 St Thomas
9 Linfield
10 Wheaton
11 Ohio Northern
12 Wartburg
13 Alfred
14 Coe
15 Thomas More
16 Del Valley
17 Franklin
18 Cortland State
19 Montaclair State
20 Pac Lutheran
21 Rowan
22 Hardin Simmons
23 Hampden Sydney
24 Wittenberg
25 Cal Lutheran
So we have about a range of 5-10 for Trine...
My poll is as follows:
1. UW-Whitewater
2. Mount Union
3. North Central
4. Wesley
5. Bethel
6. Trine
7. Mary Hardin-Baylor
8. St. Thomas
9. Alfred
10. Wheaton
11. Linfield
12. Cortland St.
13. Ohio Northern
14. Delaware Valley
15. Montclair St.
16. Thomas More
17. Hampden-Sydney
18. DePauw
19. Wartburg
20. Endicott
21. Coe
22. Cal Lutheran
23. Wittenberg
24. Franklin
25. Salisbury
Quote from: sflzman on December 23, 2010, 08:07:25 PM
I want to know where everyone had Trine at in their polls...
I had them at 10...
Quote from: sflzman on December 24, 2010, 06:49:26 PM
So we have about a range of 5-10 for Trine...
My poll is as follows:
1. UW-Whitewater
2. Mount Union
3. North Central
4. Wesley
5. Bethel
6. Trine
7. Mary Hardin-Baylor
8. St. Thomas
9. Alfred
10. Wheaton
11. Linfield
12. Cortland St.
13. Ohio Northern
14. Delaware Valley
15. Montclair St.
16. Thomas More
17. Hampden-Sydney
18. DePauw
19. Wartburg
20. Endicott
21. Coe
22. Cal Lutheran
23. Wittenberg
24. Franklin
25. Salisbury
I'm confused.
Wow...that was a bad typo....I've had them higher than 10 since the 2nd week we did that poll....not sure why I wrote 10....
I'm in for doing a 2011 pre-season poll
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on June 02, 2011, 12:53:28 PM
I'm in for doing a 2011 pre-season poll
But only after we have a chance to read the team write-ups that are in Kickoff.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on June 02, 2011, 02:05:05 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on June 02, 2011, 12:53:28 PM
I'm in for doing a 2011 pre-season poll
But only after we have a chance to read the team write-ups that are in Kickoff.
I was thinking the same thing. I think this is the year I cave and finaly purchase Kickoff.
I heard good things about it.
Totally with you on both points 02 Warhawk
Is there going to be a pre-season fan poll???
Quote from: sflzman on August 11, 2011, 02:28:47 PM
Is there going to be a pre-season fan poll???
Yes. Sometime after Kickoff gets published we'll get the ball rolling on this.
K. Thanks!
Awesome
If ya want me again I'm still willing
Can't recall for sure if I was a voter last year (I'm much stronger on bball than fball, but keep up nationally fairly well), but I'm available if you want me.
(And, fear not, IWU will not appear on my ballot unless they start 4-0 - which would mean beating Wheaton - and perhaps 7-0, which would also include beating NCC. ;D)
(Well, OK, 4-0 would mean top 25; but 7-0 would be required to hit top 10! :D)
I'm in! For anything.
Hi everyone,
i'd be happy to coordinate the fan poll again this year, unless someone else wants to go for it. Anyone who is in, just send me a private message to confirm you want to be a part of it. I was thinking it would be good to give ourselves about a week to read Kickoff and then try to get me the ballots by midnight on August 30th. And then I will put out the pre-season poll results on September 1st.
And yes, Kickoff is DEFINITELY worth the money!
Thanks Bleedpurple for putting this together.
Welcome to the initial addition of the 2011 D3 Top 25 Fan Poll. Thanks to those agreeing to being pollsters for the 2011 season. Here is the "fan's view" of where team ranks as the 2011 season kicks off this week:
1. UW-Whitewater (12) 348
2. Mount Union (2) 338
3. North Central 314
4. Wesley 309
5. St. Thomas 286
6. UMHB 280
7. Bethel 249
8. Wheaton 242
9 Linfield 238
10.. Coe 200
11. Ohio Northern 184
12. Wartburg 167
13. Montclair State 153
14. Thomas More 146
15. Cortland State 138
16. Hardin-Simmons 134
17. Cal Lutheran 130
18. Alfred 92
19. Trine 81
20. Wabash 80
21. Wittenberg 77
22. UW-Stevens Point 62
23. St. Johns 60
24. Rowan 47
25. Franklin 34
Also Receiving Votes: Delaware Valley 29, Baldwin Wallace 26, Central 20, Willamette 16, Elmhurst 13, UW- Oshkosh 11, Salisbury 11, Hampden-Sydney 9, Washington and Lee 6, Johns Hopkins 5, Louisiana College 5, Pacific Lutheran 4, Redlands 3, St. John Fisher 2, Illinois Wesleyan 1.
Thanks for taking the time to get this done Bleedpurple.
I don't know if I'm surprised or disappointed that the poll looks an awful lot like the D3 poll released. As much as I respect the DIII gang, I thought the preseason poll provided many opportunities for differing opinions- which I guess I'll start here.
I love UWW through and through, but MT has 18 returning starters. From a "pre-season" perspective, MT seems they should be the pre-season #1, for now.
MHB continues to receive lots of love and I don't get it- 10th place for me. I put Hardin Simmons at #6.
I feel Baldwin-Wallace should replace Ohio Northern at 11- I don't get the love for Ohio Northern. ONU out of top 25.
I placed St. Thomas at #3- ahead of NCC and Wesley. These three teams are close to a toss up to me. St. Thomas over NCC because NCC losses an unbelievable linebacker. NCC over Wesley because I feel they play a more disciplined overall game- with speed everywhere that can compete with Wesley.
Bethel at 7 and Wheaton at 8- So the OAC, MIAC, ASC and CCIW each had two top 10 teams in my book.
Oshkosh just missed, coming in at 15 ;)
Quote from: emma17 on August 31, 2011, 11:57:02 AM
Thanks Bleedpurple for putting this together.
Welcome to the initial addition of the 2011 D3 Top 25 Fan Poll. Thanks to those agreeing to being pollsters for the 2011 season. Here is the "fan's view" of where team ranks as the 2011 season kicks off this week:
1. UW-Whitewater (12) 348
2. Mount Union (2) 338
3. North Central 314
4. Wesley 309
5. St. Thomas 286
6. UMHB 280
7. Bethel 249
8. Wheaton 242
9 Linfield 238
10.. Coe 200
11. Ohio Northern 184
12. Wartburg 167
13. Montclair State 153
14. Thomas More 146
15. Cortland State 138
16. Hardin-Simmons 134
17. Cal Lutheran 130
18. Alfred 92
19. Trine 81
20. Wabash 80
21. Wittenberg 77
22. UW-Stevens Point 62
23. St. Johns 60
24. Rowan 47
25. Franklin 34
Also Receiving Votes: Delaware Valley 29, Baldwin Wallace 26, Central 20, Willamette 16, Elmhurst 13, UW- Oshkosh 11, Salisbury 11, Hampden-Sydney 9, Washington and Lee 6, Johns Hopkins 5, Louisiana College 5, Pacific Lutheran 4, Redlands 3, St. John Fisher 2, Illinois Wesleyan 1.
Bleedpurple & emma17,
Thanks for the effort, I'm a Montclair State fan, a little different slant then D3. +K
No credit to me, I only cut and pasted all the work Bleedpurple did.
Quote from: emma17 on August 31, 2011, 12:07:19 PM
Thanks for taking the time to get this done Bleedpurple.
I don't know if I'm surprised or disappointed that the poll looks an awful lot like the D3 poll released. As much as I respect the DIII gang, I thought the preseason poll provided many opportunities for differing opinions- which I guess I'll start here.
I love UWW through and through, but MT has 18 returning starters. From a "pre-season" perspective, MT seems they should be the pre-season #1, for now.
MHB continues to receive lots of love and I don't get it- 10th place for me. I put Hardin Simmons at #6.
I feel Baldwin-Wallace should replace Ohio Northern at 11- I don't get the love for Ohio Northern. ONU out of top 25.
I placed St. Thomas at #3- ahead of NCC and Wesley. These three teams are close to a toss up to me. St. Thomas over NCC because NCC losses an unbelievable linebacker. NCC over Wesley because I feel they play a more disciplined overall game- with speed everywhere that can compete with Wesley.
Bethel at 7 and Wheaton at 8- So the OAC, MIAC, ASC and CCIW each had two top 10 teams in my book.
Oshkosh just missed, coming in at 15 ;)
Thanks, Emma17. I think it's great for you (and all the pollsters) to think through criteria and rank the teams (Even though you screwed up your #1 team ;)). It should get pretty interesting as upsets occur and teams move up and down and in and out of the Top 25. For those wondering, Here is the D3football.com Top 25 poll:
1 UW-Whitewater (19) 15-0 619 1
2 Mount Union (6) 14-1 606 2
3 Wesley 12-1 561 4
4 North Central (Ill.) 12-1 526 3
5 St. Thomas 12-1 491 7
6 Mary Hardin-Baylor 12-1 481 5
7 Bethel 12-2 480 6
8 Wheaton (Ill.) 10-2 382 11
9 Linfield 9-2 347 9
10 Coe 9-2 321 14
11 Thomas More 11-1 277 15
12 Montclair State 10-2 270 19
13 Cortland State 10-2 267 18
14 Ohio Northern 10-2 259 8
15 Wartburg 10-1 238 12
16 Hardin-Simmons 8-2 230 24
17 Cal Lutheran 8-2 199 21
18 Alfred 10-3 195 13
19 Wabash 8-2 175 --
20 Wittenberg 10-1 165 17
21 Trine 11-1 129 10
22 Rowan 9-1 108 23
23 UW-Stevens Point 7-3 89 --
24 Franklin 9-2 86 22
25 St. John's 7-3 78 --
Others receiving votes: Delaware Valley 76, Hampden-Sydney 73, Central 64, Pacific Lutheran 62, Salisbury 55, Baldwin-Wallace 45, Springfield 29, Redlands 24, Bridgewater (Va.) 22, Johns Hopkins 16, Willamette 15, Louisiana College 13, Monmouth 10, St. John Fisher 9, Christopher Newport 9, Washington and Jefferson 6, DePauw 5, McMurry 3, Washington and Lee 3, Lebanon Valley 2, UW-Oshkosh 2, Millsaps 1, UW-Stout 1, Williams 1.
And once again the D3 Top 25 Fan Poll:
1. UW-Whitewater (12) 348
2. Mount Union (2) 338
3. North Central 314
4. Wesley 309
5. St. Thomas 286
6. UMHB 280
7. Bethel 249
8. Wheaton 242
9 Linfield 238
10.. Coe 200
11. Ohio Northern 184
12. Wartburg 167
13. Montclair State 153
14. Thomas More 146
15. Cortland State 138
16. Hardin-Simmons 134
17. Cal Lutheran 130
18. Alfred 92
19. Trine 81
20. Wabash 80
21. Wittenberg 77
22. UW-Stevens Point 62
23. St. Johns 60
24. Rowan 47
25. Franklin 34
Also Receiving Votes: Delaware Valley 29, Baldwin Wallace 26, Central 20, Willamette 16, Elmhurst 13, UW- Oshkosh 11, Salisbury 11, Hampden-Sydney 9, Washington and Lee 6, Johns Hopkins 5, Louisiana College 5, Pacific Lutheran 4, Redlands 3, St. John Fisher 2, Illinois Wesleyan 1.
Quote from: emma17 on August 31, 2011, 12:07:19 PM
Thanks for taking the time to get this done Bleedpurple.
I don't know if I'm surprised or disappointed that the poll looks an awful lot like the D3 poll released. As much as I respect the DIII gang, I thought the preseason poll provided many opportunities for differing opinions- which I guess I'll start here.
I love UWW through and through, but MT has 18 returning starters. From a "pre-season" perspective, MT seems they should be the pre-season #1, for now.
MHB continues to receive lots of love and I don't get it- 10th place for me. I put Hardin Simmons at #6.
I feel Baldwin-Wallace should replace Ohio Northern at 11- I don't get the love for Ohio Northern. ONU out of top 25.
I placed St. Thomas at #3- ahead of NCC and Wesley. These three teams are close to a toss up to me. St. Thomas over NCC because NCC losses an unbelievable linebacker. NCC over Wesley because I feel they play a more disciplined overall game- with speed everywhere that can compete with Wesley.
Bethel at 7 and Wheaton at 8- So the OAC, MIAC, ASC and CCIW each had two top 10 teams in my book.
Oshkosh just missed, coming in at 15 ;)
Thanks for the work guys, anything that can get me through the last few days without college football is great in my book.
I am curious though Emma, why don't you get the love for MHB but seem to have the love for HSU?
Quote from: emma17 on August 31, 2011, 12:07:19 PM
I love UWW through and through, but MT has 18 returning starters. From a "pre-season" perspective, MT seems they should be the pre-season #1, for now.
I agree they have a lot coming back. But nobody on their roster, that's coming back, is named: Cecil Shorts, Kyle Miller,
Lambert Budzinski, Sam Kershaw or Samy Geurrero.
As long as UWW still has Coppage, UWW will still be my #1. UWW's weakness last season was their secondary....I believe this year those positions will be their strength. Just about everyone is returning, including a transfer from DII that is tearing it up in preseason from what I hear. I really excited about their secondary.
Quote from: emma17 on August 31, 2011, 12:07:19 PM
Oshkosh just missed, coming in at 15 ;)
Considering Oshkosh received 11 points (Others receiving votes), that makes you the only one to put them in the top 25. ;)
As a fan on the WIAC, I hope you're right about them. And if they knock off both Central and Mount, then you can tell us all to suck it!!! 8-)
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on August 31, 2011, 02:47:49 PM
Quote from: emma17 on August 31, 2011, 12:07:19 PM
I love UWW through and through, but MT has 18 returning starters. From a "pre-season" perspective, MT seems they should be the pre-season #1, for now.
I agree they have a lot coming back. But nobody on their roster, that's coming back, is named: Cecil Shorts, Kyle Miller,
Lambert Budzinski, Sam Kershaw or Samy Geurrero.
As long as UWW still has Coppage, UWW will still be my #1. UWW's weakness last season was their secondary....I believe this year those positions will be their strength. Just about everyone is returning, including a transfer from DII that is tearing it up in preseason from what I hear. I really excited about their secondary.
I have UWW at #1 in my submission for this very reason, although I went back and forth on Mount and UWW.
Those 18 returners are significant, especially given how many were very talented sophomores last year. That said, the four that Mount graduated were elite talents that will be no automatic to replace. Two of these guys are currently on an NFL roster. Shorts is looking like he's locked down the #3 spot on the Jags roster, with some saying he could be their #2 by seasons end. He was an NFL caliber player at WR.
UWW definitely graduates some talent, but they bring back their two most important pieces at RB and QB. The O-line lost some guys, but they seem to have reached a level of reloading there as well as on the D-line. At the end of the day, I gave the #1 nod to UWW because they bring back their best player from the Stagg and get a great QB back as well. Those new starters for UWW will be a push by the time these two teams likely meet. Every new starter at that point will probably have 14 games under their belt, more than a full season.
I dropped Trine out of my Top 25 until I see how they fair replacing an All-American QB.
The way I'm treating these early poll submissions is that they will be very fluid. It's all based on perception at this point and no team has proved anything on the field. I anticipate lots of movement in the next several weeks in my poll.
Quote from: hazzben on August 31, 2011, 03:36:19 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on August 31, 2011, 02:47:49 PM
Quote from: emma17 on August 31, 2011, 12:07:19 PM
I love UWW through and through, but MT has 18 returning starters. From a "pre-season" perspective, MT seems they should be the pre-season #1, for now.
I agree they have a lot coming back. But nobody on their roster, that's coming back, is named: Cecil Shorts, Kyle Miller,
Lambert Budzinski, Sam Kershaw or Samy Geurrero.
As long as UWW still has Coppage, UWW will still be my #1. UWW's weakness last season was their secondary....I believe this year those positions will be their strength. Just about everyone is returning, including a transfer from DII that is tearing it up in preseason from what I hear. I really excited about their secondary.
I have UWW at #1 in my submission for this very reason, although I went back and forth on Mount and UWW.
Those 18 returners are significant, especially given how many were very talented sophomores last year. That said, the four that Mount graduated were elite talents that will be no automatic to replace. Two of these guys are currently on an NFL roster. Shorts is looking like he's locked down the #3 spot on the Jags roster, with some saying he could be their #2 by seasons end. He was an NFL caliber player at WR.
UWW definitely graduates some talent, but they bring back their two most important pieces at RB and QB. The O-line lost some guys, but they seem to have reached a level of reloading there as well as on the D-line. At the end of the day, I gave the #1 nod to UWW because they bring back their best player from the Stagg and get a great QB back as well. Those new starters for UWW will be a push by the time these two teams likely meet. Every new starter at that point will probably have 14 games under their belt, more than a full season.
I dropped Trine out of my Top 25 until I see how they fair replacing an All-American QB.
The way I'm treating these early poll submissions is that they will be very fluid. It's all based on perception at this point and no team has proved anything on the field. I anticipate lots of movement in the next several weeks in my poll.
I don't think Trine will be there at the end of the year, honestly I don't think they will win the MIAA this year with an undefeated record. Albion or Alma will beat them. I have them slotted at 25 just out of the respect of the name, but I don't think their run in my top 25 will last.
dlip who has been contibuting to the East Region Fan Poll for a couple years now never even knew this was here :o. Looks like some really dedicated work and research is done here each week by the Top 25 Fan Pollsters. Nice job fellas this looks solid! dlip looks forward to following this thread as well as his usual East Region threads here in 2011. Thanks for all the work!
Quote from: emma17 on August 31, 2011, 12:07:19 PM
Thanks for taking the time to get this done Bleedpurple.
I don't know if I'm surprised or disappointed that the poll looks an awful lot like the D3 poll released. As much as I respect the DIII gang, I thought the preseason poll provided many opportunities for differing opinions- which I guess I'll start here.
I love UWW through and through, but MT has 18 returning starters. From a "pre-season" perspective, MT seems they should be the pre-season #1, for now.
MHB continues to receive lots of love and I don't get it- 10th place for me. I put Hardin Simmons at #6.
I feel Baldwin-Wallace should replace Ohio Northern at 11- I don't get the love for Ohio Northern. ONU out of top 25.
I placed St. Thomas at #3- ahead of NCC and Wesley. These three teams are close to a toss up to me. St. Thomas over NCC because NCC losses an unbelievable linebacker. NCC over Wesley because I feel they play a more disciplined overall game- with speed everywhere that can compete with Wesley.
Bethel at 7 and Wheaton at 8- So the OAC, MIAC, ASC and CCIW each had two top 10 teams in my book.
Oshkosh just missed, coming in at 15 ;)
emma17,
I can KIND OF understand the point about MU having so many returning starters and looking THAT good from a preseason perspective.
Now, on the UMHB topic, what "don't you get"? I don't know if you haven't taken a close enough look at the Crusaders this year or what it is, but they're returning 16 starters and even have a few transfers that could be game changers. There is nothing that says they shouldn't be MORE successful than last year, i'm not trying to be rude. It just doesnt make any sense you having them at No.10. Most people around Belton are talking even bigger than usual about this year's group.
HSU on the other hand? They lost there head coach last year and their ALL-American QB. If anyone isn't getting enough love this year it's McMurry, who in my opinion has a good chance to take down HSU and even give UMHB a tight ballgame. All i'm saying is, UMHB is ranked No.6 by D3football for a reason and in my opinion may be even better than that. HSU is no where near No.6 in the nation this year, i dont think they should even be ranked.
As a voter, after the obvious first two there was such a knot for me between 3-11 and then a gap between 11 (Bethel) and 12 (Wartburg) and then another knot all the way down. I had Salisbury higher than most, and didn't have another WIAC team in the top 25, as I'm on a 'wait and see' with them. I don't know how much difference there is between a Salisbury, a Wittenberg, a UW-SP, or a Del Val until the first game or three.
We're now blessed with a lot of good to great teams in D-3 behind the obvious powers. I think that's excellent for the growth of the sport and the division. There's nothing better to incent excellence than to strive toward an aspirational peer, and we have a couple in D-3. I think the equality of the top programs after the Purple shows that.
Quote from: crufootball on August 31, 2011, 02:19:15 PM
Quote from: emma17 on August 31, 2011, 12:07:19 PM
Thanks for taking the time to get this done Bleedpurple.
I don't know if I'm surprised or disappointed that the poll looks an awful lot like the D3 poll released. As much as I respect the DIII gang, I thought the preseason poll provided many opportunities for differing opinions- which I guess I'll start here.
I love UWW through and through, but MT has 18 returning starters. From a "pre-season" perspective, MT seems they should be the pre-season #1, for now.
MHB continues to receive lots of love and I don't get it- 10th place for me. I put Hardin Simmons at #6.
I feel Baldwin-Wallace should replace Ohio Northern at 11- I don't get the love for Ohio Northern. ONU out of top 25.
I placed St. Thomas at #3- ahead of NCC and Wesley. These three teams are close to a toss up to me. St. Thomas over NCC because NCC losses an unbelievable linebacker. NCC over Wesley because I feel they play a more disciplined overall game- with speed everywhere that can compete with Wesley.
Bethel at 7 and Wheaton at 8- So the OAC, MIAC, ASC and CCIW each had two top 10 teams in my book.
Oshkosh just missed, coming in at 15 ;)
Thanks for the work guys, anything that can get me through the last few days without college football is great in my book.
I am curious though Emma, why don't you get the love for MHB but seem to have the love for HSU?
Cru- Thanks for asking about my MHB ranking. First, I did make them #10- so it's not that I think they are weak or undeserving of a high ranking. Since I don't get to see many ASC games I based my rank on what they did the last couple years in the playoffs and what I read in the Kickoff write-ups. H-S was the #1 ranked offensive team last year, and although they lose their stud QB, it seems they have experienced and talented guys in the wings. In addition, they return 8 defensive starters, which I have to believe will help them against MHB. I know MHB returns the same on defense, but I feel it's easier to improve on defense against a team with a year or two experience. I am not a huge fan of the MHB offense- at least in what I read from last year. They struggled mightily to pass vs. Wesley I remember. Is that because they feature a QB that is better at running than passing? I don't know for sure, but that's what I based my decision on.
Having seen MHB in 2007, I have lots of respect for the program.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on August 31, 2011, 02:47:49 PM
Quote from: emma17 on August 31, 2011, 12:07:19 PM
I love UWW through and through, but MT has 18 returning starters. From a "pre-season" perspective, MT seems they should be the pre-season #1, for now.
I agree they have a lot coming back. But nobody on their roster, that's coming back, is named: Cecil Shorts, Kyle Miller,
Lambert Budzinski, Sam Kershaw or Samy Geurrero.
As long as UWW still has Coppage, UWW will still be my #1. UWW's weakness last season was their secondary....I believe this year those positions will be their strength. Just about everyone is returning, including a transfer from DII that is tearing it up in preseason from what I hear. I really excited about their secondary.
Quote from: emma17 on August 31, 2011, 12:07:19 PM
Oshkosh just missed, coming in at 15 ;)
Considering Oshkosh received 11 points (Others receiving votes), that makes you the only one to put them in the top 25. ;)
As a fan on the WIAC, I hope you're right about them. And if they knock off both Central and Mount, then you can tell us all to suck it!!! 8-)
02- I understand the reluctance with Oshkosh, you know I've had to explain myself plenty with them on other boards. The fact is, they don't have to beat both, they can beat Central and play a close game against Mt and they will be entirely deserving of the #15 ranking I gave them. If they don't, then it's the same ol Oshkosh I reckon.
Re UWW. I can't remember for sure, but I think Mt was ranked #1 in 2008 after losing to UWW in 2007. I think that was based on who each team had returning and there was logic in that pre-season ranking. It's somewhat the same this year. As great as Coppage is, he won't be nearly as productive without a great O-Line. In no way am I saying UWW won't have a great one, but at this point in the season, I don't think we can confidently say they will be. Hopefully a few games into the season we'll all be talking about how well the O-Line has played and then a #1 ranking will be justified- for me anyway.
I was interested in the fact that the Top 25 Fan Poll tabulation reflected results so similar to the D3football.com poll. That was unexpected to me because as the ballots were coming in, there seemed to be quite a variance in rankings. To give a bit more of a glimpse into the variance (and affirm that the pollsters are independent thinkers), I worked up some more data from the initial D3 Top 25 Fan Poll.
Below is a list of each Top 25 team along with the highest ranking each received on any individual ballot and the lowest ranking each received on an individual ballot.
TEAM- (Highest ranking, lowest ranking)
1. UWW- (1,2)
2. Mount Union- (1,2)
3. North Central- (3,5)
4. Wesley- (3,6)
5. St. Thomas- (3,8)
6. UMHB- (4,10)
7. Bethel- (5, 13)
8. Wheaton- (7,15)
9. Linfield- (6,22)
10. Coe- (8, 23)
11. Ohio Northern- (9, unranked)
12. Wartburg- (9, 25)
13. Montclair State- (10, unranked)
14. Thomas More- (10, unranked)
15. Cortland State- (11, unranked)
16. Hardin-Simmons- (6, unranked)
17. Cal Lutheran- (11, unranked)
18. Alfred- (17, unranked)
19. Trine- (11, unranked)
20. Wabash- (14, unranked)
21. Wittenberg- (15, unranked)
22. UW-Stevens Point- (12, unranked)
23. St. John's- (15, unranked)
24. Rowan- (19, unranked)
25. Franklin- (19, unranked)
Quote from: emma17 on August 31, 2011, 11:21:44 PM
Quote from: crufootball on August 31, 2011, 02:19:15 PM
Quote from: emma17 on August 31, 2011, 12:07:19 PM
Thanks for taking the time to get this done Bleedpurple.
I don't know if I'm surprised or disappointed that the poll looks an awful lot like the D3 poll released. As much as I respect the DIII gang, I thought the preseason poll provided many opportunities for differing opinions- which I guess I'll start here.
I love UWW through and through, but MT has 18 returning starters. From a "pre-season" perspective, MT seems they should be the pre-season #1, for now.
MHB continues to receive lots of love and I don't get it- 10th place for me. I put Hardin Simmons at #6.
I feel Baldwin-Wallace should replace Ohio Northern at 11- I don't get the love for Ohio Northern. ONU out of top 25.
I placed St. Thomas at #3- ahead of NCC and Wesley. These three teams are close to a toss up to me. St. Thomas over NCC because NCC losses an unbelievable linebacker. NCC over Wesley because I feel they play a more disciplined overall game- with speed everywhere that can compete with Wesley.
Bethel at 7 and Wheaton at 8- So the OAC, MIAC, ASC and CCIW each had two top 10 teams in my book.
Oshkosh just missed, coming in at 15 ;)
Thanks for the work guys, anything that can get me through the last few days without college football is great in my book.
I am curious though Emma, why don't you get the love for MHB but seem to have the love for HSU?
Cru- Thanks for asking about my MHB ranking. First, I did make them #10- so it's not that I think they are weak or undeserving of a high ranking. Since I don't get to see many ASC games I based my rank on what they did the last couple years in the playoffs and what I read in the Kickoff write-ups. H-S was the #1 ranked offensive team last year, and although they lose their stud QB, it seems they have experienced and talented guys in the wings. In addition, they return 8 defensive starters, which I have to believe will help them against MHB. I know MHB returns the same on defense, but I feel it's easier to improve on defense against a team with a year or two experience. I am not a huge fan of the MHB offense- at least in what I read from last year. They struggled mightily to pass vs. Wesley I remember. Is that because they feature a QB that is better at running than passing? I don't know for sure, but that's what I based my decision on.
Having seen MHB in 2007, I have lots of respect for the program.
Thanks for the reply Emma and no worries I know you weren't trying to disrespect UMHB. One thing I would point out about HSU is not only are they losing their QB, but their best WR and their coach of 20+ years. They do have some talented guys waiting but that is a lot to replace in one off season especially when they are a pass happy offense.
To answer your question about UMHB, our QB is much better at running than passing but that has pretty much always been the case for us (In one playoff game we only threw 3 passes the whole game). This year could be different, we still have the same QB as last year but we are going to be doing some different things on offense that will allow us to pass more... if we need to.
Thanks again for the work and let the fun begin.
emma17,
Thanks for replying. I suppose we'll just have to agree to disagree and see what happens. And by the way, be expecting a very interesting change in the way the Cru's offense will be run this year. I cant say exactly but we'll all see soon.
GO CRU!!!
Quote from: smedindy on August 31, 2011, 10:47:15 PM
As a voter, after the obvious first two there was such a knot for me between 3-11 and then a gap between 11 (Bethel) and 12 (Wartburg) and then another knot all the way down. I had Salisbury higher than most, and didn't have another WIAC team in the top 25, as I'm on a 'wait and see' with them. I don't know how much difference there is between a Salisbury, a Wittenberg, a UW-SP, or a Del Val until the first game or three.
We're now blessed with a lot of good to great teams in D-3 behind the obvious powers. I think that's excellent for the growth of the sport and the division. There's nothing better to incent excellence than to strive toward an aspirational peer, and we have a couple in D-3. I think the equality of the top programs after the Purple shows that.
This was my thought exactly. I had Bethel higher in the knot than you, given they beat 2 of those 'knot' teams (UST and Wheaton) in the playoffs last year and those two 'knot' teams each beat another 'knot' team (Linfield and Coe). But all those games were ridiculously close games that could have broken either way for either team. Parsing out where to place those teams is tricky, especially this early in the year. Several of these teams will face off in the regular season and give us a clearer indicator as the season progresses.
I was pretty confident in the teams I had ranked 1 through 17 (Wittenberg) deserving to be in the Top 25 and feeling like they'll be somewhere in the poll at seasons end. After that, it got a lot murkier for me. 18 through 30 really seemed like a quagmire.
The great thing is that there are sure to be a few teams in the top 17, maybe even the top 10, that fail to impress as we anticipate and don't even make the field. But there are also some teams nobody even sees coming at this point. Bethel is a great example (can you tell I'm a Bethel fan ;)) from last year. From unranked to closing the season in the top 5. I had a lot of confidence in last years team, but most people not close to the MIAC probably didn't have any of those expectations. There are bound to be some out there this year. No one knows perfectly how a season breaks down, but some are going to disappoint and some are going to exceed the pollsters expectations.
Crufootball! haha, was he replying to you or me? I couldnt tell. Either way i know you and i will both agree we are a little better than number 10 forsure. hahaha. Go Cru!!!
Quote from: bleedpurple on September 01, 2011, 12:15:13 AM
I was interested in the fact that the Top 25 Fan Poll tabulation reflected results so similar to the D3football.com poll. That was unexpected to me because as the ballots were coming in, there seemed to be quite a variance in rankings. To give a bit more of a glimpse into the variance (and affirm that the pollsters are independent thinkers), I worked up some more data from the initial D3 Top 25 Fan Poll.
Below is a list of each Top 25 team along with the highest ranking each received on any individual ballot and the lowest ranking each received on an individual ballot.
TEAM- (Highest ranking, lowest ranking)
1. UWW- (1,2)
2. Mount Union- (1,2)
3. North Central- (3,5)
4. Wesley- (3,6)
5. St. Thomas- (3,8)
6. UMHB- (4,10)
7. Bethel- (5, 13)
8. Wheaton- (7,15)
9. Linfield- (6,22)
10. Coe- (8, 23)
11. Ohio Northern- (9, unranked)
12. Wartburg- (9, 25)
13. Montclair State- (10, unranked)
14. Thomas More- (10, unranked)
15. Cortland State- (11, unranked)
16. Hardin-Simmons- (6, unranked)
17. Cal Lutheran- (11, unranked)
18. Alfred- (17, unranked)
19. Trine- (11, unranked)
20. Wabash- (14, unranked)
21. Wittenberg- (15, unranked)
22. UW-Stevens Point- (12, unranked)
23. St. John's- (15, unranked)
24. Rowan- (19, unranked)
25. Franklin- (19, unranked)
Wow, that is really interesting. Both in seeing the variance among fan opinion and the fact that in the end it still broke so similarly to the D3football.com official poll.
Which makes me think, I'd love to see a similar breakdown of the official poll. Pat, would that ever be in the realm of possibility?
In theory, yes, but I would have to do the breakdowns by hand as well and I'm not sure I would have the time to do that during the season.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 01, 2011, 12:52:23 AM
In theory, yes, but I would have to do the breakdowns by hand.
Great....we'll expect them by Friday.
;D
From what I read about Coe and Cal Lutheran, they both have very good teams returning.
Cal Lutheran seems to be a team on the rise and should challenge Linfield for the conference title.
I think both will have surprisingly good seasons.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 01, 2011, 09:14:00 AM
From what I read about Coe and Cal Lutheran, they both have very good teams returning.
Cal Lutheran seems to be a team on the rise and should challenge Linfield for the conference title.
I think both will have surprisingly good seasons.
02 Warhawk, that would certainly be surprising, if not an amazing accomplishment. Cal Lutheran and Linfield play in different conferences!! ;)
However, I don't think Linfield having a surprisingly good season would be all that big of a surprise. They haven't had a losing season in a gazillion years!! ;D
Quote from: BoBo on September 01, 2011, 10:03:10 AM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 01, 2011, 09:14:00 AM
From what I read about Coe and Cal Lutheran, they both have very good teams returning.
Cal Lutheran seems to be a team on the rise and should challenge Linfield for the conference title.
I think both will have surprisingly good seasons.
02 Warhawk, that would certainly be surprising, if not an amazing accomplishment. Cal Lutheran and Linfield play in different conferences!! ;)
I have no excuse...oops
:-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 01, 2011, 12:02:49 PM
Quote from: BoBo on September 01, 2011, 10:03:10 AM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 01, 2011, 09:14:00 AM
From what I read about Coe and Cal Lutheran, they both have very good teams returning.
Cal Lutheran seems to be a team on the rise and should challenge Linfield for the conference title.
I think both will have surprisingly good seasons.
02 Warhawk, that would certainly be surprising, if not an amazing accomplishment. Cal Lutheran and Linfield play in different conferences!! ;)
I have no excuse...oops
:-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[
Been there, done that. We all have a post or two like that up our sleeve!
But the Cal Lutheran v. Linfield matchup is a key game for early season Top 25 clarity. Both for these two programs and for how to gauge the their conferences, to a degree, the rest of the year. It'll be a good matchup.
Hard to keep all the Lutherans straight. I was in Minnesota for 4 years and I still have trouble on all of the darm Lutheran schools (and what flavor of Lutherans they are...) ;D
Quote from: smedindy on September 01, 2011, 03:24:51 PM
Hard to keep all the Lutherans straight. I was in Minnesota for 4 years and I still have trouble on all of the darm Lutheran schools (and what flavor of Lutherans they are...) ;D
And all the Concordia's...
Quote from: hazzben on September 01, 2011, 09:01:21 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 01, 2011, 03:24:51 PM
Hard to keep all the Lutherans straight. I was in Minnesota for 4 years and I still have trouble on all of the darm Lutheran schools (and what flavor of Lutherans they are...) ;D
And all the Concordia's...
. . . and Wesleyan's, too.
And it's a good thing I didn't cast an NCAC 'homer' vote for Wooster at #25.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 01, 2011, 09:14:00 AM
From what I read about Coe and Cal Lutheran, they both have very good teams returning.
I think both will have surprisingly good seasons.
Thanks to a butt whooping issued by Harden Simmons, but prediction about Coe isn't going according to plan. me ranking them at 7th looks a little foolish now.
I guess Coe busing it all the way from Iowa to deep in the heart of Texas didn't help their cause.
1. UW-Whitewater (12) 348 (1)
2. Mount Union (2) 338 (2)
3. Wesley 316 (4)
4. St. Thomas 292 (5)
5. Mary Hardin-Baylor 289 (6)
6. Linfield 261 (9)
7. Bethel 258 (7)
8. Wheaton 243 (8)
9. Ohio Northern 198 (11)
10. Hardin-Simmons 196 (16)
11. North Central 185 (4)
12. Wartburg 156 (12)
13. Montclair State 154 (13)
14. Cortland State 144 (15)
15. Cal Lutheran 130 (17)
16. Thomas More 128 (14)
17. UW-Stevens Point 100 (22)
18. Wabash 92 (20)
19. Wittenberg 90 (21)
20. Redlands 84 (U)
21. Alfred 83 (18)
22. St. John's 80 (23)
23. Trine 70 (19)
24. Coe 67 (10)
25. Franklin 60 (25)
Also receiving votes: Baldwin Wallace (34), Delaware Valley (26), Hampden-Sydney (19), Louisiana College (15), Elmhurst (13), Illinois Wesleyan (13), UW-Oshkosh (12), Pacific Lutheran (12), Salisbury (11), Willamette (7), Washington and Lee (6), UW-LaCrosse (5), Rowan (4), UW-Platteville (3), Adrian (2), Lycoming (2), St. John Fisher(2), Johns Hopkins (1), Washington University (1).
This one's confusing for me :o
UST moves up a spot after a ugly win (for a team that is supposed to be #4): 1 for 13 on third downs, 55 yds rushing on 30 attempts and 2 for 5 in the redzone. I get that NCC dropped so there was an open spot. But I actually dropped UST a spot in my bracket. They played poorly against SNC. SNC is a solid team, but they're not in anyones top 25.
Linfield doesn't play anyone and goes from 9 to 6? This is just really strange.
And how can people be putting North Central above Redlands?!? (The official poll had this too) Redlands proved, on the field, that they are a better football team in 2011. NCC would have probably beaten them last year, but this isn't last year anymore folks. For the life of me I don't understand how you can keep a team above another team in the poll after it loses head to head. Especially when there's been only one game. NCC has no quality wins this season to justify this. All they have is a preseason ranking that is totally conjecture. Maybe NCC ends up being a top 15 team. But at this point, I think they've got to prove it on the field and earn/climb their way back up there. My 2¢. Given the way Coe dropped after losing to the #10 team in our poll, it makes me wonder if NCC at 12 is a bit of name recognition.
Man, what did I have for breakfast this morning?!? I seem like a crotchety old man :D
Redlands proved, on the field, that they are a better football team on Sept. 4, 2011. Not everyone is forced to believe that they are a better team hands-down, not this early in the season.
I think the week 1 rankings gap between NCC and Redlands was too great for Redlands to be in front of NCC in week 2. However, if Coe was still ranked ahead of Harden-Simmons....then you would have a valid argument, b/c both were in the top 25 BEFORE they played.
St. Norbert's wasn't ranked to begin with and then they lost....so why would anyone catapult them in the top 25? Putting a new team in the top 25 means someone has to be ousted. It makes since that Redlands enters the top 25 (with a win over a good team), and Rowans falls out of the rankings (week one loss). With that being said, who would you have St. Norbert's replace? Almost everyone in the bottom half of the bracket won (or didn't play).
Linfield moved up b/c Coe and NCC lost. But why they jumped ahead of Bethel? Probably b/c of some inconsistent voting by our NWC friends ;D
Hazzben- I hear you loud and clear and I think I agree.
I dropped UST to 6, which was doing them a favor.
Linfield at 6? I have them at 22- Great program yes, but they have a lot to prove having lost their very good QB.
People actually think Ohio Northern is the 9th best team in the country?
I see both sides of the NCC- Redlands issue. I'm an NCC fan and have watched them three times in the last year, I know they are good. But, so was Redlands last year. I think you convinced me, the Fan Poll is refreshed each week. As such, Redlands should be ahead of NCC until NCC earns their way back.
This is the weekend that will convince me of MHB. They play a very below average Lacrosse offense but a good Lacrosse defense. If they come out and score big, I'll eat my words and give them a better ranking. Until then, calling them the 5th best team in the country is awfully generous.
RE: NCC and Redlands. Don't forget that it was a very close game AT Redlands. If Redlands had won AT NCC, things might have gone differently.
Quote from: emma17 on September 07, 2011, 11:51:58 AM
Linfield at 6? I have them at 22- Great program yes, but they have a lot to prove having lost their very good QB.
Whitewater lost a very good QB at the end of the 2009 season, but I don't think anyone was going to drop them in the bottom of the pool to start the 2010 season.
Linfield is a top ten team. They reload each year like Mount has been doing, but not exactly on the same caliber as Mount.
Quote from: emma17 on September 07, 2011, 11:51:58 AM
This is the weekend that will convince me of MHB. They play a very below average Lacrosse offense but a good Lacrosse defense. If they come out and score big, I'll eat my words and give them a better ranking. Until then, calling them the 5th best team in the country is awfully generous.
So would 26 points scored or a 19 point victory count as big enough to earn the ranking?
The fun of rankings are that they don't mean anything (unless you're in the FB$) and with so few data points available this early in the season everything is purely speculative. That's why we have 44 teams ranked in the top 25 from only 14 pollsters. I wouldn't be surprised if by the end of the season that number is down to between 30-35. This early in the season we're just guessing who we think is good and until the end of the season when we can see who's done what I don't put any weight on ranks. Plus with only 14 people voting I could cause a lot of variance by myself with a weird ballot. I had Coe out of my top 25, but if I had voted terribly and put them 3rd they'd have gone from 24th up to 19th.
The one good thing about the polls this early is to see who are those teams just off the top 25 but getting some votes because different people have more knowledge about teams in different regions so they may put someone on their list that others may have no idea about and it brings them onto people's radars.
Just because team A beat team B doesn't necessarily mean that team A is the better team and deserves the higher ranking, just that on that particular day they were better. I think most people would say UWW is better than Franklin (even I will admit that), but if Franklin pulls a 1 in 10 (or whatever chance you want to say) win this weekend, how many people are going to claim Franklin is a better team? Sure Franklin will rise in voters eyes, but are you really going to say UWW still isn't one of the top teams?
Quote from: crufootball on September 07, 2011, 12:46:23 PM
Quote from: emma17 on September 07, 2011, 11:51:58 AM
This is the weekend that will convince me of MHB. They play a very below average Lacrosse offense but a good Lacrosse defense. If they come out and score big, I'll eat my words and give them a better ranking. Until then, calling them the 5th best team in the country is awfully generous.
So would 26 points scored or a 19 point victory count as big enough to earn the ranking?
A fair question Cru- if they hadnt been beaten the last X number of years in the playoffs- a 19 point difference would earn them a higher ranking supported by past performance. I will have to see the stats and hear the details of the game. If MHB is up 28-0 at half, but plays all subs in second half and wins 28-14, I'd give em a better ranking. If MHB wins 24-0 and played all starters and struggled to pass the ball, I'd probably keep them lower.
Good points FC- but if Franklin beats UWW this Sat then they will be ranked ahead of UWW in my poll next week.
UWW will have a chance to pass them throughout the season/post season- if they deserve it.
02'- I hear you on Linfield and it was hard for me to rank them 22 because Im a fan of their program. I would love for them to give me reason this week to move them up.
Quote from: emma17 on September 07, 2011, 01:47:30 PM
Quote from: crufootball on September 07, 2011, 12:46:23 PM
Quote from: emma17 on September 07, 2011, 11:51:58 AM
This is the weekend that will convince me of MHB. They play a very below average Lacrosse offense but a good Lacrosse defense. If they come out and score big, I'll eat my words and give them a better ranking. Until then, calling them the 5th best team in the country is awfully generous.
So would 26 points scored or a 19 point victory count as big enough to earn the ranking?
A fair question Cru- if they hadnt been beaten the last X number of years in the playoffs- a 19 point difference would earn them a higher ranking supported by past performance. I will have to see the stats and hear the details of the game. If MHB is up 28-0 at half, but plays all subs in second half and wins 28-14, I'd give em a better ranking. If MHB wins 24-0 and played all starters and struggled to pass the ball, I'd probably keep them lower.
I think I am still confused by your lack of confidence in UMHB, you mention our playoff record like it is something we should be ashamed of. Over the course of the last 5+ years you can count on one hand the amount of teams that have had better success than we have had.
I have full confidence that UMHB will win the game but this is our first real game and we didn't have a scrimmage this year since it was canceled. La Crosse comes in having already played a game and with the knowledge that if they lose again they will be 0-2 and their season is almost already lost so they have a ton to play for.
I think the rankings may have jumbled because of where folks had Coe and NCC, and when they did the rankings shuffle it all depended on who put who where to replace them.
My outlier is Thomas More. I don't have 'em ranked. I think there are 25 better teams, maybe 30 better. Doesn't mean they are bad, nor does it mean they won't move into my rankings. It just seems their league is pretty weak sauce right now. (And yes, I know this is coming from an NCAC guy...)
Week 4 or 5 is when the pretenders and contenders emerge, after everyone has 3 or 4 games under their belts and conference season is in full swing.
Any upsets of this week's Top 10 on Saturday? :-\
Quote from: Raider 68 on September 07, 2011, 02:48:25 PM
Any upsets of this week's Top 10 on Saturday? :-\
If there is, I'm certain it'll involve a WAIC team. A large chuck of the WIAC is either in or playing a top 10 team this week.
St Thomas @ River Falls
LaCrosse @ Mary Hardin-Baylor (TX)
Oshkosh @ Mount Union (OH)
Whitewater @ Franklin
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 07, 2011, 02:54:48 PM
Quote from: Raider 68 on September 07, 2011, 02:48:25 PM
Any upsets of this week's Top 10 on Saturday? :-\
If there is, I'm certain it'll involve a WAIC team. A large chuck of the WIAC is either in or playing a top 10 team this week.
St Thomas @ River Falls
LaCrosse @ Mary Hardin-Baylor (TX)
Oshkosh @ Mount Union (OH)
Whitewater @ Franklin
The only one that has a change is the first one, not sure about UW-RF this year, but we'll see! Good post +k
Another reason the rankings can be jumbled around could be because I didn't get my ballot in last week but I did this week. But that also means that there was someone else who didn't get it in this week. So that could be a reason for the change.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 07, 2011, 11:28:54 AM
Redlands proved, on the field, that they are a better football team on Sept. 4, 2011. Not everyone is forced to believe that they are a better team hands-down, not this early in the season.
I'd absolutely grant that at seasons end or even mid-season you could make an argument for ranking Redlands below NCC. But you note that on Sept. 4, 2011 Redlands proved, on the field, that they were the better team. Fact is, there is no other evidence to the contrary in 2011 to refute this. So how can you reasonably rank them lower? Because you
think that in the future what you
know to be true after week one might not be the case? Personally that just seems overly subjective to me when you have such an obvious piece of objective criteria pointing in the other direction.
I've got no beef with a Wk 8 NCC team ranked higher than Redlands, even if the latter is still undefeated. There could be some impressive things NCC has done by that point to prove it on the field. The problem is they haven't proved any of them on the field at this point. All we have to go on in the Week 1 polls is 1 result, in which Redlands beat North Central. That's all I'm saying. Voters certainly have a right to vote how they see fit. And some no doubt view their polls as how they project the season finishing. I'm just saying those 'projection' polls are pretty shaky this early in the season faced with the cold hard facts on the field.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 07, 2011, 01:36:11 PM
Just because team A beat team B doesn't necessarily mean that team A is the better team and deserves the higher ranking, just that on that particular day they were better. I think most people would say UWW is better than Franklin (even I will admit that), but if Franklin pulls a 1 in 10 (or whatever chance you want to say) win this weekend, how many people are going to claim Franklin is a better team? Sure Franklin will rise in voters eyes, but are you really going to say UWW still isn't one of the top teams?
Agree to disagree here. If team A beats team B, then team A is the better team.
Maybe team B would win 9 out of 10, but that's just
conjecture. There is no objective proof that this would be the case. Maybe team A was just the better team on that given day, but that's still the only objective thing you have to go on. UST should have been regarded as better than Bethel last year at the end of the regular season. They won on the field. After Bethel beat UST on the road in the playoffs, well now you can start wondering about who would win __ out of 10. Now if Redlands ends up 7-3 and NCC 9-1, you've got some objective criteria for arguing that NCC is still the better team despite the head to head. Teams improve, some more than others, as a season progresses. The problem I see is that you have no such objective evidence after week one of the season. Despite that nagging little thing that happened last Saturday on the field.
But I do appreciate the dialogue. This is exactly why Polls -- and fan polls in particular -- are so much fun. We get to debate like crazy! :)
02 You forgot to list UWEC @ St John's. Though the game is in Collegeville, Eau Claire always seems to be a thorn in the Johnnie's side. Particularly this early in the season. I know SJU is not in the Top Ten, I find it odd that you would pass up the opportunity to pump the WIAC on this. ;) By the way, I do agree with your post 100%.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 07, 2011, 02:54:48 PM
Quote from: Raider 68 on September 07, 2011, 02:48:25 PM
Any upsets of this week's Top 10 on Saturday? :-\
If there is, I'm certain it'll involve a WAIC team. A large chuck of the WIAC is either in or playing a top 10 team this week.
St Thomas @ River Falls UST looked vulnerable last week against SNC. I just don't know if UWRF is good enough to take advantage...very close but no upset
LaCrosse @ Mary Hardin-Baylor (TX) On paper only. UMHB controls the lines and Lax can't get their offense moving
Oshkosh @ Mount Union (OH) On a limb, Oshkosh puts a scare in Mount, but talent & coaching carry the day
Whitewater @ Franklin Don't see it. Franklin keeps it close, but UWW jumps on LC's back and pulls away in the second half.
UWEC @ SJU
UWEC leads at the half. SJU settles on Bruns & they come from behind to win in the second half.Cal Lutheran @ Linfield
Cal Lutheran does what it couldn't do in the playoffs last year. SCIAC makes a statement for 2nd week in a row**UWP @ UWSP
Platteville wins a tight one that shows just why the WIAC is so highly regarded. The annual WIAC chaos begins in earnest**
Quote from: hazzben on September 07, 2011, 04:00:50 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 07, 2011, 11:28:54 AM
Redlands proved, on the field, that they are a better football team on Sept. 4, 2011. Not everyone is forced to believe that they are a better team hands-down, not this early in the season.
I'd absolutely grant that at seasons end or even mid-season you could make an argument for ranking Redlands below NCC. But you note that on Sept. 4, 2011 Redlands proved, on the field, that they were the better team. Fact is, there is no other evidence to the contrary in 2011 to refute this. So how can you reasonably rank them lower? Because you think that in the future what you know to be true after week one might not be the case? Personally that just seems overly subjective to me when you have such an obvious piece of objective criteria pointing in the other direction.
Because it's an opinion -- 25 of them, in fact. If you just want to list people by record with head-to-head results, that's what standings are for.
Quote from: retagent on September 07, 2011, 04:48:40 PM
02 You forgot to list UWEC @ St John's. Though the game is in Collegeville, Eau Claire always seems to be a thorn in the Johnnie's side. Particularly this early in the season. I know SJU is not in the Top Ten, I find it odd that you would pass up the opportunity to pump the WIAC on this. ;) By the way, I do agree with your post 100%.
Out of the games I mentioned above, I think the underdog that has the best chance to win is Franklin, actually.
Quote from: MasterJedi on September 07, 2011, 03:09:53 PM
Another reason the rankings can be jumbled around could be because I didn't get my ballot in last week but I did this week. But that also means that there was someone else who didn't get it in this week. So that could be a reason for the change.
I got mine in last week but not this week. Too much birthday celebration over the 3 day weekend............... ;) ;D
Cru- I didn't have a chance to look up actual records for this comment, so I could be a bit misguided. My issue w ranking MHB high is how they lose and who they lose to. First, they were in a dogfight against a very average Lacrosse team last year. Second, they dont pass the ball well- it's like they choose to ignore the invention entirely. Wesley made them look silly when they tried to pass. Third- they dont do well against teams that can truly stop the run. I think they played UWW 3 or 4 times in last few years and really struggled to score (although 2007 semi final game was a good one).
A top 5 (or 10) team in my opinion should be able to put points up against the best competition- and in today's day and age that usually requires more offensive balance. I dont know how true the old adage of "defense wins championships" is anymore. Defense is a must and it keeps you in the game- but you have to be able to score points to be a top team. IMO.
QuoteAgree to disagree here. If team A beats team B, then team A is the better team
Really?
There have been so many games won on a fluke bounce in the history of football. Is Auburn better than Utah State? Most neutral observers think that Utah State was the better team, and outplayed Auburn for the entire game.
And then there's this scenario, in successive weeks:
Team A beats Team B
Team B beats Team C
Team C beats Team A
There are no injury problems nor real home field advantage. Who's the better team?
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 07, 2011, 05:57:21 PM
Quote from: retagent on September 07, 2011, 04:48:40 PM
02 You forgot to list UWEC @ St John's. Though the game is in Collegeville, Eau Claire always seems to be a thorn in the Johnnie's side. Particularly this early in the season. I know SJU is not in the Top Ten, I find it odd that you would pass up the opportunity to pump the WIAC on this. ;) By the way, I do agree with your post 100%.
Out of the games I mentioned above, I think the underdog that has the best chance to win is Franklin, actually.
??? ???
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic, 02, or just being a nervous Nellie!! I think UWW covers the spread (24.5) on the OAC pick'ems. River Falls and Eau Claire have much better shots at being part of upsets than Franklin has of upseting your Warhawks, IMO. Oshkosh and La Crosse? Not even close on the road against those two teams.
I may be biased, but I think Franklin certainly has a chance. They kept it close for 3 quarters last year in the playoffs with no rushing game at all and they appear to be able to run this season. They'll definitely put up some points, it's just a matter of whether the UWW defense or the Franklin defense can make more plays.
Quote from: smedindy on September 07, 2011, 08:11:05 PM
QuoteAgree to disagree here. If team A beats team B, then team A is the better team
Really?
There have been so many games won on a fluke bounce in the history of football. Is Auburn better than Utah State? Most neutral observers think that Utah State was the better team, and outplayed Auburn for the entire game.
And then there's this scenario, in successive weeks:
Team A beats Team B
Team B beats Team C
Team C beats Team A
There are no injury problems nor real home field advantage. Who's the better team?
Yep, call me crazy, but when a team wins on the field, I think they're the better team. Hence when SJU won the 2003 national title, I thought they were the better team. Never mind that some felt Mount would win 7, 8 or 9 out of 10. They weren't playing 10 times. They played once. Hence, SJU ended up #1 in the polls and got a national title over a Mt Union team that was being hailed as possibly their greatest ever prior to the game.
And your second scenario is just silly. It has nothing to do with week 1 in the polls (which is what this discussion is about). Team A has played
exactly one game against Team B. Team A won. Team A and Team B have played no one else so far this season. While they will play other teams, they haven't yet. You have only 1 objective result to consult this far. And Team A has it in spades. Nice hypothetical, but we have a real world situation. Redlands, a real team, beat North Central. Another real team, head to head.
I specifically state that I could see NCC being ranked above Redlands in later weeks once more data is available. Maybe Redlands suffers a loss. Maybe NCC rebounds and starts dominating teams for the rest of the season. Great, move them above Redlands if objective and subjective material support it. But as of week won, every bit of objective data says Redlands was better.
And 'most neutral observers think Utah State was the better team'. Really? Show me that data on neutral observers. And no, Utah State did not outplay Auburn for the 'entire game'. That's the 'entire' reason Auburn won the game. There was a large portion of the game that Utah State did outplay Auburn. BUT, it wasn't for the 'entire game', hence, Auburn won. Aka, they scored more points than Utah State, get a W in the column, etc.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 07, 2011, 09:06:50 PM
I may be biased, but I think Franklin certainly has a chance. They kept it close for 3 quarters last year in the playoffs with no rushing game at all and they appear to be able to run this season. They'll definitely put up some points, it's just a matter of whether the UWW defense or the Franklin defense can make more plays.
I agree, the Grizz were within 7 - 14 points for 3 quarters. And they may very well keep it with 7 -14 points for three quarters again. But in the end, Warhawks will prevail by +25. If you dissect their games over this run, you will discover that this is not unusual for them. In fact, it is commonly their winning formula. IMO, there were some interesting dynamics at work in that game in week 11 last year & especially the week leading up to it (having to start a QB with 0 career starts and just a handful of snaps vs a 4 year starter and one of D3's best gunslingers, etc). Nothing that happened last week suggests that Franklin won't throw the ball all over the place again this week. The Grizz offense rushed the ball for 200+ last week, but considering the opponent (losers of their last 21 games), I don't think your assumption about the Grizz running game can be made quite yet. If I were a Grizz fan, I'd be concerned with my own defense, they didn't really make the plays last week against a really bad team. I look for UWW to play a very strong game, creating scoring opportunities by forcing turnovers, pounding the rock, and Blanchard showing the Grizz faithful what they missed in week 11 last year. I'm glad to see that Franklin is going to stream the game live over the 'net. Are you expecting a large crowd?
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 07, 2011, 09:06:50 PM
I may be biased, but I think Franklin certainly has a chance. They kept it close for 3 quarters last year in the playoffs with no rushing game at all and they appear to be able to run this season. They'll definitely put up some points, it's just a matter of whether the UWW defense or the Franklin defense can make more plays.
While I was writing this, Bobo responded with some of the same points, but I still thought I'd post the below nonetheless:
I preface my thoughts by agreeing that Franklin CERTAINLY has a chance. However, I do think your reasoning based on last year's game may be a bit optimistic. While in the strictest sense, Franklin "kept it close" for 3 quarters", UW-W did score 6 seconds into the 4th quarter extending their lead to 17 points. And while they may not have had a rushing game at all AGAINST UW-W (-11 yards rushing), they did average over 160 yards per game on the ground when you take away the sack yardage (which I still believe should be held against the passing game). There are also facts that could support a UW-W blowout win (which I readily acknowledge you never said there WEREN'T):
1. Last year's final score probably shouldn't be completely ignored: UW-W 52-21.
2. It is improbable that sophomore QB Jonny West's game is quite at the level that Gagliardi Finalist Kyle Ray's was when he played against UW-W.
3. In last year's game sophomore QB Lee Brekke was making his first collegiate start for UW-W.
But once again, having said all that, I do believe Franklin has a chance to win.
Enjoy the game!
Quote from: hazzben on September 07, 2011, 10:49:15 PM
Yep, call me crazy, but when a team wins on the field, I think they're the better team. Hence when SJU won the 2003 national title, I thought they were the better team. Never mind that some felt Mount would win 7, 8 or 9 out of 10. They weren't playing 10 times. They played once. Hence, SJU ended up #1 in the polls and got a national title over a Mt Union team that was being hailed as possibly their greatest ever prior to the game.
And your second scenario is just silly. It has nothing to do with week 1 in the polls (which is what this discussion is about).
Your first scenario has nothing to do with week 1 in the polls either. I doubt anyone would really give the winner of the title game a No. 2 vote. (Unless there were somehow some better team left out of the field entirely.)
Quote from: BoBo on September 07, 2011, 10:50:24 PMI'm glad to see that Franklin is going to stream the game live over the 'net. Are you expecting a large crowd?
Well, probably not a large crowd by UWW standards, but for a school with 1000 students we should get at least 2-3k packed in. If it doesn't rain (40% chance at the moment) the weather is looking nice
Nice post Bleed. And FC Griz I respect your stance.
I don't understand the number of posters that say a team doesn't "have a chance"- especially to keep a game close, for a team that has shown some level of ability. Both Franklin and Oshkosh are big underdogs according to some pickem boards, and many people pick UWW and MT without any comment whatsoever about the abilities of the teams they are playing. I feel it's a bit disrespectful of the talent and the work the athletes put in the offseason, and the work the coaches put in.
I think all good teams have a chance against historically great teams, and all it takes is some breaks along the way and confidence to build and doubt to creep in with 20 yr olds and you end up with a result you didn't expect. I didn't expect Stevens Point to beat UWW three years ago.
Quote from: emma17 on September 07, 2011, 11:19:57 PM
Nice post Bleed. And FC Griz I respect your stance.
I don't understand the number of posters that say a team doesn't "have a chance"- especially to keep a game close, for a team that has shown some level of ability. Both Franklin and Oshkosh are big underdogs according to some pickem boards, and many people pick UWW and MT without any comment whatsoever about the abilities of the teams they are playing. I feel it's a bit disrespectful of the talent and the work the athletes put in the offseason, and the work the coaches put in.
I think all good teams have a chance against historically great teams, and all it takes is some breaks along the way and confidence to build and doubt to creep in with 20 yr olds and you end up with a result you didn't expect. I didn't expect Stevens Point to beat UWW three years ago.
We wouldn't have the word "upset" in our sports vocabulary if every or most or many teams that "have a chance" to win were winning these games with regularity. We call it an upset for the simple fact that they are not winning these games on a regular basis & we don't expect they will win. That Point game was an upset because you and many others never thought UWSP had a chance, me included. We didn't expect it so it was an upset in our collective minds. Point fans might disagree with us - they thought they could win - we weren't disrespecting them because we thought otherwise. Our view then had nothing to do with the dreaded "D" word in the same way it has nothing to do with what I'm saying today. You're entitled to your opinion just like anybody else is entitled to theirs; but, IMO it's wrong to accuse them of being disrepectful to others because their opinion differs from you.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 07, 2011, 10:56:41 PM
Quote from: hazzben on September 07, 2011, 10:49:15 PM
Yep, call me crazy, but when a team wins on the field, I think they're the better team. Hence when SJU won the 2003 national title, I thought they were the better team. Never mind that some felt Mount would win 7, 8 or 9 out of 10. They weren't playing 10 times. They played once. Hence, SJU ended up #1 in the polls and got a national title over a Mt Union team that was being hailed as possibly their greatest ever prior to the game.
And your second scenario is just silly. It has nothing to do with week 1 in the polls (which is what this discussion is about).
Your first scenario has nothing to do with week 1 in the polls either. I doubt anyone would really give the winner of the title game a No. 2 vote. (Unless there were somehow some better team left out of the field entirely.)
Fair enough. But I remember talking to folks about the fact that they still felt Mount was the better team than SJU in 2003, despite the results on the field. That's what we love about having a playoff, it proves it on the field. Call me crazy, but I think SJU, having won on the field, deserved to be ranked higher than Mount. I get that it's not exactly the same as a wk 1 victory. But a head to head playoff victory has more correlation to what happened on the field in wk 1 than a hypothetical.
But contrary to how the majority of voters in both the fan poll and D3 poll voted, one week into the season, Redlands beat North Central. For a voter to place North Central above Redlands
at this point in the season is contrary to all objective evidence on the subject. They've essentially said, subjective weighs more in my poll than objective, on the field evidence. 4, 5, 6 weeks from now things will be immensely more convoluted, you'll have all sorts of objective evidence that will necessarily lead to subjective weighting of that evidence. That's what makes it fun. However, the preseason and early weeks are the
most subjective times for the polls. In my world, that'd be where I gave the most weight to the
only objective evidence available.
Considering I've now annoyed and exhausted myself with this subject, I can't imagine how much everyone else must be sick of it. I'll shut up now! ;D :-X
Quote from: BoBo on September 07, 2011, 08:21:10 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 07, 2011, 05:57:21 PM
Quote from: retagent on September 07, 2011, 04:48:40 PM
02 You forgot to list UWEC @ St John's. Though the game is in Collegeville, Eau Claire always seems to be a thorn in the Johnnie's side. Particularly this early in the season. I know SJU is not in the Top Ten, I find it odd that you would pass up the opportunity to pump the WIAC on this. ;) By the way, I do agree with your post 100%.
Out of the games I mentioned above, I think the underdog that has the best chance to win is Franklin, actually.
??? ???
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic, 02, or just being a nervous Nellie!! I think UWW covers the spread (24.5) on the OAC pick'ems. River Falls and Eau Claire have much better shots at being part of upsets than Franklin has of upseting your Warhawks, IMO. Oshkosh and La Crosse? Not even close on the road against those two teams.
I'm not saying they'll lose. I'm just saying that out of the games I mentioned below, I just think Franklin has the best chance for the upset.
St Thomas @ River Falls
LaCrosse @ Mary Hardin-Baylor (TX)
Oshkosh @ Mount Union (OH)
Whitewater @ Franklin
RF beating St. Thomas? No way
LaCrosse traveling a million hours on bus and winning AT MHB? No chance
Mount losing at home to an unranked team? Please
A tough, ranked Franklin team knocking off UWW, in Franklin? Possible
That's all I'm saying I'm not taking this game for granted. UWW has to lose eventually...right?
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 07, 2011, 09:06:50 PM
I may be biased, but I think Franklin certainly has a chance. They kept it close for 3 quarters last year in the playoffs with no rushing game at all and they appear to be able to run this season. They'll definitely put up some points, it's just a matter of whether the UWW defense or the Franklin defense can make more plays.
With an All-American QB
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 08, 2011, 09:45:42 AM
Quote from: BoBo on September 07, 2011, 08:21:10 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 07, 2011, 05:57:21 PM
Quote from: retagent on September 07, 2011, 04:48:40 PM
02 You forgot to list UWEC @ St John's. Though the game is in Collegeville, Eau Claire always seems to be a thorn in the Johnnie's side. Particularly this early in the season. I know SJU is not in the Top Ten, I find it odd that you would pass up the opportunity to pump the WIAC on this. ;) By the way, I do agree with your post 100%.
Out of the games I mentioned above, I think the underdog that has the best chance to win is Franklin, actually.
??? ???
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic, 02, or just being a nervous Nellie!! I think UWW covers the spread (24.5) on the OAC pick'ems. River Falls and Eau Claire have much better shots at being part of upsets than Franklin has of upseting your Warhawks, IMO. Oshkosh and La Crosse? Not even close on the road against those two teams.
I'm not saying they'll lose. I'm just saying that out of the games I mentioned below, I just think Franklin has the best chance for the upset.
St Thomas @ River Falls
LaCrosse @ Mary Hardin-Baylor (TX)
Oshkosh @ Mount Union (OH)
Whitewater @ Franklin
RF beating St. Thomas? No way
LaCrosse traveling a million hours on bus and winning AT MHB? No chance
Mount losing at home to an unranked team? Please
A tough, ranked Franklin team knocking off UWW, in Franklin? Possible
That's all I'm saying I'm not taking this game for granted. UWW has to lose eventually...right?
Is LaCrosse really traveling by bus?
Quote from: crufootball on September 08, 2011, 10:17:44 AM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 08, 2011, 09:45:42 AM
Quote from: BoBo on September 07, 2011, 08:21:10 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 07, 2011, 05:57:21 PM
Quote from: retagent on September 07, 2011, 04:48:40 PM
02 You forgot to list UWEC @ St John's. Though the game is in Collegeville, Eau Claire always seems to be a thorn in the Johnnie's side. Particularly this early in the season. I know SJU is not in the Top Ten, I find it odd that you would pass up the opportunity to pump the WIAC on this. ;) By the way, I do agree with your post 100%.
Out of the games I mentioned above, I think the underdog that has the best chance to win is Franklin, actually.
??? ???
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic, 02, or just being a nervous Nellie!! I think UWW covers the spread (24.5) on the OAC pick'ems. River Falls and Eau Claire have much better shots at being part of upsets than Franklin has of upseting your Warhawks, IMO. Oshkosh and La Crosse? Not even close on the road against those two teams.
I'm not saying they'll lose. I'm just saying that out of the games I mentioned below, I just think Franklin has the best chance for the upset.
St Thomas @ River Falls
LaCrosse @ Mary Hardin-Baylor (TX)
Oshkosh @ Mount Union (OH)
Whitewater @ Franklin
RF beating St. Thomas? No way
LaCrosse traveling a million hours on bus and winning AT MHB? No chance
Mount losing at home to an unranked team? Please
A tough, ranked Franklin team knocking off UWW, in Franklin? Possible
That's all I'm saying I'm not taking this game for granted. UWW has to lose eventually...right?
Is LaCrosse really traveling by bus?
Yes, sir.
Wow, I hope for their sake they have already left and can chop the drive up as much as possible.
Just to keep the record straight we call a surprising outcome in a contest an upset because a 2 year old colt named Upset defeated Man O'War in the 1919 Sanford Stakes at Saratoga Race Course in Saratoga Springs, New York for Man O'War's sole lifetime loss.
Easy now Bobo- I feel you have a slight tendency to argue things I haven't said.
First, I'm not criticizing people for different opinions- I am simply saying I believe it shows arrogance and disrespect to flat out say another team has "no chance" to beat my team- especially without logical evidence other than "because we have won x championships so there".
And please stop putting words in my mouth- I never said or felt "Stevens Point didn't have a chance"- you must have me confused w someone else.
To say I didn't expect Stevens Point to win is not the same, IMO, as saying Stevens Point "had no chance" to win.
Criticize me for what I say and not for what I didn't say.
Hazzben- you are fighting the good fight- many of us agree w your logic.
Quote from: bleedpurple on September 07, 2011, 10:53:52 PM
While I was writing this, Bobo responded with some of the same points, but I still thought I'd post the below nonetheless:
I preface my thoughts by agreeing that Franklin CERTAINLY has a chance. However, I do think your reasoning based on last year's game may be a bit optimistic. While in the strictest sense, Franklin "kept it close" for 3 quarters", UW-W did score 6 seconds into the 4th quarter extending their lead to 17 points. And while they may not have had a rushing game at all AGAINST UW-W (-11 yards rushing), they did average over 160 yards per game on the ground when you take away the sack yardage (which I still believe should be held against the passing game). There are also facts that could support a UW-W blowout win (which I readily acknowledge you never said there WEREN'T):
1. Last year's final score probably shouldn't be completely ignored: UW-W 52-21.
2. It is improbable that sophomore QB Jonny West's game is quite at the level that Gagliardi Finalist Kyle Ray's was when he played against UW-W.
3. In last year's game sophomore QB Lee Brekke was making his first collegiate start for UW-W.
But once again, having said all that, I do believe Franklin has a chance to win.
Enjoy the game!
Lee Brekke had quite the game last year. You'd never have known it was his first start looking at him. If a sophomore can do that in his first start I wonder what a sophomore in his second start can do :D So I still have hope that West (while probably not performing quite as well as Kyle Ray) can perform well enough.
I think the key factors will be:
a) Whether the Grizzlies can run the ball at all... it's hard to win when you go for -11 yards against a tough defense. If we can at least produce an adequate rushing performance this time, that will force the defense to respect the run enough to open up the passing game
b) Which Grizzlies defense shows up... if the defense from the first half last week shows up, UWW will be too much even for our offense to keep up with. If the defense from the second half shows up and plays a full 60 minutes (a bad couple minutes either side of halftime last year hurt big) that could be enough for the Grizzlies offense to pull it off
c) Who gets off to the fast start... I don't know how much experience UWW has at being behind early on but I'm guessing it doesn't happen too often. Franklin likes to get out front early (but they managed to come back from 14 down last week) but I know it will be tougher to do that than normal. I think it could be important for the Grizzlies to get that early lead and put the pressure on to get UWW out of their comfort zone.
I think the range of possible scores for Franklin is somewhere between 17-40 (I just don't see UWW completely shutting them down and giving up single digits) and the range for UWW is 24-50 (could I make the ranges any larger? :P)
To be honest, if I absolutely had to predict I'd sadly have to say Franklin loses by 14-17... but that's why we play the game on the field rather than on paper. We can argue till we're blue in the face (or purple for Warhawks) but once the ball is kicked it all goes out the window. Too bad we have to wait another day and a half...
Win or lose, I think it'll be a great game. Hopefully both teams will learn a lot of valuable things and we'll meet again in a few months 8-)
Just to play devil's advocate here (since the weekend can't come quick enough and there's been plenty of talk this week about voting methods) and to get the thread back onto the Fan Poll a bit...
If a team who's borderline top 25, like Franklin or UW-Oshkosh this week, were to have an excellent performance and come close but lose (say 28-27 or something) to one of the top teams would everyone still drop them out of the top 25 (unless they were ranked top 10-15 and would probably stay just in the rankings) or would someone consider keeping them at the same spot or even raising them slightly because of a strong performance against a top team?
I guess it's kinda like saying, is a loss a loss whether or not it's by 50 to an average team or 1 point to the best team and thus must be dropped at least X number of positions, or are there enough different levels of losses where there's the unique situation a loss could still be viewed positively in voters eyes
I'll go ahead and post my opinion... I don't know if I'd raise someone in the poll even though they lost (unless some teams above lost and dropped) but I would be willing to drop a team little or none if the right situation arose.
^^ GrizzliesGrad, I've noticed in the past that lower ranked teams, teams also receiving votes or unranked teams that perform well against highly ranked teams have routinely increase their vote totals in the following weeks poll. IMO, they are rewarded for their strong performance. I think it sometimes matters what other teams around them do as well.
If FC is close to UW-W, they will be rewarded.
I noticed that Auburn dropped out of the rankings in the AP and dropped a few spots in the coaches poll based on their 'win' against Utah State. Again, Utah State should have won, a couple of flukes happened and they didn't. Many commentators and observers I heard, read and watched Saturday and Sunday said Utah State was indeed the best team. Auburn was not rewarded at all for the win.
So if FC actually leads UW-W and loses like Utah St. lost, I bet UW-W won't be #1. Winning ugly is one thing; winning by a couple of flukes is another.
FC- To your question on a quality loss, I definately see a team moving up in rankings if they lose to a highly ranked team in a competitive game. If Franklin losses in a close and well played game, then I for one will surely move them up in the fan poll. As I already see Oshkosh as #15, if they play Mt tough and lose, I certainly won't move them down. Depending on how others do, I may very well move them up.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 08, 2011, 08:09:04 PM
If a team who's borderline top 25, like Franklin or UW-Oshkosh this week, were to have an excellent performance and come close but lose (say 28-27 or something) to one of the top teams would everyone still drop them out of the top 25 (unless they were ranked top 10-15 and would probably stay just in the rankings) or would someone consider keeping them at the same spot or even raising them slightly because of a strong performance against a top team?
I guess it all depends on what the rest of the top 25 does. If most everyone in top 25 wins, I'll have a tough time dropping a team (that won) out of the poll, just so a team (that lost) like UWO can take its place. No matter who they played or how close it was.
Quote from: smedindy on September 08, 2011, 08:40:59 PM
So if FC actually leads UW-W and loses like Utah St. lost, I bet UW-W won't be #1. Winning ugly is one thing; winning by a couple of flukes is another.
UWW is playing a ranked team on the road. They will stay #1 if they win by 1 or 50.
So yes, I'll take that bet.
You may be right - there is a degree of difference there. Ack, shouldn't post with an eye on the Saints / Packers.
"I guess it all depends on what the rest of the top 25 does. If most everyone in top 25 wins, I'll have a tough time dropping a team (that won) out of the poll, just so a team (that lost) like UWO can take its place. No matter who they played or how close it was."
02- Don't you feel that the above is one of the many problems of the BCS as well as rankings in general? As an example, lets say NCC played UWW and Mt Union in the first two games- and lost both games in close contests. Would you not have them in your top 25 if all the other teams were 2-0?
Quote from: emma17 on September 09, 2011, 01:14:41 PM
"I guess it all depends on what the rest of the top 25 does. If most everyone in top 25 wins, I'll have a tough time dropping a team (that won) out of the poll, just so a team (that lost) like UWO can take its place. No matter who they played or how close it was."
02- Don't you feel that the above is one of the many problems of the BCS as well as rankings in general? As an example, lets say NCC played UWW and Mt Union in the first two games- and lost both games in close contests. Would you not have them in your top 25 if all the other teams were 2-0?
BCS blows. Computers shouldn't determine national championship games. DIII (and every other possible sporting event) does it right with a playoff system.
Back to your question. Yea, I think I would have a tough time moving NCC of out the top 25 if they start off losing to the top two ranked teams in the country. Especially when NCC started out ranked 3rd (or 4th).
But I'm not sure what that has to do with my post that you quoted above. I was talking about moving a team like UWO into the top 25 (after a loss), when all other top 25 teams won.
02-
I'm practicing the important communication principle of "seek first to understand".
As I understand your position, only teams given a pre-seasonp top 25 ranking should be given ranking privileges if they play a great game and lose against top ranked teams?
Isn't there room for subjectivity?
When looking at an outcome, what would one expect to happen in a match between Top 25 teams in which one team takes its first flight in who knows how long, across 2 time zones, to play a game that is 8 hours later than its usual start time?
I expect Redlands to gain 5-6 points on home field advantage with that information alone.
Quote from: emma17 on September 09, 2011, 02:02:30 PM
02-
I'm practicing the important communication principle of "seek first to understand".
As I understand your position, only teams given a pre-season top 25 ranking should be given ranking privileges if they play a great game and lose against top ranked teams?
Isn't there room for subjectivity?
No, I just didn't understand what you were trying to get at....that's all.
No schools receive any "special privileges" for being in the top 25. When I fill out my poll my philosophy is: If a school wins, then more than likely its positioning within the poll will improve from the week before. However, if they lose, then they will fall down the rankings (possibly out of it all together, depending on where they were previously ranked). Kind of simple.
If a team is already outside the top 25 (UWO) and then loses, I can't justify moving them
up into the poll. No matter who they lost to, or by how much.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 09, 2011, 01:29:44 PM
Quote from: emma17 on September 09, 2011, 01:14:41 PM
"I guess it all depends on what the rest of the top 25 does. If most everyone in top 25 wins, I'll have a tough time dropping a team (that won) out of the poll, just so a team (that lost) like UWO can take its place. No matter who they played or how close it was."
02- Don't you feel that the above is one of the many problems of the BCS as well as rankings in general? As an example, lets say NCC played UWW and Mt Union in the first two games- and lost both games in close contests. Would you not have them in your top 25 if all the other teams were 2-0?
BCS blows. Computers shouldn't determine national championship games. DIII (and every other possible sporting event) does it right with a playoff system.
Now wait a minute.
A. Yes, there should be a playoff system in D-1A. One rep from each D-1 conference and then at-larges to make a 16 team tourney.
B. The BCS have neutered the impact of the computers. When it started, they had all of the right elements to create a good ratings system, but they threw out the margin of victory calculations (even though there was a limit on how big of a margin counted, in Sagarin especially there is diminishing returns), revamped the SOS to where it's not that relevant (or accurate), and then didn't throw out games against 1-AA schools so they can feast on the Charleston Southerns of the world instead of playing real, actual opponents.
I feel that good computer rankings are better than trusting the assistant to the traveling secretary to cast the coaches' vote (which may happen in the D-1 coaches poll, never here!) or some cynical ink-stained wretch who never sees anyone outside of his own little geographic area except for when he has a chance to catch a game on TV. But the BCS wanted to 'rig' the system - heck they always want to 'rig' the system and so they're not using real computer rankings.
I know the RPI has flaws, but they use it for many sports in the NCAA and it does a decent job. Same with the PairWise system for hockey. A good computer ranking can help aid the discussion of who should stay or go...TO A PLAYOFF!
And yes, you can keep the bowl games for the other teams outside of the 16.
Quote from: emma17 on September 09, 2011, 02:02:30 PM
02-
I'm practicing the important communication principle of "seek first to understand".As I understand your position, only teams given a pre-seasonp top 25 ranking should be given ranking privileges if they play a great game and lose against top ranked teams?
Isn't there room for subjectivity?
+1! :)
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 09, 2011, 02:33:49 PM
Quote from: emma17 on September 09, 2011, 02:02:30 PM
02-
I'm practicing the important communication principle of "seek first to understand".
As I understand your position, only teams given a pre-season top 25 ranking should be given ranking privileges if they play a great game and lose against top ranked teams?
Isn't there room for subjectivity?
No, I just didn't understand what you were trying to get at....that's all.
No schools receive any "special privileges" for being in the top 25. When I fill out my poll my philosophy is: If a school wins, then more than likely its positioning within the poll will improve from the week before. However, if they lose, then they will fall down the rankings (possibly out of it all together, depending on where they were previously ranked). Kind of simple.
If a team is already outside the top 25 (UWO) and then loses, I can't justify moving them up into the poll. No matter who they lost to, or by how much.
02, I just don't know that I totally understand it because much of what you say relies on some preseason "top 25" list as if it is a true ranking of the best teams based on fact. Wouldn't you agree that there are probably several schools that don't make a pre-season top 25 list that more than likely will end up there during the season? And don't you agree that there are some that make the list that will be gone? That's the challenge of the preseason poll- there is a huge amount of unknown. But now we have one game under our belts for most teams. So take Oshkosh, you'd agree they beat a pretty darn good team in Central wouldn't you? Central is probably a better team than the majority of teams that were beat by preseason Top 25 teams- right? Just in terms of strength of schedule alone for week one Oshkosh is a top team- and they won. Then, if they play the #2 team in the country really tough and lose- you don't feel you have enough evidence that Oshkosh is worthy of moving into the top 25?
Quote from: smedindy on September 09, 2011, 04:11:07 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 09, 2011, 01:29:44 PM
Quote from: emma17 on September 09, 2011, 01:14:41 PM
"I guess it all depends on what the rest of the top 25 does. If most everyone in top 25 wins, I'll have a tough time dropping a team (that won) out of the poll, just so a team (that lost) like UWO can take its place. No matter who they played or how close it was."
02- Don't you feel that the above is one of the many problems of the BCS as well as rankings in general? As an example, lets say NCC played UWW and Mt Union in the first two games- and lost both games in close contests. Would you not have them in your top 25 if all the other teams were 2-0?
BCS blows. Computers shouldn't determine national championship games. DIII (and every other possible sporting event) does it right with a playoff system.
Now wait a minute.
A. Yes, there should be a playoff system in D-1A. One rep from each D-1 conference and then at-larges to make a 16 team tourney.
B. The BCS have neutered the impact of the computers. When it started, they had all of the right elements to create a good ratings system, but they threw out the margin of victory calculations (even though there was a limit on how big of a margin counted, in Sagarin especially there is diminishing returns), revamped the SOS to where it's not that relevant (or accurate), and then didn't throw out games against 1-AA schools so they can feast on the Charleston Southerns of the world instead of playing real, actual opponents.
I feel that good computer rankings are better than trusting the assistant to the traveling secretary to cast the coaches' vote (which may happen in the D-1 coaches poll, never here!) or some cynical ink-stained wretch who never sees anyone outside of his own little geographic area except for when he has a chance to catch a game on TV. But the BCS wanted to 'rig' the system - heck they always want to 'rig' the system and so they're not using real computer rankings.
I know the RPI has flaws, but they use it for many sports in the NCAA and it does a decent job. Same with the PairWise system for hockey. A good computer ranking can help aid the discussion of who should stay or go...TO A PLAYOFF!
And yes, you can keep the bowl games for the other teams outside of the 16.
That's pretty much the solution I'd like to see for the BCS as well... 16 team tourney with 11 conference champs and 5 at large, and with there being 35 bowl games this year, you could take 15 away for a tourney and still leave 20 games for 40 other teams. That would give 56 (out of 120ish schools) rather than 70 playing in the postseason and forcing games like 6-6 New Mexico St vs 6-6 Buffalo which no one will care about.
And as to the comment about computers determining the national championship game... I don't think anyone (computers, people, or a mixture) should determine a championship
game... since there's usually more than just 2 teams worthy of competing. Now using computers as a tool or guide can be very beneficial but I don't know if I'd rely solely on them to pick a tournament field either. Computers are only as good as the person who programs the formulas and so will likely always have some flaw possible, but they can try to compare every team with every result with no bias which a human will never be able to do.
If top 25 poll votes were awarded due to attention paid, Wisconsin-Oshkosh would be the unanamous #1!!
Looks like we'll see a major shake up after this week. A number of ranked teams have gone down today - and a few others are in the process of losing. Top of the heap stays the same as UWW and Mount both win easily.
Another top 5 team falls this week.
Wesley loses to Kean, who they beat something like 48-10 last year. It was Kean's first game, so I don't know if this says more about Wesley's weakness or Kean's unexpected strength. Probably a little of both.
Should be another interesting week in the upcoming polls.
It took me 15 minutes to decide on 12-25 on my ballot. I think everyone is treading lightly...
That poll was tough
Quote from: emma17 on September 09, 2011, 05:13:28 PM
02, I just don't know that I totally understand it because much of what you say relies on some preseason "top 25" list as if it is a true ranking of the best teams based on fact. Wouldn't you agree that there are probably several schools that don't make a pre-season top 25 list that more than likely will end up there during the season? And don't you agree that there are some that make the list that will be gone? That's the challenge of the preseason poll- there is a huge amount of unknown. But now we have one game under our belts for most teams. So take Oshkosh, you'd agree they beat a pretty darn good team in Central wouldn't you? Central is probably a better team than the majority of teams that were beat by preseason Top 25 teams- right? Just in terms of strength of schedule alone for week one Oshkosh is a top team- and they won. Then, if they play the #2 team in the country really tough and lose- you don't feel you have enough evidence that Oshkosh is worthy of moving into the top 25?
Yea, I admit the preseason polls is very tough to do, b/c there's a lot of uncertainty. But it isn't a total shot in the dark. There is a degree of research involved in making the polls, and there's reasoning behind where teams are ranked to begin the season.
Yes, of course I agree there will be schools that aren't in the top 25 to begin the year that will end up there during the season. I would agree that Oshkosh beat a good
program in Central. Although, according to some research, Central was picked to finish fourth in the IIAC this year, with a record just over .500. So, experts think they
possibly won't be as good as previous years. Hence, Central not being ranked to start the season. So, I guess time will tell if they actually are a "pretty darn good team"
this year. Is Central better than a majority of the teams beat by a top 25 team? I have no idea, and few do, but yes it's possible. That's another debate.
Unfortunately for Oshkosh, strength of schedule isn't good enough to get you in the top 25....you still have to win the games. Beating an unranked team at home, then losing to a powerhouse doesn't get you in the top 25, in my book. And it looks like I'm not alone.
Since Oshkosh was blown out at Alliance, looks like this is all a mute point. However, I appreciate the debate and respect your point of views. It's been fun. ;)
Now 02, you didn't really think Oshkosh's loss would mute me did you?
Preface, I don't have any connection to Oshkosh that causes me to think irrationally (it's my undersized brain that does that). Oshkosh happens to be the WIAC team that was playing Mt this year. Because they have played 2 tough teams (yes, Central is a tough team in a tough conference), they are an interesting case study when it comes to discussing ranking teams-IMO.
I get the feeling that some look at the Oshkosh game as a "blow out" (24 point loss) and, as such, Oshkosh isn't deserving of ranking discussion. So who does deserve national rankings? Since it's all about who we think is the best team in the country at the time of the poll (I think), I choose to rank teams based upon the following question:
"How would this team fare against the top 2 teams in the country?"
If my approach above has merit (and maybe I'm missing something here), then there are some hard facts to ignore in the current rankings.
If Oshkosh was blown out Saturday and therefore, undeserving of ranking disucssion, what about:
ONU-they lost by 27 points to MT last year, and ONU finished 8th in the final D3 poll and are preseason 12.
Alfred-they lost to Mt by 30 in the playoffs last year, and they are preseason 16.
Del Valley-they lost to Mt by 28 in the playoffs last year, and they are preseason 25.
Surely Oshkosh has at least equal talent returning this year as teams above (I say that facetiously because they probably have better talent returning).
If the arguement is that Oshkosh appeared to be a "tougher out", relatively speaking, because it was Mt's first game- then look at the scores of Mt's last 6 "first games".
If the arguement is overall wins and losses, well that just goes back to the question of who have the other teams played to warrant such a ranking?
I know comparative scores are not the best way to determine strength, but what other method can be used at this point to try and determine how one team may do against another?
This isn't a knock on ONU, the OAC or any team mentioned above. The point is, what criteria do we use to rank teams?
More and more, I'm tempted to put all WIAC teams in the top 10 to start the season, and just drop them down once other teams prove they can beat them.
Quote from: emma17 on September 12, 2011, 03:35:30 PM
More and more, I'm tempted to put all WIAC teams in the top 10 to start the season, and just drop them down once other teams prove they can beat them.
. . . or possibly when they start beating on each other?
emma17 -
Me thinks you doth protest too much. This is supposed to be 'fun' for us. Early season rankings are always conjecture. Until a body of work comes into play, it's all about what we 'think' is right and true and just.
I can't put too much into one result, or even two. I still have my conjecture. Like North Central vs. Redlands. I still think North Central is a better team, and I will rank them higher. Because I KNOW of the paradox that I wrote about earlier (A beats B, B beats C, C beats A), and I want to avoid it because I know that ranking on the initial head to head isn't a true gauge especially with the staggered starts.
You shouldn't rank against the top 2 teams, either. That's not a realistic standard. My standard is, "if A and B played 1000 times, who would win more"? If A, they're ahead of B, if B then they're ahead of A. Sometimes it's easy to do. This week, it was tough. I think Wabash would beat Wittenberg about 518 times out of 1,000 (or so...). I don't care about their results against the Purple Horde - the chances of an NCAC team winning there are equally lousy, and statistically insignificant in the grand scheme of things.
And I have Wesley ahead of Kean. Because Wesley's a better team. But I don't have Wesley third anymore, and I have Kean ranked now. And I think Wesley beats Kean 2/3 of the time. Saturday was the other 1/3.
But again, this is FUN!
Quote from: emma17 on September 12, 2011, 03:35:30 PM
I choose to rank teams based upon the following question:
"How would this team fare against the top 2 teams in the country?"
If my approach above has merit (and maybe I'm missing something here), then there are some hard facts to ignore in the current rankings.
If Oshkosh was blown out Saturday and therefore, undeserving of ranking disucssion, what about:
ONU-they lost by 27 points to MT last year, and ONU finished 8th in the final D3 poll and are preseason 12.
Alfred-they lost to Mt by 30 in the playoffs last year, and they are preseason 16.
Del Valley-they lost to Mt by 28 in the playoffs last year, and they are preseason 25.
Surely Oshkosh has at least equal talent returning this year as teams above (I say that facetiously because they probably have better talent returning).
If the arguement is that Oshkosh appeared to be a "tougher out", relatively speaking, because it was Mt's first game- then look at the scores of Mt's last 6 "first games".
If the arguement is overall wins and losses, well that just goes back to the question of who have the other teams played to warrant such a ranking?
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.parrettinsurance.com%2Fimages%2Ffrustrated-man.jpg&hash=5b659f1e0a030ad9a224f6550ceca25ccb097097)
Warhawk, are you saying I put too much time and effort into the response I posted.
But you know every Mt. Union team is monolithic. They're all the same...they just cleverly change the names in the program. So you CAN compare 2006 to 2011.
Right?
;)
Quote from: smedindy on September 12, 2011, 09:12:58 PM
Warhawk, are you saying I put too much time and effort into the response I posted.
But you know every Mt. Union team is monolithic. They're all the same...they just cleverly change the names in the program. So you CAN compare 2006 to 2011.
Right?
;)
not sure what you mean
It was about comparing last year Mt. Union to this year Mt. Union, and last year Alfred, Del Val and ONU to this year, and I extrapolated it. Trying to be cerebral and funny on a day where my head hurts.
Smedindy,
I think you may have meant to respond to me, not to Warhawk?
I am sorry if my posts reduce the fun of the board, it's not my intention at all. For me, it's a lot of fun to have the discussion. This is a Fan Poll of top 25 and very few of them actually play each other (at least this soon in the season), so the whole point is conjecture I think.
If asking the question about a team like Oshkosh isn't fun or provacative, I'll stop- it's no fun for me to discuss with myself.
In case others are interested in the discussion, I'll just ask the question. What is it about the teams ranked 16-25 that makes us believe Oshkosh couldn't beat them? And in your scenario Smed- what makes us think Oshkosh wouldn't beat them 501 out of 1,000 times?
Oops, looks like emma17 beat me to it, but since I took the time. . .
smedindy,
JMO, I think 02 warhawk posted the picture in regards to e17's comments. From my view, the picture shows a man very frustrated at something - probably placing a great deal of unnecessary stress on himself over something very trivial in the whole scope of things. Quite possibly, 02 warhawk is postulating that the picture mirrors the way e17 spends his time thinking about his Top 25 fan poll. But, since you seem to think it's about you, maybe 02 warhawk killed two birds with one stone!! ;)
BoBo - No, I knew the picture wasn't about me! It was about the inane logic comparing Oshkosh results to last year Mt. Union results. I think it was akin to the FARK meme of "facepalm" with Picard. I was trying to make a funny myself about said thing, and misfired.
Emma - It comes down to a few things:
1. Oshkosh is a mid-level WIAC team and went 4-6 last year. While yes that's better than a mid-level NCAC team, it's still a team that is more suspect than prospect.
2. Oshkosh beat Central. Central looks to be down. They barely squeaked by Augie, who lost to Dubuque this season, who is a mid-level IIAC team. Their win against Central was certainly something that sparked interest, but as more data is accumulated, I can say that while it's not an A beats B beats C beats A scenario, it's a Oshkosh beat B that barely beat C that lost to D, who is in B's conference and mediocre. So Oshkosh's win over B isn't as shiny as it could be.
3. Up 34-10 at the half, I'm not surprised Mt. Union didn't go for the jugular and blow out Oshkosh by 40 or so. ONU is different for Mt. Union - they're probably their closest OAC rival and they want to 'finish' them. Also, in the playoffs Mt. Union doesn't have their entire roster - so they can't sub out as much as they could.
4. Because the WIAC is a conference that beats up on each other, making sense of the entire body of work is different since the teams are kind of bunched together in the middle. But I'll take the NCAC for example.
Oshkosh would have no problems at all with Kenyon, Hiram, Denison, Oberlin.
Oshkosh would beat OWU 9 times out of 10.
Oshkosh would probably handle Allegheny 75 times out of 100.
Oshkosh probably beats Wooster 6 times out of 10. Wooster has had some issues with turnovers, but solve them and they're a damn fine team.
Oshkosh against DePauw (not in the NCAC but close). DPU is rebuilding but has a good tradition. I'd say 55 times out of 100 Oshkosh beats them this year. Last year, despite the 47-0, I'd say DPU has the edge 6 out of 10.
Oshkosh against Wabash and Witt, with what both teams have coming back. About a 1 in 3 chance.
Is that conjecture? Yeah. But the sample sizes are so small, and a two or three plays can turn a one possession game into a rout. If the stars align, Oshkosh runs the table in the NCAC. But I said this year if the stars aligned Wooster could have (COULD HAVE) run the table in the NCAC. The stars were normal, though.
Wonder if UMHB can survive the 2011-Being-Ranked-#3-Curse?
So far the two #3 rank teams (in the Fan's Poll) both lost.
Week 1: #3 NCC lost to Redlands 29-35
Week 2: #3 Wesley lost to Kean 28-31
Week 3: #3 UMHB (?) to McMurry
McMurry is coming off a big win, but the game is at MHB.
All right Smed, I know the subject has been beat to death. You did a nice job of providing some reasoning and I appreciate it.
For the record, the score of the Mt v Oshkosh game was 34-17 as the fourth quarter started- and based upon the play by play info on the stat sheet, Mt had all their starters in until what appears the last 3 minutes of the game.
Anyone know when the fan poll is coming out?
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 13, 2011, 11:22:45 AM
Wonder if UMHB can survive the 2011-Being-Ranked-#3-Curse?
So far the two #3 rank teams (in the Fan's Poll) both lost.
Week 1: #3 NCC lost to Redlands 29-35
Week 2: #3 Wesley lost to Kean 28-31
Week 3: #3 UMHB (?) to McMurry
McMurry is coming off a big win, but the game is at MHB.
Wasn't it 3 years ago where the FBS division had like 8 number 2's in 9 weeks?
Quote from: emma17 on September 13, 2011, 04:38:21 PM
All right Smed, I know the subject has been beat to death. You did a nice job of providing some reasoning and I appreciate it.
For the record, the score of the Mt v Oshkosh game was 34-17 as the fourth quarter started- and based upon the play by play info on the stat sheet, Mt had all their starters in until what appears the last 3 minutes of the game.
Anyone know when the fan poll is coming out?
I am hoping to have the fan poll out tonight, but two people thought so much of certain teams they ranked them twice! Check your email indexes folks!
And for the record. UW-Oshkosh was NOT one of the teams ranked twice. ;)
1. University of Wisconsin-Whitewater (12) 348 1
2. Mount Union (2) 338 2
3. St. Thomas 302 4
4. Mary Hardin-Baylor 297 5
5. Bethel 290 7
6. Linfield 287 6
7. Wheaton 257 8
8. Hardin-Simmons 250 10
9. North Central 193 11
10. Ohio Northern 185 9
11. Thomas More 183 16
12. Cortland State 175 14
13. Wesley 165 3
14. Montclair State 162 11
15. Wartburg 158 12
16. Redlands 137 20
17. Wittenberg 116 19
18. Alfred 112 21
19. Wabash 90 18
20. Kean 89 unranked
21. Cal Lutheran 73 15
22. Trine 60 23
23. Hampden-Sydney 55 unranked
24. Salisbury 49 unranked
25. Delaware Valley 36 unranked
Falling Out of Top 25 This Week: Coe, Franklin, St. John's, UW-Stevens Point.
Also receiving votes: UW-Platteville (34), Baldwin-Wallace (27), Elmhurst (14), Illinois Wesleyan (13), UW-Oshkosh (9), Pacific Lutheran (8), Adrian (6), Franklin (5), Lycoming (5), Rowan (3), Johns Hopkins (2), Louisiana College (2), Trinity (2), UW-LaCrosse (1), Washington University (1).
I don't know if I'm blind or he forgot them or what, but I know I had UW-SP still in my top 25 so they should at least be in the also receiving votes section
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 14, 2011, 01:00:32 AM
I don't know if I'm blind or he forgot them or what, but I know I had UW-SP still in my top 25 so they should at least be in the also receiving votes section
Same with me.
Edited post after after further searching.
FC,
Not finding your ballot. Could u send again?
MJ,
Sorry I didn't include yours. When I went to record them, I started with Sunday and I see you were on top of it and submitted yours late Saturday night. I will re-tabulate.
Sorry for inconvenience. We will see what kind of weight FCGriz and MasterJedi have!!
I guess Yahoo is off the hook. Maybe it's just UW-SP's sin against the universe on 10/25/08 coming back to haunt them!
Quote from: bleedpurple on September 14, 2011, 08:02:10 AM
MasterJedi and FCGriz,
I didn't get a ballot from either of you. At least it is not in my inbox. Could you resend? Did you send them to d3fanpoll@yahoo.com? Hmmm both voters who ranked UW-SP and their ballots turn up missing! I know there is an anti-WIAC bias out there, but could Yahoo really be involved? :D
"This is Jim Rockford. At the tone, leave your name and number and I'll get back to you."
Quote from: bleedpurple on September 13, 2011, 09:40:25 PM
Quote from: emma17 on September 13, 2011, 04:38:21 PM
All right Smed, I know the subject has been beat to death. You did a nice job of providing some reasoning and I appreciate it.
For the record, the score of the Mt v Oshkosh game was 34-17 as the fourth quarter started- and based upon the play by play info on the stat sheet, Mt had all their starters in until what appears the last 3 minutes of the game.
Anyone know when the fan poll is coming out?
I am hoping to have the fan poll out tonight, but two people thought so much of certain teams they ranked them twice! Check your email indexes folks!
And for the record. UW-Oshkosh was NOT one of the teams ranked twice. ;)
Somewhat comforting that I wasn't the only one. At my age, I'm easily confused! Wartburg/Wabash......Wabash/Wartburg............. ;) ;D
OK, no conspiracies. I have no idea quite what I did, but it is all on me. I found both "missing ballots". I have no idea why I didn't originally tabulate them, they are there. It took awhile to find them because I don't have a chart matching email addresses with D3boards screen names. I will work on that this weekend. I will have the "Correct, I think" Poll out in a few minutes. I will post it right here. Sorry for the confusion!
No worries. This is all for fun and I bet the AP screws up tabulations too! "The dog ate Pat Forde's ballot!"
OK, This should be right. I hope so :o For the record, in the final tabulations Johns Hopkins actually lost a vote!
D3 Top 25 Fan Poll Week 3
1. University of Wisconsin-Whitewater (14) 398 1(LW)
2. Mount Union (2) 386 2
3. St. Thomas 345 4
4. Bethel 335 7
5. Mary Hardin-Baylor 333 5
6. Linfield 327 6
7. Wheaton 298 8
8. Hardin-Simmons 278 10
9. North Central 229 11
10. Ohio Northern 219 9
11. Wesley 194 3
12. Cortland State 191 14
13. Thomas More 188 16
14. Montclair State 179 11
15. Wartburg 177 12
16. Redlands 159 20
17. Alfred 135 21
18. Wittenberg 131 19
19. Wabash 114 18
20. Kean 89 unranked
21. Trine 83 23
22. Cal Lutheran 74 15
23. Hampden-Sydney 64 unranked
24. Salisbury 55 unranked
25. UW-Platteville 47 unranked
Falling Out of Top 25 This Week: Coe, Franklin, St. John's, UW-Stevens Point.
Also receiving votes: Delaware Valley (44), Baldwin-Wallace (34), Elmhurst (14), Illinois Wesleyan (15), UW-Stevens Point (13), UW-Oshkosh (11), Pacific Lutheran (8), Adrian (6), Franklin (6), Lycoming (5), Rowan (3), Louisiana College (2), Trinity (2), UW-LaCrosse (1), UW-Eau Claire (1), Washington University (1), Johns Hopkins (1),.
Emma have Oshkosh at 15 this week?
;) ;D
I normally let the individual pollsters reveal what they want about the ballots. But I will tell you this, believe it or not Emma did NOT have Oshkosh at 15 this week!
Wow...so more than one person has them in the top 25.
Interesting
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 14, 2011, 12:22:34 PM
Wow...so more than one person has them in the top 25.
Interesting
Not to mention Franklin. Who is quickly becoming one of my favorite non-WIAC programs!
Wow, those couple of ballots really shook things up more than I expected.
My certain to be controversial ballot!:
1. UW- Whitewater
2. Mount Union
3. St. Thomas
4. Bethel
5. Linfield
6. Wheaton
7. North Central
8. Hardin Simmons
9. Wesley
10. Ohio Northern
11. Redlands
12. Mary Hardin Baylor
13. UW- Platteville
14. Wabash
15. Wittenberg
16. UW- Stevens Point
17. Alfred
18. Trine
19. Baldwin Wallace
20. Salisbury
21. Cortland State
22. Montclair State
23. Wartburg
24. UW- Oshkosh
25. Cal Lutheran
Lots of WIAC love in MaterJedi's poll.
16th for UWSP, and they have yet to score a touchdown. ;)
Here's mine....fire away.
1. UWW
2. Mount Union
3. MHB
4. St. Thomas
5. Bethel
6. Linfield
7. Wheaton
8. Harden Simmons
9. Wartburg
10. Thomas More
11. NCC
12. Ohio Northern
13. Cortland St.
14. Montclair St.
15. Redlands
16. Wabash
17. Alfred
18. Wittenburg
19. Cal Lutheran
20. Trine
21. Kean
22. Wesley
23. Delaware Valley
24. Hampden-Sydney
25. UW-Platteville
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 14, 2011, 12:40:31 PM
Lots of WIAC love in MaterJedi's poll.
16th for UWSP, and they have yet to score a touchdown. ;)
It's more that I feel it's a down year for most and that I have no confidence in the East. :P
Quote from: hazzben on September 14, 2011, 12:31:57 PM
Wow, those couple of ballots really shook things up more than I expected.
MasterJedi's ballot certainly helped push UW-P over the top and into the Top 25!
Quote from: MasterJedi on September 14, 2011, 12:44:32 PM
It's more that I feel it's a down year for most and that I have no confidence in the East. :P
Seems like an interesting time to make the "East is weak" argument as Kean just took down Wesley. Granted, Wesley is most likely the better team, but no one is arguing that Kean is the pinnacle of the East either. And I felt like Del Valley and Alfred both gave Mt. Union the same sort of challenge as Bethel did, especially considering they didn't open Piloto up until the 2nd quarter after the Seaman injury which led to the Royals' first score. The East certainly doesn't have a team competing for a Stagg Bowl currently, but the best of the region is able to be steamrolled just as well as the rest of the playoff field, IMO.
Here's how my "missing" ballot changed the votes :P
UW-Whitewater
Mount Union
Bethel
Mary Hardin-Baylor
Wheaton
St Thomas
Linfield
Ohio Northern
North Central
Wartburg
Trine
Alfred
Montclair St
Wesley
Cortland St
Hardin-Simmons
Hampden-Sydney
Delaware Valley
Redlands
Wabash
Thomas More
Wittenberg
UW-Stevens Point
Illinois Wesleyan
Franklin
I think the perception of the East is formed by some in other regions because Mount is moved there fairly often as the number one seed and then proceeds to advance with lopsided scores year after year. I'm not saying it's a fair perception, just that I think that is a big part of what it is based on. I recognize that many years, Mount could potentially do that in most any region. Maybe a bigger indictment is the East's consistent failure to produce a team worthy number one seed. But given that UW-W wasn't even a number one seed, there's no guarantee that's a good basis either. What might be a better indicator is the record of east teams against teams from other regions over the past few years. Being short on time right now I can't look it up, but are there some East Region "quality wins" that can be pointed to in order to build a case for the strength of the east? Obviously, one great one is Kean over Wesley on Saturday. That may win the east a lot of respect nationally. However, in the little community of Whitewater, WI, you'll have to pardon us if we are a little slow to buy in to a case that is formed by beating the Wolverines. Not big fans here.... ;)
East is weak?
No, I think that the East is very strong this year, and relatively better able to contend with any team outside the region, moving in.
My "East" radar has several strong teams on it...Montclair St, Cortland St, Alfred, Kean, Del Valley and 2 more from the neighborhood, Wesley and Salisbury. I am counting on the NJAC and E8 to do some weeding.
I think that the non-ASC South is weak, with the exception of the old ACFC pair.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 14, 2011, 05:13:31 PM
East is weak?
Reminded me of the Seinfeld episode.
"You say Ukraine is weak???"
Quote from: smedindy on September 14, 2011, 08:29:41 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 14, 2011, 05:13:31 PM
East is weak?
Reminded me of the Seinfeld episode.
"You say Ukraine is weak???"
We could do with a whole lot more Seinfeld references on these boards!
I had three things to say about this:
With all the WIAC schools gettin votes I wanted to say the only one besides whitewater j had was plattville at 23
I don't get how IWU got that many votes considering they easily could hve and maybe should have lost to alma, who has yet to prove themseles even close to top25 worthy, this week.
And finally, trine. For all of u who voted for trine, I believe that they will not win the MIAA this year, and will lose to UWRF this weekend. They've given up too many points to bluffton and Manchester, two not very good teams. Adrian is my favorte to win the MIAA right now. But alma or Albion could also be there in a weaker year for the conference
TOP 25!
1.Mount Union
2.UWW
3.St. Thomas
4.UMHB
5.Linfield
6.HSU
7.Bethel
8.Wheaton
9.Wesley
10.Ohio Northern
11.Cal Lutheran
12.Montclair State
13.North Central
14.Kean
15.Wartburg
16.Cortland State
17.Deleware Valley
18.Wittenburg
19.Wabash
20.Trine
21.Redlands
22.Alfred
23.Salisbury
24.Hampden-Sydney
25.UW-Stevens Point
Correction: MY top 25. obviously
Quote from: CruFrenzy on September 14, 2011, 10:52:38 PM
TOP 25!
1.Mount Union
2.UWW
3.St. Thomas
4.UMHB
5.Linfield
6.HSU
7.Bethel
8.Wheaton
9.Wesley
10.Ohio Northern
11.Cal Lutheran
12.Montclair State
13.North Central
14.Kean
15.Wartburg
16.Cortland State
17.Deleware Valley
18.Wittenburg
19.Wabash
20.Trine
21.Redlands
22.Alfred
23.Salisbury
24.Hampden-Sydney
25.UW-Stevens Point
I think good arguments can be made for how you placed the teams. Personally, I believe North Central is the best one loss team, but that's why we have the fan poll and this message board. ;)
This is the last week of 'feeling things out'. After week four we'll know. Or think we do...
Quote from: bleedpurple on September 14, 2011, 05:09:02 PM
Being short on time right now I can't look it up, but are there some East Region "quality wins" that can be pointed to in order to build a case for the strength of the east?
Thinking quickly back to last year's playoffs, Del Valley beat Salisbury by two scores and Montclair went down to Hampden-Sydney and came away with a squeaker (then got dusted by Wesley who Del Val and Salisbury both played close in the regular season, so who knows?). The East isn't close to the two perennials, but neither are 99% (maybe 97%) of teams in the other three regions.
There are a few 'certainties' in our D-3 world.
1. There will be two purple teams that will be odds-on favorites.
2. A Pool C team will be seeded higher than most Pool A teams.
3. Teams from the south and west will have seedings and pairings disconnect.
4. One of the purple teams will move regions.
5. Some team will get more than 60 points hung on them in the playoffs.
Quote from: smedindy on September 15, 2011, 10:41:33 AM
There are a few 'certainties' in our D-3 world.
1. There will be two purple teams that will be odds-on favorites.
2. A Pool C team will be seeded higher than most Pool A teams.
3. Teams from the south and west will have seedings and pairings disconnect.
4. One of the purple teams will move regions.
5. Some team will get more than 60 points hung on them in the playoffs.
6. At the end of the day, we'll have a legit champion decided on the field!! :)
Quote from: hazzben on September 15, 2011, 11:26:30 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 15, 2011, 10:41:33 AM
There are a few 'certainties' in our D-3 world.
1. There will be two purple teams that will be odds-on favorites.
2. A Pool C team will be seeded higher than most Pool A teams.
3. Teams from the south and west will have seedings and pairings disconnect.
4. One of the purple teams will move regions.
5. Some team will get more than 60 points hung on them in the playoffs.
6. At the end of the day, we'll have a legit champion decided on the field!! :)
7. The winner of the NESCAC will not win a playoff game.
1. This board gets along real well when I don't post.
2. Master Jedi- Except for Stevens Point at 16- I'm really liking your rankings.
3. Again with MHB- UWL takes them to death's doorstep and their reward is an even higher ranking by many?
4. Jerry, just remember, it's not a lie if you believe it. – George Costanza
My Rankings
1. Mt. Union
2. UWW
3. Bethel
4. Hardin-Simmons
5. Wheaton
6. Redlands
7. NCC
8. St. Thomas
9. Linfield
10. Wittenberg
11. Kean
12. Elmhurst
13. IL Wesleyan
14. Wesley
15. Baldwin-Wallace
16. Mary Hardin-Baylor
17. Oshkosh
18. Platteville
19. Cal Lutheran
20. Thomas Moore
21. Lycoming
22. Hampden Sydney
23. Salisbury
24. Del Valley
25. Wartburg
Quote from: emma17 on September 15, 2011, 02:27:57 PM
1. This board gets along real well when I don't post.
2. Master Jedi- Except for Stevens Point at 16- I'm really liking your rankings.
3. Again with MHB- UWL takes them to death's doorstep and their reward is an even higher ranking by many?
4. Jerry, just remember, it's not a lie if you believe it. – George Costanza
My Rankings
1. Mt. Union
2. UWW
3. Bethel
4. Hardin-Simmons
5. Wheaton
6. Redlands
7. NCC
8. St. Thomas
9. Linfield
10. Wittenberg
11. Kean
12. Elmhurst
13. IL Wesleyan
14. Wesley
15. Baldwin-Wallace
16. Mary Hardin-Baylor
17. Oshkosh
18. Platteville
19. Cal Lutheran
20. Thomas Moore
21. Lycoming
22. Hampden Sydney
23. Salisbury
24. Del Valley
25. Wartburg
Why?? IMO, WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY overanked.
Quote from: emma17 on September 15, 2011, 02:27:57 PM
1. This board gets along real well boring when I don't post.
Fixed
You make things interesting and spark debate....I like it.
Quote from: MasterJedi on September 15, 2011, 02:36:49 PM
Quote from: emma17 on September 15, 2011, 02:27:57 PM
1. This board gets along real well when I don't post.
2. Master Jedi- Except for Stevens Point at 16- I'm really liking your rankings.
3. Again with MHB- UWL takes them to death's doorstep and their reward is an even higher ranking by many?
4. Jerry, just remember, it's not a lie if you believe it. – George Costanza
My Rankings
1. Mt. Union
2. UWW
3. Bethel
4. Hardin-Simmons
5. Wheaton
6. Redlands
7. NCC
8. St. Thomas
9. Linfield
10. Wittenberg
11. Kean
12. Elmhurst
13. IL Wesleyan
14. Wesley
15. Baldwin-Wallace
16. Mary Hardin-Baylor
17. Oshkosh
18. Platteville
19. Cal Lutheran
20. Thomas Moore
21. Lycoming
22. Hampden Sydney
23. Salisbury
24. Del Valley
25. Wartburg
Why?? IMO, WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY overanked.
MJ, You forgot to highlight Redlands.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 15, 2011, 02:43:43 PM
Quote from: MasterJedi on September 15, 2011, 02:36:49 PM
Quote from: emma17 on September 15, 2011, 02:27:57 PM
1. This board gets along real well when I don't post.
2. Master Jedi- Except for Stevens Point at 16- I'm really liking your rankings.
3. Again with MHB- UWL takes them to death's doorstep and their reward is an even higher ranking by many?
4. Jerry, just remember, it's not a lie if you believe it. – George Costanza
My Rankings
1. Mt. Union
2. UWW
3. Bethel
4. Hardin-Simmons
5. Wheaton
6. Redlands
7. NCC
8. St. Thomas
9. Linfield
10. Wittenberg
11. Kean
12. Elmhurst
13. IL Wesleyan
14. Wesley
15. Baldwin-Wallace
16. Mary Hardin-Baylor
17. Oshkosh
18. Platteville
19. Cal Lutheran
20. Thomas Moore
21. Lycoming
22. Hampden Sydney
23. Salisbury
24. Del Valley
25. Wartburg
Why?? IMO, WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY overranked.
MJ, You forgot to highlight Redlands.
Well I think Redlands is overranked there too, I just don't think they're as bad as the three I bolded. Redlands actually has a chance to end up that high IMO if they play well, they're just unproven. The other three I don't think even have a prayer of sniffing the "recieving votes" category in the end.
Quote from: MasterJedi on September 15, 2011, 02:45:25 PM
Well I think Redlands is overranked there too, I just don't think they're as bad as the three I bolded. Redlands actually has a chance to end up that high IMO if they play well, they're just unproven. The other three I don't think even have a prayer of sniffing the "receiving votes" category in the end.
Those three teams are at least undefeated. But then again, at this time of the year, so are a lot of teams.
UMHB had not played a game, against a credible team that had.
Their week #1 scrimmage with a team from Mexico was canceled.
UWL had that big advantage.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 15, 2011, 03:11:18 PM
Quote from: MasterJedi on September 15, 2011, 02:45:25 PM
Well I think Redlands is overranked there too, I just don't think they're as bad as the three I bolded. Redlands actually has a chance to end up that high IMO if they play well, they're just unproven. The other three I don't think even have a prayer of sniffing the "receiving votes" category in the end.
Those three teams are at least undefeated. But then again, at this time of the year, so are a lot of teams.
So is Redlands, they beat NCC in Week 1, and had a bye in Week 2....
When the body of work is compared, I still say a 9-1 NC is better than an undefeated Redlands. it's just one of those things that happened.
An 8-2 North Central vs. an undefeated Redlands (which means a loss to Wheaton), well, that's going to cause some coin flipping.
A 7-3 North Central (that means Wheaton AND another ICC team beats 'em, not out of the realm of possibilities), then that's another vat of elephant ear dough...
Quote from: MasterJedi on September 15, 2011, 02:36:49 PM
Quote from: emma17 on September 15, 2011, 02:27:57 PM
1. This board gets along real well when I don't post.
2. Master Jedi- Except for Stevens Point at 16- I'm really liking your rankings.
3. Again with MHB- UWL takes them to death's doorstep and their reward is an even higher ranking by many?
4. Jerry, just remember, it's not a lie if you believe it. – George Costanza
My Rankings
1. Mt. Union
2. UWW
3. Bethel
4. Hardin-Simmons
5. Wheaton
6. Redlands
7. NCC
8. St. Thomas
9. Linfield
10. Wittenberg
11. Kean
12. Elmhurst
13. IL Wesleyan
14. Wesley
15. Baldwin-Wallace
16. Mary Hardin-Baylor
17. Oshkosh
18. Platteville
19. Cal Lutheran
20. Thomas Moore
21. Lycoming
22. Hampden Sydney
23. Salisbury
24. Del Valley
25. Wartburg
Why?? IMO, WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY overanked.
I do not get Elmhurst and Illinois Wesleyan either, 17. Yes, the Bluejays are 2-0 but those are hardly quality wins and they beat the same two teams last season and then went on to go 3-4 in conference. Same for IWU who went on to have a 4-3 conference record. Wins against Hope and Alma don't impress me much either. You have them 12 and 13???
As for Redlands, I had them at 10 which is probably overated but they do have a very quality win against the #3 ranked team at the time. Are they a better than NCC? Probably not but that will work its way out over the next few weeks.
In the interest of fair play, I have to post my rankings if I am going to question anybody else about theirs.
UW-EC was a bogus pic, I totally admit but their monkey stomp of the Johnnies just gave me a smile. Actually, in my effort to bend over backwards to not be biased toward the WIAC, I think I unfairly slight them too much. I think it is because there is usually just so much parity that I am confused as to who really is the next top team this early in the season. Going to work on that.
My September 12th rankings
1. UW-Whitewater
2. Mount Union
3. St,. Thomas
4. Mary Harding Baylor
5. Bethel
6. Linfield
7. Wheaton
8. Hardin-Simmons
9. Thomas Moore
10. Redlands
11. North Central
12. Kean
13. Wesley
14. Ohio Northern
15. Montclair State
16. Cortland State
17. Wartburg
18. Cal Lutheran
19. Alfred
20. Wabash
21. Wittenburg
22. Hampton Sydney
23. Delaware Valley
24 Salsbury
25. UW-EC (Gotta reward them for blowing up the Johnnies in Collegeville!) LOL
Quote from: emma17 on September 15, 2011, 02:27:57 PM
1. This board gets along real well when I don't post.
Seriously? What would the fun in that be? ;) Dropping by my tailgate on Saturday?
Quote from: emma17 on September 15, 2011, 02:27:57 PM
1. This board gets along real well when I don't post.
2. Master Jedi- Except for Stevens Point at 16- I'm really liking your rankings.
3. Again with MHB- UWL takes them to death's doorstep and their reward is an even higher ranking by many?
4. Jerry, just remember, it's not a lie if you believe it. – George Costanza
My Rankings
1. Mt. Union
2. UWW
3. Bethel
4. Hardin-Simmons
5. Wheaton
6. Redlands
7. NCC
8. St. Thomas
9. Linfield
10. Wittenberg
11. Kean
12. Elmhurst
13. IL Wesleyan
14. Wesley
15. Baldwin-Wallace
16. Mary Hardin-Baylor
17. Oshkosh
18. Platteville
19. Cal Lutheran
20. Thomas Moore
21. Lycoming
22. Hampden Sydney
23. Salisbury
24. Del Valley
25. Wartburg
What's your reasoning behind placing Hardin-Simmons at No.4 in the Nation and UMHB at No.16? UMHB if anything is as good as they were last year, and last year they beat HSU. So would you mind explaining this? I mean i can see UMHB being a little farther than No.3 or whatever, but why would you have them all the way at No.16? thats pretty tough..
I, for one, think that anyone who whaps the Johnnies at St. John's deserves a lotta love. It's one thing for NC to GO to Redlands and lose, it's another to GO to Collegeville and dominate....
1. UW - Whitewater
2. Mt. Union
3. St. Thomas
4. Wheaton
5. Linfield
6. UMHB
7. North Central
8. Wesley
9. Ohio Northern
10. Bethel
11. Hardin- Simmons
12. Wartburg
13. Montclair State
14. Wabash
15. Wittenberg
16. Redlands
17. Baldwin - Wallace
18. Cortland State
19. Salisbury
20. Alfred
21. Kean
22. UW - Eau Claire
23. Thomas More
24. Delaware Valley
25. Cal Lutheran
Almost pulled the trigger on Platteville. Almost pulled the trigger on Trine.
Oh, and to my distinguished posters:
Since I, for one, have a last name that can be (and is) spelled in several permutations (it's a Scottish last name (not that I'm 100% Scottish) and I blame the alcohol on the spelling issues), I must remind you that it's:
Thomas More
After, Sir Thomas More: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_More
He was kind of a big deal.
Now, Thomas Moore, he was a semi big-deal : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Moore
But nothing to name a college after. However, I bet many D-3 scholars studied him in their Lit classes.
Speaking of misspelling names I for some reason kept using Westley instead of Wesley... maybe I've seen The Princess Bride too much :P
Quote from: smedindy on September 15, 2011, 11:37:17 PM
I, for one, think that anyone who whaps the Johnnies at St. John's deserves a lotta love. It's one thing for NC to GO to Redlands and lose, it's another to GO to Collegeville and dominate....
My thoughts EXACTLY! But only time will tell if the Johnnies program has dropped as far as some on the MIAC board fear. But this early in the season and based solely on history and the huge, butt kicking score, that is a quality win for the BluGolds.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 16, 2011, 12:28:00 AM
Speaking of misspelling names I for some reason kept using Westley instead of Wesley... maybe I've seen The Princess Bride too much :P
Inconceivable!
Quote from: CruFrenzy on September 15, 2011, 10:53:45 PM
What's your reasoning behind placing Hardin-Simmons at No.4 in the Nation and UMHB at No.16? UMHB if anything is as good as they were last year, and last year they beat HSU. So would you mind explaining this? I mean i can see UMHB being a little farther than No.3 or whatever, but why would you have them all the way at No.16? thats pretty tough..
Below is emma's thoughts on MHB. I don't endorsing this, I'm merely just a messenger.
Quote from: emma17 on September 07, 2011, 07:40:20 PM
Cru- I didn't have a chance to look up actual records for this comment, so I could be a bit misguided. My issue w ranking MHB high is how they lose and who they lose to. First, they were in a dogfight against a very average Lacrosse team last year. Second, they dont pass the ball well- it's like they choose to ignore the invention entirely. Wesley made them look silly when they tried to pass. Third- they dont do well against teams that can truly stop the run. I think they played UWW 3 or 4 times in last few years and really struggled to score (although 2007 semi final game was a good one).
A top 5 (or 10) team in my opinion should be able to put points up against the best competition- and in today's day and age that usually requires more offensive balance. I dont know how true the old adage of "defense wins championships" is anymore. Defense is a must and it keeps you in the game- but you have to be able to score points to be a top team. IMO.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 16, 2011, 09:55:26 AM
Quote from: CruFrenzy on September 15, 2011, 10:53:45 PM
What's your reasoning behind placing Hardin-Simmons at No.4 in the Nation and UMHB at No.16? UMHB if anything is as good as they were last year, and last year they beat HSU. So would you mind explaining this? I mean i can see UMHB being a little farther than No.3 or whatever, but why would you have them all the way at No.16? thats pretty tough..
Below is emma's thoughts on MHB. I don't endorsing this, I'm merely just a messenger.
Quote from: emma17 on September 07, 2011, 07:40:20 PM
Cru- I didn't have a chance to look up actual records for this comment, so I could be a bit misguided. My issue w ranking MHB high is how they lose and who they lose to. First, they were in a dogfight against a very average Lacrosse team last year. Second, they dont pass the ball well- it's like they choose to ignore the invention entirely. Wesley made them look silly when they tried to pass. Third- they dont do well against teams that can truly stop the run. I think they played UWW 3 or 4 times in last few years and really struggled to score (although 2007 semi final game was a good one).
A top 5 (or 10) team in my opinion should be able to put points up against the best competition- and in today's day and age that usually requires more offensive balance. I dont know how true the old adage of "defense wins championships" is anymore. Defense is a must and it keeps you in the game- but you have to be able to score points to be a top team. IMO.
Since emma didn't have time to look at stats i thought I would.
I started with 06 since d3football schedules went back that far.
06 VS. Whitewater Loss 7-3: held whitewater to 120yds total offense. UWW only score was the ko return for a td on the opening kickoff
06 VS Wesley Loss (Quarterfinals): 34-20: Wesley passed for 436
07 VS Wesley Win 27-10: UMHB Rushed for 289 Wesley passed for 256
07 VS UWW Loss (Semifinals): 16-7: Defensive struggle...UWW got up early and held on
08 VS Wesley Win (playoffs): 46-14 UMHB rushed for 302
08 VS UWW Loss (Semifinals): 39-13 UWW Dominated the second half
09 VS Linfield Loss (quarterfinals):53-21 UMHB has 7 turnovers & Linfield dominates the second half
10 VS Wesley Loss (quarterfinals): 19-9 Passing game gets UMHB again
Note that while these games are mostly losses, they are losses to the same teams deep in the playoffs. I don't think its hard to see why people vote them into the top 5 year in and out. Every year the story plays out basically the same. UMHB starts slowly and builds momentum through the season then plays into the quarters or semis and loses to 1 of 3 teams. Each of which has consistently played itself into the top 5 of D3. The fact that they haven't beat UWW in 4 or 5 tries says that they're not better than UWW, but guess what, no one else is either. I think its easy to give MUC the nod for #2 because who other than UWW has beat them when it counts in the last 5 years? After that the most consistent teams going deep in the playoffs are Wesley and UMHB.
Now i won't say that the same will happen this season. New offense + Murderer's row in conference early when UMHB's secondary is historically still trying to figure things out could be bad. Saturday should tell the story. McM has a very good passing attack and a stud DB that likes picking off passes. If UMHB comes out slow it could get ugly. Then emma's wish will be fulfilled and UMHB will not be #3 on everyone's ballot. If they come out on top this week and then again next week vs HSU, your probably looking at the same scenario, except this season UMHB will have a passing game.
Add this one if you include that 06 regular season game:
10/27/07 @ UWW
UWW 41 UMHB 14
As for this week, I see the Cru making significant progress from last weeks narrow victory vs UWL (who was playing their second game).
413 I'm 95% in for tomorrow's tailgate and game- lookin forward to seeing you.
I can't believe I wasn't taken to task for putting UWW at #2? I was all prepared for that defense.
Rationale for IWU and Elmhurst: The conference they play in. More and more I'm heavily crediting the conference. I don't think either has a good chance at winning the conference, I happen to believe that a 3rd and 4th place CCIW team is definately a top 25 team though. I think both of them give any team ranked 10-25 a real ball game. Significant returning talent on both teams.
Lycoming- I fully admit I don't know much about them, but they beat Rowan, which is a team predicted to go 10-0 (not anymore)- with 18 returning starters.
MHB- Very happy to see they emphasized their passing game. Developing a passing attack takes a LOT of work that occurs over time- it doesn't happen in one year usually. Thus, the 3 interceptions. It's not enough to throw for 250+ yards, you have to complete them to your own team. IMO this is the thorn in their side and the reason they don't win in the deeper rounds of the playoffs. The main reason they only lost to UWW, Linfield and Wesely in the playoffs is because they didn't have to play NCC, St. Thomas, Wheaton, Mt, Bethel and some others. There is a good chance MHB moves up in my rankings from #16, but they didn't do anywhere near enough in week 1 to justify it yet.
Hardin-Simmons- They've earned it with two good wins. Yes they got beat by MHB last year, but they return a lot and have the intangible of a new head coach. I'm banking on them learning to stop the MHB running game.
Redlands- This pick is primarily due to the timing of the poll. As discussed much in previous posts, they beat NCC so they get ranked ahead of them for now.
NCC- Because I believe NCC is a top 8 team and likely top 4, my week 3 rankings are a little skewed due to their first game loss.
Oshkosh- I know- nobody asked. Quality game one win and despite the misconceptions of a "blow out" or "second teamers" playing for Mt, they gave Mt a better run the last two years than any team Mt has played not named UWW or Wesley.
Are you kidding me emma17? Putting UWW at #2? I'd love to hear your spin on that one!! ;) ;) ;)
(how's that for taking you to task!!)
So what is the reason?
Quote from: emma17 on September 16, 2011, 12:13:51 PM
413 I'm 95% in for tomorrow's tailgate and game- lookin forward to seeing you.
I can't believe I wasn't taken to task for putting UWW at #2? I was all prepared for that defense.
Rationale for IWU and Elmhurst: The conference they play in. More and more I'm heavily crediting the conference. I don't think either has a good chance at winning the conference, I happen to believe that a 3rd and 4th place CCIW team is definately a top 25 team though. I think both of them give any team ranked 10-25 a real ball game. Significant returning talent on both teams.
Lycoming- I fully admit I don't know much about them, but they beat Rowan, which is a team predicted to go 10-0 (not anymore)- with 18 returning starters.
MHB- Very happy to see they emphasized their passing game. Developing a passing attack takes a LOT of work that occurs over time- it doesn't happen in one year usually. Thus, the 3 interceptions. It's not enough to throw for 250+ yards, you have to complete them to your own team. IMO this is the thorn in their side and the reason they don't win in the deeper rounds of the playoffs. The main reason they only lost to UWW, Linfield and Wesely in the playoffs is because they didn't have to play NCC, St. Thomas, Wheaton, Mt, Bethel and some others. There is a good chance MHB moves up in my rankings from #16, but they didn't do anywhere near enough in week 1 to justify it yet.
Hardin-Simmons- They've earned it with two good wins. Yes they got beat by MHB last year, but they return a lot and have the intangible of a new head coach. I'm banking on them learning to stop the MHB running game.
Redlands- This pick is primarily due to the timing of the poll. As discussed much in previous posts, they beat NCC so they get ranked ahead of them for now.
NCC- Because I believe NCC is a top 8 team and likely top 4, my week 3 rankings are a little skewed due to their first game loss.
Oshkosh- I know- nobody asked. Quality game one win and despite the misconceptions of a "blow out" or "second teamers" playing for Mt, they gave Mt a better run the last two years than any team Mt has played not named UWW or Wesley.
Emma, HSU could very well end up beating UMHB this year however it won't be because they learned how to stop our rushing attack it will be because they score more than we do. Since 2006 we have played them 7 times (5 regular season and 2 post season) and have averaged over 300 yards of rushing yards. On top of that Willamette, a team I don't think you even have in the Top 25, ran for 284 yards last week.
In regards to UMHB only losing to UWW, Linfield and Wesley because we didn't play the other teams you listed, you can only beat them teams that the NCAA puts in front of you and consistenly we have made it to the quarter finals or better. And UMHB is proud to be one of very teams that has a winning record against Mt. Union ;)
Several NCAC schools do have winning records against Mt. Union. Oberlin is 7-7-2 against Mt. Union! (For Oberlin, that's a winner!) And the mighty Denison Big Red is 19-9-1 against the Mount! Ohio Wesleyan is 17-5, Wooster is 38-30-4 and Wittenberg is 18-10.
/old school rivalries
Quote from: BoBo on September 16, 2011, 12:42:24 PM
Are you kidding me emma17? Putting UWW at #2? I'd love to hear your spin on that one!! ;) ;) ;)
Yeah, they should be 5th just like the NCAA slotted them in last year's playoffs!
Cru- You're absolutely right that MHB can only play the teams they are paired with. However, as I believe has been the case a bit for Mt. of late, some teams have lesser challenges in the early rounds of the playoffs-through no fault of their own. Perhaps MHB has benefited from some of those early round matchups.
Good point about Willamette in the top- tough to rank them when they are 0-2- but a good point. I think they are a very good team and most likely capable of beating several in bottom 10 of poll. They will need to earn their way back.
UWW as #2- it was my preseason ranking- based entirely on the fact that one of the two Stagg teams has 18 returning starters and one has 9 (11 when counting special teams). UWW's week 1 win didn't do enough to vault them past an idle Mt. UWW's week 2 game was outstanding (to see what it really looks like when a team decides to play subs and not go for the jugular- see UWW vs Franklin). Mt did what they had to do and I give them benefit of the doubt as it was their first game. In truth I see them 1a and 1b now. As long as UWW finishes 1, being 2 is fine for now.
Quote from: emma17 on September 16, 2011, 02:08:45 PM
UWW's week 1 win didn't do enough ......... Mt did what they had to do and I give them benefit of the doubt as it was their first game.
So you give the enemy the benefit of the doubt for their first game (at home). But don't give it to your own team who opened up on the road!?!?! ;)
Just messing you, emma. :)
Quote from: emma17 on September 16, 2011, 02:08:45 PM
Cru- You're absolutely right that MHB can only play the teams they are paired with. However, as I believe has been the case a bit for Mt. of late, some teams have lesser challenges in the early rounds of the playoffs-through no fault of their own. Perhaps MHB has benefited from some of those early round matchups.
Good point about Willamette in the top- tough to rank them when they are 0-2- but a good point. I think they are a very good team and most likely capable of beating several in bottom 10 of poll. They will need to earn their way back.
UWW as #2- it was my preseason ranking- based entirely on the fact that one of the two Stagg teams has 18 returning starters and one has 9 (11 when counting special teams). UWW's week 1 win didn't do enough to vault them past an idle Mt. UWW's week 2 game was outstanding (to see what it really looks like when a team decides to play subs and not go for the jugular- see UWW vs Franklin). Mt did what they had to do and I give them benefit of the doubt as it was their first game. In truth I see them 1a and 1b now. As long as UWW finishes 1, being 2 is fine for now.
Emma just so you know I wasn't trying to say that Willamette should be in the top 25, I mentioned them to show that HSU hasn't learned how to consistenly stop a rushing team, just how to out score them, and that won't change in 2 weeks just like you say we won't become a passing team either.
Quote from: smedindy on September 16, 2011, 01:39:19 PM
Several NCAC schools do have winning records against Mt. Union. Oberlin is 7-7-2 against Mt. Union! (For Oberlin, that's a winner!) And the mighty Denison Big Red is 19-9-1 against the Mount! Ohio Wesleyan is 17-5, Wooster is 38-30-4 and Wittenberg is 18-10.
/old school rivalries
Yet none of these teams will schedule Mount Union for a Non-Conference game anymore. Hmm...
Well,
1. Mt. Union only has one game each year to schedule, and in 2013 the NCAC goes round-robin as well.
2. Denison, Oberlin and even OWU would be absolutely insane to schedule it.
3. I like the Witt / Capital rivalry.
4. The post was just for 'laughs', you know, a funny thing!
Quote from: emma17 on September 16, 2011, 02:08:45 PM
Cru- You're absolutely right that MHB can only play the teams they are paired with. However, as I believe has been the case a bit for Mt. of late, some teams have lesser challenges in the early rounds of the playoffs-through no fault of their own. Perhaps MHB has benefited from some of those early round matchups.
Good point about Willamette in the top- tough to rank them when they are 0-2- but a good point. I think they are a very good team and most likely capable of beating several in bottom 10 of poll. They will need to earn their way back.
emma, I don't know anything about you other than what I glean from this board so i ask in all seriousness if you pay any attention to what goes on in D3 football in the south during the playoffs? UMHB doesn't get the benefit of anything most of the time because of the geographic proximity rule. Looking back 10 years, most of UMHB's 1st round games have involved HSU or Trinity. Last year both were down so UMHB played Christopher Newport, and the year before that UMHB went on the road to Central. Since 2001 UMHB has played Trinity 5 times in the first round (2 of which were followed by games with HSU in the second rd because of the Texas sub-bracket) and HSU twice. in 2005 UMHB didn't make the field because of a 3 way tie for the conference championship and ETBU had the tie-breaker. That's 7 of 10 years accounted for where there was no benefit of a weak 1st round team 8 including Central in 09. After round one, whoever plays round 2 has "earned" their spot.
What I gather from reading your posts is that you are a WIAC fan and I can respect that. There are a lot of reasons to be proud of what goes on in Wisconsin. I am and ASC fan, and I believe that the ASC is consistently a strong conference from the middle up with UMHB and HSU sitting at the top of the heap. There are a few schools that will probably never be great, like SRSU which ic way out in west Texas where there is a whole lot of nothing, but the group in the middle of the pack Mississippi College, Louisiana College, McMurry, East Texas Baptist and occasionally Texas Lutheran make noise periodically and I think would give a lot of D3 conference champs a run for their money most years.
I read what you said about the importance of a passing game, but keep in mind that UMHB has been dominating a pass happy conference for a while with a ball control ground game that often rushes for more yards than the other team passes for. Where UMHB has a problem is not usually with teams that can stop the run. It's with teams that score fast from a long way out, which is why I think the next 2 weeks will tell the story of the Cru for the 2011 season. McM and HSU both have potent passing attacks and if the Cru takes a quarter or two to get in the game, it'll be over. Oh and I wouldn't worry too much about the 3 picks Bailey threw. I was at the game. One pick was a hail mary at the half. The first pick was a good throw but a great play by the defender to take the ball away and the third was a tip drill that four people touched before the pick.
You know,if you want to see for yourself, the UMHB MCM game will be available on line @6pm central on Saturday.
I pull these quotes from the ASC board in 2008 about the UWW-UMHB semifinal game.
Quote from: badgerwarhawk on December 13, 2008, 07:40:46 PM
I've watched football games for 50+ years and in that time I have never seen a kickoff go backwards. I can't even understand how that was possible. A punt maybe because it's kicked high into the air but a kickoff. It must have been one hell a wind. The ball has to travel at least 10 yards before we have to field it. Evidently that didn't happen this time so the ball belonged to the WARHAWKS regardless of who recovered it. What confused me is why the officals had to huddle and discuss it.
Congrats to UMHB on their successfull season and best wishes for the future. I'm a big believer in the law of averages but apparently it was irrelevant in this instance.
The second half onside kick went backwards, the wind was so strong. UMHB was trailing 12-10 at the end of the first half.
Quote from: Bill McCabe on December 13, 2008, 08:10:55 PM
Today was the hardest wind I've ever seen at a football game. UWW did a much better job handling the wind than the Cru. The TD drive into the wind before the half might have been the turning point of the game.
A commentary on the second half kickoff that was the turning point of the game, if the 80-yd second quarter drive was not.
Quote from: headlinesman on December 14, 2008, 12:13:02 AM
I, too, was present at the Wind Bowl this afternoon, and I must agree with a couple of the other posters that talked about how Whitewater physically dominated the game. I believe UMHB got outplayed in all aspects of the game, and that, as sacrireligious as this might be, they also got outcoached. The kids were confused in the kicking game, and the secondary never did adjust, and a lot of that is coaching.
What I wanted to address, however, is the opening kickoff of the 2nd half. We all know the rule that says the ball has to travel 10 yards before a member of the kicking team can legally touch the ball. The Field Judge (FJ) (the guy with the F on his back) was straddling the 40 yd line, also known as the kicking team's restraining liine. His main job is to make sure the ball travels 10 yards. Here's where it gets hinky. Any restraining line is treated as a line, not as a plane, as the goal line is treated. A kicked ball, by rule, is deemed not to have crossed a line until it touches the ground, a player, or an official on or beyond that line. In all the confusion, you miay not have noticed, but the FJ had dropped his bean bag on the UMHB 39, signifying that being the spot where the kick first touched the ground. Of course, we all know that once the ball hit the ground, it looked like a Tiger Woods wedge shot, and shot back toward the UMHB goal line, so the ball, by rule, never crossed the restraining line, hence it never traveled the required 10 yards, hence when the CRU recovered, it constitited illegal touching, giving Whitewater the ball at the spot of the illegal touching. If the FJ was right, the call was absolutely correct, inasmuch as the home crowd protested.
Some of the confusion occurred up in our part of the stands when some folks started sayint that the ball actually hit the ground at the 42, not the 39. If that were the case, then the ball crossed the restraining line, and the Cru should have been allowed to keep the ball. However, without replay, the only way to know will be to look at the game film much after the fact.
I agree with the other poster who said that this game also pointed out the difference in the level of play between us and the Wisconsin/Ohio area. Obviously, the Cru is the best DIII team in this part of the country, but they've only beaten Mount Union once, and are o-for against Whitewater. Still, all in all, a great and wonderfully entertaining season for Coach Pete and his student athletes.
Discussion of the 2nd half kickoff (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=3803.9240)
Gents,
Unless something else happens, I think I need to recognize Catholic in my #25 spot. Three double digit deficits in the fourth quarter, three wins. They pulled another one out, beating Carnegie Mellon 29-28 after trailing 28-16 entering the fourth.
Holy schmokes!
Toby,
You raise good points and I just need to reiterate that I don't have a disrespect for MHB or the ASC. In a post I entered not long ago on the OAC board, I stated that I felt the ASC is a tougher conference than the OAC. I don't know the ASC like you, but I know enough that MHB has to be very good to win that conference. The point I am making is that I don't believe MHB is a top 5 team as most do. My current ranking is only based on 2 weeks into the schedule and time will tell if they should move up.
When it comes to the playoffs, you've had some really lopsided games, even after the first round. To me, that doesn't necessarily mean MHB is so dominant as much as it means some of the playoff teams haven't been as strong. In 2010 MHB put up 59 and 69 points in 2 playoff games-in 2008 MHB put up 63 in the 3rd round and in 2007 MHB put up 52 and 64 points. In all those years MHB eventually lost to a team that must have been much different than those they previously whalloped. There must be a reason this happens.
To me, not having seen the games, it must come down to facing a team that can stop the run and when that happens, MHB doesn't have the passing game needed for balance.
I don't root against MHB.
emma,
I don't think you root against UMHB. I just wanted to explain why people consistently put them in the top 5. You are correct about the blowouts in the 2nd and 3rd rounds, but I tend to think it has to do with relative conference strength. ASC vs PAC is pretty much always a blow out, but what can you do when the conference has the AQ and wins their playoff games.
Quote from: Toby Taff on September 17, 2011, 11:40:18 AM
emma,
I don't think you root against UMHB. I just wanted to explain why people consistently put them in the top 5. You are correct about the blowouts in the 2nd and 3rd rounds, but I tend to think it has to do with relative conference strength. ASC vs PAC is pretty much always a blow out, but what can you do when the conference has the AQ and wins their playoff games.
And the metrics that are used by the national committee do not account for the statistical disparities that arise because of the isolated ASC and the concentration of schools in the "eastern" side of the South Region. Furthermore, the "geographical proximity" clause in the Handbook mandates that the ASC teams will be sent wherever necessary.
Here is the link to a message board that talks about "Bracketgate" games.
Best All-time South Region teams (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=5306.0)
OK all you MHB fans, I think it may be time to beg for forgiveness.
I caught some of the MHB game and HSU game video streams. I can see why you say HSU won't be able to stop your run. On top of it, HSU didn't look all that impressive on offense. Maybe it's a bad game type of thing- I don't know. Meanwhile, in the first half I saw of MHB, they look very good. Back to the drawing board on the polls.
Nice work MHB
What a bad week for a few Top 25 teams. Kean shows they're for reals. North Central is still a wee bit upset about losing to Redlands. And the big question is what do you do about ONU and Montclair? Reward them for a close win, or penalize them for almost losing to an opponent they should have rolled? (Though in the OAC, the mid-tier teams are hard to 'roll' unless you're Mt. Union.)
Quote from: smedindy on September 17, 2011, 10:09:49 PM
What a bad week for a few Top 25 teams. Kean shows they're for reals. North Central is still a wee bit upset about losing to Redlands. And the big question is what do you do about ONU and Montclair? Reward them for a close win, or penalize them for almost losing to an opponent they should have rolled? (Though in the OAC, the mid-tier teams are hard to 'roll' unless you're Mt. Union.)
That, and they've played some pretty bad teams to boot! CCIW schedule starts for them now though, they'll have some tests coming up during the rest of the season.
Quote from: MasterJedi on September 17, 2011, 10:25:48 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 17, 2011, 10:09:49 PM
What a bad week for a few Top 25 teams. Kean shows they're for reals. North Central is still a wee bit upset about losing to Redlands. And the big question is what do you do about ONU and Montclair? Reward them for a close win, or penalize them for almost losing to an opponent they should have rolled? (Though in the OAC, the mid-tier teams are hard to 'roll' unless you're Mt. Union.)
That, and they've played some pretty bad teams to boot! CCIW schedule starts for them now though, they'll have some tests coming up during the rest of the season.
Yeah, Olivet certainly isn't Wheaton or IWU! But Bethel (TN) won 69-6 today over West Virginia Tech. So they're not wretched.
Add Mary Hardin Baylor to my, "penalize or praise" list. Going to start to contemplate...
Don't overlook Carthage this year.
Can't pull the trigger on Catholic... :(
Considering only 2 teams I had in my poll lost (and 3 didn't play) I still ended up moving a bunch of teams. Taking out movement because of the losses, I still have 10 teams changing spots. Of course that's probably better than just leaving everything the same and simply moving people up a spot when someone loses.
Mine is in. Lots of turmoil and uncertainty just below the Top 7-8.
HSC85 - It depends. No seriously.
It depends on home / road, conference vs. non-conference, rival vs. non-rival, and past results.
So, I can't say for sure except on a case-by-case basis.
It's not political. To me, it's simple. As I stated before, will team X beat team Y a majority of times. It's not about getting respect or not. Flukes happen. But I can't rank on the basis of a fluke. (Not to say Miss. College beating Hardin - Simmons was a total fluke, but I do think Hardin-Simmons will beat them 3 times out of 5 on a neutral field...)
Quote from: smedindy on September 18, 2011, 10:54:35 PM
It's not political. To me, it's simple. As I stated before, will team X beat team Y a majority of times. It's not about getting respect or not. Flukes happen. But I can't rank on the basis of a fluke. (Not to say Miss. College beating Hardin - Simmons was a total fluke, but I do think Hardin-Simmons will beat them 3 times out of 5 on a neutral field...)
That's not simple...that's simply subjective. Why was it a fluke? Because you say so? Because you think so? Why would Hardin-Simmons win 3 of 5? I'm not going to tell anyone how to fill out their ballot, everyone's got to figure out their philosophy. And the difference in philosophies is part of the fun. But yours is clearly to put more weight upon subjective data than objective data.
Mississippi College was up 45 - 14 with 8 minutes to play. 14 of HS points and 150 yds of offense came in the closing minutes, even seconds of the game. And MC
still won by 17 points. I don't see how this is a fluke and I see no evidence that would suggest that Hardin-Simmons should be considered the favorite in a 5, 7 or 10 game series.
The ASC gets sorted out even more this weekend with UMHB at HSU and Miss College at LaCollege.
The road trip to Mississippi College is always a hard one... 600 miles from Abilene TX to Clinton MS.
Even the officiating crews are vastly different between Texas and Mississippi. ;)
Quote from: hazzben on September 18, 2011, 11:22:34 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 18, 2011, 10:54:35 PM
It's not political. To me, it's simple. As I stated before, will team X beat team Y a majority of times. It's not about getting respect or not. Flukes happen. But I can't rank on the basis of a fluke. (Not to say Miss. College beating Hardin - Simmons was a total fluke, but I do think Hardin-Simmons will beat them 3 times out of 5 on a neutral field...)
That's not simple...that's simply subjective. Why was it a fluke? Because you say so? Because you think so? Why would Hardin-Simmons win 3 of 5? I'm not going to tell anyone how to fill out their ballot, everyone's got to figure out their philosophy. And the difference in philosophies is part of the fun. But yours is clearly to put more weight upon subjective data than objective data.
Mississippi College was up 45 - 14 with 8 minutes to play. 14 of HS points and 150 yds of offense came in the closing minutes, even seconds of the game. And MC still won by 17 points. I don't see how this is a fluke and I see no evidence that would suggest that Hardin-Simmons should be considered the favorite in a 5, 7 or 10 game series.
I want to see the Massey data after this week, when the teams are more connected. But my analytical, dispassionate side says that the HSC - Miss College game was 'one of those days' for both teams. My fan side roots for the underdog and is quite intrigued by results like this. However, I don't vote with my heart. (I tend to gamble with my heart - that's why I avoid sports books!)
One from this year:
St. John's losing to UW-EC by a gazillion was a fluke. Play that game again and St. John's remains close or wins. One result does not make it a trend. One lambasting does not make a team dominant against the other. It just happened on that day and time.
And one from the NFL.
Tennessee beat Baltimore yesterday. If you saw Baltimore last Sunday against Pittsburgh, you'd think that there would be absolute zero chance the Titans could beat them. Remember, the Titans lost to the moribund Jags on opening week. But beat them they did and made the Ravens look silly.
As a fan, I loved it. But in ranking the teams, I can only think that was a fluke result.
Because Miss College beat HSU so convincingly Saturday, I put Miss College (previously unranked) ahead of HSU in my new poll. If the game was closer I probably won't have dropped HSU so far down. I moved HSU from #8 down to #20, and slid Miss College into the polls at #19. I felt comfortable doing so b/c Miss College's only loss this year is to a scholarship-offering school.
However, I still have NCC ahead of Redlands, mostly b/c it was a close game in week 1, AND NCC was ranked #3 to begin the season. So, to me, that gap was too big to close (#3 ranked team in NCC and a non ranked team in Redlands) to put Redlands ahead of NCC in the week two's poll. If Redlands destroyed NCC, that that's a different story, then I probably wold have put NCC further down in the poll, and Redlands ahead of them (like what I did to HSU and Miss College).
Quote from: smedindy on September 17, 2011, 11:29:19 PM
Can't pull the trigger on Catholic... :(
Pretty sure they are going to get rolled by Hampden-Sydney if they play like that. They'd give up 45 to H-SC easily.
Quote from: HSC85 on September 18, 2011, 10:42:31 PM
Well the voters in the D3 Top 25 poll certainly answered the question I posed. Hardin Simmons is still ranked ahead of Mississippi College even after the result on Saturday. I really feel bad for the schools who actually beat a top team and still don't get any respect from some people.
smedindy,
I guess you were right. It is case by case and some teams get penalized for a performance that is not up to the expected standards and some teams don't. It seems very political to me and that is a shame. At least the championship is not dependent on what a group of pollsters think.
Pretty sure that going from zero votes to No. 23 is "any respect." I can't picture any politics on our panel that would favor one ASC team over another.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 19, 2011, 11:12:54 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 17, 2011, 11:29:19 PM
Can't pull the trigger on Catholic... :(
Pretty sure they are going to get rolled by Hampden-Sydney if they play like that. They'd give up 45 to H-SC easily.
Pretty sure most of the ODAC is going to get rolled by Hampden-Sydney. I had some hope for the Generals after last year's stellar conference campaign, but turnovers and penalties are falling out much different, surprising given the number of seniors on the field. Combined with no longer sneaking up on anyone, and having to play on the road at H-SC, I think this is H-SC's conference to lose. Of course, like last year, the Tigers are going to have to play ALL the games. Votes only win championships when money rules!
When I complete the top 25 I do so from the perspective of who I think deserves to be there now, not necessarily where I think the teams will be at season's end. This idea can be a struggle for me as I have to remind myself to think here and now and not to project where teams will end up- no matter how I try I think my poll becomes a blend.
From this perspective, I can rank a bunch of teams ahead of NCC for now, however, I believe the season will prove that NCC is a top 5 team. For instance, I don't think for a second that Ohio Northern or Wartburg and some others could beat North Central (and I wonder if the D3 pollsters don't feel the same), however, the teams are rewarded/punished based on current results.
Quote from: emma17 on September 19, 2011, 12:26:26 PM
When I complete the top 25 I do so from the perspective of who I think deserves to be there now, not necessarily where I think the teams will be at season's end.
I think that's a fare statement. I think most people fill out their polls using the same philosophy.
The only time I fill out my poll on where I think each team will finish up is my preseason poll. To me, the perfect preseason poll will mirror the final poll.
Quote from: smedindy on September 19, 2011, 09:14:56 AM
One from this year:
St. John's losing to UW-EC by a gazillion was a fluke. Play that game again and St. John's remains close or wins. One result does not make it a trend. One lambasting does not make a team dominant against the other. It just happened on that day and time.
Not sure many Johnnie fans would agree with your take. They play again and SJU probably keeps it closer, but I don't think they'd win. UWEC dominated them from start to finish in every aspect of the game. They were faster. They were more physical. They were more disciplined. They executed better. And it all happened in Collegeville.
From what I read on the MIAC board, to a poster, SJU fans admitted they got dominated by a superior team. What makes you think SJU could possibly win that game in a rematch?
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 19, 2011, 02:25:24 PM
Quote from: emma17 on September 19, 2011, 12:26:26 PM
When I complete the top 25 I do so from the perspective of who I think deserves to be there now, not necessarily where I think the teams will be at season's end.
I think that's a fare statement. I think most people fill out their polls using the same philosophy.
The only time I fill out my poll on where I think each team will finish up is my preseason poll. To me, the perfect preseason poll will mirror the final poll.
I was curious if that was the case.
In this week's poll I did jump ahead to prediciting season's end with one team- I moved NCC to #3. From the perspective of results through today it's probably unfair to other teams. But in keeping them lower, such as 11 like D3 has them, I feel it's kind of playing a game. Their last two victories tell me that whatever happened in week 1 is not indicative of who they are.
Quote from: emma17 on September 19, 2011, 07:22:55 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 19, 2011, 02:25:24 PM
Quote from: emma17 on September 19, 2011, 12:26:26 PM
When I complete the top 25 I do so from the perspective of who I think deserves to be there now, not necessarily where I think the teams will be at season's end.
I think that's a fare statement. I think most people fill out their polls using the same philosophy.
The only time I fill out my poll on where I think each team will finish up is my preseason poll. To me, the perfect preseason poll will mirror the final poll.
I was curious if that was the case.
In this week's poll I did jump ahead to prediciting season's end with one team- I moved NCC to #3. From the perspective of results through today it's probably unfair to other teams. But in keeping them lower, such as 11 like D3 has them, I feel it's kind of playing a game. Their last two victories tell me that whatever happened in week 1 is not indicative of who they are.
My top 7 remained the same (NCC at 7) but I can say if they win big against Wheaton and IWU and the rest of the CCIW they'll be back at #3, if they win close games (winning by 3-7 points) then I don't see myself moving them up as long as nobody above them loses.
Quote from: HSC85 on September 19, 2011, 02:36:49 PM
Pat,
I have no complaint about the votes that HSC is getting. I just watch teams lose to teams that are supposed to be weaker and the penalty is not very strong. Especially if they were already in the top 25. If you are in the top 15 it seems to take two losses to get bounced. My comments had nothing to do with Hampden Sydney.
Neither did mine. Not sure what I said that would make you think I was talking about anyone other than Mississippi College, which went from 0 votes to No. 23 in the country.
Quote from: hazzben on September 19, 2011, 02:52:21 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 19, 2011, 09:14:56 AM
One from this year:
St. John's losing to UW-EC by a gazillion was a fluke. Play that game again and St. John's remains close or wins. One result does not make it a trend. One lambasting does not make a team dominant against the other. It just happened on that day and time.
Not sure many Johnnie fans would agree with your take. They play again and SJU probably keeps it closer, but I don't think they'd win. UWEC dominated them from start to finish in every aspect of the game. They were faster. They were more physical. They were more disciplined. They executed better. And it all happened in Collegeville.
From what I read on the MIAC board, to a poster, SJU fans admitted they got dominated by a superior team. What makes you think SJU could possibly win that game in a rematch?
The Johnnie fans I know seem to be 'the sky is falling' types at times. Has to be in their Minnesota blood.
emma17 - I do the same thing. What I see now is that North Central is a lot better than a lot of teams, and they lost on opening week a long way away from home against a decent team. But I see a team that is NOW a lot better than almost every team in the country, even with that loss.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 19, 2011, 10:02:28 AM
Because Miss College beat HSU so convincingly Saturday, I put Miss College (previously unranked) ahead of HSU in my new poll. If the game was closer I probably won't have dropped HSU so far down. I moved HSU from #8 down to #20, and slid Miss College into the polls at #19. I felt comfortable doing so b/c Miss College's only loss this year is to a scholarship-offering school.
However, I still have NCC ahead of Redlands, mostly b/c it was a close game in week 1, AND NCC was ranked #3 to begin the season. So, to me, that gap was too big to close (#3 ranked team in NCC and a non ranked team in Redlands) to put Redlands ahead of NCC in the week two's poll. If Redlands destroyed NCC, that that's a different story, then I probably wold have put NCC further down in the poll, and Redlands ahead of them (like what I did to HSU and Miss College).
I'm going to wait and see another week on Miss. College and see the Massey data. I have about 4 or 5 'bubbling under'....
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 19, 2011, 07:58:00 PM
Quote from: HSC85 on September 19, 2011, 02:36:49 PM
Pat,
I have no complaint about the votes that HSC is getting. I just watch teams lose to teams that are supposed to be weaker and the penalty is not very strong. Especially if they were already in the top 25. If you are in the top 15 it seems to take two losses to get bounced. My comments had nothing to do with Hampden Sydney.
Neither did mine. Not sure what I said that would make you think I was talking about anyone other than Mississippi College, which went from 0 votes to No. 23 in the country.
For me I don't jump on the bandwagon for one win. Kean wasn't in my poll last week, but they're top 15 this week after two solid wins in a row.
Quote from: sflzman on September 19, 2011, 09:58:14 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 19, 2011, 07:58:00 PM
Quote from: HSC85 on September 19, 2011, 02:36:49 PM
Pat,
I have no complaint about the votes that HSC is getting. I just watch teams lose to teams that are supposed to be weaker and the penalty is not very strong. Especially if they were already in the top 25. If you are in the top 15 it seems to take two losses to get bounced. My comments had nothing to do with Hampden Sydney.
Neither did mine. Not sure what I said that would make you think I was talking about anyone other than Mississippi College, which went from 0 votes to No. 23 in the country.
For me I don't jump on the bandwagon for one win. Kean wasn't in my poll last week, but they're top 15 this week after two solid wins in a row.
That's how I do it as well, or in my case Top 18.
Quote from: smedindy on September 19, 2011, 08:56:04 PM
emma17 - I do the same thing. What I see now is that North Central is a lot better than a lot of teams, and they lost on opening week a long way away from home against a decent team. But I see a team that is NOW a lot better than almost every team in the country, even with that loss.
I'm really interested to see NCC vs Wheaton. I saw the first half of Wheaton vs Pville on straming video (buffering, buffering, buffering) and was surprised at how well P-ville played Wheaton in the first half. Unfortunately I fell asleep at halftime so I didn't see Wheaton's turn around.
If you had to select today, who wins- NCC or Wheaton?
Quote from: emma17 on September 19, 2011, 10:21:45 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 19, 2011, 08:56:04 PM
emma17 - I do the same thing. What I see now is that North Central is a lot better than a lot of teams, and they lost on opening week a long way away from home against a decent team. But I see a team that is NOW a lot better than almost every team in the country, even with that loss.
I'm really interested to see NCC vs Wheaton. I saw the first half of Wheaton vs Pville on straming video (buffering, buffering, buffering) and was surprised at how well P-ville played Wheaton in the first half. Unfortunately I fell asleep at halftime so I didn't see Wheaton's turn around.
If you had to select today, who wins- NCC or Wheaton?
I hope that's not because of the performance of the UW-Platteville's marching band? ;)
Quote from: emma17 on September 19, 2011, 10:21:45 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 19, 2011, 08:56:04 PM
emma17 - I do the same thing. What I see now is that North Central is a lot better than a lot of teams, and they lost on opening week a long way away from home against a decent team. But I see a team that is NOW a lot better than almost every team in the country, even with that loss.
I'm really interested to see NCC vs Wheaton. I saw the first half of Wheaton vs Pville on straming video (buffering, buffering, buffering) and was surprised at how well P-ville played Wheaton in the first half. Unfortunately I fell asleep at halftime so I didn't see Wheaton's turn around.
If you had to select today, who wins- NCC or Wheaton?
NCC/Wheaton is one of those rivalry games (Little Brass Bell) of schools roughly 10 miles apart that is essentially impossible to predict. General scuttlebutt in the CCIW is that NCC is probably a bit better, but I'm not sure a Wheaton win would even be viewed as an upset.
(It will be a battle for second, anyway - my IWU Titans plan to beat them both! 8-) ;))
Did I miss this week's poll results somehow? Haven't seen them and should be interesting to see what everyone thinks (as always).
Quote from: Ron Boerger on September 20, 2011, 10:06:14 AM
Did I miss this week's poll results somehow? Haven't seen them and should be interesting to see what everyone thinks (as always).
Not yet released yet, bp must be busy. I'm greatly looking forward to the poll as well.
I think he usually posts them sometime on Tuesdays (today).
Quote from: smedindy on September 19, 2011, 08:54:03 PM
Quote from: hazzben on September 19, 2011, 02:52:21 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 19, 2011, 09:14:56 AM
One from this year:
St. John's losing to UW-EC by a gazillion was a fluke. Play that game again and St. John's remains close or wins. One result does not make it a trend. One lambasting does not make a team dominant against the other. It just happened on that day and time.
Not sure many Johnnie fans would agree with your take. They play again and SJU probably keeps it closer, but I don't think they'd win. UWEC dominated them from start to finish in every aspect of the game. They were faster. They were more physical. They were more disciplined. They executed better. And it all happened in Collegeville.
From what I read on the MIAC board, to a poster, SJU fans admitted they got dominated by a superior team. What makes you think SJU could possibly win that game in a rematch?
The Johnnie fans I know seem to be 'the sky is falling' types at times. Has to be in their Minnesota blood.
I don't think it's a MN thing as much as it's SJU rarely losing for the last, oh, 50+ years. And they definitely aren't used to getting handled at home. They just have
very little experience in the losing department and almost none in the blowout (especially during the regular season). But yeah, there was definitely a little chicken little over on our board.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 19, 2011, 11:20:51 PM
Quote from: emma17 on September 19, 2011, 10:21:45 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 19, 2011, 08:56:04 PM
emma17 - I do the same thing. What I see now is that North Central is a lot better than a lot of teams, and they lost on opening week a long way away from home against a decent team. But I see a team that is NOW a lot better than almost every team in the country, even with that loss.
I'm really interested to see NCC vs Wheaton. I saw the first half of Wheaton vs Pville on straming video (buffering, buffering, buffering) and was surprised at how well P-ville played Wheaton in the first half. Unfortunately I fell asleep at halftime so I didn't see Wheaton's turn around.
If you had to select today, who wins- NCC or Wheaton?
NCC/Wheaton is one of those rivalry games (Little Brass Bell) of schools roughly 10 miles apart that is essentially impossible to predict. General scuttlebutt in the CCIW is that NCC is probably a bit better, but I'm not sure a Wheaton win would even be viewed as an upset.
(It will be a battle for second, anyway - my IWU Titans plan to beat them both! 8-) ;))
I'm with you, I've been flogged for having IWU in the top 15 last week (22 this week as I feel the Aurora game was too close).
D3 TOP 25 FAN POLL
1. Wisconsin-Whitewater (14) 398 pts 1
2. Mount Union (2) 386 pts 2
3. St. Thomas 355 pts 3
4. Bethel 332 pts 4
5. Mary Hardin-Baylor 330 pts 5
6. Wheaton 312 pts 7
7. Linfield 311 pts 6
8. North Central 285 pts 9
9. Wesley 227 pts 11
10. Ohio Northern 216 pts 10
11. Wartburg 211 pts 15
12. Thomas More 208 pts 13
13. Kean 201 pts 20
14. Redlands 169 pts 16
15. Montclair St. 161 pts 14
16. Alfred 142 pts 17
17. Wabash 141 pts 19
18. Wittenberg 136 pts 18
19. Trine 102 pts 21
20. Hardin-Simmons 95 pts 8
21. Cal Lutheran 89 pts 22
22. Hampden-Sydney 82 pts 23
23. Cortland State 56 pts 12
24. Baldwin-Wallace 48 pts unranked
25. Salisbury 47 pts 24
Falling out of Top 25 UW-Platteville
Also receiving votes: Delaware Valley 45, UW-Platteville 33, Mississippi College 26, UW-Stevens Point 11, UW-Oshkosh 10, UW-Eau Claire 7, Adrian 6, Illinois Wesleyan 6, Louisiana College 5, Franklin 4, St. John Fisher 3, Johns Hopkins 2, Trinity 2,
I'm telling you guys/girls. Trine is not the best MIAA team. Adrian or Alma will win the AQ this year....
Quote from: sflzman on September 20, 2011, 10:39:22 PM
I'm telling you guys/girls. Trine is not the best MIAA team. Adrian or Alma will win the AQ this year....
sflzman- Did you see the Trine v UWRF game by any chance? The stats sure don't resemble the score in that one.
Quote from: sflzman on September 20, 2011, 10:39:22 PM
I'm telling you guys/girls. Trine is not the best MIAA team. Adrian or Alma will win the AQ this year....
I was very surprised when I researched Trine before the UW-RF game and found the Thunder averaged less than 3 yards per carry against Manchester and Bluffton after averaging 7.0 yards against them last year. And both of those years, we are talking about a reasonable sample size of 80-100 carries, too. I agree that Trine is suspect at best.
Quote from: sflzman on September 20, 2011, 10:39:22 PM
I'm telling you guys/girls. Trine is not the best MIAA team. Adrian or Alma will win the AQ this year....
Until Trine loses, I have them up there... I may have them a bit high at 11, but I can't put anyone that I have ranked just below them ahead.
I don't think anyone will beat them in conference, Alma hasn't shown me any reason that they'd win (although a solid win this week at W&L might change my mind) and while Adrian may have a small chance, they have to do it on the road against a Trine team who will have an extra week to prepare. The other teams may be closing the gap between Trine and the rest of the conference but I don't think they've gotten there quite yet.
The ranking conundrum continues in my eyes. Platteville drops out after losing a tight game to a #6- isn't that what should happen when a bottom 25 plays a top 10- lose in tight game? I can't understand why they would drop out. Ohio Northern survives a 2-point conversion attempt to an unranked team and still holds on in voter's minds as the 10th best team in the entire country.
Mercy!
I can tell you I don't have Ohio Northern at #10. But it is interesting trying to rank these teams.
Quote from: emma17 on September 21, 2011, 09:11:30 AM
The ranking conundrum continues in my eyes. Platteville drops out after losing a tight game to a #6- isn't that what should happen when a bottom 25 plays a top 10- lose in tight game? I can't understand why they would drop out. Ohio Northern survives a 2-point conversion attempt to an unranked team and still holds on in voter's minds as the 10th best team in the entire country.
Mercy!
I dropped Ohio Northern for this very reason. Still ranked, but I wasn't impressed with the showing.
Quote from: sju56321 on September 21, 2011, 11:31:52 AM
I can tell you I don't have Ohio Northern at #10. But it is interesting trying to rank these teams.
exactly. Some teams I've got ranked higher than I thought I would, simply because I can't for the life of me think of a team I'd rank above them. This is a tough time of year for the poll as so many great matchups and real measuring sticks haven't happened for a lot of the ranked teams.
Quote from: emma17 on September 21, 2011, 09:11:30 AM
The ranking conundrum continues in my eyes. Platteville drops out after losing a tight game to a #6- isn't that what should happen when a bottom 25 plays a top 10- lose in tight game? I can't understand why they would drop out. Ohio Northern survives a 2-point conversion attempt to an unranked team and still holds on in voter's minds as the 10th best team in the entire country.
Mercy!
I guess when you're the last ranked team, and you lose....odds are you are going to fall out. Besides, I think Miss College is more deserving of getting into the top 25 after smoking Harden Simmons. so I kicked out UWP and put in Miss College.
Quote from: emma17 on September 20, 2011, 10:52:46 PM
Quote from: sflzman on September 20, 2011, 10:39:22 PM
I'm telling you guys/girls. Trine is not the best MIAA team. Adrian or Alma will win the AQ this year....
sflzman- Did you see the Trine v UWRF game by any chance? The stats sure don't resemble the score in that one.
No I did not see that one, and I haven't even seem much film of them yet....
Quote from: sflzman on September 21, 2011, 02:57:02 PM
Quote from: emma17 on September 20, 2011, 10:52:46 PM
Quote from: sflzman on September 20, 2011, 10:39:22 PM
I'm telling you guys/girls. Trine is not the best MIAA team. Adrian or Alma will win the AQ this year....
sflzman- Did you see the Trine v UWRF game by any chance? The stats sure don't resemble the score in that one.
No I did not see that one, and I haven't even seem much film of them yet....
Hmm, film huh? That sounds fun- Love breaking down game film. If you get the UWRF-Trine film can you fill us in a bit?
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 21, 2011, 01:08:50 PM
Quote from: emma17 on September 21, 2011, 09:11:30 AM
The ranking conundrum continues in my eyes. Platteville drops out after losing a tight game to a #6- isn't that what should happen when a bottom 25 plays a top 10- lose in tight game? I can't understand why they would drop out. Ohio Northern survives a 2-point conversion attempt to an unranked team and still holds on in voter's minds as the 10th best team in the entire country.
Mercy!
I guess when you're the last ranked team, and you lose....odds are you are going to fall out. Besides, I think Miss College is more deserving of getting into the top 25 after smoking Harden Simmons. so I kicked out UWP and put in Miss College.
I can't argue with the Miss College logic. It's just an old issue though that I realize comes down to a personal decision.
This isn't a question specific to you 02 (but I always appreciate your replies), I'm just tossing it out there. I can see the following scenario: UWP lost to Wheaton and maybe loses to UWW and one other WIAC team. Assuming that other WIAC team is proving to be very tough (you know, like Oshkosh beating everybody but UWW)- you now have a 3 loss team- that lost ONLY to teams it should lose to if it is ranked in 20-25. If the Alfreds, Trines, Hampden Sydneys, Wabashs and the like remain unbeaten, is there no room for a UWP? Or, do we rank UWP not on record, but on asking the question- who would win if they played each other?
Quote from: emma17 on September 21, 2011, 07:39:10 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 21, 2011, 01:08:50 PM
Quote from: emma17 on September 21, 2011, 09:11:30 AM
The ranking conundrum continues in my eyes. Platteville drops out after losing a tight game to a #6- isn't that what should happen when a bottom 25 plays a top 10- lose in tight game? I can't understand why they would drop out. Ohio Northern survives a 2-point conversion attempt to an unranked team and still holds on in voter's minds as the 10th best team in the entire country.
Mercy!
For me, the third loss and a 7-3 record, a WIAC slip-up drops UW-P into the second 25.
I guess when you're the last ranked team, and you lose....odds are you are going to fall out. Besides, I think Miss College is more deserving of getting into the top 25 after smoking Harden Simmons. so I kicked out UWP and put in Miss College.
I can't argue with the Miss College logic. It's just an old issue though that I realize comes down to a personal decision.
This isn't a question specific to you 02 (but I always appreciate your replies), I'm just tossing it out there. I can see the following scenario: UWP lost to Wheaton and maybe loses to UWW and one other WIAC team. Assuming that other WIAC team is proving to be very tough (you know, like Oshkosh beating everybody but UWW)- you now have a 3 loss team- that lost ONLY to teams it should lose to if it is ranked in 20-25. If the Alfreds, Trines, Hampden Sydneys, Wabashs and the like remain unbeaten, is there no room for a UWP? Or, do we rank UWP not on record, but on asking the question- who would win if they played each other?
Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 21, 2011, 08:08:15 PM
Quote from: emma17 on September 21, 2011, 07:39:10 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 21, 2011, 01:08:50 PM
Quote from: emma17 on September 21, 2011, 09:11:30 AM
The ranking conundrum continues in my eyes. Platteville drops out after losing a tight game to a #6- isn't that what should happen when a bottom 25 plays a top 10- lose in tight game? I can't understand why they would drop out. Ohio Northern survives a 2-point conversion attempt to an unranked team and still holds on in voter's minds as the 10th best team in the entire country.
Mercy!
I guess when you're the last ranked team, and you lose....odds are you are going to fall out. Besides, I think Miss College is more deserving of getting into the top 25 after smoking Harden Simmons. so I kicked out UWP and put in Miss College.
I can't argue with the Miss College logic. It's just an old issue though that I realize comes down to a personal decision.
This isn't a question specific to you 02 (but I always appreciate your replies), I'm just tossing it out there. I can see the following scenario: UWP lost to Wheaton and maybe loses to UWW and one other WIAC team. Assuming that other WIAC team is proving to be very tough (you know, like Oshkosh beating everybody but UWW)- you now have a 3 loss team- that lost ONLY to teams it should lose to if it is ranked in 20-25. If the Alfreds, Trines, Hampden Sydneys, Wabashs and the like remain unbeaten, is there no room for a UWP? Or, do we rank UWP not on record, but on asking the question- who would win if they played each other?
For me, the third loss, a WIAC slip-up, and a 7-3 record, drops UW-P into the second 25.
Quote from: emma17 on September 21, 2011, 09:11:30 AM
The ranking conundrum continues in my eyes. Platteville drops out after losing a tight game to a #6- isn't that what should happen when a bottom 25 plays a top 10- lose in tight game? I can't understand why they would drop out. Ohio Northern survives a 2-point conversion attempt to an unranked team and still holds on in voter's minds as the 10th best team in the entire country.
Mercy!
Us who have seen the OAC semi-close and personal know that the non-Mt. Union teams tend to claw at each other. I dropped Montclair big time because of their performance, but knowing how rough the OAC is from teams 2 through 7 I couldn't drop ONU that much.
I have ONU as the bottom of my "11" that I've always had as my first tier:
1. UW - Whitewater
2. Mt. Union
3. St. Thomas
4. Wheaton
5. Linfield
6. North Central
7. UMHB
8. Wesley
9. Bethel
10. Wartburg
11. Ohio Northern
12. Wabash
13. Wittenberg
14. Redlands
15. Baldwin - Wallace
16. Kean
17. Alfred
18. Montclair State
19. Salisbury
20. Cortland State
21. Thomas More
22. UW - Eau Claire
23. Cal Lutheran
24. Delaware Valley
25. Trine
This is also why I'm going to start using Massey to do comparisons and power rankings and schedule rankings. Gather and glean good data.
Quote from: emma17 on September 21, 2011, 07:27:58 PM
Quote from: sflzman on September 21, 2011, 02:57:02 PM
Quote from: emma17 on September 20, 2011, 10:52:46 PM
Quote from: sflzman on September 20, 2011, 10:39:22 PM
I'm telling you guys/girls. Trine is not the best MIAA team. Adrian or Alma will win the AQ this year....
sflzman- Did you see the Trine v UWRF game by any chance? The stats sure don't resemble the score in that one.
No I did not see that one, and I haven't even seem much film of them yet....
Hmm, film huh? That sounds fun- Love breaking down game film. If you get the UWRF-Trine film can you fill us in a bit?
No problem. The key will be when I finally get to see a Trine film, but I'll definately give a breakdown on it...
Just wondering, who are the pollsters for the fan top 25 poll & are they equally distributed among the regions? How does one become a pollster? Is the weekly deadline for each pollster to submit their top 25 before or after the d3football.com top 25 is published? Could someone in the know kindly respond? TY
Quote from: BoBo on September 22, 2011, 10:27:26 AM
Just wondering, who are the pollsters for the fan top 25 poll & are they equally distributed among the regions? How does one become a pollster? Is the weekly deadline for each pollster to submit their top 25 before or after the d3football.com top 25 is published? Could someone in the know kindly respond? TY
All you have to do to be a pollster is to let me know at d3fanpoll@yahoo.com. I posted an announcement in every region and every conference a week or two before the season started. I took everyone who indicated interest. A couple guys have also been added since the season started. Obviously, it would be great to have you! The deadline we have set up is midnight. I never really clarified as to whether that is Eastern, Central, Mountain, or Pacific time. But I know it's not KST! :D
Quote from: BoBo on September 22, 2011, 10:27:26 AM
Just wondering, who are the pollsters for the fan top 25 poll & are they equally distributed among the regions?
I'd be interested in finding that out too... maybe us pollsters could include in our next ballot what region and maybe what conference we're from and then at the bottom of the latest poll bleed could either tally up region and conference representation or list everyone and their affiliations and someone will invariably tally it up
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 22, 2011, 01:07:57 PM
Quote from: BoBo on September 22, 2011, 10:27:26 AM
Just wondering, who are the pollsters for the fan top 25 poll & are they equally distributed among the regions?
I'd be interested in finding that out too... maybe us pollsters could include in our next ballot what region and maybe what conference we're from and then at the bottom of the latest poll bleed could either tally up region and conference representation or list everyone and their affiliations and someone will invariably tally it up
Judging by your screen name, FCGrizzliesGrad, bleedpurple can probably crack the code on what region/conference you represent ;)
That probably goes for most of us though, including myself. But I like that idea though.
Whoa- hold on. All you have to do to be a pollster is to let me know at d3fanpoll@yahoo.com
That's not what you told me Bleed >:(
Quote from: emma17 on September 22, 2011, 01:33:26 PM
Whoa- hold on. All you have to do to be a pollster is to let me know at d3fanpoll@yahoo.com
That's not what you told me Bleed >:(
Are you still upset about the D3 Fanpoll Wonderlic test I made you take, Emma?
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 22, 2011, 01:07:57 PM
Quote from: BoBo on September 22, 2011, 10:27:26 AM
Just wondering, who are the pollsters for the fan top 25 poll & are they equally distributed among the regions?
I'd be interested in finding that out too... maybe us pollsters could include in our next ballot what region and maybe what conference we're from and then at the bottom of the latest poll bleed could either tally up region and conference representation or list everyone and their affiliations and someone will invariably tally it up
I would be glad to tally if pollsters include the conference/region you follow most closely on your ballots.
West/MIAC/Bethel for me.
Quote from: bleedpurple on September 22, 2011, 02:15:16 PM
Quote from: emma17 on September 22, 2011, 01:33:26 PM
Whoa- hold on. All you have to do to be a pollster is to let me know at d3fanpoll@yahoo.com
That's not what you told me Bleed >:(
Are you still upset about the D3 Fanpoll Wonderlic test I made you take, Emma?
Should have been open book- here, you try it:
http://www.sporcle.com/games/gloucester/wonderlic-sample-test (http://www.sporcle.com/games/gloucester/wonderlic-sample-test)
Looks like MHB and HS are the only top 25 teams playing each other this week. Unless there's some upsets, I doubt the rankings will change a whole lot.
HS can make things interesting if they knock off MHB. Which is very possibly with the game being at Abilene.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 23, 2011, 02:30:04 PM
Looks like MHB and HS are the only top 25 teams playing each other this week. Unless there's some upsets, I doubt the rankings will change a whole lot.
HS can make things interesting if they knock off MHB. Which is very possibly with the game being at Abilene.
Playing in Abilene hasn't been much of an advantage, especially recently:
2009: L, 7-23
2007: L, 14-47
2005: L, 7-38
2003: L, 36-43
2001: W, 30-27
1999: W, 28-21 (UMHB's second year playing football)
Quote from: Ron Boerger on September 23, 2011, 03:46:47 PM
1999: W, 28-21 (UMHB's second year playing football)
wait......UMHB has only had a football program since 1998?!?!?!?!
Yep. Pretty freaking incredible what Coach Fred did in such a short period of time.
Quote from: Ron Boerger on September 23, 2011, 06:26:40 PM
Yep. Pretty freaking incredible what Coach Fred did in such a short period of time.
It is truly one of the most remarkable stories in D3 Football.
Quote from: Ron Boerger on September 23, 2011, 06:26:40 PM
Yep. Pretty freaking incredible what Coach Fred did in such a short period of time.
That's what I was going to say. Looks like they had just two years of growing pains....then BAM!!!! A national power. amazing.
Quote from: bleedpurple on September 22, 2011, 11:51:38 AM
Quote from: BoBo on September 22, 2011, 10:27:26 AM
Just wondering, who are the pollsters for the fan top 25 poll & are they equally distributed among the regions? How does one become a pollster? Is the weekly deadline for each pollster to submit their top 25 before or after the d3football.com top 25 is published? Could someone in the know kindly respond? TY
All you have to do to be a pollster is to let me know at d3fanpoll@yahoo.com. I posted an announcement in every region and every conference a week or two before the season started. I took everyone who indicated interest. A couple guys have also been added since the season started. Obviously, it would be great to have you! The deadline we have set up is midnight. I never really clarified as to whether that is Eastern, Central, Mountain, or Pacific time. But I know it's not KST! :D
I think I'll take a rain check this time. I'll consider it next year.
Quote from: bleedpurple on September 23, 2011, 07:07:29 PM
Quote from: Ron Boerger on September 23, 2011, 06:26:40 PM
Yep. Pretty freaking incredible what Coach Fred did in such a short period of time.
It is truly one of the most remarkable stories in D3 Football.
We Texans weren't too surprised. We kinda expected it with Texas high school football talent. ;)
Besides, the Conference has been ranked as 3rd to 6th toughest in the country over the last 5 years.
And yet there's still a good mine for talent for top-tier Liberal Arts colleges (no offense to MHB's academics). Wabash has a couple of Texas kids on their roster and I know that the good folks in admissions makes Texas a top target (in general, not just for sports).
I think some schools in Florida, if they decided to take a look at things realistically, would probably thrive in D-3 just like UMHB did. Ave Maria, where I recently caught Birmingham Southern at (and whose fans love the fact their in D-3, at least the fans I saw at the game), would be perfect for D-3, but there's no D-3 school around and everyone is wanting to emulate schools like FIU, FAU, UCF and USF to D-1 glory. Yeesh. Ave Maria's conference is kind of an island of misfit toys...
September 24th D3 Top 25 Fan Poll Notes and Quips
D3 TOP 25 FAN POLL
1. Wisconsin-Whitewater- Bye week and preparing for WIAC opener against UW-Platteville next week.
2. Mount Union- And UW-W thought they had it easy this week.
3. St. Thomas- Gained over 500 yards in running away from Cobbers.
4. Bethel- Bye week
5. Mary Hardin-Baylor- 21 point 3rd quarter propels Crusaders.
6. Wheaton- Easy win against winless Comets.
7. Linfield- Cats dominate from the get go.
8. North Central- Week off after scoring 156 points over last two weeks.
9. Wesley- Woverines were in no mood to play after Kean upset.
10. Ohio Northern- No they didn't! By 20?? Northern headed deep south in poll.
11. Wartburg- Knights slip as they step up in class.
12. Thomas More-Saints Top W&J in a good one.
13. Kean- yielded 33 to team held without a TD 5 times last year and shut out by SUNY-Maritime this year.
14. Redlands-Bye week before Cal Lutheran showdown next week.
15. Montclair St- Red Hawks crank up the offense.
16. Alfred- Saxons shut down vaunted rushing attack in 2nd half to secure the win.
17. Wabash-TD's from punt block, punt return, and interception return pay off big.
18. Wittenberg- Tigers pull away from upper tier NCAC foe.
19. Trine- Bye week before important conference clash with Adrian next week.
20. Hardin-Simmons- Defense couldn't contain Crusaders.
21. Cal Lutheran- Bye before huge Redlands game next week.
22. Hampden-Sydney-Tigers fail first major test
23. Cortland State-Red Dragons outgain Profs by 128 yards in 3 point win.
24. Baldwin-Wallace- Another OAC team falls.
25. Salisbury- Bye week
Random thoughts:
I'm hoping the pollsters can finally get over their love affair with ONU and rank teams based on merit.
Does the OAC still deserve the 2nd ranking for conference? If so, why?
MHB has proven that HS still isn't ready to challenge for that conference. I guess we will find out about Louisiana College next week as they play MHB. Is the ASC now worthy of consideration for toughest conference in D3?
Is Wittenberg proving to be much better than expected?
What to do about Dubuque?
North Park? Maybe not top 25, but hats off to their start.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 23, 2011, 08:56:15 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on September 23, 2011, 07:07:29 PM
Quote from: Ron Boerger on September 23, 2011, 06:26:40 PM
Yep. Pretty freaking incredible what Coach Fred did in such a short period of time.
It is truly one of the most remarkable stories in D3 Football.
We Texans weren't too surprised. We kinda expected it with Texas high school football talent. ;)
Besides, the Conference has been ranked as 3rd to 6th toughest in the country over the last 5 years.
(Sorry for the late response.)
Ralph, that is totally ingenuous. Rising quickly above many schools, perhaps - but swiftly blowing away fellow Texas schools (including your beloved McMurry)? How does 'Texas talent' explain that? Their rise to prominence so quickly is a helluva story - or a scandal yet to be discovered! :P ;)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 25, 2011, 12:37:41 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 23, 2011, 08:56:15 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on September 23, 2011, 07:07:29 PM
Quote from: Ron Boerger on September 23, 2011, 06:26:40 PM
Yep. Pretty freaking incredible what Coach Fred did in such a short period of time.
It is truly one of the most remarkable stories in D3 Football.
We Texans weren't too surprised. We kinda expected it with Texas high school football talent. ;)
Besides, the Conference has been ranked as 3rd to 6th toughest in the country over the last 5 years.
(Sorry for the late response.)
Ralph, that is totally ingenuous. Rising quickly above many schools, perhaps - but swiftly blowing away fellow Texas schools (including your beloved McMurry)? How does 'Texas talent' explain that? Their rise to prominence so quickly is a helluva story - or a scandal yet to be discovered! :P ;)
Thanks for the comment, Mr Ypsi.
UMHB did it right. I was "warned" about UMHB in 2000 by the husband of a childhood friend/schoolmate.
As for McMurry, our rapid demise was the result of losing one co-ordinator to Louisiana College, who began their program and took some talent with him, the same time that we lost the other co-ordinator and lead assistant coach to an ugly, agonizing (100-lb wt loss before death) bout of cancer. That took the heart out of the program, and cast us into the wilderness for the rest of the decade.
There is so much talent in Texas that has received fundamentally stellar coaching since junior high. Plenty of quality players bypass sitting on the bench of a .500 D2 state university team with a meager athletic scholarship in favor of a winner like UMHB and a competitive D3-compliant financial aid package. After the discount rates at ASC private schools, total costs after the D3 approved financial aid packages can approach the cost of room, board, tuition books fees and spending money at the D2 State schools after a partial D2 scholarship for one of the role players or one of the freshmen JV'ers.
The ASC and the late 1990's Trinity were already at the top of D3. HSU hit the ground running.
Coach Fred already had the recruiting connections to build a program quickly. UMHB is located within 4 hours of about 18 million citizens, including all of Metro Houston, San Antonio, Austin, DFW and Abilene and the little towns in football strong east Texas, (think Minnesota Viking Adrian Peterson).
emma17:
A. The OAC HAS merit. They have one non-conference game, then the rest of the time they knock into each other. Now ONU won't get the standing they had, but the OAC as a whole went 7-3 in non-conference with the three losses to good to great opponents (Mt. St. Joseph, Case, Wittenberg). Plus, their history as having two playoff teams that run deep into the playoffs is solid. I tell you what, take a mid-level OAC team into ANY conference, and they'd wreak serious havoc. (And I say this as an NCAC dude...) Capital, Baldwin-Wallace, John Carroll, Otterbein and ONU have all had excellent teams recently. It may be Muskingum's turn!
B. North Park hasn't won a CCIW game since 2000. In 2005, they went 3-0 and then lost each CCIW game by a margin of 224-59. Let's hold off on the Vikings coronation for a smidge, OK?
C. Wittenberg? How about some love for the Little Giants? BTW, Witt barely beat Wash U. which lost to North Park. Witt at home is a lot different than Witt on the road.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 25, 2011, 01:21:21 AM
As for McMurry, our rapid demise was the result of losing one co-ordinator to Louisiana College, who began their program and took some talent with him, the same time that we lost the other co-ordinator and lead assistant coach to an ugly, agonizing (100-lb wt loss before death) bout of cancer. That took the heart out of the program, and cast us into the wilderness for the rest of the decade.
There is so much talent in Texas that has received fundamentally stellar coaching since junior high.
Stunning how the loss of a couple assistant coaches, in such a talent rich state (both players and coaches) could lead to such a thing happening like you described. You'd think an area with stellar coaching in the school-age levels could/would produce a coach or two that could lead McMurry out of the doldrums more swiftly...puzzling.
:-\
Quote from: BoBo on September 25, 2011, 08:46:28 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 25, 2011, 01:21:21 AM
As for McMurry, our rapid demise was the result of losing one co-ordinator to Louisiana College, who began their program and took some talent with him, the same time that we lost the other co-ordinator and lead assistant coach to an ugly, agonizing (100-lb wt loss before death) bout of cancer. That took the heart out of the program, and cast us into the wilderness for the rest of the decade.
There is so much talent in Texas that has received fundamentally stellar coaching since junior high.
Stunning how the loss of a couple assistant coaches, in such a talent rich state (both players and coaches) could lead to such a thing happening like you described. You'd think an area with stellar coaching in the school-age levels could/would produce a coach or two that could lead McMurry out of the doldrums more swiftly...puzzling.
:-\
Thanks for the comment, BoBo.
That head coach was Coach Steve Keenum, father of U Houston QB Case Keenum, The school gave him a couple of years, but the tragic loss of his really close friend and associate was devastating for him.
I was not as closely tied to the campus during that time for me to know all of the details, but it seems that the loss was something that he could not work out of.
The school lost momentum at a time when UMHB, Louisiana College, ETBU* and TLU were building new or reinstated programs. McM fell back into the pack or behind it. When you play 8-9 conference games, and there are no other schools around you to play meaningful non-conference games e.g., North Park in the CCIW, there is not much opportunity to "stay out of the whirlpool". You can be sucked under water very quickly.
(*ETBU was Conference tri-Champs in 2003, and then a first round OT winner over defending Stagg finalist Trinity and second round loser on the road at Lycoming in OT.)
My ballot is in!
I am in. There wasn't as much movement as I thought. I did drop ONU, but I didn't drop B-W that much because I respect the OAC and Capital is a tough hombre. Their opening loss to Witt is looking better and they're on my honorable mention list, and I didn't drop Wartburg that much because I respect the rivalry aspect of the game against Coe.
And I'd like to welcome Louisiana College to my top 25.
My honorable mention list is growing.
I keep 10-12 teams in my "keep an eye on" group just out of my top 25... and 7 of them lost yesterday. Should be interesting to see who all gets votes this week
Quote from: smedindy on September 25, 2011, 01:39:17 AM
emma17:
A. The OAC HAS merit. They have one non-conference game, then the rest of the time they knock into each other. Now ONU won't get the standing they had, but the OAC as a whole went 7-3 in non-conference with the three losses to good to great opponents (Mt. St. Joseph, Case, Wittenberg). Plus, their history as having two playoff teams that run deep into the playoffs is solid. I tell you what, take a mid-level OAC team into ANY conference, and they'd wreak serious havoc. (And I say this as an NCAC dude...) Capital, Baldwin-Wallace, John Carroll, Otterbein and ONU have all had excellent teams recently. It may be Muskingum's turn!
B. North Park hasn't won a CCIW game since 2000. In 2005, they went 3-0 and then lost each CCIW game by a margin of 224-59. Let's hold off on the Vikings coronation for a smidge, OK?
C. Wittenberg? How about some love for the Little Giants? BTW, Witt barely beat Wash U. which lost to North Park. Witt at home is a lot different than Witt on the road.
Smed, since you made the comment, I'll ask you. What #2 team in the OAC has made a deep run in the playoffs lately? I'll take several conferences overall over the OAC.
Your North Park comment is silly, I think I made myself clear in the original post- I'm simply giving them some credit for playing well for 3 games.
I like Wabash too.
Really, the OAC is the dregs, eh?
The reason we're having this tussle is that the 2010 ONU team went to the round of 16.
The 2005 and 2006 Capital team made the quarters.
Many times, because of OAC shenanigans the runner up has 2 losses, thanks to Mt. Union.
Who would have in front of the OAC besides the WIAC? Tell me, I'm keen to know. the CCIW, E8 and MIAC are all strong, but even Wilmington ain't that bad. They may go o-fer, but they played a decent Mt. St. Joseph team tough.
Remember, they have just ONE non-conference game, so they knock heads nine times against each other. That leads to many two and three loss seasons for good to great teams that aren't purple.
Quote from: smedindy on September 26, 2011, 12:27:42 AM
... so they knock heads nine times against each other. That leads to many two and three loss seasons for good to great teams that aren't purple.
Sounds, too, a lot like what was happening in the WIAC prior to 2005. The Wisconsin teams were really tough back then, but it was near impossible to break through the conference slate without a blemish (or two) on one's record because of the parity. And that led to lower playoff seeds and a little difficulty in measuring just how well those teams would stack up to the nation if they didn't beat themselves up all the time.
Quote from: Ryan Tipps on September 26, 2011, 03:40:01 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 26, 2011, 12:27:42 AM
... so they knock heads nine times against each other. That leads to many two and three loss seasons for good to great teams that aren't purple.
Sounds, too, a lot like what was happening in the WIAC prior to 2005. The Wisconsin teams were really tough back then, but it was near impossible to break through the conference slate without a blemish (or two) on one's record because of the parity. And that led to lower playoff seeds and a little difficulty in measuring just how well those teams would stack up to the nation if they didn't beat themselves up all the time.
Exactly! So why would a WIAC supporter question the OAC when his conference has the same problem. (Or had...)
Quote from: emma17 on September 25, 2011, 12:16:22 AM
Random thoughts:
"I'm hoping the pollsters can finally get over their love affair with ONU and rank teams based on merit.
Does the OAC still deserve the 2nd ranking for conference? If so, why?
MHB has proven that HS still isn't ready to challenge for that conference. I guess we will find out about Louisiana College next week as they play MHB. Is the ASC now worthy of consideration for toughest conference in D3?
Is Wittenberg proving to be much better than expected?"
What to do about Dubuque?
North Park? Maybe not top 25, but hats off to their start.
Commenting on the ASC being worthy of consideration for the best conference in D3, I think it should at least be considered. In my opinion there are four, and maybe FIVE teams that are probably "top 25" teams. Those teams in my opinion are UMHB, Louisiana College, Mississippi College, McMurry, and even Hardin Simmons is probably still a "top 25" team, even with the losses. And i know there are a lot of other teams in other conferences that may be "top 25" teams but lose to good teams. But nevertheless, i do think the ASC should be considered for the toughest of all!!
Also, should be a great game this weekend in Belton when Louisiana College comes to play. Possibly the most underrated team around.
I think that best evaluation of a conference is when one matches the members that way one would have a Team Tennis match, e.g., #1 vs. #1, #2 vs. #2, ... , #last vs. #last.
Using that model, I think that the WIAC is clearly the strongest conference. The OAC is solid and probably #2 in my book.
I wonder how the ASC #8 or #9, Sul Ross State which lost to D-2 Western New Mexico 35-27, would they fare against a Marietta or Wilmington?
Except when you have a big grouping of teams close to #2, perhaps #2 through #5. Then #2 and #3 of A could beat #2 of B but #2 through #5 of B could beat #4 and #5 of A, etc. etc.
Or I'm over-thinking it...
Quote from: smedindy on September 26, 2011, 09:31:32 PM
Except when you have a big grouping of teams close to #2, perhaps #2 through #5. Then #2 and #3 of A could beat #2 of B but #2 through #5 of B could beat #4 and #5 of A, etc. etc.
Or I'm over-thinking it...
Yes, it might be a challenge to match a 7-team conference against a 10-team conference.
IMO- I think most conferences have teams that are typically weaker and I also think all good conferences struggle with beating each other up throughout the season- it's not exlusively and OAC or WIAC thing. As such, when I compare conferences I prefer to look at the top 4 teams. Out of the top 4 teams I try to determine how they would do against the top 4 from other conferences. No conference other than the WIAC or OAC has the one dominant team, so you have to look past the obvious.
In no particular order, following are some of the conferences I feel have a better top 4 than the OAC:
ASC-UMHB, Louisiana College, Mississippi College, McMurry and even HS.
WIAC- UWW, Oshkosh, Platteville, Eau Claire
MIAC- St. Thomas, Bethel, St. John (despite current issues), Augsburg
CCIW- NCC, Wheaton, IL Weslyan, Carthage or Elmhurst
NWC- Linfield, Pac Lutheran, Willamette, I'll have to only take 3 here.
IIAC- Coe, Dubuque, Wartburg, Central
OAC- Mt Union and then who? Baldwin Wallace? Capital? ONU? Muskingam? Are these three non MT teams collectively better than the other conferences top teams? I just don't think so.
Quote from: emma17 on September 26, 2011, 11:40:46 PM
IMO- I think most conferences have teams that are typically weaker and I also think all good conferences struggle with beating each other up throughout the season- it's not exlusively and OAC or WIAC thing. As such, when I compare conferences I prefer to look at the top 4 teams. Out of the top 4 teams I try to determine how they would do against the top 4 from other conferences. No conference other than the WIAC or OAC has the one dominant team, so you have to look past the obvious.
In no particular order, following are some of the conferences I feel have a better top 4 than the OAC:
ASC-UMHB, Louisiana College, Mississippi College, McMurry and even HS.
WIAC- UWW, Oshkosh, Platteville, Eau Claire
MIAC- St. Thomas, Bethel, St. John (despite current issues), Augsburg
CCIW- NCC, Wheaton, IL Weslyan, Carthage or Elmhurst
NWC- Linfield, Pac Lutheran, Willamette, I'll have to only take 3 here.
IIAC- Coe, Dubuque, Wartburg, Central
OAC- Mt Union and then who? Baldwin Wallace? Capital? ONU? Muskingam? Are these three non MT teams collectively better than the other conferences top teams? I just don't think so.
How do you think Salisbury, Alfred, Springfield and Ithaca/St. John Fisher would do against the OAC?
Quote from: smedindy on September 26, 2011, 12:27:42 AM
Really, the OAC is the dregs, eh?
The reason we're having this tussle is that the 2010 ONU team went to the round of 16.
The 2005 and 2006 Capital team made the quarters.
Many times, because of OAC shenanigans the runner up has 2 losses, thanks to Mt. Union.
Who would have in front of the OAC besides the WIAC? Tell me, I'm keen to know. the CCIW, E8 and MIAC are all strong, but even Wilmington ain't that bad. They may go o-fer, but they played a decent Mt. St. Joseph team tough.
Remember, they have just ONE non-conference game, so they knock heads nine times against each other. That leads to many two and three loss seasons for good to great teams that aren't purple.
Now Smed, let's not put words in my mouth. Just because I don't buy into the OAC as the 2nd best conference doesn't mean I think they are the dregs.
I'll make this statement about the OAC as well. As much credit as we all give Coach Kehres and Mt for 18 or 19 consecutive conference championships, I don't think you can give the rest of the conference a pass for allowing it to happen.
ONU- One way to say it is like you did- they made it to the final 16. Another way to say it is they won ONE playoff game, and then got beat Soundly by NCC. It only takes one win to make it to the final 16- and one win, in my book, doesn't qualify as a "deep playoff run"- which was your statement.
05 and 06 Capital did well as the #2 team. That was quite a while ago and many things have changed since then- in particular a team named NCC that was just making its rise then. I don't think you'd want any OAC team not named MT facing them any time soon.
Well, usually yes Capital, BW, ONU and John Carroll are top-flight. JCU is going through a down phase. It's a wacky year there, may need to let things sort out. But again, they took care of business in the one non-conference chance they had. So taking an appearance from a Cap - BW game, not knowing the history of it, is like taking WIAC game and just dismissing it as three-loss teams playing each other.
BTW, Massey does have the OAC ranked sixth, thus far, but there's still not a lot of data points out there.
BTW, BTW - the top of the CCIW always reminded me of the OAC without Mt. Union - but the bottom of the CCIW isn't as good as the bottom of the OAC. Again, lack of non-conference chances hurt the OAC in this game.
Quote from: AUPepBand on September 26, 2011, 11:48:30 PM
Quote from: emma17 on September 26, 2011, 11:40:46 PM
IMO- I think most conferences have teams that are typically weaker and I also think all good conferences struggle with beating each other up throughout the season- it's not exlusively and OAC or WIAC thing. As such, when I compare conferences I prefer to look at the top 4 teams. Out of the top 4 teams I try to determine how they would do against the top 4 from other conferences. No conference other than the WIAC or OAC has the one dominant team, so you have to look past the obvious.
In no particular order, following are some of the conferences I feel have a better top 4 than the OAC:
ASC-UMHB, Louisiana College, Mississippi College, McMurry and even HS.
WIAC- UWW, Oshkosh, Platteville, Eau Claire
MIAC- St. Thomas, Bethel, St. John (despite current issues), Augsburg
CCIW- NCC, Wheaton, IL Weslyan, Carthage or Elmhurst
NWC- Linfield, Pac Lutheran, Willamette, I'll have to only take 3 here.
IIAC- Coe, Dubuque, Wartburg, Central
OAC- Mt Union and then who? Baldwin Wallace? Capital? ONU? Muskingam? Are these three non MT teams collectively better than the other conferences top teams? I just don't think so.
How do you think Salisbury, Alfred, Springfield and Ithaca/St. John Fisher would do against the OAC?
AU Pep, I plead a bit uninformed when it comes to those 4 and I didn't look into their recent past. I know they have all had good years and appear to be on a good track this year. I believe all or most of the teams have had a run-in with Mt in the past few years and haven't faired well. Have they played any of the other OAC schools?
Quote from: smedindy on September 26, 2011, 11:50:41 PM
Well, usually yes Capital, BW, ONU and John Carroll are top-flight. JCU is going through a down phase. It's a wacky year there, may need to let things sort out. But again, they took care of business in the one non-conference chance they had. So taking an appearance from a Cap - BW game, not knowing the history of it, is like taking WIAC game and just dismissing it as three-loss teams playing each other.
BTW, Massey does have the OAC ranked sixth, thus far, but there's still not a lot of data points out there.
BTW, BTW - the top of the CCIW always reminded me of the OAC without Mt. Union - but the bottom of the CCIW isn't as good as the bottom of the OAC. Again, lack of non-conference chances hurt the OAC in this game.
The CCIW team without a (conference) win in the 21st century is NPU. They are 3-0 (including beating a solid WashU team by exactly the same margin that nationally-ranked Witt beat them) - what is Wilma's record? The rest of our bottom appears to be Millikin (2-1), 4-time national champ Augie (0-3, all games close and against opponents who are now 10-2), and either Elmhurst (2-1) or Carthage (3-0). Are you SURE you want to pit the bottom of the OAC against them (or at least declare the OAC clearly better)?
BTW, your beloved Massey declares the (non-d3, in football) NESCAC as the #1 conference. HUH?! Proof positive that Massey is NOT based solely on results (since NESCAC HAS none against anyone else - in football, it is intramurals).
IMHO, this year it is a close race among WIAC, CCIW, and ASC for #1 conference. And there (alas) will never be enough evidence to resolve that debate.
Ypsi,
I noticed that the D-3 Massey is a bit wonky with the NESCAC. Maybe I'll send a note. The overall ratings segregate out the NESCAC because of that but you need to find the D-3 teams in the big mess o' teams. I'd use Sagarin but ol' iconoclast Jeff doesn't put effort into that because USA Today won't buy it!
Wilma's only non-OAC loss was a close tussle with Mt. St. Joseph. Not a bad team. But would you put Millikin against John Carroll or Marietta?
I realize I may be arguing more historically than anything, and God knows why would I give the OAC more credit than they're due. But I do think the OAC, in years like this, doesn't look as strong as it could because of their round-robin. Of course, I would NEVER want them to give up the round-robin because that's the only way to get a true conference championship.
(This year, I also said the Witt QB was definitely the best QB in the NCAC. I must be getting soft with age...)
Quote from: smedindy on September 27, 2011, 09:34:31 AM
Ypsi,
I noticed that the D-3 Massey is a bit wonky with the NESCAC. Maybe I'll send a note. The overall ratings segregate out the NESCAC because of that but you need to find the D-3 teams in the big mess o' teams. I'd use Sagarin but ol' iconoclast Jeff doesn't put effort into that because USA Today won't buy it!
Wilma's only non-OAC loss was a close tussle with Mt. St. Joseph. Not a bad team. But would you put Millikin against John Carroll or Marietta?
I realize I may be arguing more historically than anything, and God knows why would I give the OAC more credit than they're due. But I do think the OAC, in years like this, doesn't look as strong as it could because of their round-robin. Of course, I would NEVER want them to give up the round-robin because that's the only way to get a true conference championship.
(This year, I also said the Witt QB was definitely the best QB in the NCAC. I must be getting soft with age...)
I'm sure this subject is ready for the back burner. Hopefully this will be my last arguement and it relates to this idea that "the bottom of the OAC isn't as bad as the bottom of abc conference".
Below are Conference Opponent scores Vs Mt (I know Mt is great. But a conference is making improvement when scores like the below are infrequent, as opposed to frequent as it is in the OAC):
2011:58-7
66-7
2010:51-7
51-0
52-0
2009:56-0
58-0
56-0
2008:51-13
55-0
49-0
49-7
49-0
2007:62-0
62-3
59-0
57-0
These, IMO, are not scores that support the top to bottom strength of a conference.
Also the winner of NESCAC will go undefeated, untied and unscored upon in the playoffs.
Quote from: emma17 on September 27, 2011, 02:21:54 PM
These, IMO, are not scores that support the top to bottom strength of a conference.
The OAC's argument has never been top to bottom strength though; someone wrote it above. It's been take our 2 through 5 and match it up vs. your conference's 1 through 4.
The lack of depth -- the same thing that hurts the NCAC -- also has to hurt the OAC.
I re-do the conference rankings this week. When Pat and I do them we always seriously consider moving the OAC down, but the reasoning never bears it out. In fact you DO have to count UMU as part of the conference, and quite often there are teams chasing UMU that would be winning other conferences.
That said this is the year it might move. Haven't gotten into the meat of the research yet so don't wanna comment further before Thursday's column posts.
D3 Top 25 Fan Poll: Through Games of September 24th
1. Wisconsin Whitewater (14) 374 (pts) 1 (LW)
2. Mount Union (1) 361 2
3. St. Thomas 333 3
4. Mary Hardin-Baylor 318 5
5. Linfield 308 7
6. Wheaton 298 6
7. Bethel 287 4
8. North Central 270 8
9. Wesley 219 9
10. Thomas More 208 12
11. Montclair State 179 15
12(t) Kean 176 13
12(t) Redlands 176 14
14(t) Wabash 169 17
14(t). Wittenberg 169 18
16. Alfred 145 16
17. Trine 115 19
18. Louisiana College 96 unranked
19. Delaware Valley 88 unranked
20. Cortland State 83 23
21. California Lutheran 72 21
22. Salisbury 61 25
23. Wartburg 60 11
24. Wisconsin-Oshkosh 46 unranked
25. Wisconsin-Platteville 42 unranked
Dropped from Top 25: Ohio Northern, Hardin-Simmons, Hampden-Sydney, Baldwin-Wallace.
Also Receiving Votes Ohio Northern (35), Johns Hopkins (33), Wisconsin-Eau Claire (26), Dubuque (20), Trinity (20), Hardin-Simmons (17), Franklin (15), Adrian (11), Hampden-Sydney (9), Illinois Weslayan (6), McMurry (6), St. John Fisher (6), Baldwin-Wallace (5), Muskingum (3), Centre (2), Monmouth (2), Coe (1), Washington & Lee (1)
Looks like one of the 2 who have been putting Mount Union first didn't vote this week
I'll own up to Muskingum getting three votes.
Undefeated, and blew out the ninth team in the nation. I thought they deserved some recognition.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 27, 2011, 10:01:47 PM
Looks like one of the 2 who have been putting Mount Union first didn't vote this week
True
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 27, 2011, 10:01:47 PM
Looks like one of the 2 who have been putting Mount Union first didn't vote this week
I admit to voting Mt #1 still. This is the big week for me w UWW as I believe this should be their toughest test to date.
I'll "own up" to 9 on Adrians 11 points (which hopefully is proven right when they beat Trine at Trine this weekend), the 2 centre points, and the Washington and Lee point....
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 27, 2011, 10:35:19 PM
I'll own up to Muskingum getting three votes.
Undefeated, and blew out the ninth team in the nation. I thought they deserved some recognition.
Yeah, doesn't Muskingum deserve more credit than only a few votes? I really dont know much about these guys at all. Is Ohio Northern a little down this year or are these guys legit? Would they be the type of team to challenge Mount Union?
I have Musky as #10 in the North Region and someone on my 'watch' list.
Quote from: CruFrenzy on September 27, 2011, 11:26:36 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 27, 2011, 10:35:19 PM
I'll own up to Muskingum getting three votes.
Undefeated, and blew out the ninth team in the nation. I thought they deserved some recognition.
Yeah, doesn't Muskingum deserve more credit than only a few votes? I really dont know much about these guys at all. Is Ohio Northern a little down this year or are these guys legit? Would they be the type of team to challenge Mount Union?
I believe Ohio Northern was over rated coming into this season. They beat Otterbein by 1 point. Otterbein lost to Heidelberg by 21 points. Then ONU lost by 20 points to the Muskies. Although I'm good with the Muskies getting some polling points, I think they soundly beat an over rated team. ONU was 9th ranked, but clearly not the 9th best team in the country. The scores in the recent past would indicate that the Muskies will pose no threat to Mount:
2010: 52-0 MU
2009: 45-14 MU
2008: 51-13 MU
2007: 62-0 MU
2006: 62-0 MU (not a typo same score as 07)
2005: 45-0 MU
It's interesting to compare the Fan Poll with the D3football.com top 25 this week. The variance isn't that great, but I have to say, I like the way the Fans have tilted a few of the rankings. My opinions aren't intended to criticize either poll. My thoughts are based on who I think would win if the teams being compared played head to head, not the merits of where they should be ranked per se.
The Top four teams are identical.
Five through Seven: Same teams different order. D3F has Bethel, Linfield, Wheaton. Fan poll has Linfield, Wheaton Bethel. (I like Linfield as 5th better, but I would put Bethel ahead of Wheaton).
Eight: D3F has Thomas More. Fan Poll has North Central. (I think North Central is better and it isn't close.)
Nine:D3F has North Central. FP has Wesley. D3F has Wesley 11th. (I like the D3F position for Wesley better.)
Ten: D3F has Kean. (I think this is way too high for Kean. They have earned current ranking with big wins, but I sense a paper lion. I don't believe they will last.) FP has Thomas More.
Eleven: D3F has Wesley. FP has Montclair State. D3Football has Montclair 12th.
Twelve: FP has Kean and Redlands tied. D3F has Kean 10 and Redlands 13. (I guess it all comes out in the wash. Redlands may well lose this week and suffer a drop.)
Fourteen through Sixteen: Fan Poll ties Wabash and Wittenberg at 14, with Alfred at 16. D3F places Alfred, Wabash, Wittenberg. (Hard to quibble. All three of these teams are very close.)
Seventeen Trine in both polls.
Eighteen: D3F has Cortland State. FP Louisiana College. I love the Fan poll choice here.
Nineteen: D3F Louisiana College. Fan poll Delaware Valley. I like the D3F positioning of 21 for DV better.
Twenty and Twenty-one: D3F has Cal Lutheran and Delaware Valley. Fan Poll has Cortland State 20 and Cal Lutheran at 21.
Twenty-two to twenty-five: D3F has Wartburg, Johns Hopkins, Ohio Northern, and Salisbury. FP has Salisbury, Wartburg, Wisconsin-Oshkosh, and Wisconsin-Platteville. Although I agree with D3F putting Salisbury at 25, rather than FP's 22, I think UW-O and UW-P make the FP grouping Stronger than the D3F group.
Wow, in reading that back, I'm not even sure I could follow it! Oh well, it's typed up, so I'll go with it. :)
Quote from: bleedpurple on September 28, 2011, 12:03:03 AM
Otterbein lost to Heidelberg by 21 points. Then ONU lost by 20 points to the Muskies.
Actually, these things both happened at the same time. If Otterbein had lost to Heidelberg like that last week, it may have given a better indication how overrated ONU was. But to list them in sequence like this suggests facts that were not in evidence when the poll was voted on.
Quote from: bleedpurple on September 28, 2011, 12:08:57 AM
It's interesting to compare the Fan Poll with the D3football.com top 25 this week. The variance isn't that great, but I have to say, I like the way the Fans have tilted a few of the rankings. My opinions aren't intended to criticize either poll. My thoughts are based on who I think would win if the teams being compared played head to head, not the merits of where they should be ranked per se.
Funny, I nearly did the same thing, but I figured I have plenty of cyberspace devoted to my thoughts, no need to take up space on the fan boards. I also don't follow the fan poll very closely, but I took a good look this week. So since you brought it up ...
my observations are mine alone and aren't intended to discredit the fan poll or credit the official poll, since a lot of my beefs are present in both polls:
1) Still don't like Redlands below North Central. While it's nice that NCC would have won on a hypothetical neutral field, that's not what happened. Not sure why I am alone on this.
2) No way Fisher should get 6 votes in your poll and Hobart 0.
3) Thomas More way too high. There should be a reward for beating W&J, but I don't see what they've done besides beat up on the PAC to deserve top-10 status.
4) Bethel too low. Why behind Wheaton?
5) None of the fans can figure out which UW teams to vote for either, huh? lol At least they all play each other eventually.
6) I think Witt and Bash are too high based on who they play and beat, until they play each other. But I can understand why they are where they are. After 12 or so, it gets really shaky. I like Alfred and LC around there personally, but I don't know that they've done much more to justify being there either. Those are more hunches/respect for conference strength.
7) You guys dropped all the right teams out.
8) Not really a difference if one poll has a team 18 and the other 19.
9) I was hard on the Montclair State (and Salisbury) bandwagon preseason but backed off with skin-of-their-teeth wins ... so now i think both polls are overrating them. But now-me could be wrong and preseason-me could be right.
10) I think CLU is too low given they were competitive with Linfield, but it doesn't matter. They'll get a bounce with the Redlands win or drop out if they lose, most likely.
The interesting thing to me when looking at the fan poll is to see if a grouping of 15 other minds aside from the official 25 voters sway the overall picture at all. What it seems to prove most often is that if you get a handful of people who pay attention, you'll get roughly the same results.
Have we ever tried combining the two for a master sampling of 40 minds? Just for fun, but also to weed out the variances each poll has? For instance, I can't get a team into the poll by my lonesome, as I'm just 1/25th of the voting, but I know I'm responsible for a lot of Hobart's and Birmingham-Southern's points. A few other outliers like me and we could get them into the top 25 even if most of the ballots had them unranked. Thoughts?
Also the fan poll comes out later in the week. Any chance the official poll influences it? I try, for instance, in my play of the week votes, to watch the videos before I read my fellow voters choices. Maybe a psych major could speak to this, but don't we like to think like people we like and respect think? (assuming fan poll likes and respects d3 poll here lol)
I think that the Fan Poll is the complementary 3rd leg of the 3-legged stool.
The Coaches Poll (the old UPI for the gray hair types on the boards), the Associated Press, and Fan Poll are three different views.
By 6-7 games, we should be reaching some degree of harmony.
Quote from: K-Mack on September 28, 2011, 12:40:35 AM
Also the fan poll comes out later in the week. Any chance the official poll influences it? I try, for instance, in my play of the week votes, to watch the videos before I read my fellow voters choices. Maybe a psych major could speak to this, but don't we like to think like people we like and respect think? (assuming fan poll likes and respects d3 poll here lol)
I'm the same way...I don't look at the D3football poll until I submit mine.
The fan poll is not particularly geographically diverse, which is a big difference. Ours is intentionally evenly distributed.
The fan poll is open to anyone who wants to submit an entry.
We're not saying our poll is gospel, it's just something fun to do each week for the fans.
No, I understand. Just pointing out a difference that may help people understand the variances in the results.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 28, 2011, 08:48:08 AM
The fan poll is not particularly geographically diverse, which is a big difference. Ours is intentionally evenly distributed.
Hey Pat, is the D3football.com poll distributed based on where more D3 schools are the 25 votes distributed equally no matter the amount of D3 schools in the area?
Quote from: crufootball on September 28, 2011, 10:20:18 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 28, 2011, 08:48:08 AM
The fan poll is not particularly geographically diverse, which is a big difference. Ours is intentionally evenly distributed.
Hey Pat, is the D3football.com poll distributed based on where more D3 schools are the 25 votes distributed equally no matter the amount of D3 schools in the area?
I don't know the exact composition of the voters in the poll, but I would guess that he roughly has 6 pollsters from each of the 4 regions and 1 national/at-large voter. Also, in other forums he has shared the information that he sends to each voter after each week and it is an impressive amount of information on common opponents, stats, etc.
I am part of this fan poll and the big problem I have this week is moving Bethel down because they had a bye week. I don't see how any team should drop because they can't schedule an opponent.
Second, not sure I agree that just because one poll has voters from all over, it is better than another poll, unless you mean that each voter has seen teams play in person in that area, then I understand. Of course those of us in the mid-west probably have not seen Kean play in person, how many D3football voters have? Or how many of the d3football voters from the east coast or west coast have seen UWW-Platteville play in person?
K-Mack,
I give NCC a pass because of the circumstances in their loss to Redlands. From the looks of it, it seemed to be a huge wake-up call. I think I'll be proven right.
I gave ONU a pass on the close win over Otterbein, and I was proven wrong.
Maybe I should flip a coin!
Quote from: sju56321 on September 28, 2011, 10:28:14 AM
I am part of this fan poll and the big problem I have this week is moving Bethel down because they had a bye week. I don't see how any team should drop because they can't schedule an opponent.
Think of it this way. In a hypothetical poll.
15. Kenyon
16. North Park
17. Sul Ross St.
18. Kalamazoo
19. Husson
Kenyon wins as they should.
North Park wins a conference game, on the road, closer than was expected.
Sul Ross has a bye
Kalamazoo goes on the road and upsets a team I have highly ranked.
Husson blows out someone at home convincingly in a game pundits had it as close.
Because of the data I may rank them like this now:
13. Kenyon
14. Kalamazoo
15. North Park
16. Husson
17. Sul Ross St.
just because of more data points. It's not that I penalize Sul Ross, but the others below them exceeded expectations. Not ranking them higher would penalize them if I have to keep Sul Ross sacrosanct because of the bye.
Is that clear?
Quote from: crufootball on September 28, 2011, 10:20:18 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 28, 2011, 08:48:08 AM
The fan poll is not particularly geographically diverse, which is a big difference. Ours is intentionally evenly distributed.
Hey Pat, is the D3football.com poll distributed based on where more D3 schools are the 25 votes distributed equally no matter the amount of D3 schools in the area?
It would be silly for us to have a voter in Colorado considering there are no schools there, so yes, the geography is tied to where there are actually schools. There are 25 voters and slightly more than 25 conferences -- the conferences with more playoff success are the ones represented on the panel. A handful of conferences don't have voters.
Ok Smedindy I get that example-but tell me how that played out here last week?
Mary Hardin-Baylor beat Hardin-Simmmons, then ranked #20-as expected.
Linfield beat an 0-1 team by a big score, expected.
Wheaton beat an 0-3 by a decent score.
Really doesn't work in the example you provided-but I do get that if the #5 beat the #1 team, and #4 is on a bye then can be jumped by #5. Maybe I should have not have added that a team should not drop on a bye, but if the teams below them are playing lower ranked teams, then I don't see how they should fall. If #4 is on a bye, and #5 beats #6, why would #5 jump #4?
sju - wasn't getting into specifics, but just positing a theory.
Also, the voting membership has been fluid. This week, mt. Union lost a first place vote because the voter didn't cast his ballot. That could have affected the voting.
Quote from: K-Mack on September 28, 2011, 12:40:35 AM
Also the fan poll comes out later in the week. Any chance the official poll influences it? I try, for instance, in my play of the week votes, to watch the videos before I read my fellow voters choices. Maybe a psych major could speak to this, but don't we like to think like people we like and respect think? (assuming fan poll likes and respects d3 poll here lol)
I generally try to arrange my ballot Sat night/Sun morning, then leave it till Sunday night, make a couple alterations and send it in.
By doing it early I don't let the official poll influence me per se, but I will look afterwards and compare to see who is ranked who I don't have and who is getting some votes for teams to possibly add to my "watch list"
Quote from: K-Mack on September 28, 2011, 12:40:35 AM
2) No way Fisher should get 6 votes in your poll and Hobart 0.
I don't even have Fisher on my watch list right now while Hobart is. Another team with no votes that I think should get a little attention is Albright.
Quote from: sju56321 on September 28, 2011, 12:02:47 PM
Really doesn't work in the example you provided-but I do get that if the #5 beat the #1 team, and #4 is on a bye then can be jumped by #5. Maybe I should have not have added that a team should not drop on a bye, but if the teams below them are playing lower ranked teams, then I don't see how they should fall. If #4 is on a bye, and #5 beats #6, why would #5 jump #4?
If team A is ranked #5 and their body of work for the season is improved to be better than team B ranked #4 because they beat the #6 team then they certainly should be jumped ahead. If the following week team B beats say a team ranked 18th and team A beats a winless team, team B could possibly jump back ahead. The poll should be fluid rather than just this team lost and falls down to there and every team moves up 1.
I've had a team win and still fall out out of the poll. My 4-5-6 order has been different in each of the last 3 polls without anyone losing.
Smedindy-ok, but I appreciate your initial response, as it exposed a flaw in my thinking-just wan't sure I missed something obvious this past weekend, which could have happened being that I saw first-hand the debacle at SJU!
Quote from: sju56321 on September 28, 2011, 10:28:14 AM
I am part of this fan poll and the big problem I have this week is moving Bethel down because they had a bye week. I don't see how any team should drop because they can't schedule an opponent.
Second, not sure I agree that just because one poll has voters from all over, it is better than another poll, unless you mean that each voter has seen teams play in person in that area, then I understand. Of course those of us in the mid-west probably have not seen Kean play in person, how many D3football voters have? Or how many of the d3football voters from the east coast or west coast have seen UWW-Platteville play in person?
IDK about that either, Bethel stayed in the #4 spot for me, a bye with no major changes below them doesn't change anything IMO.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 28, 2011, 12:16:03 AM
Quote from: bleedpurple on September 28, 2011, 12:03:03 AM
Otterbein lost to Heidelberg by 21 points. Then ONU lost by 20 points to the Muskies.
Actually, these things both happened at the same time. If Otterbein had lost to Heidelberg like that last week, it may have given a better indication how overrated ONU was. But to list them in sequence like this suggests facts that were not in evidence when the poll was voted on.
Actually, in this post, I was responding to the question as to whether Musky is likely to give Mount a good game this year. I was just citing evidence that perhaps their win over ONU wasn't as impressive as it looks on the surface. My point wasn't really about the ranking.
Quote from: K-Mack on September 28, 2011, 12:40:35 AM
2) No way Fisher should get 6 votes in your poll and Hobart 0.
FYI....One voter ranked Fisher 20th.
FWIW, I'm the knucklehead who didn't get his Mount-leading ballot in this week, but if I had Hobart would have had 7 points.
Quote from: bleedpurple on September 28, 2011, 12:52:34 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on September 28, 2011, 12:40:35 AM
2) No way Fisher should get 6 votes in your poll and Hobart 0.
FYI....One voter ranked Fisher 20th.
Did you ever get a chance to tally-up where everyone is voting from?
Region/Conference?
K-Mack:
I completely understand your issue w NCC being ranked ahead of Redlands- but I also admit I am guilty of doing so. After week 1 (and maybe wk 2 also) I had Redlands ahead- but the sheer dominating performance by NCC has led me to switch it. I believe NCC is the 3rd best team in the country, even w the loss.
And Absolutely I believe the D3 poll influences/ informs the fan poll- Especially the initial rankings. Some on this very board have used the D3 poll to support their position on a team.
It's understandable though because, IMO, I simply dont have enough information to determine where teams like Mont St, Cortland, Kean, Sals, Thomas Moore, Del Val, etc belong.
I used the D3 poll initially to support my 11-25 and still do when it comes to teams I just am not familiar with.
I for one actually get my poll in as soon as all the games are done Saturday night, so at least for this voter the D3 poll doesn't affect how I vote. What it does is affirms my "watch" list.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 28, 2011, 02:02:35 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on September 28, 2011, 12:52:34 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on September 28, 2011, 12:40:35 AM
2) No way Fisher should get 6 votes in your poll and Hobart 0.
FYI....One voter ranked Fisher 20th.
Did you ever get a chance to tally-up where everyone is voting from?
Region/Conference?
I have not gotten a response from everyone. I am tallying them as they come in. So far it looks like we are North and West Region heavy.
I'm not surprised by that at all.
Quote from: bleedpurple on September 28, 2011, 03:34:48 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 28, 2011, 02:02:35 PM
Did you ever get a chance to tally-up where everyone is voting from?
Region/Conference?
I have not gotten a response from everyone. I am tallying them as they come in. So far it looks like we are North and West Region heavy.
I completely forgot to put that on my ballot... North region/HCAC/Franklin if you don't have it
Quote from: smedindy on September 28, 2011, 03:16:09 PM
I for one actually get my poll in as soon as all the games are done Saturday night, so at least for this voter the D3 poll doesn't affect how I vote. What it does is affirms my "watch" list.
As the season has taken shape it is easier to do your own poll without reference. What about your first poll- before any games had been played?
Quote from: smedindy on September 28, 2011, 03:16:09 PM
I for one actually get my poll in as soon as all the games are done Saturday night, so at least for this voter the D3 poll doesn't affect how I vote. What it does is affirms my "watch" list.
So, you are saying you never look at the D3football.com poll
at anytime?
Quote from: K-Mack on September 28, 2011, 12:40:35 AM
The interesting thing to me when looking at the fan poll is to see if a grouping of 15 other minds aside from the official 25 voters sway the overall picture at all. What it seems to prove most often is that if you get a handful of people who pay attention, you'll get roughly the same results.
Have we ever tried combining the two for a master sampling of 40 minds? Just for fun, but also to weed out the variances each poll has? For instance, I can't get a team into the poll by my lonesome, as I'm just 1/25th of the voting, but I know I'm responsible for a lot of Hobart's and Birmingham-Southern's points. A few other outliers like me and we could get them into the top 25 even if most of the ballots had them unranked. Thoughts?
D3Football.Com/D3 Top 25 Fan Combination Poll through games of September 24th
1. Wisconsin-Whitewater (33) 993
2. Mount Union (7) 967
3. St. Thomas 887
4. Mary Hardin-Baylor 857
5. Linfield 814
6. Bethel 797
7. Wheaton 767
8. North Central 647
9. Thomas More 602
10. Wesley 574
11. Kean 545
12. Montclair St. 492
13. Redlands 466
14. Alfred 431
15. Wabash 426
16. Wittenberg 404
17. Trine 339
18. Louisiana College 262
19. Cortland State 257
20. Cal Lutheran 230
21. Delaware Valley 193
22. Wartburg 157
23(t) Johns Hopkins 128
23(t) Ohio Northern 128
25. Salisbury 119
Quote from: BoBo on September 28, 2011, 07:14:19 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 28, 2011, 03:16:09 PM
I for one actually get my poll in as soon as all the games are done Saturday night, so at least for this voter the D3 poll doesn't affect how I vote. What it does is affirms my "watch" list.
So, you are saying you never look at the D3football.com poll at anytime?
What I meant is that I only look at the poll when it's released to place teams on my 'watch list' that I may have missed. I don't look at the poll to cast my ballot. And since I do it Saturday night, it wouldn't do any good, now would it! I have my last poll I sent in and then the scoreboard (and then links to box scores, etc.)
Quote from: emma17 on September 28, 2011, 06:20:51 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 28, 2011, 03:16:09 PM
I for one actually get my poll in as soon as all the games are done Saturday night, so at least for this voter the D3 poll doesn't affect how I vote. What it does is affirms my "watch" list.
As the season has taken shape it is easier to do your own poll without reference. What about your first poll- before any games had been played?
Not the poll, but I read all of the wonderful pre-season publication on d3football.com. Yes it ranked teams but I had my own ideas from the last season.
Did that conference listing come out? Or did I just miss it?
I've got 15 "affiliations" of the 17 people who have submitted ballots in 2011. Here is the breakdown of those 15:
West Region (8)
WIAC-7
MIAC-1
North Region (4)
HCAC-1
NCAC-1
MIAA-1
OAC-1
East Region (2)
NJAC-1
E8-1
South Region(1)
ASC-1
Quote from: bleedpurple on September 29, 2011, 12:20:28 AM
I've got 15 "affiliations" of the 17 people who have submitted ballots in 2011. Here is the breakdown of those 15:
West Region (8)
WIAC-7
MIAC-1
North Region (4)
HCAC-1
NCAC-1
MIAA-1
OAC-1
East Region (2)
NJAC-1
E8-1
South Region(1)
ASC-1
Not too bad on distribution... except for the
slight WIAC bias ::)
Interesting that even though voting was voluntary and no one turned away, we had about 1/3 of the conferences represented and all but one had just 1 voter. Would like to see a couple more from the South and East though (and maybe a non WIAC west). Maybe poke around those boards to see if a couple more people would vote. Perhaps if we get some more voters from those unrepresented areas then we could see about trimming down the number of WIAC voters? It's ok at the moment since we need all the voters we can get, but if we get more voters then perhaps we can try to get a bit more evenly distributed
^^ Looks like the poll has a home field advantage!! ;) Let's see what gets revealed when River Falls or La Crosse wins a game!! ;)
Quote from: bleedpurple on September 29, 2011, 12:20:28 AM
I've got 15 "affiliations" of the 17 people who have submitted ballots in 2011. Here is the breakdown of those 15:
West Region (8)
WIAC-7
MIAC-1
North Region (4)
HCAC-1
NCAC-1
MIAA-1
OAC-1
East Region (2)
NJAC-1
E8-1
South Region(1)
ASC-1
Surprised no one from the CCIW or NWC would want to join in the fun 8-)
Does Ypsi vote? I wonder where he cast his allegiance?
Quote from: sflzman on September 28, 2011, 09:04:59 PM
Did that conference listing come out? Or did I just miss it?
The conference rankings are out on D3 site. Interesting format.
Quote from: emma17 on September 29, 2011, 07:24:03 PM
Quote from: sflzman on September 28, 2011, 09:04:59 PM
Did that conference listing come out? Or did I just miss it?
The conference rankings are out on D3 site. Interesting format.
No comment about OAC being in the top tier?
Quote from: emma17 on September 29, 2011, 07:24:03 PM
Quote from: sflzman on September 28, 2011, 09:04:59 PM
Did that conference listing come out? Or did I just miss it?
The conference rankings are out on D3 site. Interesting format.
I was actually talking about the diversity of conferences of the voters, but thanks I was looking for this too....
Quote from: smedindy on September 29, 2011, 01:40:32 PM
Does Ypsi vote? I wonder where he cast his allegiance?
Fall is my camping sojourn. I come to town briefly on Tuesdays for my bowling league; otherwise am near a computer only Thursday (or Friday) thru Sunday, to cast my pickems picks, and run the MIAA pickems.
I run (and pick in) the basketball fan poll (camping in Michigan is not a viable option in January! ;)), but don't feel qualified to vote in the football poll. Not that that would ever keep me from commenting on those who do! ;D).
I DO cast a ballot in the North Region fan poll - and stubbornly hold that NCC's loss at Redlands was a total fluke, and still have them second only to UMU! But I just don't spend enough time in what is laughingly called 'the real world' ;) to rate teams across the country. (My standing in the 4 pickems I participate in will probably confirm this. :P)
If I did vote, my allegiance would be North region, CCIW first, MIAA second.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 29, 2011, 07:58:46 PM
Quote from: emma17 on September 29, 2011, 07:24:03 PM
Quote from: sflzman on September 28, 2011, 09:04:59 PM
Did that conference listing come out? Or did I just miss it?
The conference rankings are out on D3 site. Interesting format.
No comment about OAC being in the top tier?
I actually don't know how to interpret what he wrote. If his point is to list the conferences most likely to produce this year's national champion- then I agree totally. If we are supposed to read his format as an actual ranking of the best conferences (which I'll define as top 4-5 teams), then I couldn't disagree more-as long as we are talking 2011 rankings. "Lop Mt Union off the OAC and you have the CCIW". Are you kidding me? That is a ridiculous statement and couldn't be a bigger slap in the face to a conference that deserves more credit. Take the top 4 2011 OAC teams (whoever you think they might be) and put them against NCC, Wheaton, Illinois Wesleyan (and pick the 4th from several) and you probably have a clean sweep of the CCIW over the OAC. If you agree with my statement above (and how could you be a writer of a D3 football blog and not agree), then the OAC is no better than 3rd. Now work down some of the other conferences. ASC- a complete wipeout of the OAC- making the OAC no better than 4th. MIAC- probably 3-1 against the OAC- making the OAC no better than 5th. The NWC- do you think Linfield, Cal Lutheran and Willamette are going to struggle against 2-4 in the OAC this year?
Quote from: emma17 on September 30, 2011, 11:50:13 AM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 29, 2011, 07:58:46 PM
Quote from: emma17 on September 29, 2011, 07:24:03 PM
Quote from: sflzman on September 28, 2011, 09:04:59 PM
Did that conference listing come out? Or did I just miss it?
The conference rankings are out on D3 site. Interesting format.
No comment about OAC being in the top tier?
I actually don't know how to interpret what he wrote. If his point is to list the conferences most likely to produce this year's national champion- then I agree totally. If we are supposed to read his format as an actual ranking of the best conferences (which I'll define as top 4-5 teams), then I couldn't disagree more-as long as we are talking 2011 rankings. "Lop Mt Union off the OAC and you have the CCIW". Are you kidding me? That is a ridiculous statement and couldn't be a bigger slap in the face to a conference that deserves more credit. Take the top 4 2011 OAC teams (whoever you think they might be) and put them against NCC, Wheaton, Illinois Wesleyan (and pick the 4th from several) and you probably have a clean sweep of the CCIW over the OAC. If you agree with my statement above (and how could you be a writer of a D3 football blog and not agree), then the OAC is no better than 3rd. Now work down some of the other conferences. ASC- a complete wipeout of the OAC- making the OAC no better than 4th. MIAC- probably 3-1 against the OAC- making the OAC no better than 5th. The NWC- do you think Linfield, Cal Lutheran and Willamette are going to struggle against 2-4 in the OAC this year?
Ya just couldn't leave it alone, could ya 02? ;)
Quote from: bleedpurple on September 30, 2011, 12:19:13 PM
Quote from: emma17 on September 30, 2011, 11:50:13 AM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 29, 2011, 07:58:46 PM
Quote from: emma17 on September 29, 2011, 07:24:03 PM
Quote from: sflzman on September 28, 2011, 09:04:59 PM
Did that conference listing come out? Or did I just miss it?
The conference rankings are out on D3 site. Interesting format.
No comment about OAC being in the top tier?
I actually don't know how to interpret what he wrote. If his point is to list the conferences most likely to produce this year's national champion- then I agree totally. If we are supposed to read his format as an actual ranking of the best conferences (which I'll define as top 4-5 teams), then I couldn't disagree more-as long as we are talking 2011 rankings. "Lop Mt Union off the OAC and you have the CCIW". Are you kidding me? That is a ridiculous statement and couldn't be a bigger slap in the face to a conference that deserves more credit. Take the top 4 2011 OAC teams (whoever you think they might be) and put them against NCC, Wheaton, Illinois Wesleyan (and pick the 4th from several) and you probably have a clean sweep of the CCIW over the OAC. If you agree with my statement above (and how could you be a writer of a D3 football blog and not agree), then the OAC is no better than 3rd. Now work down some of the other conferences. ASC- a complete wipeout of the OAC- making the OAC no better than 4th. MIAC- probably 3-1 against the OAC- making the OAC no better than 5th. The NWC- do you think Linfield, Cal Lutheran and Willamette are going to struggle against 2-4 in the OAC this year?
Ya just couldn't leave it alone, could ya 02? ;)
And another thing. "OAC teams went 7-3 against non conference opponents". Oooo, that's impressive. The combined record of the teams they beat is 6 wins and 19 losses- and one of the teams they beat is Oshkosh (Mt Union) w 2 of those 6 wins. 3 of the 7 wins came against teams that have yet to win a game (0-11).
A lamer (new word I think, but it's football Friday and I'm fired up) arguement could not have been presented to support a top tier for the OAC.
Quote from: emma17 on September 30, 2011, 12:35:09 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on September 30, 2011, 12:19:13 PM
Quote from: emma17 on September 30, 2011, 11:50:13 AM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 29, 2011, 07:58:46 PM
Quote from: emma17 on September 29, 2011, 07:24:03 PM
Quote from: sflzman on September 28, 2011, 09:04:59 PM
Did that conference listing come out? Or did I just miss it?
The conference rankings are out on D3 site. Interesting format.
No comment about OAC being in the top tier?
I actually don't know how to interpret what he wrote. If his point is to list the conferences most likely to produce this year's national champion- then I agree totally. If we are supposed to read his format as an actual ranking of the best conferences (which I'll define as top 4-5 teams), then I couldn't disagree more-as long as we are talking 2011 rankings. "Lop Mt Union off the OAC and you have the CCIW". Are you kidding me? That is a ridiculous statement and couldn't be a bigger slap in the face to a conference that deserves more credit. Take the top 4 2011 OAC teams (whoever you think they might be) and put them against NCC, Wheaton, Illinois Wesleyan (and pick the 4th from several) and you probably have a clean sweep of the CCIW over the OAC. If you agree with my statement above (and how could you be a writer of a D3 football blog and not agree), then the OAC is no better than 3rd. Now work down some of the other conferences. ASC- a complete wipeout of the OAC- making the OAC no better than 4th. MIAC- probably 3-1 against the OAC- making the OAC no better than 5th. The NWC- do you think Linfield, Cal Lutheran and Willamette are going to struggle against 2-4 in the OAC this year?
Ya just couldn't leave it alone, could ya 02? ;)
And another thing. "OAC teams went 7-3 against non conference opponents". Oooo, that's impressive. The combined record of the teams they beat is 6 wins and 19 losses- and one of the teams they beat is Oshkosh (Mt Union) w 2 of those 6 wins. 3 of the 7 wins came against teams that have yet to win a game (0-11).
A lamer (new word I think, but it's football Friday and I'm fired up) arguement could not have been presented to support a top tier for the OAC.
What I don't get is why the CCIW isn't up in arms defending themselves from such insult. Have they read the conference rankings? Is it my responsibility to post the comments on their board and inform them of how lowly they are thought of (the same as the Empire 8- come on!!!!). Sometimes I think the posters over there are too smart- dallying in subjects I just don't understand. Take up Arms I say and defend yourselves lads.
Quote from: bleedpurple on September 30, 2011, 12:19:13 PM
Quote from: emma17 on September 30, 2011, 11:50:13 AM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 29, 2011, 07:58:46 PM
Quote from: emma17 on September 29, 2011, 07:24:03 PM
Quote from: sflzman on September 28, 2011, 09:04:59 PM
Did that conference listing come out? Or did I just miss it?
The conference rankings are out on D3 site. Interesting format.
No comment about OAC being in the top tier?
I actually don't know how to interpret what he wrote. If his point is to list the conferences most likely to produce this year's national champion- then I agree totally. If we are supposed to read his format as an actual ranking of the best conferences (which I'll define as top 4-5 teams), then I couldn't disagree more-as long as we are talking 2011 rankings. "Lop Mt Union off the OAC and you have the CCIW". Are you kidding me? That is a ridiculous statement and couldn't be a bigger slap in the face to a conference that deserves more credit. Take the top 4 2011 OAC teams (whoever you think they might be) and put them against NCC, Wheaton, Illinois Wesleyan (and pick the 4th from several) and you probably have a clean sweep of the CCIW over the OAC. If you agree with my statement above (and how could you be a writer of a D3 football blog and not agree), then the OAC is no better than 3rd. Now work down some of the other conferences. ASC- a complete wipeout of the OAC- making the OAC no better than 4th. MIAC- probably 3-1 against the OAC- making the OAC no better than 5th. The NWC- do you think Linfield, Cal Lutheran and Willamette are going to struggle against 2-4 in the OAC this year?
Ya just couldn't leave it alone, could ya 02? ;)
Just striring the pot 8-)
Quote from: emma17 on September 30, 2011, 11:50:13 AM
If you agree with my statement above (and how could you be a writer of a D3 football blog and not agree), then the OAC is no better than 3rd.
I'm not saying I disagree, I was just curious on your thoughts about Keith's column.
Quote from: emma17 on September 30, 2011, 12:35:09 PM
A lamer (new word I think, but it's football Friday and I'm fired up)....
No kidding....
Quote from: emma17 on September 30, 2011, 12:35:09 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on September 30, 2011, 12:19:13 PM
Quote from: emma17 on September 30, 2011, 11:50:13 AM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 29, 2011, 07:58:46 PM
Quote from: emma17 on September 29, 2011, 07:24:03 PM
Quote from: sflzman on September 28, 2011, 09:04:59 PM
Did that conference listing come out? Or did I just miss it?
The conference rankings are out on D3 site. Interesting format.
No comment about OAC being in the top tier?
I actually don't know how to interpret what he wrote. If his point is to list the conferences most likely to produce this year's national champion- then I agree totally. If we are supposed to read his format as an actual ranking of the best conferences (which I'll define as top 4-5 teams), then I couldn't disagree more-as long as we are talking 2011 rankings. "Lop Mt Union off the OAC and you have the CCIW". Are you kidding me? That is a ridiculous statement and couldn't be a bigger slap in the face to a conference that deserves more credit. Take the top 4 2011 OAC teams (whoever you think they might be) and put them against NCC, Wheaton, Illinois Wesleyan (and pick the 4th from several) and you probably have a clean sweep of the CCIW over the OAC. If you agree with my statement above (and how could you be a writer of a D3 football blog and not agree), then the OAC is no better than 3rd. Now work down some of the other conferences. ASC- a complete wipeout of the OAC- making the OAC no better than 4th. MIAC- probably 3-1 against the OAC- making the OAC no better than 5th. The NWC- do you think Linfield, Cal Lutheran and Willamette are going to struggle against 2-4 in the OAC this year?
Ya just couldn't leave it alone, could ya 02? ;)
And another thing. "OAC teams went 7-3 against non conference opponents". Oooo, that's impressive. The combined record of the teams they beat is 6 wins and 19 losses- and one of the teams they beat is Oshkosh (Mt Union) w 2 of those 6 wins. 3 of the 7 wins came against teams that have yet to win a game (0-11).
OK...so let's play that game with the CCIW.
CCIW went 18-6 against nonconference opponents.
8 of the 18 wins came against teams that have yet to win a game (three against Olivet!)
The combined record of the teams they beat is...16-49.
(FYI, that's about the same winning percentage as 6-19)
Your argument is just as flawedas the D-3 writers.
Only fair of you to acknowledge that.
The OAC and CCIW are both great conferences, and it's not their fault that teams they've beaten in the early going have subpar records (actually, it kind of IS their fault, since they are contributing to those lowly records by BEATING them).
The only thing that really supports your argument is the victory of CCIW champ North Central over OAC runner-up Ohio Northern in the 2010 playoffs. I would also point out that North Central defeated every CCIW team (including runnerup Wheaton) by a larger margin than they did ONU.
For a while, the OAC runner-up consistently made the playoffs and often advanced until they ran into Mount (this happened five separate times from 1999-2006, including a 2002 run by John Carroll to the semifinals before losing to Mount, and 2005-06 Capital made the quarterfinals before losing to Mount). I think there's plenty of evidence to suggest that the next 3-4 OAC teams are viable contenders against top teams from other conferences.
Ex Tartan- my son's game starts in 52 minutes, otherwise I'd be glad to point out the flaws of your arguement. I do have time to say this, the reason I showed wins and losses of opponents of the OAC was to demonstrate the flaw in the D 3 writers' inclusion of the "7-3 vs non conf" as if that should be impressive.
I'll give you plenty of other reasons why the CCIW's top 4 would blank the OAC's 2-5 teams when I have time.
Go Hawks
Speaking of the CCIW, I'm interested in the Carthage NCC game at Carthage tomorrow. Could be an interesting result.
Maybe it's not an insult. I always thought the CCIW looked at the OAC as an aspirational peer.
One thing I will note about the CCIW in postseason play - against anyone but UMU or UWW, the CCIW is something over 90% wins against all others in the past c. two decades. The ONLY year that neither UMU or UWW was in the 'North', pool C Wheaton won it (only to be ousted in the semis by, you guessed it, UMU). :P
Back when playoffs were by regions (rather than four top seeds around whom 'regions' were constructed), we were at first delighted when UMU went East. That, of course, was the very year that UWW broke through with their first Stagg title (and was imported as the North #1 seed ::)). What's that about "out of the frying pan, into ..."?
The CCIW has the misfortune of being located directly between Alliance and Whitewater. 8-)
If you want to discuss Around the Nation, there's a board for that. You might get someone else's attention then, too.
What have I been saying all year long?
Adrian is the best MIAA school, not Trine.
Adrian 26
@ Trine 7
It's going to be another interesting week of ranking and discussions... does Trine fall out, will Adrian get in the rankings and pass them, what to do with Ohio Northern? And the day isn't even done yet
What to do about Bethel? And does the shellacking by the Tommies take the luster off of UW-EC's win in Collegeville?
The weather may have plagued the OAC today. This is why it's not good to do score comparisons, much less year-over-year comparisons. In conference play, especially in established conferences, wacky things happen.
Aw, smed, score comparisons are fun!
Muskingum beat ONU by 20; UMU beat ONU by 8; ergo, Muskingum is 12 points better than UMU! ;D
Oh, and Musky beat Wilmington by only 11, so Wilma is 9 points better than ONU and 1 point better than UMU! :D
Quote from: smedindy on October 01, 2011, 05:29:38 PM
What to do about Bethel? And does the shellacking by the Tommies take the luster off of UW-EC's win in Collegeville?
UW-EC's game was the second of the year...we're now in week four...big difference. Who's to say UW-EC doesn't do the same to the Johns in week four playing at home? I don't think it takes any luster off their win AT Collegeville.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 01, 2011, 05:47:26 PM
Aw, smed, score comparisons are fun!
Muskingum beat ONU by 20; UMU beat ONU by 8; ergo, Muskingum is 12 points better than UMU! ;D
Oh, and Musky beat Wilmington by only 11, so Wilma is 9 points better than ONU and 1 point better than UMU! :D
So what does this really say about these three teams? Does this mean that maybe Mount Union is a little down this year? Or maybe it just means that Muskingum is really something, and Ohio Northern and Mount Union are just as good as usual. Does ONU drop out of the top 25? And does Muskingum have a chance to take down the purple raiders??? So many questions!
Quote from: BoBo on October 01, 2011, 07:48:21 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 01, 2011, 05:29:38 PM
What to do about Bethel? And does the shellacking by the Tommies take the luster off of UW-EC's win in Collegeville?
UW-EC's game was the second of the year...we're now in week four...big difference. Who's to say UW-EC doesn't do the same to the Johns in week four playing at home? I don't think it takes any luster off their win AT Collegeville.
Just askin' the questions. The Johnnies' record is most Hamline-esque.
As a public service, and pending the Redlands / Cal Lutheran result, here are the undefeated members of D-3. Note: I didn't include anyone that may be undefeated against D-3 but has a loss (like UW-Eau Claire) because, well, I just thought of that and I gots other stuffs to do. Oh, and this excludes the NESCAC for good reasons.
In no order:
Mary Hardin-Baylor
Johns Hopkins
Illinois Wesleyan
Salisbury
Dubuque
Hobart
Delaware Valley
Adrian
St. Thomas
Augsburg
Wabash
Wittenberg
Worcester State
Endicott (Why can't you be like Endicott? Sorry, had a Kid Creole moment...)
Kean
Montclair State
Lewis & Clark
Linfield
Mt. Union
Muskingum
Thomas More
Birmingham Southern
Centre
Trinity (TX)
Redlands
St. Scholastica
UW - Whitewater
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 30, 2011, 02:14:03 PM
The only thing that really supports your argument is the victory of CCIW champ North Central over OAC runner-up Ohio Northern in the 2010 playoffs. I would also point out that North Central defeated every CCIW team (including runnerup Wheaton) by a larger margin than they did ONU.
For a while, the OAC runner-up consistently made the playoffs and often advanced until they ran into Mount (this happened five separate times from 1999-2006, including a 2002 run by John Carroll to the semifinals before losing to Mount, and 2005-06 Capital made the quarterfinals before losing to Mount). I think there's plenty of evidence to suggest that the next 3-4 OAC teams are viable contenders against top teams from other conferences.
Very minor point, but there was another OAC runner up that lost prior to facing Mount Union in the playoffs.
2003: Wheaton def. Baldwin Wallace 16-12
Mine is in.
Boy this one wasn't easy...
Quote from: smedindy on October 02, 2011, 09:20:34 PM
Boy this one wasn't easy...
...when the going gets tough...
Interested to see if Mount loses any first-place votes (both in this and D3football's poll).
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 02, 2011, 09:28:02 PM
Interested to see if Mount loses any first-place votes (both in this and D3football's poll).
They did...2 in the d3football poll. Fan's poll is too unpredictable.
Why is Wesley ahead of Kean in the D3.com poll? I bet Kean fans are ticked.
Quote from: CruFrenzy on October 02, 2011, 10:07:55 PM
Why is Wesley ahead of Kean in the D3.com poll? I bet Kean fans are ticked.
I would be too if I was a Kean fan.
Kean fans should be ticked their team only beat TCNJ 7-6. That's probably the stumbling block. Wesley beat an FCS scholarship team this week, and not a first-year program like UTSA either.
Kean's win looks more fluky, especially after too close for comfort win Friday. Wesley has righted course much like North Central. Beating a FCS team on the road that took the field against UCF and Florida State (even if they are 0-5) is fairly impressive.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 02, 2011, 09:28:02 PM
Interested to see if Mount loses any first-place votes (both in this and D3football's poll).
They don't have many to lose in the fan poll... they could gain one since one of the two who have been putting them first didn't vote last week
Quote from: smedindy on October 02, 2011, 10:27:56 PM
Kean's win looks more fluky, especially after too close for comfort win Friday. Wesley has righted course much like North Central. Beating a FCS team on the road that took the field against UCF and Florida State (even if they are 0-5) is fairly impressive.
CSU's taking the field for 2 beatdown paydays, combined score 124-10, isn't all that impressive in my view. They would still be 0-5 even if they play all bottom rung teams, which is what their schedule is mainly comprised of. BTW, they need those paydays to pay for scholarships since they only draw less than 4,000 in attendance. IMO, a fluky win (your words) is still a win as is a win that's too close for comfort. I don't think Wesley is worthy of a 4 position bump.
They basically "have to" jump two spots considering Bethel and Wheaton lost.
Bobo,
Given the body of work, who would win now on a neutral field?
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 02, 2011, 10:26:51 PM
Kean fans should be ticked their team only beat TCNJ 7-6. That's probably the stumbling block. Wesley beat an FCS scholarship team this week, and not a first-year program like UTSA either.
So if Kean's poor "showing" and Wesley's good "showing" are valid arguments, how do we justify Ohio Northern dropping out of the poll for holding Mount Union to 14 points and losing by only 7. Perhaps the best regular season "showing" against the power house in recent memory.
Personally, I think Kean IS overrated but they have managed to win and perhaps that is why they are still #10. I just don't think that Ohio Northern is getting enough credit here. I'm not a pollster but I could see this as a good loss that could have actually raised them in the poll.
Quote from: clandfan on October 03, 2011, 01:06:51 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 02, 2011, 10:26:51 PM
Kean fans should be ticked their team only beat TCNJ 7-6. That's probably the stumbling block. Wesley beat an FCS scholarship team this week, and not a first-year program like UTSA either.
So if Kean's poor "showing" and Wesley's good "showing" are valid arguments, how do we justify Ohio Northern dropping out of the poll for holding Mount Union to 14 points and losing by only 7. Perhaps the best regular season "showing" against the power house in recent memory.
Personally, I think Kean IS overrated but they have managed to win and perhaps that is why they are still #10. I just don't think that Ohio Northern is getting enough credit here. I'm not a pollster but I could see this as a good loss that could have actually raised them in the poll.
Because Ohio Northern lost. It's tough to keep a team that lost in two straight weeks in the top 25. Especially when there's so many other schools that are more deserving to be in the poll. For instance:Ill. Wesleyan, Dubuque, Adrian, St. Olaf, Muskingum....imo.
Quote from: clandfan on October 03, 2011, 01:06:51 PM
...how do we justify Ohio Northern dropping out of the poll for holding Mount Union to 14 points and losing by only 7. Perhaps the best regular season "showing" against the power house in recent memory.
I just don't think that Ohio Northern is getting enough credit here. I'm not a pollster but I could see this as a good loss that could have actually raised them in the poll.
With all due respect to the fine effort by ONU, playing in that kind of slop can REALLY affect the score. I can think of a few games, both from my playing career and games observed as a "fan" where I was shocked at the final score, only to realize that the weather made a huge difference. Just two examples:
In 2005, as a fan/alum, I watched an excellent HS team (my brother's senior season) that finished 11-1 steamrolled several quality opponents struggle to a 13-0 win in monsoon-like conditions against a team that finished the season with two wins. Our HS coach used the same conservative strategy that UMU did vs. ONU - get a lead, shut it down and keep the ball on the ground, get out of there with a win.
In 2006, I played in a slopfest against Hiram that we (Carnegie Mellon) eventually won 27-6. Hiram finished the season 0-10. We finished 10-0 and won a playoff game. On a dry field, we win that game by 50.
It's never an excuse for LOSING - in my mind, weather is part of the game, and if you're truly the "better" team you should still manage a W regardless - but I've seen enough instances of weather keeping the score down to believe that serious rain/mud can turn a three-TD margin into a one-TD margin.
(*Note: I have no affiliation with either school, and have no vested interest in making an "excuse" for why this game was close)
Point being, I'm not reading too much into the face that UMU "only" won that game by 8, and unfortunately I think that ONU has to be dropped from the poll (more because of the Muskingum loss and the lack of a major quality WIN) until they record a quality win or two. If ONU reels off five straight blowout wins, then I'll start arguing that they should still be ranked.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 03, 2011, 03:54:39 PM
Quote from: clandfan on October 03, 2011, 01:06:51 PM
...how do we justify Ohio Northern dropping out of the poll for holding Mount Union to 14 points and losing by only 7. Perhaps the best regular season "showing" against the power house in recent memory.
I just don't think that Ohio Northern is getting enough credit here. I'm not a pollster but I could see this as a good loss that could have actually raised them in the poll.
With all due respect to the fine effort by ONU, playing in that kind of slop can REALLY affect the score. I can think of a few games, both from my playing career and games observed as a "fan" where I was shocked at the final score, only to realize that the weather made a huge difference. Just two examples:
In 2005, as a fan/alum, I watched an excellent HS team (my brother's senior season) that finished 11-1 steamrolled several quality opponents struggle to a 13-0 win in monsoon-like conditions against a team that finished the season with two wins. Our HS coach used the same conservative strategy that UMU did vs. ONU - get a lead, shut it down and keep the ball on the ground, get out of there with a win.
In 2006, I played in a slopfest against Hiram that we (Carnegie Mellon) eventually won 27-6. Hiram finished the season 0-10. We finished 10-0 and won a playoff game. On a dry field, we win that game by 50.
It's never an excuse for LOSING - in my mind, weather is part of the game, and if you're truly the "better" team you should still manage a W regardless - but I've seen enough instances of weather keeping the score down to believe that serious rain/mud can turn a three-TD margin into a one-TD margin.
(*Note: I have no affiliation with either school, and have no vested interest in making an "excuse" for why this game was close)
Point being, I'm not reading too much into the face that UMU "only" won that game by 8, and unfortunately I think that ONU has to be dropped from the poll (more because of the Muskingum loss and the lack of a major quality WIN) until they record a quality win or two. If ONU reels off five straight blowout wins, then I'll start arguing that they should still be ranked.
Nice post ExTart- I second everything you said. If ONU had something impressive on its resume before the slop game vs. Mt, the arguement for ranking would have more merit.
I am one of those people "not giving ohio Northern enough credit", as I actually dropped MU below MHB because of how close that game was. I think MU should be beating them by a couple of scores.
Quote from: smedindy on October 03, 2011, 12:19:34 AM
Bobo,
Given the body of work, who would win now on a neutral field?
As a UWW fan, my views regarding Wesley are pretty well documented on these boards. As a non-UWW fan, it's hard for me to explain to you how little I think about Wesley in the grand scheme of things without bashing them. So, I'm not even going to try.
Kean may not be the greatest 4-0 team, but they did give Wesley their only loss on the year. That's one of the few things we know for sure about these two. There have been no common opponent to factor in. And finally, I don't find it fairly impressive to beat a lousy FCS team in CSU that had already lost to another non-scholarship school and who's only claim to fame has been rubbing shoulders (and acting as human tackling dummies) with UCF and FSU. Nor does a narrow victory mean a whole lot to me concerning Kean. So, as far as their body of work this year, IMO, the jury's still out on both of them. I need a bit more factual data before I can make a determination.
Bobo,
FYI, Massey has Charleston Southern as #358 and Kean at #363. Wesley is #312. That's after five weeks and so it's pretty well connected data now.
Sflzman,
Not only was it the slop, if anyone is a rival to Mt. Union it's ONU.
Quote from: smedindy on October 03, 2011, 09:28:26 PM
Bobo,
FYI, Massey has Charleston Southern as #358 and Kean at #363. Wesley is #312. That's after five weeks and so it's pretty well connected data now.
Sflzman,
Not only was it the slop, if anyone is a rival to Mt. Union it's ONU.
Interestingly, UWW at #178 comes just before Norfolk St. (#179), CSU's opponent 2 weeks ago on those very Massey Ratings.
Quote from: sflzman on October 03, 2011, 08:52:11 PM
I am one of those people "not giving ohio Northern enough credit", as I actually dropped MU below MHB because of how close that game was. I think MU should be beating them by a couple of scores.
Interesting post here sflzman. I'm not sure if you posted this before, do you have MHB at #2 now? Where do you rank St. Thomas?
For the playoffs, I'd really like to see MU play at least one of these four in order of interest: NCC, MHB, Linfield and St. Thomas.
A scary thought. A final four of Linfield, St. Thomas, UW-W, and Mt. Union.
There's no way it would happen now, but it'd be all purple, all the time!
Quote from: smedindy on October 04, 2011, 02:37:28 PM
A scary thought. A final four of Linfield, St. Thomas, UW-W, and Mt. Union.
There's no way it would happen now, but it'd be all purple, all the time!
A more realistic Purple Final Four would possibly be:
East: Mount Union
North: UWW
West: St. Thomas
South: MHB
Quote from: emma17 on October 04, 2011, 12:22:13 PM
Quote from: sflzman on October 03, 2011, 08:52:11 PM
I am one of those people "not giving ohio Northern enough credit", as I actually dropped MU below MHB because of how close that game was. I think MU should be beating them by a couple of scores.
Interesting post here sflzman. I'm not sure if you posted this before, do you have MHB at #2 now? Where do you rank St. Thomas?
For the playoffs, I'd really like to see MU play at least one of these four in order of interest: NCC, MHB, Linfield and St. Thomas.
My top 5 is as follows:
1. UWW
2. MHB
3. UMU
4. St Thomas
5. Linfield
I was almost impressed enough with the whooping StT put on the Johnnies that I almost put them above UMU as well....
Quote from: BoBo on October 02, 2011, 09:41:49 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 02, 2011, 09:28:02 PM
Interested to see if Mount loses any first-place votes (both in this and D3football's poll).
They did...2 in the d3football poll. Fan's poll is too unpredictable.
I'm surprised that MTU is even getting first place votes in the d3football. I'm mainly a CCIW guy but I usually see UWW in person a few times each season. UWW beat a supposedly good UWP easily this weekend, even though it was tied at weekend. The Warhawks plain dominated the second half. UWP had been just outside the Top 25. Earlier this season, UWW easily beat Franklin, which many people look at with interest. I can't believe anyone would not vote UWW #1. Their only challenge will be keeping LC healthy.
Quote from: sflzman on October 04, 2011, 03:37:48 PM
Quote from: emma17 on October 04, 2011, 12:22:13 PM
Quote from: sflzman on October 03, 2011, 08:52:11 PM
I am one of those people "not giving ohio Northern enough credit", as I actually dropped MU below MHB because of how close that game was. I think MU should be beating them by a couple of scores.
Interesting post here sflzman. I'm not sure if you posted this before, do you have MHB at #2 now? Where do you rank St. Thomas?
For the playoffs, I'd really like to see MU play at least one of these four in order of interest: NCC, MHB, Linfield and St. Thomas.
My top 5 is as follows:
1. UWW
2. MHB
3. UMU
4. St Thomas
5. Linfield
I was almost impressed enough with the whooping StT put on the Johnnies that I almost put them above UMU as well....
I like it, it's different than most I'm sure.
My top 6:
1. UWW
2. Mt Union
3. St. Thomas
4. NCC
5. Linfield
6. MHB
QuoteI like it, it's different than most I'm sure.
My top 6:
1. UWW
2. Mt Union
3. St. Thomas
4. NCC
5. Linfield
6. MHB
Okay, let's create a bracket for the Elite 8.
East
MUC/UMU vs. _____
North
UWW vs. NCC
South
UMHB vs. ______ (Wesley?)
West
Tommies vs Linfield
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 04, 2011, 07:42:46 PM
QuoteI like it, it's different than most I'm sure.
My top 6:
1. UWW
2. Mt Union
3. St. Thomas
4. NCC
5. Linfield
6. MHB
Okay, let's create a bracket for the Elite 8.
East
MUC/UMU vs. _____
North
UWW vs. NCC
South
UMHB vs. ______ (Wesley?)
West
Tommies vs Linfield
Highest rated east team I have is Salisbury, at #14 so I'd put them against UMU and I'd have Wesley against UMHB there.
My top 5:
1. UW- Whitewater
2. Mount Union
3. St. Thomas
4. Linfield
5. North Central
I have UMHB at #8, I feel if you put them against a defense that can stop the run (like my top 5) that they'd throw way too many picks and not be able to throw the ball well enough at all out of their newish pistol to stay competitive. Added to that the defense isn't what it used to be either. That doesn't mean that UMHB is a bad team though and won't go far.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 04, 2011, 07:42:46 PM
QuoteI like it, it's different than most I'm sure.
My top 6:
1. UWW
2. Mt Union
3. St. Thomas
4. NCC
5. Linfield
6. MHB
Okay, let's create a bracket for the Elite 8.
East
MUC/UMU vs. _____
North
UWW vs. NCC
South
UMHB vs. ______ (Wesley?)
West
Tommies vs Linfield
That's the problem with the East, many good teams, but none that jumps out as a real challenger. I'd like to see:
North: Mt vs NCC
West: UWW vs St. Thomas
South: MHB vs Linfield
East: Wesley vs ____ (Wittenberg?)
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 04, 2011, 07:42:46 PM
Okay, let's create a bracket for the Elite 8.
East
MUC/UMU vs. _____
North
UWW vs. NCC
South
UMHB vs. ______ (Wesley?)
West
Tommies vs Linfield
Based on my ballot I'd have
East: #2 Mt Union vs #8 Montclair St/#9 Delaware Valley
North: #1 UWW vs #6 North Central
South: #4 MHB vs #7 Wesley
West: #3 St Thomas vs #5 Linfield
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 04, 2011, 08:05:52 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 04, 2011, 07:42:46 PM
Okay, let's create a bracket for the Elite 8.
East
MUC/UMU vs. _____
North
UWW vs. NCC
South
UMHB vs. ______ (Wesley?)
West
Tommies vs Linfield
Based on my ballot I'd have
East: #2 Mt Union vs #8 Montclair St/#9 Delaware Valley
North: #1 UWW vs #6 North Central
South: #4 MHB vs #7 Wesley
West: #3 St Thomas vs #5 Linfield
I like Montclair in a squeeker against Mt Union. :) I enjoyed my visit to the Sacrificial Alter a few years ago and one never knows. We all know the top 2 to 4 are in a league of their own. Time to get ready for Cortland and take care of business this weekend.
Quote from: smedindy on October 04, 2011, 02:37:28 PM
A scary thought. A final four of Linfield, St. Thomas, UW-W, and Mt. Union.
There's no way it would happen now, but it'd be all purple, all the time!
Did we miss the boat when that student stood up a century ago and say "Heliotrope hell, we want blood!"? :)
D3 TOP 25 FANPOLL WEEK 6
1. Wisconsin-Whitewater (15) 375 1(LW)
2. Mount Union 359 2
3. St. Thomas 339 3
4. Mary Hardin-Baylor 323 4
5. Linfield 322 5
6. North Central 299 8
7. Wesley 270 9
8. Thomas More 231 10
9. Wabash 217 14(t)
10. Montclair State 213 11
11. Wittenberg 209 14(t)
12. Bethel 201 7
13. Kean 184 12(t)
14. Wheaton 147 6
15. Cal Lutheran 144 21
16. Cortland State 136 20
17. Delaware Valley 126 22
18. Illinois Wesleyan 122 --
19. Wartburg 102 23
20. Redlands 90 12(t)
21. Salisbury 89 22
22. Wisconsin-Oshkosh 86 24
23. Dubuque 47 --
24. Johns Hopkins 40 --
25. Adrian 24 --
Dropped Out of Top 25: Alfred, Louisiana College, Trine, Wisconsin-Platteville
Also Receiving Votes: Louisiana College (23), UW-Platteville (23), UW-Eau Claire (22), Alfred (19), Ohio Northern (18), Franklin (17), Hobart (12), Hampden-Sydney (9), Centre (8), St. Olaf (8), McMurry (7), Washington & Lee (6), Monmouth (3), Muskingum (3), St. John Fisher(3), Trinity (1)
Just a few observations of the differences between this week's Fan Poll and the D3Football.com poll:
1. FP has UW-W a unanimous #1. D3F has UW-W with 84% of 1st place votes.
2. The Top 8 is identical in each poll, but Linfield is really pushing UMHB for 4th in the FP, while Wesley is pushing NCC for 6th in the D3F.
3. The voting broke Wabash's way this week in the FP, moving them from 14th to 9th. They sit at 12th in D3F.
4. D3F has Kean 10th. FP slower to believe at 13th.
5. D3F dropped Bethel 4 spots and Wheaton a whopping 12 after losses. FP dropped Bethel 5 and Wheaton 8.
6. UW-Platteville and UW-Oshkosh much more highly regarded in Fan Poll than D3F. Is that FP WIAC influence, or is D3F underestimating those teams?
Any thoughts? Other observations?
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 05, 2011, 08:07:41 AM
6. UW-Platteville and UW-Oshkosh much more highly regarded in Fan Poll than D3F. Is that FP WIAC influence, or is D3F underestimating those teams?
Any thoughts? Other observations?
IMO FP WIAC influence (darn I was trying to write all that in abbrev.)!!
In the AFCA poll, UW-O is 31st with 51 votes, UW-EC is #36 with 23 votes, & UW-P is #37T with 5 votes.
Quote from: BoBo on October 05, 2011, 08:20:03 AM
IMO FP WIAC influence (darn I was trying to write all that in abbrev.)!!
In the AFCA poll, UW-O is 31st with 51 votes, UW-EC is #36 with 23 votes, & UW-P is #37T with 5 votes.
To me, one of the fun things about looking at polls and filling out a ballot is to decide how much to weigh out the various factors. In other words, how much do you hold a loss against a team? How much do you weigh or not weigh comparative scores? A big factor I look at is "Who would win head to head more often if a team played x times?"
In the "Who would win" category: What do people think UW-O's record would be against the following schedule?
Thomas More
Kean
Montclair State
Wittenberg
Cortland State
Delaware Valley
Illinois Wesleyan
John Hopkins
Salisbury
Alfred
I obviously don't know the answer myself. I will say that I believe UW-O would go 4-0 against the four teams NOT in the top 25 but receiving more votes than them in the D3F poll:
Hobart, Dubuque, St Olaf, Adrian
More WIAC bias or simply WIAC strength?
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 05, 2011, 08:50:44 AM
Quote from: BoBo on October 05, 2011, 08:20:03 AM
IMO FP WIAC influence (darn I was trying to write all that in abbrev.)!!
In the AFCA poll, UW-O is 31st with 51 votes, UW-EC is #36 with 23 votes, & UW-P is #37T with 5 votes.
To me, one of the fun things about looking at polls and filling out a ballot is to decide how much to weigh out the various factors. In other words, how much do you hold a loss against a team? How much do you weigh or not weigh comparative scores? A big factor I look at is "Who would win head to head more often if a team played x times?"
In the "Who would win" category: What do people think UW-O's record would be against the following schedule?
Thomas More
Kean
Montclair State
Wittenberg
Cortland State
Delaware Valley
Illinois Wesleyan
John Hopkins
Salisbury
Alfred
I obviously don't know the answer myself. I will say that I believe UW-O would go 4-0 against the four teams NOT in the top 25 but receiving more votes than them in the D3F poll:
Hobart, Dubuque, St Olaf, Adrian
More WIAC bias or simply WIAC strength?
UW Oshkosh 242- The rest a negative 7. Da Titans!
Bleed, I don't know how the mighty Titan would fare against the teams you listed, fact is, we WIACers never see those teams play. D3 poll has Franklin at #25- and imo, Oshkosh beats them.
This is where the comparative scores/6 degrees of separation/Kevin Bacon comes in to play. Many of the teams on your list have had a run-in with teams we WIACers have seen play of late. Thomas More, Mont St, Del Vall, Alfred have all been beaten badly by MHB, Wesley and Mt in the last year. Comparatively, Oshkosh played a tighter game vs UWW (please don't pick on this point, I was at the game) and they certainly scored more vs Mt.
This doesn't tell us who would win. IMO the comparative scores at least justify WIACers bias.
Quote from: emma17 on September 30, 2011, 05:14:24 PM
Ex Tartan- my son's game starts in 52 minutes, otherwise I'd be glad to point out the flaws of your arguement. I do have time to say this, the reason I showed wins and losses of opponents of the OAC was to demonstrate the flaw in the D 3 writers' inclusion of the "7-3 vs non conf" as if that should be impressive.
I'll give you plenty of other reasons why the CCIW's top 4 would blank the OAC's 2-5 teams when I have time.
Go Hawks
Is it a violation of board etiquette to reply to myself? I owe this response to ExTart.
5 reasons why I feel the CCIW is a better conference than the OAC (with or without Mt "lopped off", which was the original basis for this dicussion):
-As of today, both the D3 Poll and the Fan Poll list 3 CCIW teams in the top 25. The "lopped off" OAC has 0, otherwise 1.
-From '08-'10 (3 seasons)- 2 non Mt OAC teams made the playoffs, winning a combined 1 playoff game in the strecth. 3 CCIW teams made it, winning a combined 8 playoff games in the stretch.
-During same period, 3 CCIW teams won at least 1 playoff game. Lopped off OAC only 1 team won a playoff game, otherwise 2.
-During same period, the record of the top 5 teams in conference: OAC (lopped off): 93-60. CCIW:120-43. Obviously Mt record will make a big difference.
-2011 record of all teams: OAC: 22-18. CCIW: 22-10 (7 teams at 3-1 or better).
Ex Tartan, I agree that both the OAC and the CCIW play weak non conference schedules, which is why I place their 2011 results at the end.
Quote from: emma17 on October 05, 2011, 12:43:44 PM
Is it a violation of board etiquette to reply to myself? I owe this response to ExTart.
-From '08-'10 (3 seasons)- 2 non Mt OAC teams made the playoffs, winning a combined 1 playoff game in the strecth. 3 CCIW teams made it, winning a combined 8 playoff games in the stretch.
-During same period, 3 CCIW teams won at least 1 playoff game. Lopped off OAC only 1 team won a playoff game, otherwise 2.
Fair point. In particular, these points are probably your strongest - the fact that three different CCIW teams have won at least one playoff game in the past three seasons; I'm not sure any other conference can match that claim today.
My point was merely pointing out that your initial post (which, I understand, was brief) did not really present the argument in full; it seemed only fair, to me, that if you were going to use the weakness of the OAC's non-conference opponents to debunk the validity of their 7-3 nonconference record, then I should point out that the CCIW's non-conference opponents had a record that was equally poor.
*FWIW: I don't have a big beef with relatively "lightweight" nonconference scheduling in Division III, particularly in tough conferences like the CCIW and OAC where you're likely to be tested multiple times in-conference anyway, it's not easy to arrange a big nonconference showdown, and the margin for error in making the playoffs is very thin; lose a tough non-con game and you virtually HAVE to win your conference to get in, not an easy task if your conference schedule includes Wheaton/NorthCentral/IWU or (in better times for the OAC) Capital/Baldwin-Wallace type teams.
ExTart- I'm with you on the issue of lighter non conference schedules for teams in established conferences. NCC, Oshkosh, Platteville are 3 examples of teams that played tough non conf games, took a loss and now have almost no chance of playoffs if they lose in conference- unless committee is kind to 8-2's.
I know you guys think lightly of the SCAC (given that there are three teams without a loss with a total of 9 points in your poll) but would encourage you to keep an eye on those teams. Birmingham-Southern has arguably the best results of the three but both Trinity and Centre have had their moments. Should one of the three roll through the rest of the conference schedule undefeated, they'd certainly be worthy of some consideration for the lower rungs of the poll.
Maybe one of these days a SCAC team will even win a playoff game again. I guess if they're going to do it, it will have to be this year since, unless something dramatically unexpected happens, the conference won't have enough football teams for an automatic bid next year and competing with Wesley for the one B means .. Wesley gets it.
Quote from: Ron Boerger on October 05, 2011, 03:43:21 PM
I know you guys think lightly of the SCAC (given that there are three teams without a loss with a total of 9 points in your poll) but would encourage you to keep an eye on those teams. Birmingham-Southern has arguably the best results of the three but both Trinity and Centre have had their moments. Should one of the three roll through the rest of the conference schedule undefeated, they'd certainly be worthy of some consideration for the lower rungs of the poll.
Maybe one of these days a SCAC team will even win a playoff game again. I guess if they're going to do it, it will have to be this year since, unless something dramatically unexpected happens, the conference won't have enough football teams for an automatic bid next year and competing with Wesley for the one B means .. Wesley gets it.
Ron, it's not that I think lightly of the conference, I just don't know much about it. I'm all for new teams making a splash so I'll be rooting for some success there.
Quote from: Ron Boerger on October 05, 2011, 03:43:21 PM
I know you guys think lightly of the SCAC (given that there are three teams without a loss with a total of 9 points in your poll) but would encourage you to keep an eye on those teams. Birmingham-Southern has arguably the best results of the three but both Trinity and Centre have had their moments. Should one of the three roll through the rest of the conference schedule undefeated, they'd certainly be worthy of some consideration for the lower rungs of the poll.
I watched the Centre vs W&L game. It was a good win for Centre. I think W&L will do well in the ODAC, possibly finishing first or second. Centre won by one TD at home and I rate the teams as about even at the time. Truly a game where the home team was going to win. I'll be interested to see how Centre does against Birmingham-Southern. I also have noticed that Sewanee, despite still having a losing record, is much improved over prior years. They didn't stack up well against W&L, but have played close games since, including a tight home loss to Birmingham-Southern. I definitely think Centre is worthy of being in the receiving votes category of the polls and look forward to hearing about their matchup this weekend in Birmingham. If I wasn't so busy getting the house ready for my daughter's second birthday I would be tempted to go to that game since it is in town. The winner of that match, if I voted, would be well inside my top 25. That being said, for W&L's SoS (which is pretty poor), I'm pulling for Centre to win out.
Ron, I have three SCAC teams on my watch list. There's just a lot of teams at 5-0 or 4-1 that are worthy. What a year! I mean, when do we think Augsburg, or Dubuque, or another 'outside' team is real? Why did many of us think Illinois Wesleyan was due for a fall when they definitely have the goods! Wow.
(I guess for Augsburg and Dubuque, it's this week - Augies vs. Tommies and Wartburg clashes with Dubuque)
As for the WI - OSHKOSH scenario via Massey Ratings:
Oshkosh - 21
Thomas More - 33
Kean - 17
Montclair State - 35
Wittenberg - 45
Cortland State - 30
Delaware Valley - 18
Illinois Wesleyan - 19
John Hopkins - 16
Salisbury - 29
Alfred - 38
Hobart - 12
Dubuque - 34
St Olaf - 56
Adrian - 49
I think Oshkosh would be favored against St. Olaf and Adrian anywhere. Maybe against Alfred.
I think it'd be a home / road scenario for most teams (especially Witt, whose Massey rating is hurt by their lack of road prowess), and a team like Hobart would be a slight favorite anywhere according to an impartial analysis.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 28, 2011, 12:20:04 PM
The poll should be fluid rather than just this team lost and falls down to there and every team moves up 1.
I've had a team win and still fall out out of the poll. My 4-5-6 order has been different in each of the last 3 polls without anyone losing.
I agree with this totally. I re-evaluate every week, and look at the entire body of work. Sometimes a win that boosted up a team earlier (let's say Wittenberg's 45-28 win against Capital) later looks less impressive because of that losing team's subsequent results.
It's probably tough as a team to wonder what you could have done besides win; same time, polls are just intervals along the way. If you keep winning, you will eventually get your just due in the poll.
Quote from: BoBo on October 03, 2011, 09:21:43 PM
Kean may not be the greatest 4-0 team, but they did give Wesley their only loss on the year. That's one of the few things we know for sure about these two.[/quote]
I tend to agree. While all polling is subjective, h2h wins and losses are absolute, and it has to be a pretty heavy bit of data and outstanding circumstance for me to ignore an h2h win. Or when it gets to be a triangle or quadrangle that h2h wins can no longer solve.
Right now the only h2h win I think my ballot ignores is St. Olaf-Bethel, and I might well correct that after this week.
As of now, Kean worries me, but I still have to keep them above Wesley. Redlands, even with the L to CLU, stays above North Central.
Probably won't stay that way all year, but based on what we know now, that's how I interpret it.
Other people clearly disagree with the "who woulda done what on a neutral field" thinking and such. It's valid, I suppose.
If we are considering the indexes, then how about some love for the ASC.
Massey (minus the NESCAC) has UMHB #2, McMurry #5, LaCollege #17.
Massey-BCS has UMHB #2, LaCollege #7 and McMurry #12.
Bornpowerindex has UMHB #3, LaCollege #10 and McMurry #12.
LazIndex has UMHB #4, LaCollege #8 and McMurry #20.
I see I'm still the only one giving Muskingum points so far.
It makes me feel not totally stupid knowing they are getting 17 points on the D3football.com poll. ;D
They're on my 'watch list'. Another crazy week, and they keep winning, they'll be up there. Of course, 'winning' as in 'only losing to Mt. Union'.
Quote from: K-Mack on October 05, 2011, 11:02:52 PM
Other people clearly disagree with the "who woulda done what on a neutral field" thinking and such. It's valid, I suppose.
Week 1 H2H matchups get less and less valid, I think, as time moves on.
And Keith, what would have happened if North Central played Cal Lutheran and won. Where would Redlands, NC, and Cal Lutheran shake out?
Quote from: smedindy on October 06, 2011, 01:40:58 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on October 05, 2011, 11:02:52 PM
Other people clearly disagree with the "who woulda done what on a neutral field" thinking and such. It's valid, I suppose.
Week 1 H2H matchups get less and less valid, I think, as time moves on.
And Keith, what would have happened if North Central played Cal Lutheran and won. Where would Redlands, NC, and Cal Lutheran shake out?
Same issue occurred last season when Rowan, Montclair St, and Cortland St. all beat each other. And all three teams finished with just that one loss.
Edit: And I believe it was Rowan who got the short end of the stick, and didn't make the playoffs. While Montclair and Cortland did.
I know Pat has the data, but it would interesting to know how each region finished in Top 10 for the last
ten years? :-\
I raise the question, since I am not sure how well the East has performed, given the East region in terms of the last few years has not had ( I believe) a Top 5 team at the playoff selection time.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 06, 2011, 12:16:25 PM
I see I'm still the only one giving Muskingum points so far.
It makes me feel not totally stupid knowing they are getting 17 points on the D3football.com poll. ;D
I feel Musky has to prove it this week and then they are in top 25. My gut tells me they will struggle against the Berg though.
A quick glance at some of Saturday's more intriguing games:
"In and Around the D3 Top 25"
www.uwwfootball.com
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 06, 2011, 11:48:41 PM
A quick glance at some of Saturday's more intriguing games:
"In and Around the D3 Top 25"
www.uwwfootball.com
I'm glad you mentioned the Elmhurst-Wheaton game. I would not be surprised if Elmhurst gives them all they can handle. I hope Dubuque wins, that's a good story going there.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 06, 2011, 12:16:25 PM
I see I'm still the only one giving Muskingum points so far.
It makes me feel not totally stupid knowing they are getting 17 points on the D3football.com poll. ;D
The problem is there's 30-35 teams that could be in the top 25. If we had more voters I'm sure a few might give them a couple points. They're on my watch list, but probably only the 2nd or 3rd team I'd move in next week if teams drop out.
Quote from: emma17 on October 06, 2011, 11:55:42 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 06, 2011, 11:48:41 PM
A quick glance at some of Saturday's more intriguing games:
"In and Around the D3 Top 25"
www.uwwfootball.com
I'm glad you mentioned the Elmhurst-Wheaton game. I would not be surprised if Elmhurst gives them all they can handle. I hope Dubuque wins, that's a good story going there.
Elmhurst? The same Elmhurst team that lost to Chicago?
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 07, 2011, 10:50:03 AM
Quote from: emma17 on October 06, 2011, 11:55:42 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 06, 2011, 11:48:41 PM
A quick glance at some of Saturday's more intriguing games:
"In and Around the D3 Top 25"
www.uwwfootball.com
I'm glad you mentioned the Elmhurst-Wheaton game. I would not be surprised if Elmhurst gives them all they can handle. I hope Dubuque wins, that's a good story going there.
Elmhurst? The same Elmhurst team that lost to Chicago?
Oh ye of little faith. Yes, that same Elmhurst- in which the game vs Chicago (not a bad team btw) was a statistical anomaly.
Quote from: emma17 on October 07, 2011, 12:30:09 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 07, 2011, 10:50:03 AM
Quote from: emma17 on October 06, 2011, 11:55:42 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 06, 2011, 11:48:41 PM
A quick glance at some of Saturday's more intriguing games:
"In and Around the D3 Top 25"
www.uwwfootball.com
I'm glad you mentioned the Elmhurst-Wheaton game. I would not be surprised if Elmhurst gives them all they can handle. I hope Dubuque wins, that's a good story going there.
Elmhurst? The same Elmhurst team that lost to Chicago?
Oh ye of little faith. Yes, that same Elmhurst- in which the game vs Chicago (not a bad team btw) was a statistical anomaly.
Even if Elmhurst upsets Wheaton (which has happened twice in the past decade), that does not make them a top 25 team. Over on CCIW board, I mentioned how Elmhurst has only had 1 season since 1999 where they've been over .500 in the CCIW. Until they prove otherwise, I don't see them going better than 1-2 against the top CCIW teams (this year appears to be Wheaton, IWU and NCC).
They do have a very solid rushing attack (RB - Williams is likely 1st team All-CCIW), with an experienced QB (3 year starter) and a solid defense. I can see them upsetting a top team in the CCIW, but I can also see them losing to a lower CCIW team.
Anyway... I've rambled enough. Elmhurst is not a top 25 team.
Quote from: emma17 on October 07, 2011, 12:30:09 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 07, 2011, 10:50:03 AM
Quote from: emma17 on October 06, 2011, 11:55:42 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 06, 2011, 11:48:41 PM
A quick glance at some of Saturday's more intriguing games:
"In and Around the D3 Top 25"
www.uwwfootball.com
I'm glad you mentioned the Elmhurst-Wheaton game. I would not be surprised if Elmhurst gives them all they can handle. I hope Dubuque wins, that's a good story going there.
Elmhurst? The same Elmhurst team that lost to Chicago?
Oh ye of little faith. Yes, that same Elmhurst- in which the game vs Chicago (not a bad team btw) was a statistical anomaly.
Much like B-W losing to Capital was anomalous? :D
I've seen Chicago play (via a livestream). If you put pressure on their QB, they can't get the ball to Brizzolara. Brizzolara doesn't touch the ball, they're done.
Their defense isn't that physical either.
Quote from: smedindy on October 07, 2011, 02:57:07 PM
Quote from: emma17 on October 07, 2011, 12:30:09 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 07, 2011, 10:50:03 AM
Quote from: emma17 on October 06, 2011, 11:55:42 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 06, 2011, 11:48:41 PM
A quick glance at some of Saturday's more intriguing games:
"In and Around the D3 Top 25"
www.uwwfootball.com
I'm glad you mentioned the Elmhurst-Wheaton game. I would not be surprised if Elmhurst gives them all they can handle. I hope Dubuque wins, that's a good story going there.
Elmhurst? The same Elmhurst team that lost to Chicago?
Oh ye of little faith. Yes, that same Elmhurst- in which the game vs Chicago (not a bad team btw) was a statistical anomaly.
Much like B-W losing to Capital was anomalous? :DI've seen Chicago play (via a livestream). If you put pressure on their QB, they can't get the ball to Brizzolara. Brizzolara doesn't touch the ball, they're done.
Their defense isn't that physical either.
I don't get the reference to this game? Were the stats lopsided in B-W's favor even though they lost?
An anomalous result doesn't necessarily mean the stats are whacked out one way or another. B-W turned the ball over four times, without those, they were in control. As much as I love statistical analysis, in football it's not always easy to just compare yards. There are penalties, return yardage, and 'garbage' yards gained when defenses get vanilla.
As you should know, teams can bend and not break, giving up 40 or 50 yards, then getting a huge return on an INT or a punt and only have to go 20 yards for a score. Or, penalties could add a lot of yardage forwards or backwards. I think in one NFL game, a team gained 105 yards on an 80 yard drive for a TD because of penalties. That's 25 extra yards that are added to their total.
I contend the B-W result was anomalous because Capital got waxed by the 'Berg 55-3 the next day. I don't think B-W loses to Heidelberg, much less by 52 points.
And in that case, how would you "head-to-head" rankings people suss it out. Team A gets crushed by Team B, who beats Team C handily and then Team C beats Team A by 14 or so....
Quote from: smedindy on October 07, 2011, 06:23:30 PM
An anomalous result doesn't necessarily mean the stats are whacked out one way or another. B-W turned the ball over four times, without those, they were in control. As much as I love statistical analysis, in football it's not always easy to just compare yards. There are penalties, return yardage, and 'garbage' yards gained when defenses get vanilla.
As you should know, teams can bend and not break, giving up 40 or 50 yards, then getting a huge return on an INT or a punt and only have to go 20 yards for a score. Or, penalties could add a lot of yardage forwards or backwards. I think in one NFL game, a team gained 105 yards on an 80 yard drive for a TD because of penalties. That's 25 extra yards that are added to their total.
I contend the B-W result was anomalous because Capital got waxed by the 'Berg 55-3 the next day. I don't think B-W loses to Heidelberg, much less by 52 points.
And in that case, how would you "head-to-head" rankings people suss it out. Team A gets crushed by Team B, who beats Team C handily and then Team C beats Team A by 14 or so....
I understand your point. I look at the stats to see whether a team had success in long drives and defensive stops to determine if a team was outplayed. In the case of Elmhurst, they had the more dominant stats which simply suggests to me that without big plays like an interception return and a punt return, which are rare no matter how good a team is, that if the game were played again, there is a good chance the results would be different. I don't know whether Elmhurst will prove to be top 25 worthy, but I do feel they haven't yet lost their chance to prove it.
"Ya Gotta Pull For..."
www.uwwfootball.com
Huntingdon's performance against Witt could have a cascading affect on my ballot. If the Hawks hold on, then it will force me to reconsider Birmingham Southern, Centre AND Huntingdon.
Quote from: smedindy on October 08, 2011, 03:48:27 PM
Huntingdon's performance against Witt could have a cascading affect on my ballot. If the Hawks hold on, then it will force me to reconsider Birmingham Southern, Centre AND Huntingdon.
Kean could cause some problems as well, somehow their winning now after being down 10 for awhile. They're still not playing that well.
10-0 st. thomas over Augsburg in the 3rd.
Augsburg hangin in there
Muskingum loses, see this is why most of us did not rank them. :P
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 08, 2011, 04:01:48 PM
10-0 st. thomas over Augsburg in the 3rd.
Augsburg hangin in there
17-0 final for the toms
Wittenberg was exposed by Huntingdon.
What to do with Witt, Huntingdon, and Birmingham Southern, who beat Huntingdon?
Dubuque may be for real, but lost a rough one to Wartburg 42-39.
What to do about Dubuque?
What to do about Cortland? Losing that game to Montclair is tough, but is it really worth demoting them?
What about Kean, who played poorly, again, but won while Wesley played well and won?
What to do about Eau Claire and Oshkosh?
At least Muskingum came back to earth.
Quote from: smedindy on October 08, 2011, 08:16:43 PM
Wittenberg was exposed by Huntingdon.
What to do with Witt, Huntingdon, and Birmingham Southern, who beat Huntingdon?
Dubuque may be for real, but lost a rough one to Wartburg 42-39.
What to do about Dubuque?
Zweifel's numbers are just mind boggling. 18 receptions for 259 and 2 TD's. He is just on an absolutely torrid pace. And their RB Spaulding rushed for almost 200 yds and 2 TD's himself.
Quote from: MasterJedi on October 08, 2011, 04:50:26 PM
Muskingum loses, see this is why most of us did not rank them. :P
What is interesting here is that unless Mount gets upset by someone, the OAC's 2nd place team will be no better than 8-2. Makes things a little more interesting for the Pool C discussion. Throw in the WIAC's typical craziness, the IIAC carnage today, CCIW with IWU still to play NCC, the NJAC's possible finish and this could be one of the most unpredictable/controversial Pool C years we've had in a while.
But at least the Fan Poll got easier...oh, wait. :o
Quote from: hazzben on October 08, 2011, 08:40:53 PM
Quote from: MasterJedi on October 08, 2011, 04:50:26 PM
Muskingum loses, see this is why most of us did not rank them. :P
What is interesting here is that unless Mount gets upset by someone, the OAC's 2nd place team will be no better than 8-2. Makes things a little more interesting for the Pool C discussion. Throw in the WIAC's typical craziness, the IIAC carnage today, CCIW with IWU still to play NCC, the NJAC's possible finish and this could be one of the most unpredictable/controversial Pool C years we've had in a while.
But at least the Fan Poll got easier...oh, wait. :o
ASC and SCIAC are in line to get Pool C bids.
Could a "B" like Huntingdon, with one loss, become a "C". The Witt win really helps their cause, especially if BSC wins the SCAC.
The SCAC could get a "C" providing they don't cannibalize themselves when Centre, BSC and Trinity play.
They could. Football has never done it, though.
Quote from: smedindy on October 08, 2011, 09:24:22 PM
Could a "B" like Huntingdon, with one loss, become a "C". The Witt win really helps their cause, especially if BSC wins the SCAC.
The SCAC could get a "C" providing they don't cannibalize themselves when Centre, BSC and Trinity play.
If Huntingdon finishes with one loss then we would likely be the Pool B pick as that would mean we win out including beating Wesley to finish the regular season.
You have to be impressed with Huntingdon. One close road loss to B-SC and good home wins over (at the time ranked) H-SC and Witt. Fortunately with Wesley still to play, you won't really have to make a tough pool B choice if they both are 8-1 on 11/12. I fully expect the winner of that game, at 9-1, to get the bid. At 8-2, I'm thinking the loser goes home. Fair or not, that is the peril of being in Pool B. On the other hand, all it really means is your playoff starts a weak early.
Just checked and CWRU's one loss is out of region so they may still need to lose one somewhere.
Quote from: hazzben on October 08, 2011, 08:23:01 PM
Zweifel's numbers are just mind boggling. 18 receptions for 259 and 2 TD's. He is just on an absolutely torrid pace. And their RB Spaulding rushed for almost 200 yds and 2 TD's himself.
???
I've learned from watching football that a RB doesn't rush for almost 200 yards or score 2 TD's by themselves. It takes at least 10 other guys on offense doing their jobs, as well. Plus Zweifel's career is full of games like this, first at River Falls and now at UD. I, for one, have come to expect games like this from him (and not because the kid's from Whitewater!) - he's good. I guess he also played both ways and had an INT of defense.
Quote from: BoBo on October 08, 2011, 10:10:15 PM
Quote from: hazzben on October 08, 2011, 08:23:01 PM
Zweifel's numbers are just mind boggling. 18 receptions for 259 and 2 TD's. He is just on an absolutely torrid pace. And their RB Spaulding rushed for almost 200 yds and 2 TD's himself.
???
I've learned from watching football that a RB doesn't rush for almost 200 yards or score 2 TD's by themselves. It takes at least 10 other guys on offense doing their jobs, as well. Plus Zweifel's career is full of games like this, first at River Falls and now at UD. I, for one, have come to expect games like this from him (and not because the kid's from Whitewater!) - he's good.
Really?? I was sure Spaulding did it 1 on 11 ::) 'himself' was obviously meant in the manner of 'as well' or 'in addition too' the remarkable day for Zweifel, which is why I didn't write 'by himself.' But thanks for parsing that out for me and assuming I was a total idiot in regards to the most basic and fundamental aspect of football, namely that it's a game played with 11 guys lined up against 11 guys.
And my point about Zweifel still stands. His numbers are mind boggling, and given the other games this season and in his career, he
is 'on an absolutely torrid pace'. So yeah, as my original post intimates, he is putting together a remarkable season and career.
The condescending nature of your post just strikes me as totally unnecessary and uncalled for. Yeesh!
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 08, 2011, 08:43:23 PM
Quote from: hazzben on October 08, 2011, 08:40:53 PM
Quote from: MasterJedi on October 08, 2011, 04:50:26 PM
Muskingum loses, see this is why most of us did not rank them. :P
What is interesting here is that unless Mount gets upset by someone, the OAC's 2nd place team will be no better than 8-2. Makes things a little more interesting for the Pool C discussion. Throw in the WIAC's typical craziness, the IIAC carnage today, CCIW with IWU still to play NCC, the NJAC's possible finish and this could be one of the most unpredictable/controversial Pool C years we've had in a while.
But at least the Fan Poll got easier...oh, wait. :o
ASC and SCIAC are in line to get Pool C bids.
I wasn't implying the ASC and SCIAC wouldn't be in the Pool C race, merely listing a couple of conference races that have the potential of getting really crazy down the stretch. The MIAC could be included in this list as well.
Quote from: hazzben on October 08, 2011, 10:31:14 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 08, 2011, 08:43:23 PM
Quote from: hazzben on October 08, 2011, 08:40:53 PM
Quote from: MasterJedi on October 08, 2011, 04:50:26 PM
Muskingum loses, see this is why most of us did not rank them. :P
What is interesting here is that unless Mount gets upset by someone, the OAC's 2nd place team will be no better than 8-2. Makes things a little more interesting for the Pool C discussion. Throw in the WIAC's typical craziness, the IIAC carnage today, CCIW with IWU still to play NCC, the NJAC's possible finish and this could be one of the most unpredictable/controversial Pool C years we've had in a while.
But at least the Fan Poll got easier...oh, wait. :o
ASC and SCIAC are in line to get Pool C bids.
I wasn't implying the ASC and SCIAC wouldn't be in the Pool C race, merely listing a couple of conference races that have the potential of getting really crazy down the stretch. The MIAC could be included in this list as well.
Please understand, as the poster from the southwestern realm of D3, I wanted to bring those conferences to the discussion.
I also think that the NJAC, the MIAC and the E8 are on the short list for Pool C.
By that I mean that those conferences should have 2 teams in the Regional Rankings, from which Pool C is taken.
Quote from: BoBo on October 08, 2011, 10:10:15 PM
Quote from: hazzben on October 08, 2011, 08:23:01 PM
Zweifel's numbers are just mind boggling. 18 receptions for 259 and 2 TD's. He is just on an absolutely torrid pace. And their RB Spaulding rushed for almost 200 yds and 2 TD's himself.
???
I've learned from watching football that a RB doesn't rush for almost 200 yards or score 2 TD's by themselves. It takes at least 10 other guys on offense doing their jobs, as well. Plus Zweifel's career is full of games like this, first at River Falls and now at UD. I, for one, have come to expect games like this from him (and not because the kid's from Whitewater!) - he's good. I guess he also played both ways and had an INT of defense.
I know what you meant Hazz. Sometimes those WIACers are a little slow on such things. They're good guys, but think they know a little more than you. All because UWW starts winning. Don't take it personally. And by the way, by take, I don't mean "steal" or "pilfer." ;D
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 08, 2011, 10:52:36 PM
Quote from: hazzben on October 08, 2011, 10:31:14 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 08, 2011, 08:43:23 PM
Quote from: hazzben on October 08, 2011, 08:40:53 PM
Quote from: MasterJedi on October 08, 2011, 04:50:26 PM
Muskingum loses, see this is why most of us did not rank them. :P
What is interesting here is that unless Mount gets upset by someone, the OAC's 2nd place team will be no better than 8-2. Makes things a little more interesting for the Pool C discussion. Throw in the WIAC's typical craziness, the IIAC carnage today, CCIW with IWU still to play NCC, the NJAC's possible finish and this could be one of the most unpredictable/controversial Pool C years we've had in a while.
But at least the Fan Poll got easier...oh, wait. :o
ASC and SCIAC are in line to get Pool C bids.
I wasn't implying the ASC and SCIAC wouldn't be in the Pool C race, merely listing a couple of conference races that have the potential of getting really crazy down the stretch. The MIAC could be included in this list as well.
Please understand, as the poster from the southwestern realm of D3, I wanted to bring those conferences to the discussion.
I also think that the NJAC, the MIAC and the E8 are on the short list for Pool C.
By that I mean that those conferences should have 2 teams in the Regional Rankings, from which Pool C is taken.
Totally agree. I think the playoff discussion could be even more fun than usual this year!
Quote from: retagent on October 08, 2011, 10:57:42 PM
Quote from: BoBo on October 08, 2011, 10:10:15 PM
Quote from: hazzben on October 08, 2011, 08:23:01 PM
Zweifel's numbers are just mind boggling. 18 receptions for 259 and 2 TD's. He is just on an absolutely torrid pace. And their RB Spaulding rushed for almost 200 yds and 2 TD's himself.
???
I've learned from watching football that a RB doesn't rush for almost 200 yards or score 2 TD's by themselves. It takes at least 10 other guys on offense doing their jobs, as well. Plus Zweifel's career is full of games like this, first at River Falls and now at UD. I, for one, have come to expect games like this from him (and not because the kid's from Whitewater!) - he's good. I guess he also played both ways and had an INT of defense.
I know what you meant Hazz. Sometimes those WIACers are a little slow on such things. They're good guys, but think they know a little more than you. All because UWW starts winning. Don't take it personally. And by the way, by take, I don't mean "steal" or "pilfer." ;D
Nice! Made me laugh and got me out of my cranky mood. Didn't hurt that Nebraska remembered how to play football in the second half either. Which might also explain why I was so sensitive with BoBo to start with, since they looked like a flag football team in the first half when I was responding to him
Quote from: retagent on October 08, 2011, 10:57:42 PM
Quote from: BoBo on October 08, 2011, 10:10:15 PM
Quote from: hazzben on October 08, 2011, 08:23:01 PM
Zweifel's numbers are just mind boggling. 18 receptions for 259 and 2 TD's. He is just on an absolutely torrid pace. And their RB Spaulding rushed for almost 200 yds and 2 TD's himself.
???
I've learned from watching football that a RB doesn't rush for almost 200 yards or score 2 TD's by themselves. It takes at least 10 other guys on offense doing their jobs, as well. Plus Zweifel's career is full of games like this, first at River Falls and now at UD. I, for one, have come to expect games like this from him (and not because the kid's from Whitewater!) - he's good. I guess he also played both ways and had an INT of defense.
I know what you meant Hazz. Sometimes those WIACers are a little slow on such things. They're good guys, but think they know a little more than you. All because UWW starts winning. Don't take it personally. And by the way, by take, I don't mean "steal" or "pilfer." ;D
You guys are works of art. I know exactly what hazzben was trying to say, retagent. Once again, it had nothing to do with you - but once again you're johnny on the spot (no pun intended). Fact remains, with little Z, I was just trying to point out that he's been doing this for A LONG TIME, his entire career...a torid pace would indicate a period of time that included a few games. Didn't know if you were as familiar with his River Falls period in the distant past as you seem to be with the present at UD. Questioning my post as condescending is like the pot calling the kettle black, however. And I will not stand for it!! >:(
(no I'm not really mad, that's just in response to the pathetic "Yeesh!")
Can't we all just get along? Pert near every conference is a mess right now. There could realistically be a two-loss "C".
Quote from: smedindy on October 09, 2011, 12:05:58 AM
Can't we all just get along? Pert near every conference is a mess right now. There could realistically be a two-loss "C".
And a "B" getting a "C"
Quote from: BoBo on October 08, 2011, 11:50:51 PM
Quote from: retagent on October 08, 2011, 10:57:42 PM
Quote from: BoBo on October 08, 2011, 10:10:15 PM
Quote from: hazzben on October 08, 2011, 08:23:01 PM
Zweifel's numbers are just mind boggling. 18 receptions for 259 and 2 TD's. He is just on an absolutely torrid pace. And their RB Spaulding rushed for almost 200 yds and 2 TD's himself.
???
I've learned from watching football that a RB doesn't rush for almost 200 yards or score 2 TD's by themselves. It takes at least 10 other guys on offense doing their jobs, as well. Plus Zweifel's career is full of games like this, first at River Falls and now at UD. I, for one, have come to expect games like this from him (and not because the kid's from Whitewater!) - he's good. I guess he also played both ways and had an INT of defense.
I know what you meant Hazz. Sometimes those WIACers are a little slow on such things. They're good guys, but think they know a little more than you. All because UWW starts winning. Don't take it personally. And by the way, by take, I don't mean "steal" or "pilfer." ;D
You guys are works of art. I know exactly what hazzben was trying to say, retagent. Once again, it had nothing to do with you - but once again you're johnny on the spot (no pun intended). Fact remains, with little Z, I was just trying to point out that he's been doing this for A LONG TIME, his entire career...a torid pace would indicate a period of time that included a few games. Didn't know if you were as familiar with his River Falls period in the distant past as you seem to be with the present at UD. Questioning my post as condescending is like the pot calling the kettle black, however. And I will not stand for it!! >:(
(no I'm not really mad, that's just in response to the pathetic "Yeesh!")
You are correct, I condescended to your condescension. Guilty as charged ;D 8-)
Quote from: hazzben on October 09, 2011, 12:16:58 AM
Quote from: BoBo on October 08, 2011, 11:50:51 PM
Quote from: retagent on October 08, 2011, 10:57:42 PM
Quote from: BoBo on October 08, 2011, 10:10:15 PM
Quote from: hazzben on October 08, 2011, 08:23:01 PM
Zweifel's numbers are just mind boggling. 18 receptions for 259 and 2 TD's. He is just on an absolutely torrid pace. And their RB Spaulding rushed for almost 200 yds and 2 TD's himself.
???
I've learned from watching football that a RB doesn't rush for almost 200 yards or score 2 TD's by themselves. It takes at least 10 other guys on offense doing their jobs, as well. Plus Zweifel's career is full of games like this, first at River Falls and now at UD. I, for one, have come to expect games like this from him (and not because the kid's from Whitewater!) - he's good. I guess he also played both ways and had an INT of defense.
I know what you meant Hazz. Sometimes those WIACers are a little slow on such things. They're good guys, but think they know a little more than you. All because UWW starts winning. Don't take it personally. And by the way, by take, I don't mean "steal" or "pilfer." ;D
You guys are works of art. I know exactly what hazzben was trying to say, retagent. Once again, it had nothing to do with you - but once again you're johnny on the spot (no pun intended). Fact remains, with little Z, I was just trying to point out that he's been doing this for A LONG TIME, his entire career...a torid pace would indicate a period of time that included a few games. Didn't know if you were as familiar with his River Falls period in the distant past as you seem to be with the present at UD. Questioning my post as condescending is like the pot calling the kettle black, however. And I will not stand for it!! >:(
(no I'm not really mad, that's just in response to the pathetic "Yeesh!")
You are correct, I condescended to your condescension. Guilty as charged ;D 8-)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi395.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fpp31%2FYanglow%2FGif%2Fbeer.gif%3Ft%3D1317384234&hash=55472ff756c7d665c6e54707e02dec65149eca10)
You know me too well BoBo.
It takes a while, but getting the spirit in which these little back-and-forth things are done is half the fun. Sometimes it does involve understanding each other. +k to you both for "getting it."
Mine's in, and the bottom of mine are full of teams I'd never have considered before the season.
And I had to leave off a couple of teams worthy of mention.
Mine is in.
Quote from: hazzben on October 08, 2011, 08:40:53 PM
Quote from: MasterJedi on October 08, 2011, 04:50:26 PM
Muskingum loses, see this is why most of us did not rank them. :P
What is interesting here is that unless Mount gets upset by someone, the OAC's 2nd place team will be no better than 8-2. Makes things a little more interesting for the Pool C discussion.
Two 8-2 OAC Pool C teams have made the playoffs in recent years:
In 2007 an 8-2 Capital Team made the playoffs and lost to UWW in the first round.
In 2005 an 8-2 Capital Team made the playoffs and ended up beating North Central and Wabash, before losing to Mount Union. Mount Union was 9-1 regular season (lost to ONU), made the playoffs and beat UWW in the Championship that year. ONU ended up 7-2, losing to John Carroll and Capital, and missed the playoffs after beating Mount Union.
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on October 10, 2011, 09:08:25 AM
Quote from: hazzben on October 08, 2011, 08:40:53 PM
Quote from: MasterJedi on October 08, 2011, 04:50:26 PM
Muskingum loses, see this is why most of us did not rank them. :P
What is interesting here is that unless Mount gets upset by someone, the OAC's 2nd place team will be no better than 8-2. Makes things a little more interesting for the Pool C discussion.
Two 8-2 OAC Pool C teams have made the playoffs in recent years:
In 2007 an 8-2 Capital Team made the playoffs and lost to UWW in the first round.
In 2005 an 8-2 Capital Team made the playoffs and ended up beating North Central and Wabash, before losing to Mount Union. Mount Union was 9-1 regular season (lost to ONU), made the playoffs and beat UWW in the Championship that year. ONU ended up 7-2, losing to John Carroll and Capital, and missed the playoffs after beating Mount Union.
You HAD to bring up 2005. That was THE year that the Purple Raiders could have come to Crawfordsville. Sigh...
:(
Triple sigh.
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on October 10, 2011, 09:08:25 AM
Quote from: hazzben on October 08, 2011, 08:40:53 PM
Quote from: MasterJedi on October 08, 2011, 04:50:26 PM
Muskingum loses, see this is why most of us did not rank them. :P
What is interesting here is that unless Mount gets upset by someone, the OAC's 2nd place team will be no better than 8-2. Makes things a little more interesting for the Pool C discussion.
Two 8-2 OAC Pool C teams have made the playoffs in recent years:
In 2007 an 8-2 Capital Team made the playoffs and lost to UWW in the first round.
In 2005 an 8-2 Capital Team made the playoffs and ended up beating North Central and Wabash, before losing to Mount Union. Mount Union was 9-1 regular season (lost to ONU), made the playoffs and beat UWW in the Championship that year. ONU ended up 7-2, losing to John Carroll and Capital, and missed the playoffs after beating Mount Union.
In 2008, very few people expected Wheaton to get a pool C nod at 8-2, many were shocked (and a bit angry).
As the last team into the field of 32, Wheaton went onto the semi-finals before their nearly annual exit from the playoffs at the hands of Mount Union.
1st Round: Wheaton def. Trine 14-0
2nd Round: Wheaton def. Wabash 59-28
Quarter Finals: Wheaton def. Franklin 45-28
Semi Finals: Mount Union def. Wheaton 45-24
Quote from: Mugsy on October 10, 2011, 01:52:31 PM
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on October 10, 2011, 09:08:25 AM
Quote from: hazzben on October 08, 2011, 08:40:53 PM
Quote from: MasterJedi on October 08, 2011, 04:50:26 PM
Muskingum loses, see this is why most of us did not rank them. :P
What is interesting here is that unless Mount gets upset by someone, the OAC's 2nd place team will be no better than 8-2. Makes things a little more interesting for the Pool C discussion.
Two 8-2 OAC Pool C teams have made the playoffs in recent years:
In 2007 an 8-2 Capital Team made the playoffs and lost to UWW in the first round.
In 2005 an 8-2 Capital Team made the playoffs and ended up beating North Central and Wabash, before losing to Mount Union. Mount Union was 9-1 regular season (lost to ONU), made the playoffs and beat UWW in the Championship that year. ONU ended up 7-2, losing to John Carroll and Capital, and missed the playoffs after beating Mount Union.
In 2008, very few people expected Wheaton to get a pool C nod at 8-2, many were shocked (and a bit angry).
As the last team into the field of 32, Wheaton went onto the semi-finals before their nearly annual exit from the playoffs at the hands of Mount Union.
1st Round: Wheaton def. Trine 14-0
2nd Round: Wheaton def. Wabash 59-28
Quarter Finals: Wheaton def. Franklin 45-28
Semi Finals: Mount Union def. Wheaton 45-24
I hear all of that. I just think there are probably going to be some very quality 8-2 teams at seasons end and an OAC 8-2 might not be the one (if any even do) to get the nod.
I'm pulling for Oshkosh to finish 8-2 this season, with their only losses coming to Mount and UWW. It will be tough leaving them out of the playoffs, if that ends up happening.
If I was an Oshkosh fan, I'm hoping Central wins out to improve the Titans' regional SOS.
Quote from: hazzben on October 10, 2011, 04:24:31 PM
Quote from: Mugsy on October 10, 2011, 01:52:31 PM
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on October 10, 2011, 09:08:25 AM
Quote from: hazzben on October 08, 2011, 08:40:53 PM
Quote from: MasterJedi on October 08, 2011, 04:50:26 PM
Muskingum loses, see this is why most of us did not rank them. :P
What is interesting here is that unless Mount gets upset by someone, the OAC's 2nd place team will be no better than 8-2. Makes things a little more interesting for the Pool C discussion.
Two 8-2 OAC Pool C teams have made the playoffs in recent years:
In 2007 an 8-2 Capital Team made the playoffs and lost to UWW in the first round.
In 2005 an 8-2 Capital Team made the playoffs and ended up beating North Central and Wabash, before losing to Mount Union. Mount Union was 9-1 regular season (lost to ONU), made the playoffs and beat UWW in the Championship that year. ONU ended up 7-2, losing to John Carroll and Capital, and missed the playoffs after beating Mount Union.
In 2008, very few people expected Wheaton to get a pool C nod at 8-2, many were shocked (and a bit angry).
As the last team into the field of 32, Wheaton went onto the semi-finals before their nearly annual exit from the playoffs at the hands of Mount Union.
1st Round: Wheaton def. Trine 14-0
2nd Round: Wheaton def. Wabash 59-28
Quarter Finals: Wheaton def. Franklin 45-28
Semi Finals: Mount Union def. Wheaton 45-24
I hear all of that. I just think there are probably going to be some very quality 8-2 teams at seasons end and an OAC 8-2 might not be the one (if any even do) to get the nod.
Yup. I know you're reply wasn't necessarily directed at me, I was giving another example of an 8-2 team to make it into the playoffs as a Pool C and do quite well.
For what it's worth, almost every year one could make a case for 8-2 teams that if in the playoffs would contend quite well, if not win a game or two.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 10, 2011, 04:42:08 PM
I'm pulling for Oshkosh to finish 8-2 this season, with their only losses coming to Mount and UWW. It will be tough leaving them out of the playoffs, if that ends up happening.
If I was an Oshkosh fan, I'm hoping Central wins out to improve the Titans' regional SOS.
My question is this: Why would any coach in the WIAC schedule MU in the first place with the obvious exception of UWW? That is a self-induced a$$ whopping and a great way to lose a Pool C bid. I don't understand it unless he wanted a shot at the target on the backs of the jerseys..... ::)
-Ski
Quote from: Teamski on October 10, 2011, 05:35:18 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 10, 2011, 04:42:08 PM
I'm pulling for Oshkosh to finish 8-2 this season, with their only losses coming to Mount and UWW. It will be tough leaving them out of the playoffs, if that ends up happening.
If I was an Oshkosh fan, I'm hoping Central wins out to improve the Titans' regional SOS.
My question is this: Why would any coach in the WIAC schedule MU in the first place with the obvious exception of UWW? That is a self-induced a$$ whopping and a great way to lose a Pool C bid. I don't understand it unless he wanted a shot at the target on the backs of the jerseys..... ::)
-Ski
Never mind, I noticed that the WIAC does a round-robin, so it doesn't matter in the end. ::)
-Ski
Quote from: Mugsy on October 10, 2011, 04:43:26 PM
For what it's worth, almost every year one could make a case for 8-2 teams that if in the playoffs would contend quite well, if not win a game or two.
This is especially true considering the variation in quality between conferences. I'd even guess that some 6-4 teams from the strongest conferences (WIAC, CCIW, OAC) could win a few playoff games with the right matchup.
With that said, I strongly believe that all conference champions deserve a playoff spot regardless of the relative "quality" of the conference (and the same goes for undefeated Pool B teams). If you don't like it...then win your conference!
Quote from: Teamski on October 10, 2011, 05:41:00 PM
Quote from: Teamski on October 10, 2011, 05:35:18 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 10, 2011, 04:42:08 PM
I'm pulling for Oshkosh to finish 8-2 this season, with their only losses coming to Mount and UWW. It will be tough leaving them out of the playoffs, if that ends up happening.
If I was an Oshkosh fan, I'm hoping Central wins out to improve the Titans' regional SOS.
My question is this: Why would any coach in the WIAC schedule MU in the first place with the obvious exception of UWW? That is a self-induced a$$ whopping and a great way to lose a Pool C bid. I don't understand it unless he wanted a shot at the target on the backs of the jerseys..... ::)
-Ski
Never mind, I noticed that the WIAC does a round-robin, so it doesn't matter in the end. ::)
-Ski
Ski, when you say round-robin- do you mean automatic qualifier for conference champ?
I won't pretend to know the exact reasons Oshkosh scheduled Mt, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was somewhat analagous to me believing it would be good for my 12 year old daughter to play on the 14 year old volleyball team if she can make it (and importantly, it's what she wants). She will get better playing better competition.
If Oshkosh were to go 8-2, losing only to Mt and UWW, it would be a travisty in my opinion if the committee did not select them. I know that means some other team has to lose out, but...
The loss to Mount is not "in-region" for UW-O. It doesn't hurt them as much.
An 8-2 Oshkosh would definitely be in consideration. Of course, that all depends on the other West Region shenanigans for their regional rankings. There's a chance they may not get 'to the table' at 8-2.
I think from 15-35 it's all a toss of the coin anyway.
Quote from: smedindy on October 10, 2011, 07:53:58 PM
An 8-2 Oshkosh would definitely be in consideration. Of course, that all depends on the other West Region shenanigans for their regional rankings. There's a chance they may not get 'to the table' at 8-2.
I think from 15-35 it's all a toss of the coin anyway.
More accurately, UW-O would be West Region 8-1.
Quote from: emma17 on October 10, 2011, 07:42:24 PM
Quote from: Teamski on October 10, 2011, 05:41:00 PM
Quote from: Teamski on October 10, 2011, 05:35:18 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 10, 2011, 04:42:08 PM
I'm pulling for Oshkosh to finish 8-2 this season, with their only losses coming to Mount and UWW. It will be tough leaving them out of the playoffs, if that ends up happening.
If I was an Oshkosh fan, I'm hoping Central wins out to improve the Titans' regional SOS.
My question is this: Why would any coach in the WIAC schedule MU in the first place with the obvious exception of UWW? That is a self-induced a$$ whopping and a great way to lose a Pool C bid. I don't understand it unless he wanted a shot at the target on the backs of the jerseys..... ::)
-Ski
Never mind, I noticed that the WIAC does a round-robin, so it doesn't matter in the end. ::)
-Ski
Ski, when you say round-robin- do you mean automatic qualifier for conference champ?
Hehehe..... I lost two Karma on this posting....anyways, all of the teams in WIAC play eachother, so if Oshkosh did finish 8-2, it would be in consideration for a pool C bid anyways.
-Ski
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 10, 2011, 07:55:55 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 10, 2011, 07:53:58 PM
An 8-2 Oshkosh would definitely be in consideration. Of course, that all depends on the other West Region shenanigans for their regional rankings. There's a chance they may not get 'to the table' at 8-2.
I think from 15-35 it's all a toss of the coin anyway.
More accurately, UW-O would be West Region 8-1.
Right of course...but still it all depends on the regional rankings.
Quote from: smedindy on October 11, 2011, 12:20:31 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 10, 2011, 07:55:55 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 10, 2011, 07:53:58 PM
An 8-2 Oshkosh would definitely be in consideration. Of course, that all depends on the other West Region shenanigans for their regional rankings. There's a chance they may not get 'to the table' at 8-2.
I think from 15-35 it's all a toss of the coin anyway.
More accurately, UW-O would be West Region 8-1.
Right of course...but still it all depends on the regional rankings.
I think the thing that probably hurts UWO in the regional conference calls will be the question of 'who have they beaten'. Granted the WIAC is a weekly grind. But a big criteria they look at in those calls is success against regionally ranked opponents. If UWEC drops a game to anyone other than UWW they'll definitely be out of the rankings. But even just a loss to UWW likely will push UWEC out of the regional top 10. This weakens, justly or not, UWO's consideration given they'll only be able to say, but we only
lost to UWW and UMU. To which members of the committee will say, yeah, but who have you beaten?
Redlands and potentially a couple of MIAC and IIAC schools will be able to point to victories against regionally ranked teams.
UWO will definitely be in the discussion, the strength of their position is just unclear until the remaining weeks have played out. If there's a shortage of 1 loss Pool C candidates, their potential to get in will be strong. If there's a bevy of 1 loss teams out there, they'll have to hope most of them come from weak conferences and have very poor SOS numbers.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 10, 2011, 07:55:55 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 10, 2011, 07:53:58 PM
An 8-2 Oshkosh would definitely be in consideration. Of course, that all depends on the other West Region shenanigans for their regional rankings. There's a chance they may not get 'to the table' at 8-2.
I think from 15-35 it's all a toss of the coin anyway.
More accurately, UW-O would be West Region 8-1.
I think that in football, it's a mistake to think they stick solely to the primary criteria.
Quote from: Teamski on October 11, 2011, 12:18:46 AM
Quote from: emma17 on October 10, 2011, 07:42:24 PM
Quote from: Teamski on October 10, 2011, 05:41:00 PM
Quote from: Teamski on October 10, 2011, 05:35:18 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 10, 2011, 04:42:08 PM
I'm pulling for Oshkosh to finish 8-2 this season, with their only losses coming to Mount and UWW. It will be tough leaving them out of the playoffs, if that ends up happening.
If I was an Oshkosh fan, I'm hoping Central wins out to improve the Titans' regional SOS.
My question is this: Why would any coach in the WIAC schedule MU in the first place with the obvious exception of UWW? That is a self-induced a$$ whopping and a great way to lose a Pool C bid. I don't understand it unless he wanted a shot at the target on the backs of the jerseys..... ::)
-Ski
Never mind, I noticed that the WIAC does a round-robin, so it doesn't matter in the end. ::)
-Ski
Ski, when you say round-robin- do you mean automatic qualifier for conference champ?
Hehehe..... I lost two Karma on this posting....anyways, all of the teams in WIAC play eachother, so if Oshkosh did finish 8-2, it would be in consideration for a pool C bid anyways.
-Ski
There are a couple of curmudgeonly UWW fans who will smite any Wesley poster. Sorry for their lack of maturity. You'd think going 3-0 in the semifinals against Wesley would be enough satisfaction without anonymous smiting on top of it.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 11, 2011, 11:11:11 AM
Quote from: Teamski on October 11, 2011, 12:18:46 AM
Quote from: emma17 on October 10, 2011, 07:42:24 PM
Quote from: Teamski on October 10, 2011, 05:41:00 PM
Quote from: Teamski on October 10, 2011, 05:35:18 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 10, 2011, 04:42:08 PM
I'm pulling for Oshkosh to finish 8-2 this season, with their only losses coming to Mount and UWW. It will be tough leaving them out of the playoffs, if that ends up happening.
If I was an Oshkosh fan, I'm hoping Central wins out to improve the Titans' regional SOS.
My question is this: Why would any coach in the WIAC schedule MU in the first place with the obvious exception of UWW? That is a self-induced a$$ whopping and a great way to lose a Pool C bid. I don't understand it unless he wanted a shot at the target on the backs of the jerseys..... ::)
-Ski
Never mind, I noticed that the WIAC does a round-robin, so it doesn't matter in the end. ::)
-Ski
Ski, when you say round-robin- do you mean automatic qualifier for conference champ?
Hehehe..... I lost two Karma on this posting....anyways, all of the teams in WIAC play eachother, so if Oshkosh did finish 8-2, it would be in consideration for a pool C bid anyways.
-Ski
There are a couple of curmudgeonly UWW fans who will smite any Wesley poster. Sorry for their lack of maturity. You'd think going 3-0 in the semifinals against Wesley would be enough satisfaction without anonymous smiting on top of it.
I still would like to know what he meant by round robin. I can be real slow on the uptake with hidden meaning.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 11, 2011, 11:11:11 AM
Quote from: Teamski on October 11, 2011, 12:18:46 AM
Quote from: emma17 on October 10, 2011, 07:42:24 PM
Quote from: Teamski on October 10, 2011, 05:41:00 PM
Quote from: Teamski on October 10, 2011, 05:35:18 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 10, 2011, 04:42:08 PM
I'm pulling for Oshkosh to finish 8-2 this season, with their only losses coming to Mount and UWW. It will be tough leaving them out of the playoffs, if that ends up happening.
If I was an Oshkosh fan, I'm hoping Central wins out to improve the Titans' regional SOS.
My question is this: Why would any coach in the WIAC schedule MU in the first place with the obvious exception of UWW? That is a self-induced a$$ whopping and a great way to lose a Pool C bid. I don't understand it unless he wanted a shot at the target on the backs of the jerseys..... ::)
-Ski
Never mind, I noticed that the WIAC does a round-robin, so it doesn't matter in the end. ::)
-Ski
Ski, when you say round-robin- do you mean automatic qualifier for conference champ?
Hehehe..... I lost two Karma on this posting....anyways, all of the teams in WIAC play eachother, so if Oshkosh did finish 8-2, it would be in consideration for a pool C bid anyways.
-Ski
There are a couple of curmudgeonly UWW fans who will smite any Wesley poster. Sorry for their lack of maturity. You'd think going 3-0 in the semifinals against Wesley would be enough satisfaction without anonymous smiting on top of it.
You would think the Wesley coaching staff would have been a little less spiteful in their loss.
FYI...I wasn't the "curmudgeonly" fan who did the smiting. But I can think of a few usual suspects :)
D3 TOP 25 FAN POLL: WEEK 7
1. Wisconsin-Whitewater (16) 400 1(LW)
2. Mount Union 383 2
3. St. Thomas 363 3
4. Mary Hardin-Baylor 346 4
5. Linfield 344 5
6. North Central 306 6
7. Wesley 292 7
8. Thomas More 262 8
9. Montclair St. 259 9
10. Wabash 230 10
11. (t) Bethel 215 12
11.(t) Kean 215 13
13. California Lutheran 174 15
14. Illinois Wesleyan 170 18
15. Delaware Valley 164 17
16. Wheaton 163 14
17. Wartburg 145 19
18. Salisbury 123 21
19 Redlands 116 20
20. Wisconsin-Oshkosh 93 22
21. Johns Hopkins 63 24
22. Cortland State 59 16
23. Franklin 45 unranked
24. Louisiana College 35 unranked
25. Adrian 33 25
Dropped Out of Top 25: Wittenberg, Dubuque
Also Receiving Votes: Alfred (23), Birmingham-Southern (22), Wittenberg (19), McMurry (15), UW-Platteville (15), Dubuque (14), Centre (13), St. Olaf (12), Hampden-Sydney (11) Hobart (11), Ohio Northern (10), Wisconsin-Eau Claire (9), Trinity (7), Washington and Lee (7), Monmouth (6), St. John Fisher (5), Huntingdon (3).
Quote from: emma17 on October 11, 2011, 12:44:47 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 11, 2011, 11:11:11 AM
Quote from: Teamski on October 11, 2011, 12:18:46 AM
Quote from: emma17 on October 10, 2011, 07:42:24 PM
Quote from: Teamski on October 10, 2011, 05:41:00 PM
Quote from: Teamski on October 10, 2011, 05:35:18 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 10, 2011, 04:42:08 PM
I'm pulling for Oshkosh to finish 8-2 this season, with their only losses coming to Mount and UWW. It will be tough leaving them out of the playoffs, if that ends up happening.
If I was an Oshkosh fan, I'm hoping Central wins out to improve the Titans' regional SOS.
My question is this: Why would any coach in the WIAC schedule MU in the first place with the obvious exception of UWW? That is a self-induced a$$ whopping and a great way to lose a Pool C bid. I don't understand it unless he wanted a shot at the target on the backs of the jerseys..... ::)
-Ski
Never mind, I noticed that the WIAC does a round-robin, so it doesn't matter in the end. ::)
-Ski
Ski, when you say round-robin- do you mean automatic qualifier for conference champ?
Hehehe..... I lost two Karma on this posting....anyways, all of the teams in WIAC play eachother, so if Oshkosh did finish 8-2, it would be in consideration for a pool C bid anyways.
-Ski
There are a couple of curmudgeonly UWW fans who will smite any Wesley poster. Sorry for their lack of maturity. You'd think going 3-0 in the semifinals against Wesley would be enough satisfaction without anonymous smiting on top of it.
I still would like to know what he meant by round robin. I can be real slow on the uptake with hidden meaning.
"Round robin" menas that every team plays every other team in the conference to determine the conference championship.
The NCAC only plays 6 of a possible 8 conference games.
In the early part of the last decade, the 11-team Middle Atlantic Conference did not play a complete conference schedule.
The Big Ten (or "XI" or "12") did not play a full "round robin" football conference schedule, before they broke into divisions.
Actually, the Big 10 did play round-robins for a few years. (1982-84).
The NCAC is going for a full-round robin in 2013 after the UAA agreement is finished and a year after DPU joins.
Round robin" menas that every team plays every other team in the conference to determine the conference championship.
Thanks Ralph. For whatever reason, I've have always thought of the term "round robin" as a "tournament" phrase-I guess I can't smite Teamski for that.
I won't smite him for the "self-induced a$$ whooping" comment either- I'll just credit Oshkosh for having giant kohones.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 11, 2011, 01:03:35 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 11, 2011, 11:11:11 AM
Quote from: Teamski on October 11, 2011, 12:18:46 AM
Quote from: emma17 on October 10, 2011, 07:42:24 PM
Quote from: Teamski on October 10, 2011, 05:41:00 PM
Quote from: Teamski on October 10, 2011, 05:35:18 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 10, 2011, 04:42:08 PM
I'm pulling for Oshkosh to finish 8-2 this season, with their only losses coming to Mount and UWW. It will be tough leaving them out of the playoffs, if that ends up happening.
If I was an Oshkosh fan, I'm hoping Central wins out to improve the Titans' regional SOS.
My question is this: Why would any coach in the WIAC schedule MU in the first place with the obvious exception of UWW? That is a self-induced a$$ whopping and a great way to lose a Pool C bid. I don't understand it unless he wanted a shot at the target on the backs of the jerseys..... ::)
-Ski
Never mind, I noticed that the WIAC does a round-robin, so it doesn't matter in the end. ::)
-Ski
Ski, when you say round-robin- do you mean automatic qualifier for conference champ?
Hehehe..... I lost two Karma on this posting....anyways, all of the teams in WIAC play eachother, so if Oshkosh did finish 8-2, it would be in consideration for a pool C bid anyways.
-Ski
There are a couple of curmudgeonly UWW fans who will smite any Wesley poster. Sorry for their lack of maturity. You'd think going 3-0 in the semifinals against Wesley would be enough satisfaction without anonymous smiting on top of it.
You would think the Wesley coaching staff would have been a little less spiteful in their loss.
FYI...I wasn't the "curmudgeonly" fan who did the smiting. But I can think of a few usual suspects :)
Uncurmdgeonly fans can smite too.
Quote from: emma17 on October 11, 2011, 04:51:16 PM
Round robin" menas that every team plays every other team in the conference to determine the conference championship.
Thanks Ralph. For whatever reason, I've have always thought of the term "round robin" as a "tournament" phrase-I guess I can't smite Teamski for that.
I won't smite him for the "self-induced a$$ whooping" comment either- I'll just credit Oshkosh for having giant kohones.
Uh-oh, my keyboard dyslexia struck again! (Is that a "dystypia"?)
Quote from: emma17 on October 11, 2011, 04:51:16 PM
Round robin" menas that every team plays every other team in the conference to determine the conference championship.
Thanks Ralph. For whatever reason, I've have always thought of the term "round robin" as a "tournament" phrase-I guess I can't smite Teamski for that.
I won't smite him for the "self-induced a$$ whooping" comment either- I'll just credit Oshkosh for having giant kohones.
There are round-robin tournaments of course. Many times, the Olympics had round-robin tournaments that determined the champion in various sports (and still, they split into groups that do round-robin before having a single elimination final 8). In the World Cup, South America always plays a double round-robin to determine their qualifiers.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 11, 2011, 07:33:58 PM
Quote from: emma17 on October 11, 2011, 04:51:16 PM
Round robin" menas that every team plays every other team in the conference to determine the conference championship.
Thanks Ralph. For whatever reason, I've have always thought of the term "round robin" as a "tournament" phrase-I guess I can't smite Teamski for that.
I won't smite him for the "self-induced a$$ whooping" comment either- I'll just credit Oshkosh for having giant kohones.
Uh-oh, my keyboard dyslexia struck again! (Is that a "dystypia"?)
Dystypia --
(n) A condition where a person is unable to type, usually caused by fatigue, injury, distraction, and more often than not.. stupidity
Hmm depends on what your circumstances were there ;)
Hopefully it is not the latter of the reasons in the definition ;D
Quote from: sflzman on October 11, 2011, 09:07:47 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 11, 2011, 07:33:58 PM
Quote from: emma17 on October 11, 2011, 04:51:16 PM
Round robin" menas that every team plays every other team in the conference to determine the conference championship.
Thanks Ralph. For whatever reason, I've have always thought of the term "round robin" as a "tournament" phrase-I guess I can't smite Teamski for that.
I won't smite him for the "self-induced a$$ whooping" comment either- I'll just credit Oshkosh for having giant kohones.
Uh-oh, my keyboard dyslexia struck again! (Is that a "dystypia"?)
Dystypia --
(n) A condition where a person is unable to type, usually caused by fatigue, injury, distraction, and more often than not.. stupidity
Hmm depends on what your circumstances were there ;)
Well, I was sober. ;)
PubMed gives a citation for dystypia.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21959361..
I don't think that I have a left frontal subcortical (brain) infract. :-\
I just noticed something (both in the D3 Top 25 and the Fan Poll) and I have a question.
Who are all the stooges voting Bethel in the Top 10 and leaving St. Olaf off of their ballot entirely? (Yes, I know that the cumulative ranking does not reflect ALL voters' beliefs, but for the rankings to fall where they are obviously Bethel must be ranked in the Top 10 by SOME people, and St. Olaf must be left off the ballot by SOME people)
St. Olaf and Bethel are both 4-1.
St. Olaf beat Bethel. On the road.
This falls into the "when considering two teams with equal resumes, shouldn't the head-to-head team be ranked higher?" category for me. If St. Olaf had a lesser record, or had lost to a lesser opponent, I would understand it, but the Oles' loss came at St. Thomas (currently ranked #3 behind the Purple Powers and a consensus Top 5 team). How is that any "worse" than Bethel losing to the Oles at home?
Obviously, this should correct itself if St. Olaf can win out and then St. Thomas beats Bethel (dropping Bethel to 8-2), but it still gnaws at me to see people ignoring a head-to-head result when comparing two teams with equal records, ESPECIALLY when the team did it on the road.
If you don't want to rank St. Olaf because you have doubts about them, that's fine, but then I don't see how you can justify ranking Bethel in the Top 10.
If you want to keep Bethel in the Top 10 (or even Top 20), I don't see how you leave St. Olaf unranked.
I do not have Bethel in the top 10 and I do have STO on my ballot, but not above Bethel. Guess it is hard for me to put STO over Bethel, even though they won, as I am not sure about this STO team. But this week will help a little.
Full disclosure
Here's mine
1. UWW
2. Mount Union
3. MHB
4. St. Thomas
5. Linfield
6. Thomas More
7. NCC
8. Monclair St.
9. Kean
10. Wabash
11. Cal Lutheran
12. Wartburg
13. Wesley
14. Delaware Valley
15. Oshkosh
16. Redlands
17. Cortland State
18. Ill Wesleyan
19. Adrian
20. Wittenburg
21. St. Olaf
22. Bethel
23. Wheaton
24. Salisbury
25. Huntingdon
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 14, 2011, 01:11:45 PM
I just noticed something (both in the D3 Top 25 and the Fan Poll) and I have a question.
Who are all the stooges voting Bethel in the Top 10 and leaving St. Olaf off of their ballot entirely? (Yes, I know that the cumulative ranking does not reflect ALL voters' beliefs, but for the rankings to fall where they are obviously Bethel must be ranked in the Top 10 by SOME people, and St. Olaf must be left off the ballot by SOME people)
St. Olaf and Bethel are both 4-1.
St. Olaf beat Bethel. On the road.
This falls into the "when considering two teams with equal resumes, shouldn't the head-to-head team be ranked higher?" category for me. If St. Olaf had a lesser record, or had lost to a lesser opponent, I would understand it, but the Oles' loss came at St. Thomas (currently ranked #3 behind the Purple Powers and a consensus Top 5 team). How is that any "worse" than Bethel losing to the Oles at home?
Obviously, this should correct itself if St. Olaf can win out and then St. Thomas beats Bethel (dropping Bethel to 8-2), but it still gnaws at me to see people ignoring a head-to-head result when comparing two teams with equal records, ESPECIALLY when the team did it on the road.
If you don't want to rank St. Olaf because you have doubts about them, that's fine, but then I don't see how you can justify ranking Bethel in the Top 10.
If you want to keep Bethel in the Top 10 (or even Top 20), I don't see how you leave St. Olaf unranked.
I have Bethel 16th and St Olaf on my watch list.
First, my list is fluid and sometimes it takes more than one week for a loss or win to fully kick in as I get to thinking about it more during the week after I've submitted my ballot (I had Bethel 3rd, then dropped them to 11th after the loss, then dropped them more to 16th this week)
Second, a simple W/L head-to-head isn't the only consideration even if they have a similar resume. StO won but only by 2 and required 20 unanswered points in the 4th to win which to me says that Bethel was better most of the game and St Olaf were lucky to get that win. Had one or two things gone the other way Bethel would be unbeaten and probably still ranked in the top 5 while StO would be 3-2 and not even in the conversation. So while they have similar resumes and St Olaf did win the head-to-head, I still regard Bethel as the better team and my ranking reflects that.
Another example is Wesley/Kean. Wesley is 4-1 but has looked more impressive in their wins than Kean has at 5-0 so even though Kean won by 3, Wesley is still ranked higher.
Add to the fact there are a lot of teams with worthy records to be ranked... as said in this week's Around the Nation... and it makes midseason rankings difficult to pick.
QuoteThere are still 25 spots in the poll. Yet, NESCAC (three games into the season) aside, 20 teams are unbeaten at 4-0 or better. Thirty-six more teams are either 4-1 or 5-1, and that excludes two top-25 worthy teams from the SCIAC who are each 3-1 (Cal Lutheran and Redlands).
As long as there are 58 teams to consider for 25 spots, there are going to be some on the outside looking in.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 14, 2011, 05:56:01 PM
Second, a simple W/L head-to-head isn't the only consideration even if they have a similar resume. StO won but only by 2 and required 20 unanswered points in the 4th to win which to me says that Bethel was better most of the game and St Olaf were lucky to get that win. Had one or two things gone the other way Bethel would be unbeaten and probably still ranked in the top 5 while StO would be 3-2 and not even in the conversation. So while they have similar resumes and St Olaf did win the head-to-head, I still regard Bethel as the better team and my ranking reflects that.
Another example is Wesley/Kean. Wesley is 4-1 but has looked more impressive in their wins than Kean has at 5-0 so even though Kean won by 3, Wesley is still ranked higher.
Add to the fact there are a lot of teams with worthy records to be ranked... as said in this week's Around the Nation... and it makes midseason rankings difficult to pick.
QuoteThere are still 25 spots in the poll. Yet, NESCAC (three games into the season) aside, 20 teams are unbeaten at 4-0 or better. Thirty-six more teams are either 4-1 or 5-1, and that excludes two top-25 worthy teams from the SCIAC who are each 3-1 (Cal Lutheran and Redlands).
As long as there are 58 teams to consider for 25 spots, there are going to be some on the outside looking in.
I always find something like this to be an interesting way to justify an opinion. Bethel was better for 3/4, but St. Olaf absolutely ran them off the field for 1/4. Therefore Bethel is better and St. Olaf is lucky. Interesting, but an amazing logical fallacy. Football is played for 60 minutes. It gives a team the chance to get off to a slow start, make adjustments, and still win a game. It also allows a team to get off to a fast start, lose concentration, fail to make adjustments, and lose a game. How can you define one of these as "lucky" and the other as "better"? We don't "win" quarters. Any coach I've ever played for understood that you only win by winning at the end of the game. That means the game is 60 minutes long. Now a winner isn't always a better team, and a loser isn't always the worse team. But to claim that a fast start makes someone good, and a strong finish makes someone lucky, is just poor, poor logic. It's also hard to play a "luck" card when St. Olaf's last drive was a 10 play 65 yard grind. Good teams make that drive. Better teams stop that drive when they have to. On 10 plays, Bethel had the time to stop it and couldn't. That's not luck.
When you go on to extend that logic and say they got lucky so they should be 3-2 and out of the conversation and the other team is good and should be 5-0 so they should be much higher in the conversation... well, a poor foundation makes for an unsteady building. Facts on the ground tell us football is a 60 minute game that St. Olaf won on the road, dominating when it counted. They AREN'T 3-2. I could see having Bethel ranked higher because you think they are better, but to have them 10 or more spots higher because you think they are lucky and should be 3-2 is missing the reality.
I have Bethel 11th. I have St. Olaf on my watch list.
Massey (with the NESCAC) has Bethel 35th and St. Olaf 54th.
The results against Simpson and Luther have weighted the power rankings against the Oles.
My take is that it was a 'bad game' for Bethel, and the MIAC is like the OAC and WIAC in that teams get beat up by each other. Did Bethel not take the Oles seriously? Did the Oles get up for one of the 'big shots' of the MIAC?
Time will tell. There's a big ol' mess under the top six or seven.
Two words I dislike together - watch lists!! :P
If you don't have one, you don't know who to put on when someone loses!
I used to power rank every team before my job got more challenging!
Quote from: BoBo on October 14, 2011, 11:13:46 PM
Two words I dislike together - watch lists!! :P
That's what the tin foil hats are for BoBo...then no one can listen in on your thoughts! ;D ;)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fberkeley.intel-research.net%2Farahimi%2Fhelmet%2Fali2.jpg&hash=c70cff8b74eb59f128ef1dd222692a6aa8f2e063)
Submitted my poll early this week.
I only had one team drop out (Huntingdon), I replaced them with Franklin.
Mine's in.
In. I dropped three and had three ready replacements. You know, from my WATCH LIST! ;)
I've gone through and done some reorganizing to my list. Lowered some teams I felt I had too high... moved up teams that were too low... I think the most I dropped one was 10 spots, moved a couple teams up 7. Three new teams on my list, one team won and dropped out.
What are the chances of Oshkosh taking down Whitewater?
They're playing at home and are looking strong.
Quote from: CruFrenzy on October 16, 2011, 10:51:33 PM
What are the chances of Oshkosh taking down Whitewater?
They're playing at home and are looking strong.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KX5jNnDMfxA&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KX5jNnDMfxA&feature=related)
Sorry... couldn't resist.
Quote from: CruFrenzy on October 16, 2011, 10:51:33 PM
What are the chances of Oshkosh taking down Whitewater?
They're playing at home and are looking strong.
Both sides surrfered a key injury last game (UWW's preseason all american LB, and UWO's QB).
This will be UWW's toughest game of the regular season....I, for one, am nervous.
Is Oshkosh's QB out for this game too?
Quote from: CruFrenzy on October 16, 2011, 10:51:33 PM
What are the chances of Oshkosh taking down Whitewater?
They're playing at home and are looking strong.
We ASC fans don't want that. That might gobble up another Pool C bid.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 16, 2011, 11:29:28 PM
Quote from: CruFrenzy on October 16, 2011, 10:51:33 PM
What are the chances of Oshkosh taking down Whitewater?
They're playing at home and are looking strong.
We ASC fans don't want that. That might gobble up another Pool C bid.
Good point i hadn't thought of that. But, it still will be interesting to see what Oshkosh has really got.
Quote from: CruFrenzy on October 16, 2011, 11:32:53 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 16, 2011, 11:29:28 PM
Quote from: CruFrenzy on October 16, 2011, 10:51:33 PM
What are the chances of Oshkosh taking down Whitewater?
They're playing at home and are looking strong.
We ASC fans don't want that. That might gobble up another Pool C bid.
Good point i hadn't thought of that. But, it still will be interesting to see what Oshkosh has really got.
If we get lucky, then we might have a Pool C ASC at Trinity (SCAC Pool A) for the first round and someone else sent to UMHB.
Quote from: CruFrenzy on October 16, 2011, 11:06:14 PM
Is Oshkosh's QB out for this game too?
We probably won't know until game time on the status of Oshkosh QB Nate Wara or for that matter LB Greg Arnold for the Warhawks. I doubt either coach will announce anything prior to Saturday. If neither can go, it will be a greater loss for the Titans IMO, as Wara leads Osh in both rushing and passing; UWW has good depth at the LB position, though it will be a significant loss if Arnold is unable to play. The UW-O back-up (Nick Olla. so) did a good job finishing the game vs Platteville last week; the big question is how he reacts if he is forced to to make his 1st collegiate start against the 2 time champs (and having a whole week to think about it) & how much of the playbook will be open for him. Even if Wara is able to play, it is important to note that WW has held him to his 2 worst games statistically (not including this past weekend ) in the two years he's been the Titan starter. WW has beaten Osh 48-21 last year and 40-7 two years ago with Wara as the starter. This UWW fan doesn't share 02 Warhawk's nerves - if I were making a spread, I would set it at Osh +17.5 - that's with Wara starting.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 16, 2011, 11:03:57 PM
Quote from: CruFrenzy on October 16, 2011, 10:51:33 PM
What are the chances of Oshkosh taking down Whitewater?
They're playing at home and are looking strong.
Both sides surrfered a key injury last game (UWW's preseason all american LB, and UWO's QB).
This will be UWW's toughest game of the regular season....I, for one, am nervous.
But let's face it 02, you have probably been nervous at least 7 or 8 times so far during this 36 game winning streak. ;)
^^ ...probably 3 or 4 times this year alone, bp!!
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 17, 2011, 07:50:21 AM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 16, 2011, 11:03:57 PM
Quote from: CruFrenzy on October 16, 2011, 10:51:33 PM
What are the chances of Oshkosh taking down Whitewater?
They're playing at home and are looking strong.
Both sides surrfered a key injury last game (UWW's preseason all american LB, and UWO's QB).
This will be UWW's toughest game of the regular season....I, for one, am nervous.
But let's face it 02, you have probably been nervous at least 7 or 8 times so far during this 36 game winning streak. ;)
Yea, I'm always nervous. You should have seen me when Stout pulled within seven on Friday's night. We had guests over at our house, and I totally ignored them to watch the game. :-[
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 17, 2011, 09:14:31 AM
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 17, 2011, 07:50:21 AM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 16, 2011, 11:03:57 PM
Quote from: CruFrenzy on October 16, 2011, 10:51:33 PM
What are the chances of Oshkosh taking down Whitewater?
They're playing at home and are looking strong.
Both sides surrfered a key injury last game (UWW's preseason all american LB, and UWO's QB).
This will be UWW's toughest game of the regular season....I, for one, am nervous.
But let's face it 02, you have probably been nervous at least 7 or 8 times so far during this 36 game winning streak. ;)
Yea, I'm always nervous. You should have seen me when Stout pulled within seven on Friday's night. We had guests over at our house, and I totally ignored them to watch the game. :-[
;D
That's okay. I am sure that your boss and his wife understood how critical of a situation that was.
:) ;) 8-)
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 17, 2011, 09:14:31 AM
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 17, 2011, 07:50:21 AM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 16, 2011, 11:03:57 PM
Quote from: CruFrenzy on October 16, 2011, 10:51:33 PM
What are the chances of Oshkosh taking down Whitewater?
They're playing at home and are looking strong.
Both sides surrfered a key injury last game (UWW's preseason all american LB, and UWO's QB).
This will be UWW's toughest game of the regular season....I, for one, am nervous.
But let's face it 02, you have probably been nervous at least 7 or 8 times so far during this 36 game winning streak. ;)
Yea, I'm always nervous. You should have seen me when Stout pulled within seven on Friday's night. We had guests over at our house, and I totally ignored them to watch the game. :-[
Paging Lou Holtz...
Strength of Schedule (http://www.d3football.com/seasons/2011/schedule?tmpl=sos-template) has been released
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 16, 2011, 11:03:57 PM
Quote from: CruFrenzy on October 16, 2011, 10:51:33 PM
What are the chances of Oshkosh taking down Whitewater?
They're playing at home and are looking strong.
Both sides surrfered a key injury last game (UWW's preseason all american LB, and UWO's QB).
This will be UWW's toughest game of the regular season....I, for one, am nervous.
All things considered, losing a LB (even a very good one) is much less critical than your starting QB. Good luck to both young men.
Quote from: Ron Boerger on October 17, 2011, 11:10:04 AM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 16, 2011, 11:03:57 PM
Quote from: CruFrenzy on October 16, 2011, 10:51:33 PM
What are the chances of Oshkosh taking down Whitewater?
They're playing at home and are looking strong.
Both sides surrfered a key injury last game (UWW's preseason all american LB, and UWO's QB).
This will be UWW's toughest game of the regular season....I, for one, am nervous.
All things considered, losing a LB (even a very good one) is much less critical than your starting QB. Good luck to both young men.
agreed
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 06, 2011, 02:02:07 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 06, 2011, 01:40:58 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on October 05, 2011, 11:02:52 PM
Other people clearly disagree with the "who woulda done what on a neutral field" thinking and such. It's valid, I suppose.
Week 1 H2H matchups get less and less valid, I think, as time moves on.
And Keith, what would have happened if North Central played Cal Lutheran and won. Where would Redlands, NC, and Cal Lutheran shake out?
Same issue occurred last season when Rowan, Montclair St, and Cortland St. all beat each other. And all three teams finished with just that one loss.
Sorry for the slow reply.
This happens every season in a few conferences. The playoffs and conferences have their own ways of sorting this out, but for the purpose of rankings, we can also consider the non-conference games, the margin of victory in the h2h games or special circumstances (game x occurred later in the season, with player y injured and not participating), etc.
The triangles can be dealt with because there's an even amount of data for each; going 1-1 against the other two in the group.
The trouble is when, say, Kean beats Wesley but then loses to Brockport State later in the year ... or when there are four- and five-way groups to compare
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 07, 2011, 07:13:52 AM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 06, 2011, 12:16:25 PM
I see I'm still the only one giving Muskingum points so far.
It makes me feel not totally stupid knowing they are getting 17 points on the D3football.com poll. ;D
The problem is there's 30-35 teams that could be in the top 25. If we had more voters I'm sure a few might give them a couple points. They're on my watch list, but probably only the 2nd or 3rd team I'd move in next week if teams drop out.
Yes I think it might be time to revive the top 25 overflow item in ATN, except rank it all the way out to 50. As I have long mentioned, if a 120-team division ranks its top 25, then a 240-team division could rank a top 50 to fairly compare. i.e. being top 50 in D-III = being top 25 in D1.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 08, 2011, 10:52:36 PM
Quote from: hazzben on October 08, 2011, 10:31:14 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 08, 2011, 08:43:23 PM
Quote from: hazzben on October 08, 2011, 08:40:53 PM
Quote from: MasterJedi on October 08, 2011, 04:50:26 PM
Muskingum loses, see this is why most of us did not rank them. :P
What is interesting here is that unless Mount gets upset by someone, the OAC's 2nd place team will be no better than 8-2. Makes things a little more interesting for the Pool C discussion. Throw in the WIAC's typical craziness, the IIAC carnage today, CCIW with IWU still to play NCC, the NJAC's possible finish and this could be one of the most unpredictable/controversial Pool C years we've had in a while.
But at least the Fan Poll got easier...oh, wait. :o
ASC and SCIAC are in line to get Pool C bids.
I wasn't implying the ASC and SCIAC wouldn't be in the Pool C race, merely listing a couple of conference races that have the potential of getting really crazy down the stretch. The MIAC could be included in this list as well.
Please understand, as the poster from the southwestern realm of D3, I wanted to bring those conferences to the discussion.
I also think that the NJAC, the MIAC and the E8 are on the short list for Pool C.
By that I mean that those conferences should have 2 teams in the Regional Rankings, from which Pool C is taken.
I think Oshkosh would have a tremendous case if it goes 8-0 and then loses to UMU and UWW. Would be unique and unprecendented, but it's basically the same as Hobart going unbeaten, no? Except they would have an AQ to show for it.
Quote from: K-Mack on October 18, 2011, 09:30:57 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 07, 2011, 07:13:52 AM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 06, 2011, 12:16:25 PM
I see I'm still the only one giving Muskingum points so far.
It makes me feel not totally stupid knowing they are getting 17 points on the D3football.com poll. ;D
The problem is there's 30-35 teams that could be in the top 25. If we had more voters I'm sure a few might give them a couple points. They're on my watch list, but probably only the 2nd or 3rd team I'd move in next week if teams drop out.
Yes I think it might be time to revive the top 25 overflow item in ATN, except rank it all the way out to 50. As I have long mentioned, if a 120-team division ranks its top 25, then a 240-team division could rank a top 50 to fairly compare. i.e. being top 50 in D-III = being top 25 in D1.
I agree, but even then you'd have arguments, especially with some of the OAC, WIAC and ODAC schools that like to beat each other up versus teams that are 7-3 or so. But it's a fun exercise!
D3 TOP 25 FAN POLL: WEEK 8
1. Wisconsin-Whitewater (14) 422 1
2. Mount Union (3) 410 2
3. St. Thomas 386 3
4. (t) Linfield 366 5
4. (t) Mary Hardin-Baylor 366 4
6. North Central 333 6
7. Wesley 303 7
8. Montclair St. 269 9
9. Thomas More 260 8
10. Wabash 253 10
11. Bethel 231 11(t)
12. California Lutheran 214 13
13. Illinois Wesleyan 212 14
14. Wheaton 204 16
15. Salisbury 196 18
16. Delaware Valley 181 15
17. Redlands 135 19
18. Wisconsin-Oshkosh 132 20
19. Johns Hopkins 92 21
20. Kean 72 11(t)
21. Franklin 66 23
22. Louisiana College 63 24
23. Adrian 49 25
24. Trinity 39 unranked
25. Cortland State 36 22
Dropped Out of Top 25: Wartburg
Also Receiving Votes: Hobart (35), St. Olaf (33), McMurry (32), Wittenberg (29), Centre (26), Dubuque (21), Hobart (20), Hampden-Sydney (14), Wisconsin-Eau Claire (11), Washington and Lee (9), Monmouth (7), Wartburg (7), St. John Fisher (6), Baldwin-Wallace (3), Endicott (2)
I'm a bit surprised with how Franklin is holding the #21 ranking when I look at some of the other 1 loss teams that are unranked. McMurry (in D3), Dubuque and even 2 loss Eau Claire are teams I would take in a "pick em" over Franklin.
Anybody else surprised?
Quote from: emma17 on October 19, 2011, 09:42:00 AM
I'm a bit surprised with how Franklin is holding the #21 ranking when I look at some of the other 1 loss teams that are unranked. McMurry (in D3), Dubuque and even 2 loss Eau Claire are teams I would take in a "pick em" over Franklin.
Anybody else surprised?
Their only loss was to the #1 ranked team in the nation....that's why I have them above the teams you mentioned.
I have Franklin at 17. Their game against Whitewater showed that they're pretty much for real.
I'm surprised Centre and Trinity haven't gotten the love, especially Centre. Their win against BSC proved their worth and the win against W&L looks less and less like a fluky win.
Could it be pollsters resist the Canadian spelling? ;)
I probably have the most interest in Franklin here and sadly I've dropped them out of my poll. Maybe it's the fact that I actually pay attention to their games rather than just seeing the final score, or me being tougher on them to try to not be biased.
Quote from: smedindy on October 19, 2011, 11:47:06 AM
I have Franklin at 17. Their game against Whitewater showed that they're pretty much for real.
Really? They lost 45-0 (down 35-0 at halftime and first time shut out in a long time), had less than 200 yards of offense, gave up over 470 yards, and had 4 turnovers. It was a much better game last season in the playoffs. So far this season they have consistently struggled to rush the ball and have turned the ball over way too much. They've fumbled 9 times and thrown 11 interceptions and average turnover margin per game is -1. I just don't have faith in them compared to other teams near the bottom of the top 25.
Quote from: smedindy
I'm surprised Centre and Trinity haven't gotten the love, especially Centre. Their win against BSC proved their worth and the win against W&L looks less and less like a fluky win.
Could it be pollsters resist the Canadian spelling? ;)
Assuming you're referring to Trinity (TX) and not Trinity (CT), I have them up at 16th. And Centre is 23rd for me. They at least are getting some votes... what about 7-0 Endicott? I'm the only one to have them on my ballot.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 19, 2011, 12:21:09 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 19, 2011, 11:47:06 AM
I have Franklin at 17. Their game against Whitewater showed that they're pretty much for real.
Really? They lost 45-0 (down 35-0 at halftime and first time shut out in a long time), had less than 200 yards of offense, gave up over 470 yards, and had 4 turnovers. It was a much better game last season in the playoffs. So far this season they have consistently struggled to rush the ball and have turned the ball over way too much. They've fumbled 9 times and thrown 11 interceptions and average turnover margin per game is -1. I just don't have faith in them compared to other teams near the bottom of the top 25.
I was going to say the same thing.
It's what Franklin did AFTER the UWW game that impressed me.
Quote from: smedindy on October 19, 2011, 11:47:06 AM
I'm surprised Centre and Trinity haven't gotten the love, especially Centre. Their win against BSC proved their worth and the win against W&L looks less and less like a fluky win.
Listened to this game on the radio. There was nothing fluky about it. Two teams with a lot of seniors and very contrasting styles. W&L played a better first half, Centre played a better second half and caught up to win. Both are good teams. Not top 15 good in my opinion, but toward the bottom of the top 25 is probably about right. Not much separating them and if the game was played 50 times, I think whichever team is home wins 35-40 of them.
Centre, H-SC, W&L, B-SC, and Huntingdon all have cases to be ranked somewhere 7-10 in the south. Trinity may be a cut ahead and certainly had the advantage of a home game against Huntingdon and upcoming home games against Centre and B-SC. Centre had and H-SC has the advantage of a home game against W&L, B-SC had home games against Centre (which may turn out to be the only road victory in the bunch) and Huntingdon, and Huntingdon had the home game against H-SC. There might be a pattern by the end of the year with Trinity playing the majority of the group, but only at home.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 19, 2011, 12:24:36 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 19, 2011, 12:21:09 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 19, 2011, 11:47:06 AM
I have Franklin at 17. Their game against Whitewater showed that they're pretty much for real.
Really? They lost 45-0 (down 35-0 at halftime and first time shut out in a long time), had less than 200 yards of offense, gave up over 470 yards, and had 4 turnovers. It was a much better game last season in the playoffs. So far this season they have consistently struggled to rush the ball and have turned the ball over way too much. They've fumbled 9 times and thrown 11 interceptions and average turnover margin per game is -1. I just don't have faith in them compared to other teams near the bottom of the top 25.
I was going to say the same thing.
It's what Franklin did AFTER the UWW game that impressed me.
I think Franklin, overall is a good team, just not at the level they were at least year. They have the building blocks though IMO to be a very good team next year after their QB gets his experience this year.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 19, 2011, 12:24:36 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 19, 2011, 12:21:09 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 19, 2011, 11:47:06 AM
I have Franklin at 17. Their game against Whitewater showed that they're pretty much for real.
Really? They lost 45-0 (down 35-0 at halftime and first time shut out in a long time), had less than 200 yards of offense, gave up over 470 yards, and had 4 turnovers. It was a much better game last season in the playoffs. So far this season they have consistently struggled to rush the ball and have turned the ball over way too much. They've fumbled 9 times and thrown 11 interceptions and average turnover margin per game is -1. I just don't have faith in them compared to other teams near the bottom of the top 25.
I was going to say the same thing.
It's what Franklin did AFTER the UWW game that impressed me.
against / after same thing, right?
Quote from: smedindy
I'm surprised Centre and Trinity haven't gotten the love, especially Centre. Their win against BSC proved their worth and the win against W&L looks less and less like a fluky win.
Could it be pollsters resist the Canadian spelling? ;)
Assuming you're referring to Trinity (TX) and not Trinity (CT), I have them up at 16th. And Centre is 23rd for me. They at least are getting some votes... what about 7-0 Endicott? I'm the only one to have them on my ballot.
[/quote]
I've been saying about how Thomas More is overrated. I just checked the Massey Ratings in D-3 and Endicott is #39 while Thomas More is #40. Hmmm....
Quote from: smedindy on October 19, 2011, 12:46:19 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 19, 2011, 12:24:36 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 19, 2011, 12:21:09 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 19, 2011, 11:47:06 AM
I have Franklin at 17. Their game against Whitewater showed that they're pretty much for real.
Really? They lost 45-0 (down 35-0 at halftime and first time shut out in a long time), had less than 200 yards of offense, gave up over 470 yards, and had 4 turnovers. It was a much better game last season in the playoffs. So far this season they have consistently struggled to rush the ball and have turned the ball over way too much. They've fumbled 9 times and thrown 11 interceptions and average turnover margin per game is -1. I just don't have faith in them compared to other teams near the bottom of the top 25.
I was going to say the same thing.
It's what Franklin did AFTER the UWW game that impressed me.
against / after same thing, right?
No
against = including the UWW game specifically
after = not including the UWW game (but all the games following that matchup)
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 19, 2011, 12:50:45 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 19, 2011, 12:46:19 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 19, 2011, 12:24:36 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 19, 2011, 12:21:09 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 19, 2011, 11:47:06 AM
I have Franklin at 17. Their game against Whitewater showed that they're pretty much for real.
Really? They lost 45-0 (down 35-0 at halftime and first time shut out in a long time), had less than 200 yards of offense, gave up over 470 yards, and had 4 turnovers. It was a much better game last season in the playoffs. So far this season they have consistently struggled to rush the ball and have turned the ball over way too much. They've fumbled 9 times and thrown 11 interceptions and average turnover margin per game is -1. I just don't have faith in them compared to other teams near the bottom of the top 25.
I was going to say the same thing.
It's what Franklin did AFTER the UWW game that impressed me.
against / after same thing, right?
No
against = including the UWW game specifically
after = not including the UWW game (but all the games following that matchup)
02- When you talk about what Franklin did after the UWW game, what wins are impressing you? If you look at a one-loss Dubuque, or a one-loss McMurry (to a D3 school), would you not pick either of these teams if they were playing Franklin? Would you not pick Eau Claire if they were playing Franklin?
Quote from: emma17 on October 19, 2011, 01:18:39 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 19, 2011, 12:50:45 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 19, 2011, 12:46:19 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 19, 2011, 12:24:36 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 19, 2011, 12:21:09 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 19, 2011, 11:47:06 AM
I have Franklin at 17. Their game against Whitewater showed that they're pretty much for real.
Really? They lost 45-0 (down 35-0 at halftime and first time shut out in a long time), had less than 200 yards of offense, gave up over 470 yards, and had 4 turnovers. It was a much better game last season in the playoffs. So far this season they have consistently struggled to rush the ball and have turned the ball over way too much. They've fumbled 9 times and thrown 11 interceptions and average turnover margin per game is -1. I just don't have faith in them compared to other teams near the bottom of the top 25.
I was going to say the same thing.
It's what Franklin did AFTER the UWW game that impressed me.
against / after same thing, right?
No
against = including the UWW game specifically
after = not including the UWW game (but all the games following that matchup)
02- When you talk about what Franklin did after the UWW game, what wins are impressing you? If you look at a one-loss Dubuque, or a one-loss McMurry (to a D3 school), would you not pick either of these teams if they were playing Franklin? Would you not pick Eau Claire if they were playing Franklin?
I think all four teams you just mentioned are all at the same level. It'll be tough to say who would beat who.
I put Franklin 25th in my poll...if the poll consisted of 26 teams, McMurry would be 26th. McMurry does have two losses, and I know...one is against a DI-A (or whatever division they are). I guess I gave the
SLIGHT edge to the team who's only loss was to a program that won the past two stagg bowls.
Looking at the D3football.com's poll....I'm not alone. For the record, I submit my picks prior to looking at their poll, so I'm not persuaded.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 19, 2011, 12:21:09 PM
what about 7-0 Endicott? I'm the only one to have them on my ballot.
In the East Region Fan Poll (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=5311.msg1352304#msg1352304) the Gulls didn't crack the top 10, so while their record remains shiny the historical insignificance of the NEFC holds them back. As has been pointed out in that thread Endicott has never beaten a team outside of the NEFC or ECFC. The playoffs will be where they can gain credibility.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 19, 2011, 12:50:45 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 19, 2011, 12:46:19 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 19, 2011, 12:24:36 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 19, 2011, 12:21:09 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 19, 2011, 11:47:06 AM
I have Franklin at 17. Their game against Whitewater showed that they're pretty much for real.
Really? They lost 45-0 (down 35-0 at halftime and first time shut out in a long time), had less than 200 yards of offense, gave up over 470 yards, and had 4 turnovers. It was a much better game last season in the playoffs. So far this season they have consistently struggled to rush the ball and have turned the ball over way too much. They've fumbled 9 times and thrown 11 interceptions and average turnover margin per game is -1. I just don't have faith in them compared to other teams near the bottom of the top 25.
I was going to say the same thing.
It's what Franklin did AFTER the UWW game that impressed me.
against / after same thing, right?
No
against = including the UWW game specifically
after = not including the UWW game (but all the games following that matchup)
That's the JOKE! I screwed up, OK! :o
Quote from: smedindy on October 19, 2011, 03:55:09 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 19, 2011, 12:50:45 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 19, 2011, 12:46:19 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 19, 2011, 12:24:36 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 19, 2011, 12:21:09 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 19, 2011, 11:47:06 AM
I have Franklin at 17. Their game against Whitewater showed that they're pretty much for real.
Really? They lost 45-0 (down 35-0 at halftime and first time shut out in a long time), had less than 200 yards of offense, gave up over 470 yards, and had 4 turnovers. It was a much better game last season in the playoffs. So far this season they have consistently struggled to rush the ball and have turned the ball over way too much. They've fumbled 9 times and thrown 11 interceptions and average turnover margin per game is -1. I just don't have faith in them compared to other teams near the bottom of the top 25.
I was going to say the same thing.
It's what Franklin did AFTER the UWW game that impressed me.
against / after same thing, right?
No
against = including the UWW game specifically
after = not including the UWW game (but all the games following that matchup)
That's the JOKE! I screwed up, OK! :o
sorry, didn't pick up on the sarcasm.
Quote from: AUKaz00 on October 19, 2011, 02:40:50 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 19, 2011, 12:21:09 PM
what about 7-0 Endicott? I'm the only one to have them on my ballot.
In the East Region Fan Poll (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=5311.msg1352304#msg1352304) the Gulls didn't crack the top 10, so while their record remains shiny the historical insignificance of the NEFC holds them back. As has been pointed out in that thread Endicott has never beaten a team outside of the NEFC or ECFC. The playoffs will be where they can gain credibility.
Pretty much what I thought too. The NEFC has gained a little bit of traction this year, most notably with Salve Regina's win over a decent Union team (actually, that's the only decent win I could find; I think that all of the other NEFC nonconfence wins were against the equally-lowly ECFC). Correction, I just found that Worcester State beat LL member WPI.
Despite the recent progress by the NEFC, it's pretty obvious that they're still near the bottom of the totem pole. It's going to take either a) a few more legitimate wins against respectable LL/E8 opponents and b) a second playoff win by an NEFC team.
It's OK. I should have smiley'd it.
McMurry's kind of snuck up on us all. We were all paying attention to Hardin - Simmons and Louisiana College. Also, McMurry's performance against SF Austin was ghastly (and they are the dregs of scholarship 1-AA). So it was hard to get a read on them before and now they face H-S and LC in the next two weeks.
Dubuque's great season is now overshadowed the lackluster efforts of the IIAC as a whole. Wartburg, Coe and Central aren't what they were in the past, and we now know Augie's pretty bad (so their 'signature' non-conference win is moot).
As for UW-EC, their 'signature' win over St. John's seemingly is now 'fool's gold' and beating the middle of the WIAC is what they should be doing. They also lost to Bethel (TN), a team that was destroyed by North Central.
Quote from: smedindy on October 19, 2011, 04:18:25 PM
It's OK. I should have smiley'd it.
McMurry's kind of snuck up on us all. We were all paying attention to Hardin - Simmons and Louisiana College. Also, McMurry's performance against SF Austin was ghastly (and they are the dregs of scholarship 1-AA). So it was hard to get a read on them before and now they face H-S and LC in the next two weeks.
Dubuque's great season is now overshadowed the lackluster efforts of the IIAC as a whole. Wartburg, Coe and Central aren't what they were in the past, and we now know Augie's pretty bad (so their 'signature' non-conference win is moot).
As for UW-EC, their 'signature' win over St. John's seemingly is now 'fool's gold' and beating the middle of the WIAC is what they should be doing. They also lost to Bethel (TN), a team that was destroyed by North Central.
Of course there isn't a right or wrong answer, I was just interested in people's opinions as to how they come to the Franklin decision. As much as I respect and root for the Franklin program, for me there is no question that I would pick McMurry, Dubuque and Eau Claire to beat them in a game this year.
Some props for UW-EC; their win over St. John's isn't the big factor for me liking them. I saw their game vs Oshkosh on video and that was their game to win. A fumble at the goal line and at least three open receivers missed on long passes is what cost them. They beat La Crosse last week, which is a team that plays much tougher than their record indicates. If they hadn't lost to Bethel, TN, a team I saw NCC play and make look silly, I'd rank UW-EC right up with Oshkosh in the polls.
I'm not a voter here, but I think its crazy that LC is ranked when McMurry is not. The McMurry - LC game in a few weeks will open some eyes. McMurry's passing game is for real.
Quote from: smedindy on October 19, 2011, 12:46:19 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 19, 2011, 12:24:36 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 19, 2011, 12:21:09 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 19, 2011, 11:47:06 AM
I have Franklin at 17. Their game against Whitewater showed that they're pretty much for real.
Really? They lost 45-0 (down 35-0 at halftime and first time shut out in a long time), had less than 200 yards of offense, gave up over 470 yards, and had 4 turnovers. It was a much better game last season in the playoffs. So far this season they have consistently struggled to rush the ball and have turned the ball over way too much. They've fumbled 9 times and thrown 11 interceptions and average turnover margin per game is -1. I just don't have faith in them compared to other teams near the bottom of the top 25.
I was going to say the same thing.
It's what Franklin did AFTER the UWW game that impressed me.
against / after same thing, right?
What does Massey say? ;)
Massey says Franklin isn't as good as Whitewater!
Could someone give me the link to the massey ratings that you guys are talking about? I cant seem to find exactly what i was looking for.
www.masseyratings.com
http://masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cf Select NCAA III
Thanks Ralph.
15. Centre
17. Washington and Lee
Quote from: smedindy on October 19, 2011, 09:13:19 PM
Massey says Franklin isn't as good as Whitewater!
Massey is an Einstein, that's if there really is a Massey!! :-\
Ken Massey. He's real. Along with Jeff Sagarin. (And Ken Pomeroy, whose basketball ratings are quite good...)
Just trying to make sense of a bunch of data points without any biases. Well, as few biases as you can have.
But I use it as just another data point. It would be no fun to just regurgitate the Massey ratings as my Top 25.
I dont know, i dont quite get why Massey has Amherst at No.2.
For some reason, he's got the NESCAC in the D-3 ratings this year when he used to exclude them into their own bucket because they were never connected to anyone else. If you go to the main ratings (not just the D-3 ratings) in group 1 the NESCAC isn't there. Of course, that has everyone so you have to pick through the D-3 schools.
What it does show is that Whitewater (212) has a better power rating than Memphis (217)!
Quote from: smedindy on October 20, 2011, 12:05:44 AM
What it does show is that Whitewater (212) has a better power rating than Memphis (217)!
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi395.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fpp31%2FYanglow%2Fanimation%2Fthumbup.gif%3Ft%3D1262912771&hash=207dddcdb84dd701f588ee53a9aab9ed56cbcaa7)
Quote from: CruFrenzy on October 19, 2011, 11:49:49 PM
I dont know, i dont quite get why Massey has Amherst at No.2.
It reminds me of one of the choices for the multiple choice questions that I used to take, back in the day.
"True, true, unrelated"
Quote from: CruFrenzy on October 19, 2011, 11:49:49 PM
I dont know, i dont quite get why Massey has Amherst at No.2.
That's why I don't look at it....useless
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 20, 2011, 09:24:43 AM
Quote from: CruFrenzy on October 19, 2011, 11:49:49 PM
I dont know, i dont quite get why Massey has Amherst at No.2.
That's why I don't look at it....useless
Not necessarily useless. Having lived in New England for 7 years and attended Ivy League, old Yankee Conference, and NESCAC (and its predecessor) games, I know that occassionally a team emerges that could hold its own in the playoffs. Unfortunately, the Ivy League and NESCAC don't subscribe to the "playoff philosophy" so we never get to know just how good some of those teams are. That Amherst is rated so high in the Massey ratings may seem like an aberration to some, but that's how it is ... for this point in the season at least. I wonder if some might think having Amherst ranked so high somehow diminishes the accomplishments of UWW ... or any other of the D3 teams?
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 20, 2011, 09:24:43 AM
Quote from: CruFrenzy on October 19, 2011, 11:49:49 PM
I dont know, i dont quite get why Massey has Amherst at No.2.
That's why I don't look at it....useless
It's not just Amherst at #2, but 5 of the NESCAC schools in the top 20 that does it for me.
Quote from: DBQ1965 on October 20, 2011, 09:49:22 AM
That Amherst is rated so high in the Massey ratings may seem like an aberration to some, but that's how it is ... for this point in the season at least. I wonder if some might think having Amherst ranked so high somehow diminishes the accomplishments of UWW ... or any other of the D3 teams?
It's not an aberration, it's just a flaw. There is no way to make any kind of objective measurement of these teams relative to the rest of the D3 universe. Not because they don't compete in the playoffs, which would probably include 1 team playing at most 1-3 games, but because the entire conference is a closed circuit. There are no non-conference games to judge the strength of the conference from top to bottom, therefore there is no actual data to use.
A very good example of this is the debate about Endicott, which is 7-0 but plays in a conference that is considered very weak. So while some people will give Endicott credit for winning in conference and against a weak out of conference schedule, others point to the fact that beating weak teams doesn't make you a good one. If we can't get consensus on this situation, how can you even begin to evaluate a team/conference with no exterior data?
Since it really doesn't matter, the best thing to do in my opinion is to ignore the NESCAC and just treat the Massey ratings as another computer system that can't adjust for Garbage In/Garbage Out. In comparison to the D3 universe, any stats that the NESCAC racks up against each other are island numbers, therefore they are garbage in.
It's not useless at all. Just need to filter those out. If you want, use the ratings against the entire universe of football schools "group1" that do factor out the NESCAC. Besides, I look at it on relative strength. When I say "school X is 24th and Y is 31st" it doesn't matter if the NESCAC is in there or not - it's saying that there's a small gap between them, but data shows one team may be slightly better than the other.
Ignoring data points because of a flaw that can be filtered out is...well...a flaw in itself! Or so I've been told. ;)
We're at a point now where (except the NESCAC) enough games have been played and everyone can be related. Again I use Massey for one of my points at consideration - and it helps on some of the lesser-known schools and conferences to get a perspective. How good is Endicott? Well, I turn to Massey for a data point, and then look at the schedules of the league itself. Right now, I don't feel confident enough to put Endicott in my Top 25. Maybe after this week. But without the Massey data, I'd never really consider them, even if they were undefeated.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 20, 2011, 09:24:43 AM
Quote from: CruFrenzy on October 19, 2011, 11:49:49 PM
I dont know, i dont quite get why Massey has Amherst at No.2.
That's why I don't look at it....useless
What smed said -- these schools don't play anyone other than each other so just eliminate them and keep numbering.
Good points made by jknezek, smedindy, and Pat. Thanks for contributing to the discussion.
Someone tell Mr. Massey that DePauw's no longer in the SCAC.
If I recall, he puts his email on the website.
I'm in a pickle. It's not every day where a loser has to find itself in the Top 25. But I gotta put Oshkosh in there. But all of my teams from 16-25 either won or did not play. How far do I drop Montclair, or Bethel?
Need to cogitate!
Quote from: smedindy on October 22, 2011, 07:45:50 PM
I'm in a pickle. It's not every day where a loser has to find itself in the Top 25. But I gotta put Oshkosh in there. But all of my teams from 16-25 either won or did not play. How far do I drop Montclair, or Bethel?
Need to cogitate!
Was at the game. It was one of the most fun games I've been at for a long time. Oshkosh is very good. They are strong at the line of scrimmage, they defend the pass very well, and they have a great athlete at QB. I know we are miles away from the first game of the season, but the Franklin team I saw on the opening week wasn't close to the level of this Oshkosh team. If UW-O wins out, they should make the playoffs in my opinion.
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 22, 2011, 08:36:04 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 22, 2011, 07:45:50 PM
I'm in a pickle. It's not every day where a loser has to find itself in the Top 25. But I gotta put Oshkosh in there. But all of my teams from 16-25 either won or did not play. How far do I drop Montclair, or Bethel?
Need to cogitate!
Was at the game. It was one of the most fun games I've been at for a long time. Oshkosh is very good. They are strong at the line of scrimmage, they defend the pass very well, and they have a great athlete at QB. I know we are miles away from the first game of the season, but the Franklin team I saw on the opening week wasn't close to the level of this Oshkosh team. If UW-O wins out, they should make the playoffs in my opinion.
IMHO, Wara is the best QB in the WIAC. What does this tell us about UW-O's common purple foes? MTU/UW-O 41-17, UWW/UW-O 20-17? :-\
Agree, UW-O should make the playoffs, IMHO if they finish 8-2!
It doesn't say much because it's a WIAC conference game, and was Oshkosh's Homecoming.
We could play the same game with Mt. Union vs. ONU and compare that score to their game with Muskingum or B-W!
Quote from: Raider 68 on October 22, 2011, 08:53:07 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 22, 2011, 08:36:04 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 22, 2011, 07:45:50 PM
I'm in a pickle. It's not every day where a loser has to find itself in the Top 25. But I gotta put Oshkosh in there. But all of my teams from 16-25 either won or did not play. How far do I drop Montclair, or Bethel?
Need to cogitate!
Was at the game. It was one of the most fun games I've been at for a long time. Oshkosh is very good. They are strong at the line of scrimmage, they defend the pass very well, and they have a great athlete at QB. I know we are miles away from the first game of the season, but the Franklin team I saw on the opening week wasn't close to the level of this Oshkosh team. If UW-O wins out, they should make the playoffs in my opinion.
IMHO, Wara is the best QB in the WIAC. What does this tell us about UW-O's common purple foes? MTU/UW-O 41-17, UWW/UW-O 20-17? :-\
Agree, UW-O should make the playoffs, IMHO if they finish 8-2!
Is this the same person who said the following on the OAC board today:
Quote from: Raider 68 on October 22, 2011, 06:30:27 PM
While there were some close OAC games today, I do not read too much into the comparison that now B-W is a top offensive power based upon one week. Look at the season overall.
Ahhh.....OK...whatever you say!! Pick and choose your comparisons. ;) ::)
Your rhetoric is noted, however. Comparing scores is an imperfect science and you know that full well. I doubt you would set the spread at Raiders +21 over UWW - or would you? I'd be first in line for a piece of that action!! ;)
Furthermore...
bp said Wara is a great athlete, which he is, even with the bum knee like he had today. But...did you see Matt Blanchard today? The vote is in Raider 68...Blanchard is the WIAC best QB (and a great athlete in his own right)! He was also better today.
Quote from: Raider 68 on October 22, 2011, 08:53:07 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 22, 2011, 08:36:04 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 22, 2011, 07:45:50 PM
I'm in a pickle. It's not every day where a loser has to find itself in the Top 25. But I gotta put Oshkosh in there. But all of my teams from 16-25 either won or did not play. How far do I drop Montclair, or Bethel?
Need to cogitate!
Was at the game. It was one of the most fun games I've been at for a long time. Oshkosh is very good. They are strong at the line of scrimmage, they defend the pass very well, and they have a great athlete at QB. I know we are miles away from the first game of the season, but the Franklin team I saw on the opening week wasn't close to the level of this Oshkosh team. If UW-O wins out, they should make the playoffs in my opinion.
IMHO, Wara is the best QB in the WIAC. What does this tell us about UW-O's common purple foes? MTU/UW-O 41-17, UWW/UW-O 20-17? :-\
Agree, UW-O should make the playoffs, IMHO if they finish 8-2!
Absolutely nothing
Quote from: BoBo on October 23, 2011, 12:14:39 AM
Quote from: Raider 68 on October 22, 2011, 08:53:07 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 22, 2011, 08:36:04 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 22, 2011, 07:45:50 PM
I'm in a pickle. It's not every day where a loser has to find itself in the Top 25. But I gotta put Oshkosh in there. But all of my teams from 16-25 either won or did not play. How far do I drop Montclair, or Bethel?
Need to cogitate!
Was at the game. It was one of the most fun games I've been at for a long time. Oshkosh is very good. They are strong at the line of scrimmage, they defend the pass very well, and they have a great athlete at QB. I know we are miles away from the first game of the season, but the Franklin team I saw on the opening week wasn't close to the level of this Oshkosh team. If UW-O wins out, they should make the playoffs in my opinion.
IMHO, Wara is the best QB in the WIAC. What does this tell us about UW-O's common purple foes? MTU/UW-O 41-17, UWW/UW-O 20-17? :-\
Agree, UW-O should make the playoffs, IMHO if they finish 8-2!
Is this the same person who said the following on the OAC board today:
Quote from: Raider 68 on October 22, 2011, 06:30:27 PM
While there were some close OAC games today, I do not read too much into the comparison that now B-W is a top offensive power based upon one week. Look at the season overall.
Ahhh.....OK...whatever you say!! Pick and choose your comparisons. ;) ::)
Your rhetoric is noted, however. Comparing scores is an imperfect science and you know that full well. I doubt you would set the spread at Raiders +21 over UWW - or would you? I'd be first in line for a piece of that action!! ;)
Furthermore...
bp said Wara is a great athlete, which he is, even with the bum knee like he had today. But...did you see Matt Blanchard today? The vote is in Raider 68...Blanchard is the WIAC best QB (and a great athlete in his own right)! He was also better today.
BoBO,
What a reaction! I have just raised the conversation. I did mention that the UWW/UW-O would be closer
than many thought and it was. I have not seen QB Blanchard, but have great respect for the Blanchard
athletes, and QB Wara is UW-O's MVP. :)
B-W scored 75 pts against Wilmington and 208 thus far 29.7 per game. For the 6 games prior, 133 pts
per game or 22.1 per game. As the playoffs come, we know that the purple powers will be compared and a common opponent is a comparison, despite different game situations.
Mine is in. Only one team moves in Oshkosh, one team moves out in Montclair, and there's some reshuffling afoot elsewhere.
Quote from: Raider 68 on October 22, 2011, 08:53:07 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 22, 2011, 08:36:04 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 22, 2011, 07:45:50 PM
I'm in a pickle. It's not every day where a loser has to find itself in the Top 25. But I gotta put Oshkosh in there. But all of my teams from 16-25 either won or did not play. How far do I drop Montclair, or Bethel?
Need to cogitate!
Was at the game. It was one of the most fun games I've been at for a long time. Oshkosh is very good. They are strong at the line of scrimmage, they defend the pass very well, and they have a great athlete at QB. I know we are miles away from the first game of the season, but the Franklin team I saw on the opening week wasn't close to the level of this Oshkosh team. If UW-O wins out, they should make the playoffs in my opinion.
IMHO, Wara is the best QB in the WIAC. What does this tell us about UW-O's common purple foes? MTU/UW-O 41-17, UWW/UW-O 20-17? :-\
Agree, UW-O should make the playoffs, IMHO if they finish 8-2!
That's like saying what do the common results against Capital tell us about Heidelberg, Baldwin-Wallace and Mount Union?
So dangerous. (and yet i always do it)
Also from a few pages back ... I rank Centre and Endicott very close to the 25th spot and not voting for Franklin currently.
I think 8-2 Oshkosh should get in and could ... we have a committee that pays attention I think to trying to do what is considered the "right" thing if not always the popular thing. In this case, right seems to be what's popular ... until it's your favorite 9-1 team knocked out.
Also started paying attention to Widener this week. Del Val maybe not a lock.
I'm ready to see the poll. (They never come out soon enough :P) I know my ballot had 1 new team in it. I also had 5 teams that aren't top 25 in the d3 poll.
Somehow I messed up. I had a team listed twice. Thirty lashes...
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 25, 2011, 04:51:09 AM
I'm ready to see the poll. (They never come out soon enough :P) I know my ballot had 1 new team in it. I also had 5 teams that aren't top 25 in the d3 poll.
That's one of the first things I look at every week, who I had ranked that is in Also Receiving Votes. And then how many of those votes I was responsible for ;D
I have extended the deadline through email until midnight tonight because we have a few missing ballots. I will post the poll tomorrow morning regardless of whether the ballots come in or not.
D3 Top 25 Fan Poll: Week 9
1. Wisconsin-Whitewater (13) 373 1(LW)
2. Mount Union (2) 361 2
3. St. Thomas 339 3
4. Mary Hardin-Baylor 324 4(t)
5. Linfield 323 4(t)
6. North Central 298 6
7. Wesley 269 7
8. Wabash 246 10
9. Thomas More 240 9
10. California Lutheran 214 12
11. Salisbury 200 15
12. Delaware Valley 198 16
13. Wheaton 197 14
14. Wisconsin-Oshkosh 157 18
15. Redlands 131 17
16. Johns Hopkins 121 19
17. Illinois Wesleyan 101 13
18. Bethel 88 11
19. Montclair State 78 8
20. Adrian 74 23
21. Franklin 71 21
22. Kean 68 20
23. Louisiana College 62 22
24. Trinity (TX) 56 24
25. Hobart 48 unranked
Dropped Out of Top 25: Cortland State.
Also Receiving Votes: St. Olaf (45), Centre (41), Wittenberg (35), Dubuque (25), Cortland State (22), Hampden-Sydney (16), McMurry (14), Baldwin-Wallace (10), Washington and Lee (10), Endicot (7), St. John Fisher (7), Wartburg (3), Monmouth (2), Lycoming (1).
UWW lose a vote? or was it a matter of someone not submitting their poll?
It looks like 2 people didn't vote and both teams lost a 1st place vote.
It also looks like I'm responsible for all the votes for 3 different teams :o
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 26, 2011, 02:59:35 PM
It looks like 2 people didn't vote and both teams lost a 1st place vote.
It also looks like I'm responsible for all the votes for 3 different teams :o
Well, in my humble opinion, your #21 - #25 can be ballot orphans who are on your watch list, but beyond that, I am interested in what you see that other people don't.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 26, 2011, 04:09:24 PM
Well, in my humble opinion, your #21 - #25 can be ballot orphans who are on your watch list, but beyond that, I am interested in what you see that other people don't.
I'll admit that Endicott at 19 is a bit too high and I need to lower them a couple spots next week depending on how they do. I moved them up past 4 teams who lost and it usually takes me more than one week to properly get teams sorted after a loss.
Monmouth I have 24th... their lone loss is their opener to a decent Wartburg squad by 7. They've beaten 4 squads that are 5-3 or better with three of those on the road, 3 by at least 25 and 2 by at least 40 including Illinois College's lone loss.
Lycoming I have 25th (and they're neck and neck with Monmouth)... their lone loss is by 3 at a good Widener team. Their next two weeks (@ Lebanon Valley and vs Delaware Valley) will show if I am wise to have them ranked or if they'll disappear from my ballot.
As to teams who I put them ahead of... Bethel, Franklin, Kean, Louisiana College were not on my ballot this week.
The only unbeatens I don't have on my ballot are St. Scholastica, Lewis & Clark, and the two NESCAC teams... and L&C is a team I'm interested in seeing how they do the next few weeks against tough teams.
In the interest of fair disclosure, I have no orphans on my ballot.
I have McMurry, Centre and BWC in the Top 25 instead of Adrian, Trinity and Hobart.
I watched the video of Trinity and HPU and was not impressed with the early season game.
HPU is committing to the run offense, but TU could not get going until the second half in their 24-7 opener. Trinity had too much trouble with Millsaps, too, compared to Louisiana College and Mississippi College.
In a coin-flip, I went with Centre as my SCAC choice for the Top 25.
I went with BWC as my second OAC pick. If that conference did not have UMU, then I think that they would still have someone in the Top 25.
As for Adrian, I need to see someone other than Trine win a post-season game for me to give the MIAA that degree of respect.
I like both Louisiana College and McMurry in my Top 25. McMurry QB Jake Mullin is great!
I have Adrian at 18, Centre at 19. St. Olaf and Oshkosh entered my list. I downgraded Montclair and Kean.
Adrian 11. Centre 13. I've had them both on My ballot since week 3 I believe
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 26, 2011, 12:55:55 PM
UWW lose a vote? or was it a matter of someone not submitting their poll?
One voter switched from UW-W to Mount Union as #1.
One voter switched from Mount Union to UW-W as #1.
Of the two voters not submitting ballots this week, one had UW-W #1 and one had Mount Union #1 last week.
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 26, 2011, 11:00:35 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 26, 2011, 12:55:55 PM
UWW lose a vote? or was it a matter of someone not submitting their poll?
One voter switched from Mount Union to UW-W as #1.
Really? That happened on the D3football.com poll as well.
Interesting
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 26, 2011, 08:53:19 PM
I watched the video of Trinity and HPU and was not impressed with the early season game.
HPU is committing to the run offense, but TU could not get going until the second half in their 24-7 opener. Trinity had too much trouble with Millsaps, too, compared to Louisiana College and Mississippi College.
That's putting a lot of weight on the opener. They won 24-7 in their first game of the year. Chances are they've improved and are a different team now. North Central had a wee bit of trouble in their opener. But they seem to have righted things since. That and comparing scores is just dangerous stuff. That line of reasoning means Mount is
way better than UWW, given the results against a common opponent. Teams match up differently, the score comparison game gets really dicey really fast.
Quote from: hazzben on October 27, 2011, 10:02:18 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 26, 2011, 08:53:19 PM
I watched the video of Trinity and HPU and was not impressed with the early season game.
HPU is committing to the run offense, but TU could not get going until the second half in their 24-7 opener. Trinity had too much trouble with Millsaps, too, compared to Louisiana College and Mississippi College.
That's putting a lot of weight on the opener. They won 24-7 in their first game of the year. Chances are they've improved and are a different team now. North Central had a wee bit of trouble in their opener. But they seem to have righted things since. That and comparing scores is just dangerous stuff. That line of reasoning means Mount is way better than UWW, given the results against a common opponent. Teams match up differently, the score comparison game gets really dicey really fast.
Have you ever watched Howard Payne play? To quote today's Abilene Reporter news about HPU in the ASC power rankings: " The bad news for HPU fans: the Yellow Jackets have lost five straight and have UMHB up next. The good news: women's basketball season will here in no time."
HPU has not been good, is not good, and from what I understand has no prospect of being good in the foreseeable future, which saddens me because I have friends closely related to the program. I just had a conversation in which i was told if UMHB doesn't want HPU to make a first doen this weekend, barring penalty they will not make a first down. So, while it was a first game, it as a first game for both schools and Trinity only netted 288. Maybe you should allow for improvement, but I understand Ralph's reasoning on this one.
Thanks Toby. In week #2, HPU lost to Southwestern Assemblies, 21-15.
In my family, HPU (Horrid Pain as it was called around the dinner table) was the one team that we wanted to beat each year, even as far back as the late 1930's.
I am sad to see the program having this much trouble.
If Trinity has improved to Top 25 status, then they should run the table.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 27, 2011, 09:58:19 AM
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 26, 2011, 11:00:35 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 26, 2011, 12:55:55 PM
UWW lose a vote? or was it a matter of someone not submitting their poll?
One voter switched from Mount Union to UW-W as #1.
Really? That happened on the D3football.com poll as well.
Interesting
That would be me. I had UMU #1 to start the season and dropped them to #2 after their close game with Ohio Northern. Only fair to do the same to UWW after their finish with Oshkosh. Really it's a horserace, so it's more mental gymnastics than anything until the Stagg Bowl can settle it.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 26, 2011, 08:53:19 PM
I have McMurry, Centre and BWC in the Top 25 instead of Adrian, Trinity and Hobart.
I watched the video of Trinity and HPU and was not impressed with the early season game.
HPU is committing to the run offense, but TU could not get going until the second half in their 24-7 opener. Trinity had too much trouble with Millsaps, too, compared to Louisiana College and Mississippi College.
In a coin-flip, I went with Centre as my SCAC choice for the Top 25.
I went with BWC as my second OAC pick. If that conference did not have UMU, then I think that they would still have someone in the Top 25.
As for Adrian, I need to see someone other than Trine win a post-season game for me to give the MIAA that degree of respect.
I like both Louisiana College and McMurry in my Top 25. McMurry QB Jake Mullin is great!
Ralph, I say this with the greatest respect as a conscientious fan, but I also think that you're putting too much weight on the opener vs. Howard Payne, and it has less to do with how "bad" HPU has been since then and more to do with how strange season openers often are. Looking back at Week 1 results after the season often results in a number of head-scratchers, and I think that teams often take a little while to find their identity.
Anecdotal evidence, personal level: The mighty 2006 Carnegie Mellon team that I so often refer to struggled to a 27-6 win over hapless Hiram College in Week 1. Hiram would go on to lose their next several games by spectacular margins of 42-7, 53-7, 69-34, 52-0 and so forth. If you had judged our CMU team the same way that you're judging Trinity right now, just by the Week 1 game, surely you'd have said that we couldn't be any good because we struggled to pull away from Hiram; we finished undefeated and won a playoff game.
With all that said: I think it's fair to hold some of the more recent results against Trinity, namely the narrow victories over LaGrange and Millsaps, and it's fair to point out that their only real quality win vame against Huntingdon...but they will have a chance to rectify that vs. BSC and Centre in the next two weeks. I take it that victories in those two games would presumably overcome your remaining skepticism from the HPU game?
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 27, 2011, 04:16:40 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 26, 2011, 08:53:19 PM
I have McMurry, Centre and BWC in the Top 25 instead of Adrian, Trinity and Hobart.
I watched the video of Trinity and HPU and was not impressed with the early season game.
HPU is committing to the run offense, but TU could not get going until the second half in their 24-7 opener. Trinity had too much trouble with Millsaps, too, compared to Louisiana College and Mississippi College.
In a coin-flip, I went with Centre as my SCAC choice for the Top 25.
I went with BWC as my second OAC pick. If that conference did not have UMU, then I think that they would still have someone in the Top 25.
As for Adrian, I need to see someone other than Trine win a post-season game for me to give the MIAA that degree of respect.
I like both Louisiana College and McMurry in my Top 25. McMurry QB Jake Mullin is great!
Ralph, I say this with the greatest respect as a conscientious fan, but I also think that you're putting too much weight on the opener vs. Howard Payne, and it has less to do with how "bad" HPU has been since then and more to do with how strange season openers often are. Looking back at Week 1 results after the season often results in a number of head-scratchers, and I think that teams often take a little while to find their identity.
Anecdotal evidence, personal level: The mighty 2006 Carnegie Mellon team that I so often refer to struggled to a 27-6 win over hapless Hiram College in Week 1. Hiram would go on to lose their next several games by spectacular margins of 42-7, 53-7, 69-34, 52-0 and so forth. If you had judged our CMU team the same way that you're judging Trinity right now, just by the Week 1 game, surely you'd have said that we couldn't be any good because we struggled to pull away from Hiram; we finished undefeated and won a playoff game.
With all that said: I think it's fair to hold some of the more recent results against Trinity, namely the narrow victories over LaGrange and Millsaps, and it's fair to point out that their only real quality win vame against Huntingdon...but they will have a chance to rectify that vs. BSC and Centre in the next two weeks. I take it that victories in those two games would presumably overcome your remaining skepticism from the HPU game?
Yes.
Almost no one beats Trinity in San Antonio! That may explain some of the Huntingdon score. The good thing for TUTiger fans is that they catch Centre and BSC in SA, too. Going to Sherman for the finale against Austin College should not be too hard.
IMHO, the best team in the SCAC almost always deserves a Top 25 berth. Let's see where the conference race ends up. We have several critical conference games left across the country that will winnow the best 25 teams out of the current 40 that are receiving votes.
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 26, 2011, 11:00:35 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 26, 2011, 12:55:55 PM
UWW lose a vote? or was it a matter of someone not submitting their poll?
One voter switched from UW-W to Mount Union as #1.
One voter switched from Mount Union to UW-W as #1.
Of the two voters not submitting ballots this week, one had UW-W #1 and one had Mount Union #1 last week.
I am one of the posters that failed to get my poll in, sorry. I had Mt #1 last week and would have kept them there this week. Like many have said, it's a week to week thing. I'd have McMurry and Dubuque in and Franklin and Hobart out for what it's worth.
Yanked out Oshkosh and Adrian. Threw in Hobart and McMurry. But again, after the Top 15, from 16-35 in my notes it's just a jumble.
Quote from: smedindy on October 30, 2011, 10:18:23 AM
Yanked out Oshkosh and Adrian. Threw in Hobart and McMurry. But again, after the Top 15, from 16-35 in my notes it's just a jumble.
Yeah I have no idea what to do....I thought Adrian was for real....
I had 3 teams drop out of my list... added teams with 0, 1, and 2 losses
I could do with an extra 5-10 spots on my ballot for worthy teams
D3 Top 25 Fan Poll: Week 10
1. UW-Whitewater (13) 421 1
2. Mount Union (4) 411 2
3. St. Thomas 384 3
4. Mary Hardin-Baylor 368 4
5. Linfield 367 5
6. North Central 337 6
7. Wesley 313 7
8. Wabash 271 8
9. Thomas More 268 9
10. California Lutheran 254 10
11. Wheaton 242 13
12. Delaware Valley 240 12
13. Salisbury 177 11
14. Redlands 163 15
15. Johns Hopkins 155 16
16. Trinity (Tx) 120 24
17. Illinois Wesleyan 113 13
18. Montclair State 107 19
19. Louisiana College 101 23
20. Kean 92 22
21. St. Olaf 83 unranked
22. Franklin 79 21
23. Bethel 78 18
24. Hobart 68 25
25. McMurry 59 unranked
Dropping Out of the Top 25 Adrian, Wisconsin-Oshkosh
Also Receiving Votes Centre (53), Dubuque (46), Wittenberg (42), Wisconsin-Oshkosh (26), Cortland State (18), Hampden-Sydney (16), Baldwin-Wallace (13), St. John Fisher (13), Washington and Lee (11), Wartburg (6), Monmouth (5), Lycoming (4), Lewis and Clark (1)
Some interesting things I'd like to hear other voter's opinions on...
Salisbury lost to a highly ranked Wesley and just dropped 2 spots while Illinois Wesleyan won and dropped 4... on my ballot Salisbury went from 8 to 18 while IWU went from 20 to 17
Bethel won and dropped 5 spots? It wasn't a tight game to a winless team or something.... they aren't in my top 25 though
Speaking of winless teams... St Olaf beat a winless team and went from unranked to 21st?... they're not in my top 25 either
UW-Oshkosh still has quite a few votes... I know they played UWW tough, but while they're probably the best three loss team in the country can you really have a three loss team that high?... they dropped out of my poll from 22nd last week
Lastly... doesn't seem like too much variance in the teams. If you take out the three ballot orphans from me (Monmouth 21st, Lycoming 22nd, L&C 25th) then the other 16 ballots only had 35 different teams. The 25 ballots in the d3f poll has 42 teams. I guess I'm just a little surprised there aren't a few more teams picking up a couple votes here or there.
Okay...
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 02, 2011, 03:59:13 AM
Some interesting things I'd like to hear other voter's opinions on...
Salisbury lost to a highly ranked Wesley and just dropped 2 spots while Illinois Wesleyan won and dropped 4... on my ballot Salisbury went from 8 to 18 while IWU went from 20 to 17
Salisbury played its tough rival in another critical game and performed the way that a #11 team at a #7 team should have; hard fought game, the higher ranked team won at home.
IWU played the 7th place team in the CCIW and almost lost. I don't know why their voters rewarded them nationally. They did get more 35 points (about 1 1/2 ballot slots) on the real Top 25. I attribute that to "float up". Other teams above them lost or performed below expectations, and IWU just "floated up" into that slot.
Bethel won and dropped 5 spots? It wasn't a tight game to a winless team or something.... they aren't in my top 25 though
Early season hype and total season performance being reassessed against late season realities of other teams. Bethel is being re-positioned
Speaking of winless teams... St Olaf beat a winless team and went from unranked to 21st?... they're not in my top 25 either
They are moving up, as a 7-1 team in a strong canference, should as national voters put the record into perspective. Olies got 38 more votes, which is a little over 2 slots on the 17 ballots cast this week.
UW-Oshkosh still has quite a few votes... I know they played UWW tough, but while they're probably the best three loss team in the country can you really have a three loss team that high?... they dropped out of my poll from 22nd last week
Most agree. Good team. Probably Top 35 quality but voters cannot give a vote for "#27" on the ballot
Lastly... doesn't seem like too much variance in the teams. If you take out the three ballot orphans from me (Monmouth 21st, Lycoming 22nd, L&C 25th) then the other 16 ballots only had 35 different teams. The 25 ballots in the d3f poll has 42 teams. I guess I'm just a little surprised there aren't a few more teams picking up a couple votes here or there.
We have 17 voters this week. We must consider how many other "orphans" would show up on another 8 ballots that are in the D3football.com poll. These are the teams with their vote totals that we don't have:
Huntingdon (1), Birmngham-Southern (6), Widener (7), Trinity CT (11), Adrian (12). Trinity CT and Adrian are probably the only real differences. Adrian got spanked for its performance against Albion, which clearly is a tougher team and played a tougher schedule, as Pat and Keith discussed in the Monday podcast. (Check it out friends.) Considering the geographical distribution of the voters, this isn't bad.
:)
Excellent comments from Ralph.
FCGrizzlies, I think a lot of what you're observing is the "natural float" that Ralph describes. Sometimes a team might move up/down a few slots without gaining/losing that many overall voting points because of what happens to teams around them.
"Salisbury lost to a highly ranked Wesley and just dropped 2 spots while Illinois Wesleyan won and dropped 4... on my ballot Salisbury went from 8 to 18 while IWU went from 20 to 17"
I think everyone's pretty unanimous that Salisbury doesn't deserve to drop after losing a close game to multiple-time-semifinalist Wesley, especially given their body of work to date. They've pulverized good teams in the Empire 8 all season. They deserve to stay up there.
IWU, as Ralph said, squeaked out a close win over 3-5 Millikin. How is that worth more, in youir mind, than a close loss to Wesley?
Furthermore, there's an element of natural correction that just came a week late; IWU, previously ranked above Redlands, has now dropped below them. IWU lost to North Central by 24 at home; Redlands defeated North Central earlier this season. Presumably, some people bumped Redlands above IWU.
"Bethel won and dropped 5 spots? It wasn't a tight game to a winless team or something..."
"St Olaf beat a winless team and went from unranked to 21st?..."
As Ralph said, St Olaf wasn't so much rewarded for "beating a winless team" as they were for their body of work to date, with people correctly re-positioning them ahead of Bethel (how does one explain Bethel ranked 18th and St. Olaf unranked last week?).
People are starting to correct an oversight - St. Olaf is 7-1 with a head-to-head ROAD victory over 6-2 Bethel, so perhaps some people finally noticed "Gee, St. Olaf has a better record than Bethel and beat them head-to-head, maybe I should have them ranked higher."
"UW-Oshkosh still has quite a few votes... I know they played UWW tough, but while they're probably the best three loss team in the country can you really have a three loss team that high?..."
I think that you can have a three-loss team from the WIAC ranked that high, especially with one of those losses being a nonconference game vs. Mount Union. It's worth noting that some of the WIAC teams' records are depressed because they have to schedule "non-conference" games against each other to fill out their schedule (UW-Stevens Point is playing UW-Platteville twice this season, and UW-Stout is playing UW-Oshkosh twice, and UW-La Crosse is playing UW-Whitewater twice), but if you look at their performance against other conferences, it's pretty obvious that the mid-pack WIAC teams would be contending for and/or winning titles in lesser conferences. Look at some of the nonconference performances posted by the bottom of the WIAC:
UW-Eau Claire beat traditional power St. John's (MN) 47-19
UW-Stevens Point beat MIAA champ Albion 14-3
UW-La Crosse led Mary-Hardin Baylor 20-17 at the end of the third quarter
And those three teams all currently have a losing conference record.
Remember, the rankings aren't just a projection of "who is going to make the playoffs" - at least in theory, it should be an attempt to rank the 25 best teams. Tell me, with any conviction, that UW-Oshkosh wouldn't beat most of the teams ranked "below" them in the others receiving votes category.
IWU won a rivalry game in the CCIW on the road. Tough league and any road win in this league is a good win. I wouldn't reward them but I certainly wouldn't penalize them. Millikin isn't a 7th place team in any other conference. They are 3-5 and lost 3 of those games by a total of 11 pts. They are 7th place for a reason but they could probably make the playoffs in a couple other conferences.
Ex Tartan that was a great post and I agree on all points you made.
IMO- it seems some pollsters prefer to rely mostly on wins and losses vs "who would beat who" when ranking teams. This week especially I deemphasized wins and losses and simply listed the teams I think are the best. My top 7 is like everyone elses. My 8-14 include Cal Lutheran, LA College, Salisbury, Wheaton, Del Valley, McMurry and IL Wesleyan. I think these teams, regardless of a loss here and there, would beat a Wabash, Thomas More and Redlands.
I have Oshkosh at 21. No offense to FCGrizz, but IMO a 3-loss Oshkosh is a heavy favorite over a 1-loss Franklin.
Quote from: USee on November 02, 2011, 09:01:40 AM
IWU won a rivalry game in the CCIW on the road. Tough league and any road win in this league is a good win. I wouldn't reward them but I certainly wouldn't penalize them. Millikin isn't a 7th place team in any other conference. They are 3-5 and lost 3 of those games by a total of 11 pts. They are 7th place for a reason but they could probably make the playoffs in a couple other conferences.
I agree; but I don't think that dropping IWU this week is so much "penalizing" them as it is putting them where they should be at this point in the season. Three teams passed them this week:
Redlands defeated the same North Central team that just beat IWU 24-0. All other things being equal (i.e. both teams being 6-1/7-1), I think it's fair to move Redlands ahead of IWU.
Hopkins is undefeated and just annihiliated the 2nd/3rd best teams in their conference in back-to-back weeks, and the last time they made the playoofs (2009) they did win a pair of playoff games, including a road win over current #9 Thomas More. I think they've earned a lofty ranking.
Trinity has just shot up the rankings, which does surprise me. That's the only team currently ranked ahead of IWU that I'd have an issue with, considering the SCAC's lack of recent playoff success (and that's NOT because they play UMHB in the first round every year, a myth that I debunked on the SCAC boards a few weeks ago). Nonetheless, Trinity plays their undefeated conference compatriot Centre this week, and if they win, I think it would be safe to say that they've earned their ranking.
Quote from: emma17 on November 02, 2011, 09:23:12 AM
IMO- it seems some pollsters prefer to rely mostly on wins and losses vs "who would beat who" when ranking teams. This week especially I deemphasized wins and losses and simply listed the teams I think are the best. My top 7 is like everyone elses. My 8-14 include Cal Lutheran, LA College, Salisbury, Wheaton, Del Valley, McMurry and IL Wesleyan. I think these teams, regardless of a loss here and there, would beat a Wabash, Thomas More and Redlands.
I applaud your boldness; I especially like the way that you put it - one should "deemphasize" overall record in favor of listing the best teams.
The only thing that I quibble with in your post is the inclusion of Redlands in that second group. Redlands' only loss came 28-24 to Cal Lutheran, they beat North Central to open the season, and NCC might ultimately defeat both Wheaton and Illinois Wesleyan (included in your 8-14 spots). I think Redlands deserves to be mentioned with that 8-14 group you've listed.
I do agree that Thomas More is terribly overranked, primarily because they're undefeated and they've made the playofs the past two seasons. The PAC is
way down right now, and even with that TMC barely squeaked past St. Vincent and W&J (who are both 4-4 and decidedly mediocre).
I can't really figure out whether Wabash is REALLY good or just PRETTY good, so I tend to agree that they are way overranked "right now" - but it wouldn't surprise me if they made a nice playoff run.
One other thing to remember today, when the regional rankings appear...
The criteria that we use for the Top 25 are different from the critieria that are used to establish the regional rankings.
I expect several "weak" undefeated teams to have better criteria than some one-loss teams. :)
Wabash's test will come this week. I would think a 10-0 Wabash would be a #2 seed in the North. I can see the CCIW champ at #3, maybe and that would be an epic struggle. But of course, if Wabash loses to Witt they may be on the road if they get in at all.
We did have a few voters drift out and them come back in, thanks to Jay's hard work. I think this may be the result of two weeks of 'refactoring'. I know I've re-assessed my ballot quite a bit based on who I think is better. I dropped Wabash a spot.
Here is a look at how the ballots came in for Bethel weeks 9 and 10.
(Week 9/ Week 10)
Nonvoter, 25
17, 24
19, 25
18, 19
21, 18
14, 13
nonvoter, unranked
unranked, unranked
23,23
unranked, unranked
19, 23
16,16
25, 23
17, 17
15, 14
unranked, unranked
20, 20
A few interesting notes:
The two voters who didn't submit ballots in week 9 had Bethel ranked 25 and unranked in week 10. This contributed to their drop.
Three voters gave Bethel a significant drop 4 spots, 6 spots, and 7 spots (probably a ballot adjustment after reassessing their full body of work).
One voter gave them a slight drop from 18 to 19. This might be the result of a reassessment of McMurry, who the voter put from unranked in week 9 to #18 in week 10.
Four voters kept them in the same spot.
Four voters gave them a BETTER ranking in week 10 than week nine.
Three voters didn't have them ranked either week.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on November 02, 2011, 09:25:55 AM
Trinity has just shot up the rankings, which does surprise me. That's the only team currently ranked ahead of IWU that I'd have an issue with, considering the SCAC's lack of recent playoff success (and that's NOT because they play UMHB in the first round every year, a myth that I debunked on the SCAC boards a few weeks ago). Nonetheless, Trinity plays their undefeated conference compatriot Centre this week, and if they win, I think it would be safe to say that they've earned their ranking.
Because an 8-0 record, a defense ranked 11th overall and the fourth-ranked scoring defense isn't much of a reason, even after facing teams like Birmingham-Southern and Huntingdon which were averaging 450-500 yards per game and putting boatloads of points on the board. :o I think Centre is extremely underrated by this panel and the greater d3football.com poll, and whichever team wins on Saturday should be in the top 20 (lower half).
BTW the last 3 Trinity playoff losses
were to UMHB; it's just been a while since they were in the playoffs ('04, '05, '07). And Pat seems to think that, should they win out, there's a very good chance they'll go again there this year.
Quote from: Ron Boerger on November 02, 2011, 01:55:58 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on November 02, 2011, 09:25:55 AM
Trinity has just shot up the rankings, which does surprise me. That's the only team currently ranked ahead of IWU that I'd have an issue with, considering the SCAC's lack of recent playoff success (and that's NOT because they play UMHB in the first round every year, a myth that I debunked on the SCAC boards a few weeks ago). Nonetheless, Trinity plays their undefeated conference compatriot Centre this week, and if they win, I think it would be safe to say that they've earned their ranking.
Because an 8-0 record, a defense ranked 11th overall and the fourth-ranked scoring defense isn't much of a reason, even after facing teams like Birmingham-Southern and Huntingdon which were averaging 450-500 yards per game and putting boatloads of points on the board. :o I think Centre is extremely underrated by this panel and the greater d3football.com poll, and whichever team wins on Saturday should be in the top 20 (lower half).
BTW the last 3 Trinity playoff losses were to UMHB; it's just been a while since they were in the playoffs ('04, '05, '07). And Pat seems to think that, should they win out, there's a very good chance they'll go again there this year.
I didn't say that Trinity isn't any good; however, I did imply that the overall weakness of the SCAC in recent years is a reason for my skepticism, and I stand by that.
Trinity's last three playoff losses were to UMHB. However, more recently, the SCAC champion has been one-and-done every year from 2006-2010 (*incorrect, I just checked my old post and noted that Millsaps did win a game in 2008), with only one of those vs. UMHB (2007). In the other four seasons, the SCAC champ was eliminated by a team that was summarily dismissed in the next round. That leaves me with the conclusion that (with the possible exception of 2007 Trinity) the SCAC has not produced a bona fide national contender in at least five years.
Edited to add my old post from SCAC board:
"I don't think the SCAC has done much to distinguish itself in the last few years. Some might argue that SCAC champ often gets stuck playing the ASC champ in the first round because of travel considerations, but that's an old-hat argument which isn't really borne out by recent history.
In 2010 the SCAC champ (DePauw) lost at home in the first round to Trine.
In 2009 the SCAC champ (DePauw again) lost in the first round to Thomas More.
In 2008 the SCAC champ (Millsaps) beat LaGrange, then lost to Wash & Jefferson.
In 2007 the SCAC champ (Trinity) was wiped out by UMHB.
In 2006 the SCAC champ (Millsaps) lost to Carnegie Mellon.
That's a 1-5 playoff record in the last five years, with the losses spread against five different teams (only one of which is a true national power, UMHB). All but UMHB were summarily dismissed in the next round. Unfortunately, that suggests to me that the SCAC is no better than an average D-3 conference at this point."
The above paragraph, then, justifies my skepticism for ranking
any SCAC team, even one with a defense ranked 11th overall and the fourth-ranked scoring defense (side note, pointing out rankings and records without considering the caliber of the competition is a flawed strategy - earlier, someone argued that Endicott is for real because they have the #13 offense and #6 defense in the country).
You can point out Trinity's accomplishments against their SCAC brethren all you want, but the SCAC just isn't what it used to be. Does that mean I don't think Trinity is ANY good? No, of course not. It does mean that I'm skeptical that Trinity deserves a top-15 ranking, ahead of schools with recent playoff success and better overall resumes.
Now, can we not care about North Central's loss to Redlands?
Quote from: smedindy on November 05, 2011, 06:25:35 PM
Now, can we not care about North Central's loss to Redlands?
Except as a huge plus for Redlands. ;)
The way NCC has been demolishing solid teams (and downright good teams in terms of IWU and Wheaton), they just
might be the team that finally breaks the Big Two's stranglehold on Salem. And if not this year, I believe most of their key players are underclassmen.
mr. ypsi, i was thinking the same thing. ncc is just dominating good teams. with the recent struggles for the big 2 maybe the gap is closing. those of us who are fans of other teams certainly hope so, plus despite the fact that i like the folks i have met at the stagg bowl the last couple of years, i would really like to meet some new people or be cheering for wesley at the game. ncc will certainly get a shot at one of them, likely in the quarters unless they ship mount east and leave uww in the west.
The bottom 1/3 of my Top 25 is all just catty whompus. And I feel bad I couldn't add more teams in at 25a (Monmouth), 25b (Cortland), 25c (CWRU), 25d (Centre), 25e (Kean), etc.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 05, 2011, 07:25:46 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 05, 2011, 06:25:35 PM
Now, can we not care about North Central's loss to Redlands?
Except as a huge plus for Redlands. ;)
The way NCC has been demolishing solid teams (and downright good teams in terms of IWU and Wheaton), they just might be the team that finally breaks the Big Two's stranglehold on Salem. And if not this year, I believe most of their key players are underclassmen.
I, for one, don't want to see Whitewater play them....I'll worry about that matchup if and when it happens.
I'm glad that McMurry won...I was kind of looking forward to putting them in my top 25 for awhile now.
I plugged them in at 19th this week, after not ranking them last week.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 05, 2011, 07:25:46 PM
The way NCC has been demolishing solid teams (and downright good teams in terms of IWU and Wheaton), they just might be the team that finally breaks the Big Two's stranglehold on Salem. And if not this year, I believe most of their key players are underclassmen.
With all due respect to the fine programs at Mount Union and UWW...I would love to see some new blood in the Stagg this year.
Obviously this memory predates the Purple Power stranglehold, but I recall reading this story (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1031007/index.htm) about St. John's triumphing over Mount Union back in 2003 - I was a senior in high school at the time, heading to Carnegie Mellon the next year - and just getting goosebumps about how exciting that must have been for the SJU players during the 100-yard interception return that sealed the game.
I'd love to see somebody pull the David-over-Goliath upset this year and restore a little more balance to Division III. It would be especially cool if NCC did it, in part because NCC did lose to someone ELSE this year, and that might show that the talent is diffusing a little more evenly throughout the Division.
I find the Gap subject interesting because I think it's different for each team.
I do think the talent gaps are slowly closing. However, I don't think the next step/final step to closing the gap is as much about talent dispersement as it is other things. I also think the Mt gap has differences from the UWW gap. I'll end it here otherwise this will end up as a long and boring attempt to explain myself.
Once the playoffs begin, I would not be surprised to see both UWW and Mt playing at a different level than they have in the regular season.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 07, 2011, 03:49:56 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 05, 2011, 07:25:46 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 05, 2011, 06:25:35 PM
Now, can we not care about North Central's loss to Redlands?
Except as a huge plus for Redlands. ;)
The way NCC has been demolishing solid teams (and downright good teams in terms of IWU and Wheaton), they just might be the team that finally breaks the Big Two's stranglehold on Salem. And if not this year, I believe most of their key players are underclassmen.
I, for one, don't want to see Whitewater play them....I'll worry about that matchup if and when it happens.
OF COURSE you will 02! ;)
Truthfully, most UW-W posters probably feel the same way, which is quite contrary to the REP of UW-W posters advanced by a few who generalize all of us of being arrogant or cocky (My posts have probably contributed as much to the negative stereotype as anyone's). From what I've observed, UW-W has very few, if any, over-confident posters. However, lacking confidence (especially in UW-W football) has never been my downfall, so......
I do want UW-W to play North Central. Last year's game was a great game and this year's game would be a great game, too. And it will go to the fourth quarter. And that's the quarter it comes down to the playmakers, doesn't it? UW-W doesn't have any shortage of them.
I will say that I am a bit conflicted because I also want UW-W to play Mount. But I agree with the posters on the CCIW board who say they would love to see a Mount/NCC matchup. While I think NCC would have a great shot against Mount, I am not convinced NCC would beat Mount or would have beaten them last year. I have learned to be very careful not to put someone in that type of category with the Purple Powers until they have "done it". NCC was given a #1 seed and couldn't take out UW-W at home last year. Now they have a freshman QB, a loss to Redlands, and a conference that hasn't even tested them. Are they a good team? Yes. COULD they beat UWW? Of course. Do they worry me? Not a bit. ;)
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 07, 2011, 08:45:32 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 07, 2011, 03:49:56 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 05, 2011, 07:25:46 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 05, 2011, 06:25:35 PM
Now, can we not care about North Central's loss to Redlands?
Except as a huge plus for Redlands. ;)
The way NCC has been demolishing solid teams (and downright good teams in terms of IWU and Wheaton), they just might be the team that finally breaks the Big Two's stranglehold on Salem. And if not this year, I believe most of their key players are underclassmen.
I, for one, don't want to see Whitewater play them....I'll worry about that matchup if and when it happens.
OF COURSE you will 02! ;)
Truthfully, most UW-W posters probably feel the same way, which is quite contrary to the REP of UW-W posters advanced by a few who generalize all of us of being arrogant or cocky (My posts have probably contributed as much to the negative stereotype as anyone's). From what I've observed, UW-W has very few, if any, over-confident posters. However, lacking confidence (especially in UW-W football) has never been my downfall, so......
I do want UW-W to play North Central. Last year's game was a great game and this year's game would be a great game, too. And it will go to the fourth quarter. And that's the quarter it comes down to the playmakers, doesn't it? UW-W doesn't have any shortage of them.
I will say that I am a bit conflicted because I also want UW-W to play Mount. But I agree with the posters on the CCIW board who say they would love to see a Mount/NCC matchup. While I think NCC would have a great shot against Mount, I am not convinced NCC would beat Mount or would have beaten them last year. I have learned to be very careful not to put someone in that type of category with the Purple Powers until they have "done it". NCC was given a #1 seed and couldn't take out UW-W at home last year. Now they have a freshman QB, a loss to Redlands, and a conference that hasn't even tested them. Are they a good team? Yes. COULD they beat UWW? Of course. Do they worry me? Not a bit. ;)
???
Similar conversations about how NCC compares to Mount and UWW this year is going on in the CCIW board. I'm sure they would have a few opinions about this statement.
Funny how little talk there is about the #3 ranked team. I guess the MIAC is just too soft a conference to get any props.
Then there's St. Thomas, who is very much an emerging power - they've given up just 27 points in their last six games after Concordia - Moorhead dropped 30 on them (but gave up 48).
I wouldn't overlook them to nose their way into the Purple Two, and they're Purple as well.
Wow, great minds, eh smed?
Yep. Just have a feeling about this St. Thomas team.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 07, 2011, 03:52:19 PM
I'm glad that McMurry won...I was kind of looking forward to putting them in my top 25 for awhile now.
I plugged them in at 19th this week, after not ranking them last week.
I had them at 18 last week. Moved them all the way up to 10 this week!
Quote from: AUKaz00 on November 08, 2011, 10:48:09 AM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 07, 2011, 03:52:19 PM
I'm glad that McMurry won...I was kind of looking forward to putting them in my top 25 for awhile now.
I plugged them in at 19th this week, after not ranking them last week.
I had them at 18 last week. Moved them all the way up to 10 this week!
wow...that's a big jump
Quote from: AUKaz00 on November 08, 2011, 10:48:09 AM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 07, 2011, 03:52:19 PM
I'm glad that McMurry won...I was kind of looking forward to putting them in my top 25 for awhile now.
I plugged them in at 19th this week, after not ranking them last week.
I had them at 18 last week. Moved them all the way up to 10 this week!
+1 for you. I think McM has been grossly underrated this season. I also think that there will be a 2nd week playoff replay in Belton (minus the lightening please) if McM makes the playoff field.
Quote from: Toby Taff on November 08, 2011, 11:28:57 AM
I think McM has been grossly underrated this season. I also think that there will be a 2nd week playoff replay in Belton (minus the lightening please) if McM makes the playoff field.
I agree, Toby; I've argued since about Week 5 that McMurry was REALLY good, mostly on the basis of the 28-27 loss to UMHB, but I see why people were hesitant to buy in. An 82-6 drubbing at the hands of SFA is hard to completely ignore, even if it was an FCS opponent, and they didn't really have a signature Division III win until recently.
Suppose that they'd beaten LaCollege and HSU in weeks 1 & 2, then lost to UMHB 28-27 in Week 3; I bet that might have garnered them a ranking. But with the weird opening two weeks vs. FCS teams and then a loss in Week 3 (even impressive one), people were hesitant to jump on the bandwagon until it became obvious that McM was going to finish 8-2.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 08, 2011, 10:49:43 AM
Quote from: AUKaz00 on November 08, 2011, 10:48:09 AM
I had them at 18 last week. Moved them all the way up to 10 this week!
wow...that's a big jump
I had them at 23 and moved them to 16th... but they also jumped 5 teams who lost
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 08, 2011, 10:49:43 AM
Quote from: AUKaz00 on November 08, 2011, 10:48:09 AM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 07, 2011, 03:52:19 PM
I'm glad that McMurry won...I was kind of looking forward to putting them in my top 25 for awhile now.
I plugged them in at 19th this week, after not ranking them last week.
I had them at 18 last week. Moved them all the way up to 10 this week!
wow...that's a big jump
Well, I did have LA College at 11 last week and when I got to 10 this week I just couldn't justify anyone else more at than the War Hawks. If we set aside the Stephen F. Austin game (away, first game, FCS opponent), it's really hard to see much difference between McMurry and UMHB.
Quote from: AUKaz00 on November 08, 2011, 02:40:13 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 08, 2011, 10:49:43 AM
Quote from: AUKaz00 on November 08, 2011, 10:48:09 AM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 07, 2011, 03:52:19 PM
I'm glad that McMurry won...I was kind of looking forward to putting them in my top 25 for awhile now.
I plugged them in at 19th this week, after not ranking them last week.
I had them at 18 last week. Moved them all the way up to 10 this week!
wow...that's a big jump
Well, I did have LA College at 11 last week and when I got to 10 this week I just couldn't justify anyone else more at than the War Hawks. If we set aside the Stephen F. Austin game (away, first game, FCS opponent), it's really hard to see much difference between McMurry and UMHB.
I wouldn't say that. Offensively the two teams are night and day different. Jake Mullins is a shifty QB with a great ability to sniff out the receiver and capitalize. He has good receivers and a great ability to get them the football in space, and when that happens, they are big and fast and hard to bring down. UMHB has 2 big receivers, but the running game is still the bread and butter. If you watch a UMHB game they will start slow sometimes and just wail on the the other teams line with the RB's. The toll taken over time just slowly grows the scoring gap. The exceptions to this are UMHB against not very good conference foes (see the 2nd and 3rd stringers stretching a lead in the 2nd half), and the game against McM. UMHB was dominating that game in the first half 27-6 when the lightening started. McM coaches made good adjustments during the delay and McM turned it around. They shortened half time to 5 minutes so the UMHB defense had to star the rest of the way.
Defensively, McM is much improved and has a few very impressive players, but UMHB's overall D and I'd say special teams is better, of course I am a little biased. ;D
Quote from: retagent on November 07, 2011, 11:36:15 PM
Funny how little talk there is about the #3 ranked team. I guess the MIAC is just too soft a conference to get any props.
I think this is just a lack of familiarity. Had STU and UWW played each other last year, we'd all be talking about a rematch this year and folk would be writing about how little talk there is of NCC and the CCIW. I'm very interested in seeing STU play. As a matter of fact, I'd like to see them play UWW with NCC playing Mt- just for the sake of getting to see new teams.
D3 TOP 25 FAN POLL: WEEK 11
1. Wisconsin-Whitewater (13) 373 1 (LW)
2. Mount Union (2) 360 2
3. St. Thomas 340 3
4. Mary Hardin-Baylor 326 4
5. Linfield 321 5
6. North Central 300 6
7. Wesley 280 7
8. Wabash 253 8
9. California Lutheran 250 10
10. Delaware Valley 229 12
11. Salisbury 196 13
12. Redlands 181 14
13. Johns Hopkins 171 15
14. Trinity (TX) 147 16
15. Wheaton 132 11
16. Montclair State 127 18
17. Illinois Wesleyan 122 17
18. McMurry 121 25
19. Kean 113 20
20. Franklin 102 22
21. Thomas More 94 9
22. Bethel 83 23
23. Dubuque 52 Unranked
24. Baldwin-Wallace 42 Unranked
25. Hampden-Sydney 37 Unranked
Dropped Out of Top 25: Louisiana College, St. Olaf, Hobart
Also Receiving Votes: Wisconsin-Oshkosh (29), Centre (19), Cortland State (17), Widener (16), Monmouth (10), Wartburg (10), Louisiana College (8), Washington and Lee (5), Wittenberg (4), Hobart (2), St. Olaf (2), St. Scholastica (1)
Interesting to see Wheaton ahead of IWU. I haven't seen IWU play this year, I wonder what the thought is here?
Quote from: emma17 on November 08, 2011, 11:01:45 PM
Interesting to see Wheaton ahead of IWU. I haven't seen IWU play this year, I wonder what the thought is here?
Last week I could buy it (despite h-to-h). Now, besides IWU beating Wheaton h-to-h, NCC beat Wheaton by a larger margin than they beat IWU. (IWU was home both games; Wheaton was on the road both games. But still...? 8-1 vs. 7-2? 8-))
I know the NCAA doesn't use the fan poll or the d3football.com poll as input, but looking at the top 8 and geography made me think that the following playoff placements would be nice:
East: UMU and Wesley
North: UWW and Wabash
West: UST and NCC
Southwest (Airlines): UMHB and Linfield
Quote from: emma17 on November 08, 2011, 11:01:45 PM
Interesting to see Wheaton ahead of IWU. I haven't seen IWU play this year, I wonder what the thought is here?
I'm guessing that people only looked at last week's result (rather than the whole body of work) when deciding how far "up" or "down" to move Wheaton and IWU.
Wheaton was ranked #11 last week; most people probably thought "road loss vs. top-10 opponent...I'll drop them a few spots" - and the cumulative effect sent them from #11 down to #15. Seems fair in its own right.
IWU was ranked #17 last week and stayed there after an uninspiring 13-9 win over Carthage. The CCIW is a very tough conference top-to-bottom, but I'm guessing that most people just look at IWU's close wins over the last two weeks and decided that they didn't deserve to move up.
The problem with this style of voting - just deciding to move teams "up" or "down" based on last week's result - get exposed when a scenario like this unfolds, where we have an 8-1 IWU team with a head-to-head win over 7-2 Wheaton ranked lower just because their result from last week wasn't impressive enough to merit moving them up. I don't necessarily think that IWU deserved to move further "up" but I certainly think that people should have moved Wheaton "down" to one spot behind IWU on their ballots.
Obviously, they're only separated by 10 points, but that still rankles me; they shouldn't be listed ahead of IWU on any ballot.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on November 09, 2011, 07:52:34 AM
Obviously, they're only separated by 10 points, but that still rankles me; they shouldn't be listed ahead of IWU on any ballot.
Well, this isn't an exercise in developing a mathematical algorithm, so a healthy dose of subjectivity is present in the voting process. H2H results, while definitive in records and tournament selection, do not necessarily represent which team is "better" similar to comparative results. In the end, every voter disagrees with the amalgamate, but it probably is closer to the truth than any individual ballot.
I have IWU 13th and Wheaton 14th. They're very closely matched, and their game was quite close. Over time, I think IWU wins 52 times out of 100. Maybe. But I can definitely see why some may think Wheaton is a tick better.
Massey has Wheaton at 21st with the 42nd toughest schedule. He ranks IWU 32nd with the 62nd toughest schedule. That takes into account home / road and margin of victory (with diminishing returns, of course). The two recent nail-biters by IWU (Millikin and Carthage) along with their eight-point win over a 2-7 Alma have dinged their power ranking, whilst Wheaton is boosted by defeating Albion by a good margin.
Quote from: smedindy on November 09, 2011, 09:36:52 AM
I have IWU 13th and Wheaton 14th. They're very closely matched, and their game was quite close. Over time, I think IWU wins 52 times out of 100. Maybe. But I can definitely see why some may think Wheaton is a tick better.
Massey has Wheaton at 21st with the 42nd toughest schedule. He ranks IWU 32nd with the 62nd toughest schedule. That takes into account home / road and margin of victory (with diminishing returns, of course). The two recent nail-biters by IWU (Millikin and Carthage) along with their eight-point win over a 2-7 Alma have dinged their power ranking, whilst Wheaton is boosted by defeating Albion by a good margin.
Then again, Massey has Amherst #1, Trinity CT #5, and Williams #13. ;)
And then again, you can just ignore those and deal with the relational aspects of the calculations! ;) ;)
(I still don't know why Massey throws the NESCAC in DIII when he isolated them in his overall rankings. But I've learned to stop worrying and deal with the data as it is...)
Quote from: ncc_fan on November 08, 2011, 11:30:49 PM
I know the NCAA doesn't use the fan poll or the d3football.com poll as input, but looking at the top 8 and geography made me think that the following playoff placements would be nice:
East: UMU and Wesley
North: UWW and Wabash
West: UST and NCC
Southwest (Airlines): UMHB and Linfield
I see it as:
East: DVC and Salisbury
North: UMU, NCC and Wabash
West: UWW, UST and Linfield
South: UMHB and Wesley
Quote from: SUADC on November 09, 2011, 12:17:20 PM
Quote from: ncc_fan on November 08, 2011, 11:30:49 PM
I know the NCAA doesn't use the fan poll or the d3football.com poll as input, but looking at the top 8 and geography made me think that the following playoff placements would be nice:
East: UMU and Wesley
North: UWW and Wabash
West: UST and NCC
Southwest (Airlines): UMHB and Linfield
I see it as:
East: DVC and Salisbury
North: UMU, NCC and Wabash
West: UWW, UST and Linfield
South: UMHB and Wesley
I would be extremely happy if that's how it ends up.
Just don't see it happening. Personally I think the East imports UMU and JHU into the 1 and 4 spots, with Del Val as 2 and Salisbury as 3. Just my thought, but that would give the East a more balanced bracket. South shapes up as UMHB, Wesley, and Trinity as 1-3, North gets UWW, NCC, and Franklin, while the West gets STT, Linfield and CLU.
The above provides at least 2 undefeated teams to each region, while providing many ways to stay within travel constraints, especially by setting up North and South sub-brackets in the South (UMHB versus 8 seed fly in, Trinity home to McM, second round bus in most likely at UMHB). You could argue that you would get more travel flexibility with Wesley in place of JHU (3 seed instead of 4 in my eyes), but its marginal enough and the bracket is more balanced with Wesley in the south. It also follows what the committee has done recently setting up the top 4 in their own brackets, UWW, STT, UMU, and UMHB.
The other wrinkle I could see is the East importing UMU as 1 and TMC as 8, especially if Centre doesn't make the field isolating TMC from the South Region. That would give Del Val and Salisbury and probably the NJAC winner home games. Of course, setting up TMC as an 8 in the South would send them as the fly-in to UMHB, most likely accomplishing the same result. Personally, I think TMC had better hope that Centre gets a Pool C or they get moved to the North...
Quote from: jknezek on November 09, 2011, 01:03:22 PM
Just don't see it happening. Personally I think the East imports UMU and JHU into the 1 and 4 spots, with Del Val as 2 and Salisbury as 3. Just my thought, but that would give the East a more balanced bracket. South shapes up as UMHB, Wesley, and Trinity as 1-3, North gets NCC, Franklin, and Wabash, while the West gets UWW, STT and Linfield.
That's close to what I think it'll be:
East: Mount, JHU, Del Val, Salisubry
South: MHB, Wesley, Trinity
North: UWW, NCC, Wabash, Franklin
West: UST, Linfield, Cal Lutheran, Redlands (Pool C bid will get REAL interesting in L&W upset Linfield)
jknezek, I see it a little differently. I think that Del Val might well get a #1 seed with a win over Widener (they'll look good on paper at 10-0, with two wins over regionally-ranked opponents, and a higher SOS than all three of the UMU, UWW, and St. Thomas trio).
I've posted this in a couple places, but if Del-Val gets a top seed, I think that you'll see a "Screw it, these teams all have to fly anyway" bracket built around UMHB and Linfield with the Way South and West Coast teams all lumped together, especially if Centre/Redlands both get a Pool C bid. That would still allow the committee to separate the Purple Powers and their potential #2 seeds look pretty good in UST and Wabash.
If that's the case, I think you get:
"East" - Del Val, Johns Hopkins, Salisbury, Wesley (assuming that they beat Huntingdon)
"North" - UWW, UST, St. Scholastica, Dubuque, and so forth...
"Midwest" - UMU, Wabash, NCC, Franklin, Illinois Wesleyan, and so forth...
"South/WestCoast" - UMHB, Linfield, Trinity, Redlands, Cal Lutheran, and so forth...
Many teams could easily swing between the UMU and UWW brackets above. The challenge would be filling out the South/West bracket, and I think that's pretty easy to do if Redlands and Centre get Pool C bids. The East, while it's not a strong overall region, will have plenty of teams in the tournament, and it's not hard to justify putting Del Val, Johns Hopkins, Salisbury, and Wesley in that region as "top dogs" and then filling it out with Kean/Montclair, Hobart/Union, Western New England, and Norwich.
If Widener beats Del-Val, of course, this is all blown to heck because there's no "East" team that possibly merits a #1 seed.
Anything is possible, but remember the "new" criteria. If you can't determine between undefeateds, you can use past playoff performance. Which undefeated out of UMU, UWW, UMHB and UST are you going to look at past playoff performance and say, hmm, I think Del Val's is better??? UST has been to the quarters two years running while Del Val went to the quarters in 04 and 05. That new criteria gives the committee an easy out.
I also don't buy the SouthWest bracket. As long as McM gets a Pool C, you have 3 teams to fill a Texas subdivision and you send a sacrificial lamb to UMHB. That makes for 1 flight in 2 rounds. I believe I figured something similar out for the West coast pitting two NW teams and two SW teams together and getting 1 flight in round 2. While it won't follow seedings per se, that's nothing new. A few years ago the West had a 1-2 matchup in round 1 just for flight purposes. So out of these 2 sub brackets you end up with 1 Texas team in Rd 3 and one West/West team in Rd 3. Essentially you have 2 flights in 2 rounds. No bean counter is going to argue too much about that since it is pretty typical and you can't do better doing a Southwest bracket where you still have a flight in Rd 1 (UMHB opponent) and at least 1 flight in Rd 2 (SW to NW). Why mess with it all, put that many top teams in 1 bracket, just to get the same bean counter result?
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on November 09, 2011, 01:16:13 PM
jknezek, I see it a little differently. I think that Del Val might well get a #1 seed with a win over Widener (they'll look good on paper at 10-0, with two wins over regionally-ranked opponents, and a higher SOS than all three of the UMU, UWW, and St. Thomas trio).
I've posted this in a couple places, but if Del-Val gets a top seed, I think that you'll see a "Screw it, these teams all have to fly anyway" bracket built around UMHB and Linfield with the Way South and West Coast teams all lumped together, especially if Centre/Redlands both get a Pool C bid. That would still allow the committee to separate the Purple Powers and their potential #2 seeds look pretty good in UST and Wabash.
If that's the case, I think you get:
"East" - Del Val, Johns Hopkins, Salisbury, Wesley (assuming that they beat Huntingdon)
"North" - UWW, UST, St. Scholastica, Dubuque, and so forth...
"Midwest" - UMU, Wabash, NCC, Franklin, Illinois Wesleyan, and so forth...
"South/WestCoast" - UMHB, Linfield, Trinity, Redlands, Cal Lutheran, and so forth...McMurry and 2 "fly-ins"
Many teams could easily swing between the UMU and UWW brackets above. The challenge would be filling out the South/West bracket, and I think that's pretty easy to do if Redlands and Centre get Pool C bids. The East, while it's not a strong overall region, will have plenty of teams in the tournament, and it's not hard to justify putting Del Val, Johns Hopkins, Salisbury, and Wesley in that region as "top dogs" and then filling it out with Kean/Montclair, Hobart/Union, Western New England, and Norwich.
If Widener beats Del-Val, of course, this is all blown to heck because there's no "East" team that possibly merits a #1 seed.
I like the idea of a UMHB Linfield bracket this season, just because the teams can be aligned that way.
After seeing the Region Ranking (2nd edition), the top seeds could be:
UWW
UMU
St. T
UMHB
No. 2's in each region, who knows for now? :-\
Quote from: Raider 68 on November 09, 2011, 03:59:19 PM
After seeing the Region Ranking (2nd edition), the top seeds could be:
UWW
UMU
St. T
UMHB
No. 2's in each region, who knows for now? :-\
Do you want to create a Southwest/ West Coast bracket?
I think that is where the committee starts to build the brackets.
I totally like the last six post, everyone has a great point. This is what makes it so crazy this time a year.
I read all these. Safe to say no one, me included, had:
UMU, NCC, Wabash
UMHB, Linfield, Wesley
UST, DV, JHU
UWW, Salisbury, Kean
as the respective top threes.
Quote from: K-Mack on November 16, 2011, 12:23:47 AM
I read all these. Safe to say no one, me included, had:
UMU, NCC, Wabash
UMHB, Linfield, Wesley
UST, DV, JHU
UWW, Salisbury, Kean
as the respective top threes.
Of course, no one foresaw that the committee would go with 9 inter-regional games in the first round.
I had 10 of the 12 in my Top 12.
I had Cal Lu at 8 and Redlands at 12. Both are in the 2011 Football version of the "Bracket of Death".
I had Kean at 14 and JHU at 16. Of the 12 in that group, I think that JHU is most vulnerable to upset in the first round.
D3 Top 25 Fan Poll
1. Wisconsin-Whitewater (11) 299 1 (LW)
2. Mount Union (1) 288 2
3. St. Thomas 272 3
4. UMHB 259 4
5. Linfield 258 5
6. North Central 238 6
7. Wesley 225 7
8. Wabash 206 8
9. California Lutheran 203 9
10. Delaware Valley 187 10
11. Salisbury 156 11
12. Johns Hopkins 153 13
13. Redlands 144 12
14. Illinois Wesleyan 114 17
15. Wheaton 113 15
16. Trinity 105 14
17. Kean 104 19
18. McMurry 96 18
19. Thomas More 95 21
20. Franklin 88 20
21. Bethel 64 22
22. Dubuque 50 23
23. Montclair State 44 16
24. Baldwin Wallace 34 24
25. Wisconsin-Oshkosh 26 unranked
Dropped Out of Top 25: Hampden-Sydney
Also Receiving Votes: Cortland State (23), Hobart (22), Centre (18), Monmouth (13), Wartburg (11), St. Olaf (9), Louisiana College (7), St. John Fisher (5), St. Scholastica (2), Amherst (1), Case Western Reserve (1)
Missing some voters but it was an exciting week, of course!
Yes, hopefully we can get the voters back next week and carry it on through the Stagg. It will be interesting to see how a playoff win or loss affects votes.
It's bizarre how an undefeated team from the academically elite NCAC, SCAC, Centennial, SCIAC, LL or UAA can crack the top 15 (8, 9, 12, 13, 16 in your latest) but Amherst gets one vote.
They have to be made up of similar athletes, no? I guess lack of top 25 love is going to be the NESCAC's pennance for starting late and not playing non-con forever.
We should really look into making them ineligible for the poll, that way no one has to bother (and clearly some don't).
:)
We don't have a point of reference. If they added just ONE game, even with the ECFC or the NEFC, then we'd have some point of reference. That's my issue and why I can't seem to vote for a NESCAC team.
Quote from: K-Mack on November 16, 2011, 09:39:34 PM
It's bizarre how an undefeated team from the academically elite NCAC, SCAC, Centennial, SCIAC, LL or UAA can crack the top 15 (8, 9, 12, 13, 16 in your latest) but Amherst gets one vote.
They have to be made up of similar athletes, no? I guess lack of top 25 love is going to be the NESCAC's pennance for starting late and not playing non-con forever.
We should really look into making them ineligible for the poll, that way no one has to bother (and clearly some don't).
:)
In football, they (by their own choice) simply are not d3.
Since they have chosen to just play intramurals, who the hell knows if Amherst is truly good or simply a 'tall dwarf'?
I respect them in every other sport, but in football I would NEVER vote for a NESCAC team.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 16, 2011, 10:35:17 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on November 16, 2011, 09:39:34 PM
It's bizarre how an undefeated team from the academically elite NCAC, SCAC, Centennial, SCIAC, LL or UAA can crack the top 15 (8, 9, 12, 13, 16 in your latest) but Amherst gets one vote.
They have to be made up of similar athletes, no? I guess lack of top 25 love is going to be the NESCAC's pennance for starting late and not playing non-con forever.
We should really look into making them ineligible for the poll, that way no one has to bother (and clearly some don't).
:)
In football, they (by their own choice) simply are not d3.
Since they have chosen to just play intramurals, who the hell knows if Amherst is truly good or simply a 'tall dwarf'?
I respect them in every other sport, but in football I would NEVER vote for a NESCAC team.
I don't vote in this poll, but if I did, I would NEVER vote for a NESCAC football team, either. :o ;) I wonder who cast the single vote for Amherst? Step forward please and explain!! ;)
Quote from: BoBo on November 16, 2011, 11:24:34 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 16, 2011, 10:35:17 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on November 16, 2011, 09:39:34 PM
It's bizarre how an undefeated team from the academically elite NCAC, SCAC, Centennial, SCIAC, LL or UAA can crack the top 15 (8, 9, 12, 13, 16 in your latest) but Amherst gets one vote.
They have to be made up of similar athletes, no? I guess lack of top 25 love is going to be the NESCAC's pennance for starting late and not playing non-con forever.
We should really look into making them ineligible for the poll, that way no one has to bother (and clearly some don't).
:)
In football, they (by their own choice) simply are not d3.
Since they have chosen to just play intramurals, who the hell knows if Amherst is truly good or simply a 'tall dwarf'?
I respect them in every other sport, but in football I would NEVER vote for a NESCAC team.
I don't vote in this poll, but if I did, I would NEVER vote for a NESCAC football team, either. :o ;) I wonder who cast the single vote for Amherst? Step forward please and explain!! ;)
T'was I who cast the nefarious vote.
Are there at least 25 teams better than them (or St Scholastica who I had 24th)... probably. But I don't care if you're playing a middle school team every week, if you win every game in the season then that deserves a slight bit of recognition. Any given Saturday and all that. I wouldn't put them any higher than the bottom slots, but I still feel they deserve a little love
^^ Oops, sorry Grad. I thought it was going to be someone else. Thanks for your explanation. +k
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 16, 2011, 11:52:25 PM
Quote from: BoBo on November 16, 2011, 11:24:34 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 16, 2011, 10:35:17 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on November 16, 2011, 09:39:34 PM
It's bizarre how an undefeated team from the academically elite NCAC, SCAC, Centennial, SCIAC, LL or UAA can crack the top 15 (8, 9, 12, 13, 16 in your latest) but Amherst gets one vote.
They have to be made up of similar athletes, no? I guess lack of top 25 love is going to be the NESCAC's pennance for starting late and not playing non-con forever.
We should really look into making them ineligible for the poll, that way no one has to bother (and clearly some don't).
:)
In football, they (by their own choice) simply are not d3.
Since they have chosen to just play intramurals, who the hell knows if Amherst is truly good or simply a 'tall dwarf'?
I respect them in every other sport, but in football I would NEVER vote for a NESCAC team.
I don't vote in this poll, but if I did, I would NEVER vote for a NESCAC football team, either. :o ;) I wonder who cast the single vote for Amherst? Step forward please and explain!! ;)
T'was I who cast the nefarious vote.
Are there at least 25 teams better than them (or St Scholastica who I had 24th)... probably. But I don't care if you're playing a middle school team every week, if you win every game in the season then that deserves a slight bit of recognition. Any given Saturday and all that. I wouldn't put them any higher than the bottom slots, but I still feel they deserve a little love
Your sentiments are admirable, but (IMO) misguided. I believe the current number of d3 football teams is 239. All we know about Amherst is that they are somewhere between #1 and #232.
I
suspect they are closer to #1 than #232, but they have chosen not to let us know that information. Therefore, they are simply irrelevant to a d3 calculation.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 17, 2011, 12:44:03 AM
Your sentiments are admirable, but (IMO) misguided. I believe the current number of d3 football teams is 239. All we know about Amherst is that they are somewhere between #1 and #232.
I suspect they are closer to #1 than #232, but they have chosen not to let us know that information. Therefore, they are simply irrelevant to a d3 calculation.
Well isn't that's the whole point of the poll... to suspect where a team should be ranked?
They're a d3 school playing in a conference of other d3 schools and the d3football site covers them. Not only that but the d3football poll has given Amherst 22 points which is good for 29th and conference runnerup Trinity 3 points.
I'm not saying I'd move them up in the top 10 or 15 or anything, but when out of 239 teams only 10 can say they made it through the regular season without a loss, that deserves one or two votes in the poll from me. Once St Scholastica loses by 40 this weekend they'll drop out of my poll I'm sure. I'll have to see how things play out whether or not Amherst drops out too.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 17, 2011, 12:44:03 AM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 16, 2011, 11:52:25 PM
Quote from: BoBo on November 16, 2011, 11:24:34 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 16, 2011, 10:35:17 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on November 16, 2011, 09:39:34 PM
It's bizarre how an undefeated team from the academically elite NCAC, SCAC, Centennial, SCIAC, LL or UAA can crack the top 15 (8, 9, 12, 13, 16 in your latest) but Amherst gets one vote.
They have to be made up of similar athletes, no? I guess lack of top 25 love is going to be the NESCAC's pennance for starting late and not playing non-con forever.
We should really look into making them ineligible for the poll, that way no one has to bother (and clearly some don't).
:)
In football, they (by their own choice) simply are not d3.
Since they have chosen to just play intramurals, who the hell knows if Amherst is truly good or simply a 'tall dwarf'?
I respect them in every other sport, but in football I would NEVER vote for a NESCAC team.
I don't vote in this poll, but if I did, I would NEVER vote for a NESCAC football team, either. :o ;) I wonder who cast the single vote for Amherst? Step forward please and explain!! ;)
T'was I who cast the nefarious vote.
Are there at least 25 teams better than them (or St Scholastica who I had 24th)... probably. But I don't care if you're playing a middle school team every week, if you win every game in the season then that deserves a slight bit of recognition. Any given Saturday and all that. I wouldn't put them any higher than the bottom slots, but I still feel they deserve a little love
Your sentiments are admirable, but (IMO) misguided. I believe the current number of d3 football teams is 239. All we know about Amherst is that they are somewhere between #1 and #232.
I suspect they are closer to #1 than #232, but they have chosen not to let us know that information. Therefore, they are simply irrelevant to a d3 calculation.
OK, maybe we can figure this out together. While Amherst's primary color is purple (of course), I am willing to go out on a limb and say they should not be ranked with the Purple Powers in the Top 2. We are now down to between #3 and #232. Anyone willing to narrow it further? ;)
And this was not without seeing them play either, I watched a grand total of one play from 2010 on Youtube :D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0f91lF9k47E
"OH YEAHHHH" :)
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 17, 2011, 08:07:06 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 17, 2011, 12:44:03 AM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 16, 2011, 11:52:25 PM
Quote from: BoBo on November 16, 2011, 11:24:34 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 16, 2011, 10:35:17 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on November 16, 2011, 09:39:34 PM
It's bizarre how an undefeated team from the academically elite NCAC, SCAC, Centennial, SCIAC, LL or UAA can crack the top 15 (8, 9, 12, 13, 16 in your latest) but Amherst gets one vote.
They have to be made up of similar athletes, no? I guess lack of top 25 love is going to be the NESCAC's pennance for starting late and not playing non-con forever.
We should really look into making them ineligible for the poll, that way no one has to bother (and clearly some don't).
:)
In football, they (by their own choice) simply are not d3.
Since they have chosen to just play intramurals, who the hell knows if Amherst is truly good or simply a 'tall dwarf'?
I respect them in every other sport, but in football I would NEVER vote for a NESCAC team.
I don't vote in this poll, but if I did, I would NEVER vote for a NESCAC football team, either. :o ;) I wonder who cast the single vote for Amherst? Step forward please and explain!! ;)
T'was I who cast the nefarious vote.
Are there at least 25 teams better than them (or St Scholastica who I had 24th)... probably. But I don't care if you're playing a middle school team every week, if you win every game in the season then that deserves a slight bit of recognition. Any given Saturday and all that. I wouldn't put them any higher than the bottom slots, but I still feel they deserve a little love
Your sentiments are admirable, but (IMO) misguided. I believe the current number of d3 football teams is 239. All we know about Amherst is that they are somewhere between #1 and #232.
I suspect they are closer to #1 than #232, but they have chosen not to let us know that information. Therefore, they are simply irrelevant to a d3 calculation.
OK, maybe we can figure this out together. While Amherst's primary color is purple (of course), I am willing to go out on a limb and say they should not be ranked with the Purple Powers in the Top 2. We are now down to between #3 and #232. Anyone willing to narrow it further? ;)
And this was not without seeing them play either, I watched a grand total of one play from 2010 on Youtube :D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0f91lF9k47E
"OH YEAHHHH" :)
I think you have to rank Trinity higher based on that one play. So, I can narrow it even further to #4 and #232!! ;)
Here are the combined score predictions of the D3 Top 25 Poll Panel of those who submitted predictions for the first round. Only a handful of people replied, but here's where we combined to land:
UW-W 48
Albion 7
Franklin 30
Thomas More 24
Kean 27
Christopher Newport 14
Salisbury 51
Western New England 16
St. Thomas 48
St. Scholastica 6
Illinois Wesleyan 28
Monmouth 20
Johns Hopkins 31
St. John Fisher 21
Delaware Valley 42
Norwich 7
Mary Hardin-Baylor 45
Redlands 24
McMurry 31
Trinity 27
Linfield 34
Cal Lutheran 27
Wesley 35
Hobart 13
Wabash 38
Illinois College 13
North Central 35
Dubuque 17
Centre 30
Hampden-Sydney 21
Mount Union 52
Benedictine 3
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 17, 2011, 10:19:59 PM
Here are the combined score predictions of the D3 Top 25 Poll Panel of those who submitted predictions for the first round. Only a handful of people replied, but here's where we combined to land:
UW-W 48
Albion 7
Franklin 30
Thomas More 24
Kean 27
Christopher Newport 14
Salisbury 51
Western New England 16
St. Thomas 48
St. Scholastica 6
Illinois Wesleyan 28
Monmouth 20
Johns Hopkins 31
St. John Fisher 21
Delaware Valley 42
Norwich 7
Mary Hardin-Baylor 45
Redlands 24
McMurry 31
Trinity 27
Linfield 34
Cal Lutheran 27
Wesley 35
Hobart 13
Wabash 38
Illinois College 13
North Central 35
Dubuque 17
Centre 30
Hampden-Sydney 21
Mount Union 52
Benedictine 3
I like it. +K
Only 8 on the panel submitted ballots this week, but for what it's worth:
D3 TOP 25 FAN POLL
1. Wisconsin-Whitewater (8) 200 1(LW)
2. Mount Union 191 2
3. St. Thomas 179 3
4. Mary Hardin-Baylor 177 4
5. Linfield 171 5
6. North Central 159 6
7. Wesley 152 7
8. Wabash 144 8
9. Delaware Valley 129 10
10. Salisbury 115 11
11. McMurry 100 18
12. Kean 96 17
13. California Lutheran 92 9
14. Franklin 83 20
15. Centre 74 unranked
16. Bethel 66 21
17. St. John Fisher 65 unranked
18. Monmouth 63 unranked
19. Johns Hopkins 39 12
20. Trinity 37 16
21(t). Illinois Wesleyan 33 14
21 (t) Redlands 33 13
23. Montclair State 30 23
24. Cortland State 19 unranked
25 (t) Baldwin-Wallace 17 24
25 (t) Hampden-Sydney 17 unranked
Dropped Out of Top 25: Thomas More, Dubuque, Wisconsin-Oshkosh
Also Receiving Votes: Dubuque (16), Thomas More (15), Wisconsin-Oshkosh (8), Louisiana College (3), Wittenberg (3), Amherst (1).
OOPS!
I didn't know we were still doing it into the playoffs :-[
I know I had Wheaton still on my ballot but they appear to not be in the poll anywhere...
Quote from: smedindy on November 16, 2011, 09:50:37 PM
We don't have a point of reference. If they added just ONE game, even with the ECFC or the NEFC, then we'd have some point of reference. That's my issue and why I can't seem to vote for a NESCAC team.
Then let's have the poll officially rule them ineligible. Don't have some people considering NESCAC teams and some people not and then just have the result not fit either methodology.
It's like that time -- brought up again this week in all the Verlander MVP stories -- where Pedro Martinez got the most first-place votes for AL MVP but didn't win it because two guys, presumably in favor of keeping Cy Young Awards for pitchers and MVPs for position players, didn't vote for him at all.
Quote from: smedindy on November 16, 2011, 09:50:37 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on November 16, 2011, 09:39:34 PM
It's bizarre how an undefeated team from the academically elite NCAC, SCAC, Centennial, SCIAC, LL or UAA can crack the top 15 (8, 9, 12, 13, 16 in your latest) but Amherst gets one vote.
They have to be made up of similar athletes, no? I guess lack of top 25 love is going to be the NESCAC's pennance for starting late and not playing non-con forever.
We should really look into making them ineligible for the poll, that way no one has to bother (and clearly some don't).
:)
We don't have a point of reference. If they added just ONE game, even with the ECFC or the NEFC, then we'd have some point of reference. That's my issue and why I can't seem to vote for a NESCAC team.
Also, I gave a point of reference. It's not a non-conference result, but it's a point of reference. (see bold)
Quote from: K-Mack on November 23, 2011, 10:05:15 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 16, 2011, 09:50:37 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on November 16, 2011, 09:39:34 PM
It's bizarre how an undefeated team from the academically elite NCAC, SCAC, Centennial, SCIAC, LL or UAA can crack the top 15 (8, 9, 12, 13, 16 in your latest) but Amherst gets one vote.
They have to be made up of similar athletes, no? I guess lack of top 25 love is going to be the NESCAC's pennance for starting late and not playing non-con forever.
We should really look into making them ineligible for the poll, that way no one has to bother (and clearly some don't).
:)
We don't have a point of reference. If they added just ONE game, even with the ECFC or the NEFC, then we'd have some point of reference. That's my issue and why I can't seem to vote for a NESCAC team.
Also, I gave a point of reference. It's not a non-conference result, but it's a point of reference. (see bold)
I disagree that that is a 'point of reference'. Being 'academically elite' and 'made up of similar athletes' is a
non sequitur. Isn't it possible that the academically elite players who are serious about pursuing athletic excellence as well would choose a school where they could display athletic excellence?
IMO, NESCAC is not a d3 conference for football (much a I respect them in all other sports). By their own choice, they are intramurals in football. That is fine, I can respect that choice, but that IS their choice.
Quote from: K-Mack on November 23, 2011, 10:05:15 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 16, 2011, 09:50:37 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on November 16, 2011, 09:39:34 PM
It's bizarre how an undefeated team from the academically elite NCAC, SCAC, Centennial, SCIAC, LL or UAA can crack the top 15 (8, 9, 12, 13, 16 in your latest) but Amherst gets one vote.
They have to be made up of similar athletes, no? I guess lack of top 25 love is going to be the NESCAC's pennance for starting late and not playing non-con forever.
We should really look into making them ineligible for the poll, that way no one has to bother (and clearly some don't).
:)
We don't have a point of reference. If they added just ONE game, even with the ECFC or the NEFC, then we'd have some point of reference. That's my issue and why I can't seem to vote for a NESCAC team.
Also, I gave a point of reference. It's not a non-conference result, but it's a point of reference. (see bold)
A point of reference as in how I can connect their results to the rest of the D-3 universe, Keith.
And it's nowhere near analogous to the "Pitcher / MVP" debate. You can compare (especially now with modern statistical measures) the results of pitchers vs. position players. I cannot tell how good Williams or Amherst are compared to the rest of D-3. Are they better than Salve Regina? Kean? Ithaca? You can't say for certain.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 23, 2011, 04:38:35 PM
I know I had Wheaton still on my ballot but they appear to not be in the poll anywhere...
Fixing...I think most of us did..will re-post. Thanks for letting me know!
Here is the correct fan poll for this week. I apologize. I forgot my last double-check, which is number of teams receiving votes!
D3 TOP 25 FAN POLL
1. Wisconsin-Whitewater (8) 200 1(LW)
2. Mount Union 191 2
3. St. Thomas 179 3
4. Mary Hardin-Baylor 177 4
5. Linfield 171 5
6. North Central 159 6
7. Wesley 152 7
8. Wabash 144 8
9. Delaware Valley 129 10
10. Salisbury 115 11
11. McMurry 100 18
12. Kean 96 17
13. California Lutheran 92 9
14. Franklin 83 20
15. Centre 74 unranked
16. Wheaton 71 15
17. Bethel 66 21
18. St. John Fisher 65 unranked
19. Monmouth 63 unranked
20. Johns Hopkins 39 12
21. Trinity 37 16
22(t). Illinois Wesleyan 33 14
22 (t) Redlands 33 13
24. Montclair State 30 23
25. Cortland State 19 unranked
Dropped Out of Top 25: Thomas More, Dubuque, Wisconsin-Oshkosh, Baldwin-Wallace
Also Receiving Votes: Baldwin-Wallace (17), Hampden-Sydney (17), Dubuque (16), Thomas More (15), Wisconsin-Oshkosh (8), Louisiana College (3), Wittenberg (3), Amherst (1).
Here are the Combined D3 Top 25 Voting Panel's Round 2 Predictions (of those who submitted them). Last week's record: 14-2.
Mount Union 41
Centre 14
Salisbury 31
Kean 21
Linfield 28
Wesley 27
St. John Fisher 21
Delaware Valley 30
UW-Whitewater 38
Franklin 10
St. Thomas 38
Monmouth 23
North Central 26
Wabash 17
UMHB 35
McMurry 23
If that holds, it would give me as 'perfect' a second round on my bracket as current conditions allow. My hope would be that Alex Tanney and company can upset the Tommies, since my bracket had IWU doing that! Since I assume most pickers had St. Thomas going a ways, for me to stay in contention requires Monmouth to do what they prevented IWU from attempting! :P
[I just checked my bracket and am not in contention anyway. :-[ I could have sworn that I picked Linfield, but in fact picked Cal Lu. I am toast.]
I have received only 2 Top 25 ballots and predictions for next week so far. fyi....
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 23, 2011, 10:14:50 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on November 23, 2011, 10:05:15 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 16, 2011, 09:50:37 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on November 16, 2011, 09:39:34 PM
It's bizarre how an undefeated team from the academically elite NCAC, SCAC, Centennial, SCIAC, LL or UAA can crack the top 15 (8, 9, 12, 13, 16 in your latest) but Amherst gets one vote.
They have to be made up of similar athletes, no? I guess lack of top 25 love is going to be the NESCAC's pennance for starting late and not playing non-con forever.
We should really look into making them ineligible for the poll, that way no one has to bother (and clearly some don't).
:)
We don't have a point of reference. If they added just ONE game, even with the ECFC or the NEFC, then we'd have some point of reference. That's my issue and why I can't seem to vote for a NESCAC team.
Also, I gave a point of reference. It's not a non-conference result, but it's a point of reference. (see bold)
I disagree that that is a 'point of reference'. Being 'academically elite' and 'made up of similar athletes' is a non sequitur. Isn't it possible that the academically elite players who are serious about pursuing athletic excellence as well would choose a school where they could display athletic excellence?
IMO, NESCAC is not a d3 conference for football (much a I respect them in all other sports). By their own choice, they are intramurals in football. That is fine, I can respect that choice, but that IS their choice.
Ypsi's correct. In addition, from my eastern bubble world, I don't know if that's really all that true. I look at the polls and see where Salisbury, Kean, Montclair/Cortland, SJF are and that Hobart's not on the map. I'm not looking to debate the relative merits of placement per se, but if you believe KMack's statement, how is Hobart so far off the map as compared with all of these schools given the year's body of work? Some people piss and moan about the 8 game schedule and that's fine, but if you line up all their seasons it's hard to see how many are 10-20 rankings in both polls and Hobart's not even garnering consideration. Maybe it's just the LL, and not the UAA or others mentioned, since 2009 and 2010 were really down years for the conference, but I don't see evidence that the schools previously defined here (I also don't want anyone taking offense since I didn't make that claim) as "academically elite" really do get that much consideration vis-a-vis other conferences.
Personally, I'm surprised how much love JHU and CWRU got this year. JHU ran the table in the regular season, but the Centennial doesn't appear any better than the LL this year and CWRU took a loss to a below .500 UofR who they pounded in most of their recent matchups.
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 29, 2011, 10:59:24 AM
I have received only 2 Top 25 ballots and predictions for next week so far. fyi....
I have been waiting until after the Stagg Bowl. :)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 23, 2011, 10:14:50 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 23, 2011, 11:13:24 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on November 23, 2011, 10:05:15 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 16, 2011, 09:50:37 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on November 16, 2011, 09:39:34 PM
It's bizarre how an undefeated team from the academically elite NCAC, SCAC, Centennial, SCIAC, LL or UAA can crack the top 15 (8, 9, 12, 13, 16 in your latest) but Amherst gets one vote.
They have to be made up of similar athletes, no? I guess lack of top 25 love is going to be the NESCAC's pennance for starting late and not playing non-con forever.
We should really look into making them ineligible for the poll, that way no one has to bother (and clearly some don't).
:)
We don't have a point of reference. If they added just ONE game, even with the ECFC or the NEFC, then we'd have some point of reference. That's my issue and why I can't seem to vote for a NESCAC team.
Also, I gave a point of reference. It's not a non-conference result, but it's a point of reference. (see bold)
A point of reference as in how I can connect their results to the rest of the D-3 universe, Keith.
And it's nowhere near analogous to the "Pitcher / MVP" debate. You can compare (especially now with modern statistical measures) the results of pitchers vs. position players. I cannot tell how good Williams or Amherst are compared to the rest of D-3. Are they better than Salve Regina? Kean? Ithaca? You can't say for certain.
I disagree that that is a 'point of reference'. Being 'academically elite' and 'made up of similar athletes' is a non sequitur. Isn't it possible that the academically elite players who are serious about pursuing athletic excellence as well would choose a school where they could display athletic excellence?
IMO, NESCAC is not a d3 conference for football (much a I respect them in all other sports). By their own choice, they are intramurals in football. That is fine, I can respect that choice, but that IS their choice.
Well suffice to say that I disagree, about your use of the phrases "point of reference" and "non sequitur," as well as the substance of the argument. I stand by my original statements, because pointing out that the NESCAC is not a D-III conference for football or that there's no direct comparison isn't breaking any new ground.
Of course it would be better to make comparisons with the benefit of non-conference results and playoff interplay. Been beating that drum for years. It's inconsistent with their policies in other D-III sports. But I'm not trying in this post to go down that road again.
There
is a comparison. It's not one you can prove through use of compared data, clearly. It's an educated guess. What if I wanted to compare Grinnell and Carleton and Lewis & Clark and RPI? Well there are technically a bunch of data points I can use to do this, but that might not be any more accurate than a guess. Polling, as we'd all admit, is an inexact science.
All of that deflects from the point:
If some people are voting for NESCAC teams and some are avoiding them altogether, what's the point of having them in the poll? Nobody's interests are served, not theirs or the poll's. Both the fan poll and real poll should take a stand -- rank the NESCAC where you think it belongs strength-wise or eliminate it from top 25 consideration entirely. What we have now is some voters giving them an honest guess and some voter throwing their hands up and saying "well we have no links to the rest of D3 therefore I cannot consider them: and what results is a ranking that neither accurately reflects the honest guesses or the fact that some find them impossible to consider. It's inconsistent with the rest of the poll, which is neither right nor wrong, just inconsistent.
I could probably take this up with a superior but it's mostly just occurred to me how I feel about it over the course of this discussion.
Quote from: smedindy on November 23, 2011, 11:13:24 PM
And it's nowhere near analogous to the "Pitcher / MVP" debate. You can compare (especially now with modern statistical measures) the results of pitchers vs. position players.
No but it is analogous to the idea that voters using inconsistent methods skewed the results of the 1999 MVP race.
Quote from: K-Mack on November 29, 2011, 08:09:58 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 23, 2011, 11:13:24 PM
And it's nowhere near analogous to the "Pitcher / MVP" debate. You can compare (especially now with modern statistical measures) the results of pitchers vs. position players.
No but it is analogous to the idea that voters using inconsistent methods skewed the results of the 1999 MVP race.
It skewed the 2011 AL MVP race too, though not fatally. One voter, as a matter of principle, left Verlander off his ballot (he claims Justin would have otherwise been #1 on his ballot); another had him EIGHTH.
(What startled me was that Valverde, with 49 saves in 49 chances did not receive a single point - Willie Hernandez, with 42 saves in 43 chances, was MVP in 1984!)
Quote from: K-Mack on November 29, 2011, 08:04:59 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 23, 2011, 10:14:50 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 23, 2011, 11:13:24 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on November 23, 2011, 10:05:15 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 16, 2011, 09:50:37 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on November 16, 2011, 09:39:34 PM
It's bizarre how an undefeated team from the academically elite NCAC, SCAC, Centennial, SCIAC, LL or UAA can crack the top 15 (8, 9, 12, 13, 16 in your latest) but Amherst gets one vote.
They have to be made up of similar athletes, no? I guess lack of top 25 love is going to be the NESCAC's pennance for starting late and not playing non-con forever.
We should really look into making them ineligible for the poll, that way no one has to bother (and clearly some don't).
:)
We don't have a point of reference. If they added just ONE game, even with the ECFC or the NEFC, then we'd have some point of reference. That's my issue and why I can't seem to vote for a NESCAC team.
Also, I gave a point of reference. It's not a non-conference result, but it's a point of reference. (see bold)
A point of reference as in how I can connect their results to the rest of the D-3 universe, Keith.
And it's nowhere near analogous to the "Pitcher / MVP" debate. You can compare (especially now with modern statistical measures) the results of pitchers vs. position players. I cannot tell how good Williams or Amherst are compared to the rest of D-3. Are they better than Salve Regina? Kean? Ithaca? You can't say for certain.
I disagree that that is a 'point of reference'. Being 'academically elite' and 'made up of similar athletes' is a non sequitur. Isn't it possible that the academically elite players who are serious about pursuing athletic excellence as well would choose a school where they could display athletic excellence?
IMO, NESCAC is not a d3 conference for football (much a I respect them in all other sports). By their own choice, they are intramurals in football. That is fine, I can respect that choice, but that IS their choice.
Well suffice to say that I disagree, about your use of the phrases "point of reference" and "non sequitur," as well as the substance of the argument. I stand by my original statements, because pointing out that the NESCAC is not a D-III conference for football or that there's no direct comparison isn't breaking any new ground.
Of course it would be better to make comparisons with the benefit of non-conference results and playoff interplay. Been beating that drum for years. It's inconsistent with their policies in other D-III sports. But I'm not trying in this post to go down that road again.
There is a comparison. It's not one you can prove through use of compared data, clearly. It's an educated guess. What if I wanted to compare Grinnell and Carleton and Lewis & Clark and RPI? Well there are technically a bunch of data points I can use to do this, but that might not be any more accurate than a guess. Polling, as we'd all admit, is an inexact science.
All of that deflects from the point:
If some people are voting for NESCAC teams and some are avoiding them altogether, what's the point of having them in the poll? Nobody's interests are served, not theirs or the poll's. Both the fan poll and real poll should take a stand -- rank the NESCAC where you think it belongs strength-wise or eliminate it from top 25 consideration entirely. What we have now is some voters giving them an honest guess and some voter throwing their hands up and saying "well we have no links to the rest of D3 therefore I cannot consider them: and what results is a ranking that neither accurately reflects the honest guesses or the fact that some find them impossible to consider. It's inconsistent with the rest of the poll, which is neither right nor wrong, just inconsistent.
I could probably take this up with a superior but it's mostly just occurred to me how I feel about it over the course of this discussion.
You've completely ignored why I called your "made up of similar athletes" argument a
non sequitur. The football players at NESCAC schools are presumably roughly similar to the football players at other academically elite schools -
academically. But is it not plausible that academically elite players who are ALSO
athletically elite, motivated, and competitive might choose to attend a school where they can demonstrate that talent
on a national stage? We have NOTHING to judge whether or not NESCAC football players are as
athletically competitive as, say, UAA players.
I'm not AS dogmatic as the MVP voter who left Verlander off his ballot (despite feeling that Verlander was the MVP!), but I would never be likely to vote for a NESCAC team in a poll, and with only 8 games there is probably not much they could do to change my mind (unlike the 34 games Verlander pitched!) ;)
D3 FAN POLL PANEL'S QUARTERFINAL COMBINED PREDICTIONS (Playoff record to date: 19-5):
UW-W 42
Salisbury 24
Mount Union 30
Wabash 16
UMHB 31
Wesley 30
St. Thomas 28
St. John Fisher 17
6 people on the panel submitted predictions. UW-W was the only unanimous selection. Here is the breakdown of predicted winners of other games:
Mount Union-5
Wabash-1
St. Thomas-5
St. John Fisher-1
UMHB-4
Wesley-2
The poll should be out sometime this afternoon.
Maybe we should now call ourselves the "Five Fanatics" but here are the Fan Poll results for the five of us who filled out ballots this week:
1. UW-Whitewater (5) 125 1 (LW)
2. Mount Union 120 2
3. (t) Mary Hardin-Baylor 111 4
4. (t) St. Thomas 111 3
5. Wesley 106 7
6. Wabash 102 8
7. Linfield 90 5
8. Salisbury 89 10
9. North Central 88 6
10. St. John Fisher 71 18
11. Delaware Valley 66 9
12. McMurry 61 11
13. California Lutheran 58 13
14. Kean 51 12
15. Monmouth 41 19
16. Bethel 40 17
17. Wheaton 39 16
18. Franklin 36 14
19. Centre 30 15
20. Trinity 29 21
21. Illinois Wesleyan 28 22 (t)
22. Johns Hopkins 27 20
23. Redlands 19 22(t)
24. Cortland State 18 25
25. Montclair State 13 24
Dropped Out of Top 25: None
Also Receiving Votes: Dubuque (10), Hobart (10), Baldwin-Wallace (8), UW-Oshkosh (8), Thomas More (5), Amherst (1)
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 30, 2011, 06:47:05 PM
Maybe we should now call ourselves the "Five Fanatics" but here are the Fan Poll results for the five of us who filled out ballots this week:
1. UW-Whitewater (5) 125 1 (LW)
2. Mount Union 120 2
3. (t) Mary Hardin-Baylor 111 4
4. (t) St. Thomas 111 3
5. Wesley 106 7
6. Wabash 102 8
7. Linfield 90 5
8. Salisbury 89 10
9. North Central 88 6
10. St. John Fisher 71 18
11. Delaware Valley 66 9
12. McMurry 61 11
13. California Lutheran 58 13
14. Kean 51 12
15. Monmouth 41 19
16. Bethel 40 17
17. Wheaton 39 16
18. Franklin 36 14
19. Centre 30 15
20. Trinity 29 21
21. Illinois Wesleyan 28 22 (t)
22. Johns Hopkins 27 20
23. Redlands 19 22(t)
24. Cortland State 18 25
25. Montclair State 13 24
Dropped Out of Top 25: None
Also Receiving Votes: Dubuque (10), Hobart (10), Baldwin-Wallace (8), UW-Oshkosh (8), Thomas More (5), Amherst (1)
Was (LW) based on how you "Five Fanatics" voted or the votes of all the usual voters? ;)
Quote from: BoBo on November 30, 2011, 07:43:57 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 30, 2011, 06:47:05 PM
Maybe we should now call ourselves the "Five Fanatics" but here are the Fan Poll results for the five of us who filled out ballots this week:
1. UW-Whitewater (5) 125 1 (LW)
2. Mount Union 120 2
3. (t) Mary Hardin-Baylor 111 4
4. (t) St. Thomas 111 3
5. Wesley 106 7
6. Wabash 102 8
7. Linfield 90 5
8. Salisbury 89 10
9. North Central 88 6
10. St. John Fisher 71 18
11. Delaware Valley 66 9
12. McMurry 61 11
13. California Lutheran 58 13
14. Kean 51 12
15. Monmouth 41 19
16. Bethel 40 17
17. Wheaton 39 16
18. Franklin 36 14
19. Centre 30 15
20. Trinity 29 21
21. Illinois Wesleyan 28 22 (t)
22. Johns Hopkins 27 20
23. Redlands 19 22(t)
24. Cortland State 18 25
25. Montclair State 13 24
Dropped Out of Top 25: None
Also Receiving Votes: Dubuque (10), Hobart (10), Baldwin-Wallace (8), UW-Oshkosh (8), Thomas More (5), Amherst (1)
Was (LW) based on how you "Five Fanatics" voted or the votes of all the usual voters? ;)
Last week I think we had 8. I didn't check back to see if we are losing ballots based on who has been eliminated from the playoffs. I know we lost one due to superstition and two due to the busyness of the season.
I will submit a ballot next week.
Thanks for doing the poll.
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 30, 2011, 08:13:58 PM
Last week I think we had 8. I didn't check back to see if we are losing ballots based on who has been eliminated from the playoffs. I know we lost one due to superstition and two due to the busyness of the season.
I still voted even though my Grizzlies were beaten by UWW.
Only 5 ballots and still just 1 spot was tied (not counting the ORV)
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 30, 2011, 08:13:58 PM
Quote from: BoBo on November 30, 2011, 07:43:57 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 30, 2011, 06:47:05 PM
Maybe we should now call ourselves the "Five Fanatics" but here are the Fan Poll results for the five of us who filled out ballots this week:
1. UW-Whitewater (5) 125 1 (LW)
2. Mount Union 120 2
3. (t) Mary Hardin-Baylor 111 4
4. (t) St. Thomas 111 3
5. Wesley 106 7
6. Wabash 102 8
7. Linfield 90 5
8. Salisbury 89 10
9. North Central 88 6
10. St. John Fisher 71 18
11. Delaware Valley 66 9
12. McMurry 61 11
13. California Lutheran 58 13
14. Kean 51 12
15. Monmouth 41 19
16. Bethel 40 17
17. Wheaton 39 16
18. Franklin 36 14
19. Centre 30 15
20. Trinity 29 21
21. Illinois Wesleyan 28 22 (t)
22. Johns Hopkins 27 20
23. Redlands 19 22(t)
24. Cortland State 18 25
25. Montclair State 13 24
Dropped Out of Top 25: None
Also Receiving Votes: Dubuque (10), Hobart (10), Baldwin-Wallace (8), UW-Oshkosh (8), Thomas More (5), Amherst (1)
Was (LW) based on how you "Five Fanatics" voted or the votes of all the usual voters? ;)
Last week I think we had 8. I didn't check back to see if we are losing ballots based on who has been eliminated from the playoffs. I know we lost one due to superstition and two due to the busyness of the season.
You must be pulling our collective leg(s)? Stopped with their ballot because of a superstition? But, the superstition didn't bother them during the regular season. That's (https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi395.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fpp31%2FYanglow%2FGif%2Feek1-1.gif%3Ft%3D1319288152&hash=33eb3603e18b789423615e6cff2c1c64ea505125)
Quote from: Ralph Turner on November 30, 2011, 10:28:25 PM
I will submit a ballot next week.
Thanks for doing the poll.
Sounds great. It's actually kind of a fun process to figure out how far to drop or raise teams depending on playoff outcomes.
Quote from: bleedpurple on December 01, 2011, 04:19:05 PM
Sounds great. It's actually kind of a fun process to figure out how far to drop or raise teams depending on playoff outcomes.
On my ballot the 8 that lost dropped between 2 (Linfield to 7th, Kean to 16th) and 5 (Monmouth to 22nd)
Of the 8 that won, the top 4 stayed put, Wabash and Wesley moved up 3 spots to 5th and 6th, Salisbury up 2 to 8th, and SJF up 9 to 14th.
Quote from: BoBo on December 01, 2011, 12:35:06 AM
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 30, 2011, 08:13:58 PM
Quote from: BoBo on November 30, 2011, 07:43:57 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 30, 2011, 06:47:05 PM
Maybe we should now call ourselves the "Five Fanatics" but here are the Fan Poll results for the five of us who filled out ballots this week:
1. UW-Whitewater (5) 125 1 (LW)
2. Mount Union 120 2
3. (t) Mary Hardin-Baylor 111 4
4. (t) St. Thomas 111 3
5. Wesley 106 7
6. Wabash 102 8
7. Linfield 90 5
8. Salisbury 89 10
9. North Central 88 6
10. St. John Fisher 71 18
11. Delaware Valley 66 9
12. McMurry 61 11
13. California Lutheran 58 13
14. Kean 51 12
15. Monmouth 41 19
16. Bethel 40 17
17. Wheaton 39 16
18. Franklin 36 14
19. Centre 30 15
20. Trinity 29 21
21. Illinois Wesleyan 28 22 (t)
22. Johns Hopkins 27 20
23. Redlands 19 22(t)
24. Cortland State 18 25
25. Montclair State 13 24
Dropped Out of Top 25: None
Also Receiving Votes: Dubuque (10), Hobart (10), Baldwin-Wallace (8), UW-Oshkosh (8), Thomas More (5), Amherst (1)
Was (LW) based on how you "Five Fanatics" voted or the votes of all the usual voters? ;)
Last week I think we had 8. I didn't check back to see if we are losing ballots based on who has been eliminated from the playoffs. I know we lost one due to superstition and two due to the busyness of the season.
You must be pulling our collective leg(s)? Stopped with their ballot because of a superstition? But, the superstition didn't bother them during the regular season. That's (https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi395.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fpp31%2FYanglow%2FGif%2Feek1-1.gif%3Ft%3D1319288152&hash=33eb3603e18b789423615e6cff2c1c64ea505125)
Bobo, I agree- that is crazy. Doesn't that pollster know you can use 13 packets of #13 Herb Spiritual Bath and take a bath every morning for a total
of 13 days to clear away a really bad jinx?
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on December 02, 2011, 07:28:28 AM
Quote from: bleedpurple on December 01, 2011, 04:19:05 PM
Sounds great. It's actually kind of a fun process to figure out how far to drop or raise teams depending on playoff outcomes.
On my ballot the 8 that lost dropped between 2 (Linfield to 7th, Kean to 16th) and 5 (Monmouth to 22nd)
Of the 8 that won, the top 4 stayed put, Wabash and Wesley moved up 3 spots to 5th and 6th, Salisbury up 2 to 8th, and SJF up 9 to 14th.
I did some shaking up after UW-W and Mount, which remained 1 and 2:
Wesley replaced Linfield at #3 (from 7).
UMHB moved from 5 to 4.
Wabash jumped from 8 to 5.
I dumped St. Thomas from 4 to 6.
Linfield fell from 3 to 7.
NCC fell from 6 to 8.
Salisbury moved from 10 to 9.
St. John Fisher jumped from 16 to 10.
Obviously, I was very impressed with Wesley, Wabash, and Fisher last week.
I'm not a voter in the national fan poll, but vote in the north region poll. Wabash beating NCC by 1 at home, on a very lucky carom of the 2-point conversion (see the intended Wabash receiver on the ground in agony thinking he cost them the game!), leaves me waiting for tomorrow's game in Alliance before deciding if I even move Wabash ahead of NCC, much less several slots ahead.
This is NOT meant to diss the LGs - they deserved the win on a remarkable comeback. I thought NCC would win by 2-3 TDs - I was wrong (though I looked good for three quarters :P). IF Wabash wins tomorrow, I'll have them first, NCC second, and UMU third - a result I never could have imagined! If UMU wins (as I predict), I'm gonna really agonize over #2.
A great playoff season so far! A few upsets, some major comebacks, and still plenty of purple power. Some of the inter-region action has been fun to follow. At the end of the day, the semi-finals consist of the purples, Wesley (who overcame an early season loss), and St. Thomas.
How accurate were the polls? Here is how these teams were ranked in the pre-season polls:
D3football.com Poll: #1, #2, #3, #5.
D3 Top 25 Fan Poll: #1, #2, #4, #5
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 02, 2011, 11:41:37 PM
I'm not a voter in the national fan poll, but vote in the north region poll. Wabash beating NCC by 1 at home, on a very lucky carom of the 2-point conversion (see the intended Wabash receiver on the ground in agony thinking he cost them the game!), leaves me waiting for tomorrow's game in Alliance before deciding if I even move Wabash ahead of NCC, much less several slots ahead.
This is NOT meant to diss the LGs - they deserved the win on a remarkable comeback. I thought NCC would win by 2-3 TDs - I was wrong (though I looked good for three quarters :P). IF Wabash wins tomorrow, I'll have them first, NCC second, and UMU third - a result I never could have imagined! If UMU wins (as I predict), I'm gonna really agonize over #2.
Hard to rank the team that blew the lead over the team that made the head to head comeback, no?
Quote from: bleedpurple on December 03, 2011, 10:29:44 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 02, 2011, 11:41:37 PM
I'm not a voter in the national fan poll, but vote in the north region poll. Wabash beating NCC by 1 at home, on a very lucky carom of the 2-point conversion (see the intended Wabash receiver on the ground in agony thinking he cost them the game!), leaves me waiting for tomorrow's game in Alliance before deciding if I even move Wabash ahead of NCC, much less several slots ahead.
This is NOT meant to diss the LGs - they deserved the win on a remarkable comeback. I thought NCC would win by 2-3 TDs - I was wrong (though I looked good for three quarters :P). IF Wabash wins tomorrow, I'll have them first, NCC second, and UMU third - a result I never could have imagined! If UMU wins (as I predict), I'm gonna really agonize over #2.
Hard to rank the team that blew the lead over the team that made the head to head comeback, no?
Almost everyone but me had Wheaton ahead of IWU at the end, despite IWU beating Wheaton. 8-)
And even I will probably put Wheaton ahead of IWU in the final, so, no, having NCC ahead of Wabash would in no way be hypocritical. I'm just not sure either way. I still THINK NCC is probably better, and 1 point at home (on a lucky carom) is not
compelling evidence the other way. Anyone got a coin to flip? ::)
North Central lost to Wabash head to head. (period)..... Anyone voting for them ahead of Wabash, even in a fan poll, because of self-proclaimed luck, home field advantage, the pollen count was too high, etc. etc. Is discrediting themselves. North Central lost, it doesn't matter how or why, they had their chance and they lost.
Mount's defense played a full game with an exceptional game plan (coaching) and defeated Wabash 20-8.
Quote from: bashbrother on December 04, 2011, 08:55:56 PM
North Central lost to Wabash head to head. (period)..... Anyone voting for them ahead of Wabash, even in a fan poll, because of self-proclaimed luck, home field advantage, the pollen count was too high, etc. etc. Is discrediting themselves. North Central lost, it doesn't matter how or why, they had their chance and they lost.
Mount's defense played a full game with an exceptional game plan (coaching) and defeated Wabash 20-8.
My, my - you certainly see the world in black-and-white (or should I say 'scarlet'). ;)
A poll is not the same as standings. Kean beat Wesley and remained behind them. Redlands beat NCC and NCC quickly went back ahead of them. IWU beat Wheaton and within two weeks most had Wheaton back ahead. If Wabash had won by ten, or had won by one but in Naperville, we're not having this discussion. But I fail to see how a one-point win AT HOME (and with a two-point conversion which was gutsy-as-hell but still can only be termed 'fluky') can be construed as compelling evidence of superiority. :P
In a poll, where I rank teams on who I think would win more often than not, I do have teams that lost head-to-head above the teams that beat them.
I didn't have NC ahead of Wabash, mainly because while it may have been a 'fluke' Wabash was without Belton. Yes Burke performed miracles, but with Belton in they may not have had to have the miracle.
Quote from: smedindy on December 04, 2011, 09:34:07 PM
In a poll, where I rank teams on who I think would win more often than not, I do have teams that lost head-to-head above the teams that beat them.
I didn't have NC ahead of Wabash, mainly because while it may have been a 'fluke' Wabash was without Belton. Yes Burke performed miracles, but with Belton in they may not have had to have the miracle.
Good point, smed, and certainly a more convincing argument than "Wabash beat NCC .... (period)". ;)
While Belton is presumably better than Burke in general (hence, he was the starter :P), whether or not he would have been any better than Burke was THAT day (posters wanted to erect 'statutes' for him! ;)) is pure speculation. As, of course, is my speculation that NCC, notwithstanding the head-to-head THAT day, is still the slightly better team.
If Wes Anderson will accept the ballot that way, I may put them as tied for 2nd in the North. 8-)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 04, 2011, 09:21:28 PM
Quote from: bashbrother on December 04, 2011, 08:55:56 PM
North Central lost to Wabash head to head. (period)..... Anyone voting for them ahead of Wabash, even in a fan poll, because of self-proclaimed luck, home field advantage, the pollen count was too high, etc. etc. Is discrediting themselves. North Central lost, it doesn't matter how or why, they had their chance and they lost.
Mount's defense played a full game with an exceptional game plan (coaching) and defeated Wabash 20-8.
My, my - you certainly see the world in black-and-white (or should I say 'scarlet'). ;)
A poll is not the same as standings. Kean beat Wesley and remained behind them. Redlands beat NCC and NCC quickly went back ahead of them. IWU beat Wheaton and within two weeks most had Wheaton back ahead. If Wabash had won by ten, or had won by one but in Naperville, we're not having this discussion. But I fail to see how a one-point win AT HOME (and with a two-point conversion which was gutsy-as-hell but still can only be termed 'fluky') can be construed as compelling evidence of superiority. :P
Interesting that when discussing the NESCAC, you need to have concrete, on-field evidence. But when you have a concrete, on-field h2h results, you don't mind being subjective.
Oh, I shouldn't have said anything. Let's not start that up again.
I like the "I rank teams I think would win more often than not" theory. I think, though, in some cases that line of thinking fails to see the forest for the trees. So I tend to go with bashbrother on this.
Every team that beats another team h2h isn't always better than that team just because it was on that day (see Kean's loss to Brockport State) but in the absence of overwhelming evidence to the contrary (see Kean's win over Wesley) I think you go with the team that won the h2h matchup.
I pick Kean for this demonstration because now there's enough evidence, with Wesley having beaten Salisbury and Kean losing to Salisbury, and then Wesley going to UHMB and winning, to say Wesley is a) Better than Kean over a full season b) better in Weeks 13-14 than it was in Week 2.
For most of the season though, in the absence of that evidence, I respected the Kean-Wesley h2h result. When we "know" something, it's awful ... hmm, presumptuous(?) ... to take your guess over that even though there are likely occurrences of me doing this very thing.
I think in the case of North Central and Redlands, my final ballot might end up respecting the h2h result even though at one point I was of the opinion that North Central might go into Alliance and win. The full package of evidence, is it convincing enough to ignore an h2h result, even if it was played after a long plane ride and all that jazz.
Obviously other people weight home field and other factors more than I do. In the end, I like to look at the entire body of work, and that means not ignoring what happened in h2h games early in the season.
We at least have to admit that polling is
1) highly fluid
2) highly subjective
Keith, you gotta post more often - I enjoy the discussions. ;D
Nice try on the first two paragraphs, but I already explained why 'academic parity' of NESCAC and other elite schools and 'athletic parity' was a non sequitur. NESCAC may or may not be equivalent, but you gotta do better than that! 8-)
As to the rest of your post, is a one-point win AT home (on a 2-point conversion that any neutral observer has to consider 'lucky' or 'fluky' - look at the intended receiver, on his knees in anguish thinking he just cost the LGs the game) really a compelling h-to-h result? As I already posted, if Wabash won by ten, or even if they had this result in Naperville, the discussion would not be happening. We can all disagree on how much home field is worth, but surely you do not think it is worth NOTHING.
Out of pure cussedness, I have decided to cast my North Region ballot as NCC 2, Wabash 3. I have little doubt that I will be outvoted (and probably reviled), but there it is. :P
(And as an IWU fan, I despise NCC! ;D)
Ypsi,
But I'd never vote for DPU over Wabash*. Not that it'll be a factor anytime soon.
*unless 1000% warranted
Quote from: smedindy on December 05, 2011, 09:01:59 PM
Ypsi,
But I'd never vote for DPU over Wabash*. Not that it'll be a factor anytime soon.
*unless 1000% warranted
Good point! ;)
Back in my day, Millikin might have been hated at least 20% as much as you hate DePauw, but I'm not sure any of IWU's rivalries today are within 95% of yours!
When I say 'despise', it is just conference banter, but we're like brothers: we 'hate' each other, but woe unto the outsider who picks on my brother! From following nearly all the boards, I'm starting to wonder if the CCIW might be the most 'collegial' conference in the country?! ;D
Or maybe I'm just getting old and mellow. :P
Using a early season examples mean much less than a playoff game in which your life is on the line... is a completely different story when a team is playing for their life in the playoffs. NC got a chance and lost...
Should we say any team that loses a game to anyone else is better than the team they lost to?......... While your at it, rank North Central in front of Mount. Why not. They didn't even have the chance at h2h..... so thus, it would become even more subjective.
Vote for NCC for President, I don't care, just save your "not trying to dis Wabash in anyway" garbage....... you either give them respect or you don't. Speaking of glasses, what color are your (CCIW glasses). You may need a better prescription.
Quote from: bashbrother on December 05, 2011, 10:26:43 PM
I don't know about Mellow... but Old... yes...
Using a early season examples mean much less than a playoff game in which your life is on the line... is a completely different story when a team is playing for their life. NC got a chance and lost...
Should we say any team that loses a game to anyone else is better than the other......... While your at it, rank North Central in front of Mount. Why not. They didn't even have the chance at h2h..... so thus, it would become even more subjective.
Vote for NCC for President, I don't care, just save your not trying to dis Wabash in anyway garbage....... you either give them respect or you don't. Speaking of glasses, what color are your (CCIW glasses). You may need a better prescription.
I've already seen your pathetic attempts at intelligent debate; I won't bother with your NCC/UMU (or NCC for President) whines.
I have great respect for Wabash. For some of their posters, not so much.
D3 TOP 25 FAN POLL SEMI-FINAL WEEK
1. UW-Whitewater (5) 125 1 (LW)
2. Mount Union 120 2
3. St. Thomas 113 3(T)
4. Wesley 112 5
5. UMHB 105 3(T)
6. Wabash 94 6
7. North Central 91 9
8. Salisbury 90 8
9. Linfield 88 7
10. St. John Fisher 75 10
11. (t) Delaware Valley 65 11
(t) McMurry 65 12
13. Kean 61 14
14. California Lutheran 55 13
15. Franklin 48 18
16. (t) Monmouth 41 15
(t) Bethel 41 16
18. Centre 34 19
19. Wheaton 29 17
20. Johns Hopkins 28 22
21. Trinity 27 20
22. Illinois Wesleyan 24 21
23. (t) Redlands 18 23
(t)Cortland State 18 24
25. Hobart 17 Unranked
Dropped Out of Top 25: Montclair State
Also Receiving Votes: Montclair State (13), Dubuque (9), Wisconsin-Oshkosh (9), Baldwin-Wallace (8), Thomas More (7), Amherst (1)
Are either of the semifinal games going to be on espn? That's what i had heard earlier in the season.
Quote from: CruFrenzy on December 08, 2011, 05:01:07 PM
Are either of the semifinal games going to be on espn? That's what i had heard earlier in the season.
They're both on ESPN3.
D3 Top 25 Fan Poll Panel Predictions (Playoff Record to Date: 22-6)
UW-Whitewater 30
St. Thomas 21
Mount Union 31
Wesley 21
D3 Top 25 Poll Panel Stagg Bowl Prediction (playoff record 24-6)
UW-Whitewater 28
Mount Union 17
I forgot to submit mine
UWW: 76
UMU: 0
does that change he Panel average at all ;)
My final poll is in.
Thanks for running the poll!
Are we re-upping this again this season?
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on August 16, 2012, 12:40:11 PM
Are we re-upping this again this season?
I hope so. I've already submitted my north region ballot and have my top 25 ready to go.
If bleed doesn't feel like doing it this year I can keep track of it. Since we're less than a week from games kicking off I figure someone has to get this going soon or we won't have a preseason poll at all. So send ballots to me and if bleed decides soon to run it again I'll pass them on.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on August 24, 2012, 11:32:15 AM
If bleed doesn't feel like doing it this year I can keep track of it. Since we're less than a week from games kicking off I figure someone has to get this going soon or we won't have a preseason poll at all. So send ballots to me and if bleed decides soon to run it again I'll pass them on.
You can go for it, FC! Thanks!!
ANYONE INTERESTED IN BEING PART OF THE 2012 TOP 25 FAN POLL:
Please send me a PM with your ballot. I'd like to get a preseason poll up by Thursday night.
During the season ballots shall be due by Tuesdays so I can get them up Tuesday night.
Remember, this is just fun and we aren't part of the BCS Formula... yet ;D
So far I've got 6 ballots. It'd be nice if we can get to at least 10 people before I put the first poll up.
There's still more than a 36 hours to get a preseason ballot in so be sure to send me a PM with your ballot.
Unless someone sends me a message in the next few minutes while I'm preparing the poll that they need more time, I will have the Preseason poll up in the next half hour. So far I've only received 7 ballots. Even if you miss this week you can join in future weeks.
2012 PRESEASON D3 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev Rank
1) UW-Whitewater (6) 174 1
2) Mount Union (1) 169 2
3) Wesley 156 4
4) Mary Hardin-Baylor 148 5
T5) Linfield 140 9
T5) North Central 140 7
7) St Thomas 135 3
8) Salisbury 120 8
9) Wabash 114 6
10) Delaware Valley 108 T11
11) St John Fisher 94 10
12) Cal Lutheran 87 14
13) Bethel 76 T16
14) Wheaton 73 19
15) Franklin 65 15
16) Kean 64 13
T17) Baldwin-Wallace 59 NR
T17) UW-Oshkosh 59 NR
19) Redlands 50 T23
20) Trinity (TX) 45 21
21) UW Platteville 39 NR
22) Illinois Wesleyan 36 22
23) Thomas More 17 NR
24) Hobart 14 25
T25) Birmingham-Southern 13 NR
T25) Centre 13 18
Dropped Out: McMurry, Monmouth, Johns Hopkins, Cortland St
Also Receiving Votes: Heidelberg (12), Chicago (8), Cortland St (8), Wittenberg (8), Louisiana College (6), Albion (5), Case Western Reserve (5), Widener (5), Hampden-Sydney (3), Wartburg (3), Adrian (1), Montclair St (1)
Voters were: 02 Warhawk, bleedpurple, FCGrizzliesGrad, Ghostbuster, hazzben, joelmama, and smedindy (you can still join next week even if you didn't vote this week)
The fan poll was quite similar to the D3F poll... the only teams in just one or the other were UW-Oshkosh (T17) was 31st in the D3F poll, Centre (T25) was 26th in the D3F poll, and Widener (25) who was 32nd in the fan poll. The top 12 had the same teams with just a couple flip flops 7/8 and 9/10.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on August 30, 2012, 07:43:07 PM
2012 PRESEASON D3 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev Rank
1) UW-Whitewater (6) 174 1
2) Mount Union (1) 169 2
3) Wesley 156 4
4) Mary Hardin-Baylor 148 5
T5) Linfield 140 9
T5) North Central 140 7
7) St Thomas 135 3
8) Salisbury 120 8
9) Wabash 114 6
10) Delaware Valley 108 T11
11) St John Fisher 94 10
12) Cal Lutheran 87 14
13) Bethel 76 T16
14) Wheaton 73 19
15) Franklin 65 15
16) Kean 64 13
T17) Baldwin-Wallace 59 NR
T17) UW-Oshkosh 59 NR
19) Redlands 50 T23
20) Trinity (TX) 45 21
21) UW Platteville 39 NR
22) Illinois Wesleyan 36 22
23) Thomas More 17 NR
24) Hobart 14 25
T25) Birmingham-Southern 13 NR
T25) Centre 13 18
Dropped Out: McMurry, Monmouth, Johns Hopkins, Cortland St
Also Receiving Votes: Heidelberg (12), Chicago (8), Cortland St (8), Wittenberg (8), Louisiana College (6), Albion (5), Case Western Reserve (5), Widener (5), Hampden-Sydney (3), Wartburg (3), Adrian (1), Montclair St (1)
Voters were: 02 Warhawk, bleedpurple, FCGrizzliesGrad, Ghostbuster, hazzben, joelmama, and smedindy (you can still join next week even if you didn't vote this week)
Nice job on the Poll. Well thought out by everyone.
Don't forget to get your ballots in. Deadline is Tuesday evening unless someone tells me they need a bit more time. Anyone can participate even if you missed out on the last poll.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 05, 2011, 08:35:27 PM
Keith, you gotta post more often - I enjoy the discussions. ;D
Been a while since I posted here and just saw this ... I don't think I can do the boards as often as I now save most of my thoughts for the podcast, or the Triple Take, or ATN or one of the many other "official" things I'm doing for the site.
I always enjoy your posts as well. And not going to re-start a discussion from December, I just stopped in to glance at your poll, and the "new" button took me way way back.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on August 31, 2012, 06:35:36 AM
The fan poll was quite similar to the D3F poll... the only teams in just one or the other were UW-Oshkosh (T17) was 31st in the D3F poll, Centre (T25) was 26th in the D3F poll, and Widener (25) who was 32nd in the fan poll. The top 12 had the same teams with just a couple flip flops 7/8 and 9/10.
Our preseason data package (spreadsheet) had good info on what UW-P and Widener had coming back. That was a while back, but it probably what convinced me to go Platteville instead of Oshkosh.
I know it'll seem like old news by Thursday, but I'll be aiming to include my rankings in ATNs this year, with reasoning. And my rule for self is to always have a reason ... which is why it sometimes takes me forever to do my ballot. ;D
Last chance to get ballots in for this week. I'll be getting it posted in about an hour so if you need a bit of time send me a PM and I'll wait. I've received 6 ballots so far.
2012 WEEK 1 D3 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev Rank
1) UW-Whitewater (6) 174 1
2) Mount Union (1) 169 2
3) Wesley 158 3
4) Mary Hardin-Baylor 154 4
5) Salisbury 137 8
6) St Thomas 126 7
7) Linfield 124 T5
8) Wabash 122 9
9) Cal Lutheran 117 12
10) St John Fisher 108 11
11) Wheaton 107 14
12) Bethel 92 13
13) Trinity (TX) 75 20
14) Redlands 71 19
15) UW Platteville 56 21
16) North Central 55 T5
17) UW-Oshkosh 52 T17
18) Franklin 46 15
T19) Baldwin-Wallace 38 T17
T19) Illinois Wesleyan 38 22
21) Delaware Valley 31 10
22) Birmingham-Southern 27 T25
23) Widener 26 NR
24) Heidelberg 25 NR
25) Hobart 20 24
Dropped Out: Kean, Thomas More, Centre
Also Receiving Votes: Johns Hopkins (17), Wartburg (17), Centre (16), UW-La Crosse (16), Kean (15), Rowan (12), Louisiana College (10), Wittenberg (9), Albion (5), Hampden-Sydney (3), UW-Eau Claire (3), St John's (2), St Olaf (2)
Voters were: 02 Warhawk, bleedpurple, FCGrizzliesGrad, Ghostbuster, hazzben, short, and smedindy
How the hell the did st. Thomas jump over linfield?
Because the voters said so, I guess, or something or other.
Well, if joelmama had submitted a ballot this week then Linfield likely would have been ahead of St Thomas. Had a few minutes so here's the breakdown of the votes
Rank Team Points
1) UW-Whitewater 174 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2)
2) Mount Union 169 ( 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3) Wesley 158 ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 6)
4) Mary Hardin-Baylor 154 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5)
5) Salisbury 137 ( 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8)
6) St Thomas 126 ( 4, 6, 6, 7, 8, 10, 15)
7) Linfield 124 ( 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, --)
8) Wabash 122 ( 5, 7, 7, 8, 9, 10, 14)
9) Cal Lutheran 117 ( 8, 9, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10)
10) St John Fisher 108 ( 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 14)
11) Wheaton 107 ( 7, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 21)
12) Bethel 92 (10, 12, 13, 13, 13, 14, 15)
13) Trinity (TX) 75 ( 9, 11, 11, 16, 18, 18, 24)
14) Redlands 71 (12, 12, 13, 14, 16, 21, 23)
15) UW Platteville 56 (13, 15, 15, 17, 20, 21, 25)
16) North Central 55 (13, 15, 15, 19, 19, 20, --)
17) UW-Oshkosh 52 (11, 15, 18, 19, 19, 22, --)
18) Franklin 46 (12, 17, 17, 18, 21, 25, --)
T19) Baldwin-Wallace 38 (11, 14, 17, 24, --, --, --)
T19) Illinois Wesleyan 38 (16, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, --)
21) Delaware Valley 31 (13, 14, 20, --, --, --, --)
22) Birmingham-Southern 27 (16, 18, 21, 22, --, --, --)
23) Widener 26 (19, 19, 20, 22, 24, --, --)
24) Heidelberg 25 (10, 20, 23, --, --, --, --)
25) Hobart 20 (16, 21, 22, 25, --, --, --)
T26) Johns Hopkins 17 (12, 24, 25)
T26) Wartburg 17 (16, 22, 24, 25)
T28) Centre 16 (16, 20)
T28) UW-La Crosse 16 (11, 25)
30) Kean 15 (17, 23, 23)
31) Rowan 12 (18, 22)
32) Louisiana College 10 (17, 25)
33) Wittenberg 9 (17)
34) Albion 5 (21)
T35) Hampden-Sydney 3 (23)
T35) UW-Eau Claire 3 (23)
T37) St John's 2 (24)
T37) St Olaf 2 (24)
Did someone forget to rank Linfield, or do they really think they aren't a top 25 team :o I'm guessing it's the former, or better yet, I'm hoping its the former...
wasn't me, I had them 5th
Is there a way to view your 'sent' personal messages that I'm not seeing?
You have to be sure to check 'save to my outbox' or something to that effect.
^^ thanks
You have until this evening to get those ballots in for this week. Only 6 received so far.
I will try to have the poll up sometime tonight after bowling.
2012 WEEK 2 D3 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev Rank
1) UW-Whitewater (6) 174 1
2) Mount Union (1) 168 2
3) Wesley 161 3
4) Mary Hardin-Baylor 154 4
5) Linfield 144 7
6) St Thomas 139 6
7) Wabash 127 8
8) Cal Lutheran 124 9
9) Salisbury 113 5
10) Bethel 109 12
11) St John Fisher 107 10
12) Trinity (TX) 86 13
13) North Central 80 16
14) UW Platteville 72 15
15) UW-Oshkosh 63 17
16) Illinois Wesleyan 61 T19
17) Baldwin-Wallace 59 T19
18) Birmingham-Southern 40 22
19) Franklin 35 18
20) Hobart 34 25
21) Widener 31 23
22) Heidelberg 28 24
23) Albion 26 NR
24) Wheaton 25 11
25) Centre 23 NR
Dropped Out: Redlands, Delaware Valley
Also Receiving Votes: Louisiana College (16), Redlands (13), Hampden-Sydney (11), Wittenberg (11), UW-La Crosse (9), Thomas More (7), Rowan (6), Brockport St (5), St John's (4), St Olaf (3), Albright (2), Elmhurst (2), Delaware Valley (1), Gettysburg (1), Johns Hopkins (1)
Voters were: 02 Warhawk, bleedpurple, FCGrizzliesGrad, Ghostbuster, hazzben, short, and smedindy
Sorry I haven't got the last couple weeks in was out of the country and will try to get back in the swing of things for next week.
Quote from: joelmama on September 12, 2012, 01:32:44 PM
Sorry I haven't got the last couple weeks in was out of the country and will try to get back in the swing of things for next week.
no excuses
2012 WEEK 3 D3 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev Rank
1) Mount Union (6) 174 2
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor (1) 169 4
3) Linfield 156 5
4) Wesley 147 3
5) St Thomas 144 6
6) UW-Whitewater 142 1
7) Wabash 129 7
T8) Salisbury 115 9
T8) Bethel 115 10
10) Cal Lutheran 111 8
11) St John Fisher 103 11
12) North Central 93 13
13) UW Platteville 76 14
14) UW-Oshkosh 73 15
15) Illinois Wesleyan 66 16
T16) Baldwin-Wallace 57 17
T16) Hobart 57 20
18) Birmingham-Southern 55 18
19) Widener 43 21
20) Heidelberg 40 22
21) Brockport St 37 NR
22) Wheaton 36 24
23) Franklin 31 19
24) Buffalo St 20 NR
25) Louisiana College 19 NR
Dropped Out: Trinity (TX), Albion, Centre
Also Receiving Votes: Hampden-Sydney (12), Wittenberg (12), Rowan (9), Willamette (7), Johns Hopkins (5), Trinity (TX) (4), Gettysburg (4), Albright (3), Thomas More (3), UW-La Crosse (3), Delaware Valley (2), Waynesburg (2), Elmhurst (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bleedpurple, FCGrizzliesGrad, Ghostbuster, hazzben, short, and smedindy
Is the one vote for MHB the same vote that was cast for Mt. U last week? Somebody must have something against the Warhawks ;D
It wasn't the same person... I'm the MHB vote this week but had Whitewater last week. I was in the interesting position of having my top 2 teams both lose... when's the last time anyone's had to deal with that on their ballot? I will say, had both UWW and Wesley won I was prepared to move Wesley to #1.
I'll put up a rundown of the voting positions later tonight
1) Mount Union 174 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 169 ( 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3) Linfield 156 ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 6)
4) Wesley 147 ( 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6)
5) St Thomas 144 ( 3, 4, 5, 5, 5, 7, 9)
6) UW-Whitewater 142 ( 3, 3, 5, 6, 6, 7, 10)
7) Wabash 129 ( 4, 6, 7, 7, 7, 9, 13)
T8) Salisbury 115 ( 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 10, 19)
T8) Bethel 115 ( 8, 8, 9, 9, 10, 11, 12)
10) Cal Lutheran 111 ( 8, 8, 10, 11, 11, 11, 12)
11) St John Fisher 103 ( 4, 6, 9, 11, 14, 15, 20)
12) North Central 93 ( 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 18)
13) UW Platteville 76 ( 12, 13, 13, 14, 16, 17, 21)
14) UW-Oshkosh 73 ( 9, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20)
15) Illinois Wesleyan 66 ( 12, 15, 16, 17, 17, 17, 22)
T16) Baldwin-Wallace 57 ( 11, 13, 13, 14, 23, 25, --)
T16) Hobart 57 ( 10, 12, 18, 19, 21, 21, 24)
18) Birmingham-Southern 55 ( 13, 13, 15, 18, 19, 23, --)
19) Widener 43 ( 15, 16, 19, 20, 21, 22, --)
20) Heidelberg 40 ( 10, 16, 18, 20, --, --, --)
21) Brockport St 37 ( 12, 17, 20, 21, 24, 25, --)
22) Wheaton 36 ( 15, 18, 19, 20, 22, --, --)
23) Franklin 31 ( 16, 18, 19, 20, --, --, --)
24) Buffalo St 20 ( 16, 19, 25, 25, 25, --, --)
25) Louisiana College 19 ( 14, 22, 23, --, --, --, --)
T26) Hampden-Sydney 12 (17, 23)
T26) Wittenberg 12 (14)
28) Rowan 9 (21, 22)
29) Willamette 7 (21, 24)
30) Johns Hopkins 5 (23. 24)
T31) Trinity (TX) 4 (22)
T31) Gettysburg 4 (22)
T33) Albright 3 (23)
T33) Thomas More 3 (24. 25)
T33) UW-La Crosse 3 (23)
T36) Delaware Valley 2 (24)
T36) Waynesburg 2 (24)
38) Elmhurst 1 (25)
Always interesting to see where Teams get placed by each voter. The things that jumped out to me the most.
SJF from 4 to 20 on the ballots. To be honest, I'm more confused by the #4 spot. They are undefeated, but haven't won any games in the convincing fashion I'd expect the #4 team in the country. In fact, their wins have been surprisingly close.
We'll find out a lot about UWP tonight. First WIAC opponent and without their starting QB. UWEC has two losses, but both by 3 points to SJU and UST.
Surprising to see the relative lack of love for Brockport St. and Buffalo St. Given where the Warhawks remained, it seems fair to conclude most voters saw the win as an anomaly than indicative of either UWW and BSU. I can certainly understand being cautious with dropping UWW. But beating UWW in the regular season on the road is impressive. In two weeks we'll all have a lot better handle on where BSU is at when they play Fan Poll #8 Salisbury.
Thanks for tabulating this every week FCGG. It's fun and motivates me to learn and digest more info on teams outside of the West and North Regions. I realize we're not playing for keeps, but I don't want to be a dope voter (although this doesn't preclude that very conclusion ;D). One of the best takeaways for me from the poll is that I feel much more invested in D3 as a whole. Good stuff.
Quote from: hazzben on September 20, 2012, 10:46:27 AM
In two weeks we'll all have a lot better handle on where BSU is at when they play Fan Poll #8 Salisbury.
Salisbury has a bye week before that game, so that gives them two weeks to prepare for Buffalo State. However, that may not matter because UWW also had two weeks to prepare for them and that ended with a very shocking result. Hopefully the two weeks off doesn't hurt us as it may have hurt UWW.
Hey, our poll made Keith's BTN!!!
I halfway blew it up and started again.
2012 WEEK 4 D3 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev Rank
1) Mount Union (7) 199 1
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor (1) 193 2
3) Linfield 181 3
T4) Wesley 168 4
T4) St Thomas 168 5
6) UW-Whitewater 162 6
7) Bethel 141 T8
8) Salisbury 139 T8
9) Cal Lutheran 133 10
10) St John Fisher 127 11
11) North Central 113 12
12) UW Platteville 102 13
13) UW-Oshkosh 96 14
T14) Illinois Wesleyan 77 15
T14) Hobart 77 T16
16) Birmingham-Southern 76 18
17) Wabash 67 7
18) Baldwin-Wallace 66 T16
19) Widener 59 19
20) Heidelberg 52 20
21) Wheaton 46 22
22) Franklin 36 23
23) Louisiana College 30 25
24) Wittenberg 18 NR
25) Johns Hopkins 15 NR
Dropped Out: Brockport St, Buffalo St
Also Receiving Votes: Huntingdon (11), Rowan (10), Concordia-Moorhead (9), Willamette (9), Waynesburg (7), Delaware Valley (4), Carnegie Mellon (2), Elmhurst (2), Gettysburg (2), Whitworth (2), Salve Regina (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bleedpurple, FCGrizzliesGrad, Ghostbuster, hazzben, short, smedindy, and our newest voter newcardfan
2012 WEEK 4 D3 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev Rank
1) Mount Union (7) 199 1
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor (1) 193 2
3) Linfield 180 3
4) Wesley 169 T4
5) St Thomas 168 T4
6) UW-Whitewater 159 6
7) Salisbury 148 8
8) Bethel 137 7
9) Cal Lutheran 135 9
10) St John Fisher 129 10
11) North Central 120 11
12) UW Platteville 100 12
13) UW-Oshkosh 96 13
14) Hobart 84 T14
15) Birmingham-Southern 81 16
16) Wabash 77 17
17) Illinois Wesleyan 66 T14
18) Widener 61 19
19) Heidelberg 57 20
20) Wheaton 41 21
21) Louisiana College 38 23
22) Franklin 34 22
23) Huntingdon 21 NR
24) Johns Hopkins 20 25
25) Wittenberg 17 24
Dropped Out: Baldwin-Wallace
Also Receiving Votes: Rowan (15), Concordia-Moorhead (12), Otterbein (11), Waynesburg (9), Willamette (7), Delaware Valley (4), Gettysburg (4), Coe (2), Ithaca (2), Salve Regina (2), Whitworth (2)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bleedpurple, FCGrizzliesGrad, Ghostbuster, hazzben, newcardfan, short, smedindy
1) Mount Union 199 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 193 ( 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3) Linfield 180 ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5)
4) Wesley 169 ( 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6)
5) St Thomas 168 ( 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 8)
6) UW-Whitewater 159 ( 3, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 10)
7) Salisbury 148 ( 4, 7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 9, 11)
8) Bethel 137 ( 6, 8, 8, 8, 9, 10, 11, 11)
9) Cal Lutheran 135 ( 7, 7, 8, 9, 10, 10, 11, 11)
10) St John Fisher 129 ( 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 17)
11) North Central 120 ( 8, 9, 10, 10, 11, 12, 14, 14)
12) UW Platteville 100 (10, 11, 12, 12, 13, 16, 17, 17)
13) UW-Oshkosh 96 ( 9, 12, 14, 14, 14, 15, 16, 18)
14) Hobart 84 ( 9, 11, 13, 16, 16, 17, 21, 21)
15) Birmingham-Southern 81 (12, 13, 13, 14, 15, 16, 21, 23)
16) Wabash 77 (12, 12, 15, 15, 16, 17, 18, --)
17) Illinois Wesleyan 66 (13, 15, 15, 17, 18, 19, 19, --)
18) Widener 61 (13, 15, 15, 18, 18, 20, 22, --)
19) Heidelberg 57 ( 9, 13, 16, 16, 19, --, --, --)
20) Wheaton 41 (17, 18, 18, 20, 20, 23, 25, --)
21) Louisiana College 38 (14, 19, 20, 20, 22, 23, --, --)
22) Franklin 34 (14, 19, 21, 22, 23, 23, --, --)
23) Huntingdon 21 (20, 21, 22, 22, 24, --, --, --)
24) Johns Hopkins 20 (18, 21, 22, 23, --, --, --, --)
25) Wittenberg 17 (17, 21, 23, --, --, --, --, --)
26) Rowan 15 (19, 20, 24)
27) Concordia-Moorhead 12 (20, 23, 24, 25)
28) Otterbein 11 (19, 24, 25, 25)
29) Waynesburg 9 (19, 25, 25)
30) Willamette 7 (21, 24)
T31) Delaware Valley 4 (22)
T31) Gettysburg 4 (22)
T33) Coe 2 (24)
T33) Ithaca 2 (24)
T33) Salve Regina 2 (25, 25)
T33) Whitworth 2 (24)
Going to be an interesting week.
I'm going to have to figure out what to do about Bethel. Yes, they won, but it took absolute madness at the end and a huge tactical mistake by C-M employing the 'punt to win' strategy at 4th and 1 at the 50 on their last possession.
Quote from: smedindy on October 06, 2012, 07:12:03 PM
Going to be an interesting week.
I'm going to have to figure out what to do about Bethel. Yes, they won, but it took absolute madness at the end and a huge tactical mistake by C-M employing the 'punt to win' strategy at 4th and 1 at the 50 on their last possession.
4th and 3 at the 50, but yes on the absolute madness at the end.
Game book had it at 4th and 1.
4th and 1 at CC50 Timeout Bethel University, clock 02:20.
Quote from: smedindy on October 06, 2012, 10:42:06 PM
Game book had it at 4th and 1.
4th and 1 at CC50 Timeout Bethel University, clock 02:20.
Wrong play. That was third down
Quote from: Bethel v. Concordia Box Score - Play by Play
Neal rush for 2 yards to the CC43, 1ST DOWN CC (TEAM).
Wolf rush for 3 yards to the CC46 (Seth Mathis).
Timeout Bethel University, clock 02:25.
Baune rush for 4 yards to the 50 yardline (J.D. Mehlhorn;Erik Smith).
Timeout Bethel University, clock 02:20.
Baune rush for no gain to the 50 yardline (T. Duppenthaler;Brett Skoog).
Timeout Concordia College, clock 01:35.
Harmelink punt 34 yards to the BETHEL16, Landen Strilzuk return 13 yards to the BETHEL29 (O'Brien).
Again, on
2nd and 7 they gained 4. Timeout Bethel, clock 02:20
3rd and 3, rush for no gain. Timeout Concordia, clock 01:35
SO, on 4th and 3 at CC50 they punt the ball. It was the right decision to kick it deep to a team with no Timeouts remaining.
The game book was messed up as posted on D3 when I posted that (because I grabbed it from what the game book says here on the site) and I thought it was closer when I looked at the video. And I disagree with the call anyway. Punt-to-win = LOSE! Anything can happen when you give the ball back as you can see.
When you're facing the big dogs you can't let them have it back unless they wrest it from you.
Quote from: smedindy on October 06, 2012, 11:15:09 PM
The game book was messed up as posted on D3 when I posted that (because I grabbed it from what the game book says here on the site) and I thought it was closer when I looked at the video. And I disagree with the call anyway. Punt-to-win = LOSE! Anything can happen when you give the ball back as you can see.
When you're facing the big dogs you can't let them have it back unless they wrest it from you.
I wish you had been around to tell Ron Rivera that when the Panthers played the Falcons last Sunday.
Quote from: smedindy on October 06, 2012, 11:15:09 PM
And I disagree with the call anyway. Punt-to-win = LOSE! Anything can happen when you give the ball back as you can see.
When you're facing the big dogs you can't let them have it back unless they wrest it from you.
Maybe, but that depends largely on the identity of the team. Concordia is a very good defensive team. Part of the punt-to-win = LOSE mentality is a reflection of an offensive oriented mindset. I.e. only your offense can win the game for you. As a defensive player, I disagree with this. You can absolutely put your D out there with a mentality, 'go win this for us.' Given that the entire game was a defensive battle, this makes sense.
The coach has to make a decision based on his team and their strengths. Is their strength more likely to pick up 3 yds on 4th down or to prevent a team from going 70+ yds with no timeouts. It's easy to nit-pic Horan's decision with 20-20 hindsight (although had they not lost control of themselves the D would have actually won the game!), but he's the one who knows his team best.
Had he gone for it on 4th and 3 and failed he'd be a goat. At the 50, given what Bethel did on the last dive, they probably give up the score. We can debate it after the fact, but it's never as clear during the game.
That's the issue - the coach is afraid to be the goat. Wabash went for it on 4th down against Witt instead of handing the ball back to the Tigers, made it and won. Had they gone for it, and were stopped, then the coach would have been second guessed by some. Not me. That was the right call.
Quote from: smedindy on October 07, 2012, 06:24:32 PM
That's the issue - the coach is afraid to be the goat. Wabash went for it on 4th down against Witt instead of handing the ball back to the Tigers, made it and won. Had they gone for it, and were stopped, then the coach would have been second guessed by some. Not me. That was the right call.
Going for it is certainly an option. But 4th and 1 is a totally different scenario than 4th and 3. That was also a game where Witt had already scored 24 points. At that point in the game Bethel had only scored 7. That, and Concordia actually did get the stop, they just had a mental meltdown on the sidelines and gave Bethel new life.
Quote from: smedindy on October 07, 2012, 06:24:32 PM
That's the issue - the coach is afraid to be the goat. Wabash went for it on 4th down against Witt instead of handing the ball back to the Tigers, made it and won. Had they gone for it, and were stopped, then the coach would have been second guessed by some. Not me. That was the right call.
Totally different situations, smeds. When Wabash went for it on 4th down yesterday, there were still something like 7 minutes left in the game. Wabash ran 13 more plays AFTER that fourth down conversion. I've got 5 that says if there were under two minutes to play, with Witt exhausted of timeouts, Raeburn punts and makes Witt drive the field against the defense.
You can probably find as many, if not more, examples of teams punting from around midfield with less than 2 minutes left and winning the game than you will of teams losing. And if not for such an egregious lack of discipline
by people who had nothing to do with the play, Concordia-Moorhead wins. The coach did his job. The players on the field did their jobs. It was spoiled by spectators.
I disagree but it's semantics at this time due to the colossal discipline meltdown. And realistically, my disgust of punt-to-win was when I thought it was 4th and closer than 3 (based on my viewing and the game book I saw posted here). You control the ball and frankly you tell your team (offense AND defense) that you trust them all by going for it. You tell the offense that you can get a yard or two (3 is the gray area, but again the book said 4th and 1 and it looked closer than 3 when I saw the vid) and you tell the defense you can stop them no matter what.
Punt-to-win is risk averse. I'm sure Ron Rivera wish he didn't punt two weeks ago.
At any rate I couldn't pull the trigger on Concordia. There are a lot of teams swimming from 20-35 or so.
Going to give it another day because I don't have all the ballots yet. But it will be up for sure tonight all ballots or not.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 10, 2012, 02:35:45 AM
Going to give it another day because I don't have all the ballots yet. But it will be up for sure tonight all ballots or not.
Thanks for working on this Griz
2012 WEEK 6 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev Rank
1) Mount Union (6) 174 1
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor (1) 169 2
3) Linfield 158 3
4) St Thomas 151 5
5) Wesley 149 4
6) Salisbury 137 7
7) UW-Whitewater 136 6
8) Cal Lutheran 120 9
9) Bethel 116 8
10) North Central 112 11
11) UW-Oshkosh 94 13
12) UW Platteville 88 12
13) St John Fisher 86 10
14) Hobart 69 14
15) Wabash 67 16
16) Birmingham-Southern 65 15
17) Illinois Wesleyan 57 17
18) Widener 53 18
T19) Heidelberg 45 19
T19) Wheaton 45 20
21) Louisiana College 37 21
22) Franklin 29 22
23) Johns Hopkins 25 24
24) Huntingdon 16 23
25) Otterbein 14 NR
Dropped Out: Wittenberg
Also Receiving Votes: Rowan (10), Willamette (10), Waynesburg (9), Concordia-Moorhead (8), Salve Regina (7), Wittenberg (6), Gettysburg (6), Delaware Valley (4), Coe (3)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bleedpurple, FCGrizzliesGrad, hazzben, newcardfan, short, smedindy
Interesting to see the number of teams in Also Receiving Votes is dwindling down. That means we'll mostly agreeing on who the top teams in DIII are.
Quote from: hazzben on October 07, 2012, 08:04:48 AM
Quote from: smedindy on October 06, 2012, 11:15:09 PM
And I disagree with the call anyway. Punt-to-win = LOSE! Anything can happen when you give the ball back as you can see.
When you're facing the big dogs you can't let them have it back unless they wrest it from you.
Maybe, but that depends largely on the identity of the team. Concordia is a very good defensive team. Part of the punt-to-win = LOSE mentality is a reflection of an offensive oriented mindset. I.e. only your offense can win the game for you. As a defensive player, I disagree with this. You can absolutely put your D out there with a mentality, 'go win this for us.' Given that the entire game was a defensive battle, this makes sense.
The coach has to make a decision based on his team and their strengths. Is their strength more likely to pick up 3 yds on 4th down or to prevent a team from going 70+ yds with no timeouts. It's easy to nit-pic Horan's decision with 20-20 hindsight (although had they not lost control of themselves the D would have actually won the game!), but he's the one who knows his team best.
Had he gone for it on 4th and 3 and failed he'd be a goat. At the 50, given what Bethel did on the last dive, they probably give up the score. We can debate it after the fact, but it's never as clear during the game.
I tend to agree with this.
All late but still.
2012 WEEK 7 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev Rank
1) Mount Union (6) 174 1
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor (1) 169 2
3) Linfield 157 3
4) St Thomas 155 4
5) Wesley 148 5
6) UW-Whitewater 136 7
7) Salisbury 135 6
8) UW-Oshkosh 116 11
9) Cal Lutheran 115 8
10) North Central 114 10
T11) Hobart 88 14
T11) Wabash 88 15
13) Illinois Wesleyan 81 17
14) Johns Hopkins 68 23
15) Heidelberg 64 T19
16) Bethel 63 9
17) Widener 61 18
18) Huntingdon 42 24
19) UW Platteville 39 12
T20) Franklin 34 22
T20) Rowan 34 NR
22) Willamette 31 NR
23) Alfred 26 NR
24) Coe 25 NR
25) Concordia-Moorhead 22 NR
Dropped Out: St John Fisher, Birmingham-Southern, Wheaton, Louisiana College, Otterbein
Also Receiving Votes: Salve Regina (18), St John Fisher (17), Waynesburg (11), Wittenberg (9), Delaware Valley (8), Washington & Lee (8), Birmingham-Southern (6), Louisiana College (4), Elmhurst (4), Augsburg (3), Wheaton (2)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bleedpurple, FCGrizzliesGrad, hazzben, newcardfan, short, smedindy
2012 WEEK 8 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev Rank
1) Mount Union (7) 199 1
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor (1) 193 2
3) Linfield 180 3
4) St Thomas 177 4
5) Wesley 168 5
6) UW-Oshkosh 158 8
7) Salisbury 153 7
8) Cal Lutheran 139 9
9) North Central 135 10
10) Hobart 118 T11
11) Wabash 114 T11
12) Bethel 91 16
13) Johns Hopkins 84 14
14) UW-Whitewater 82 6
15) Widener 80 17
16) Heidelberg 79 15
17) Huntingdon 69 18
18) UW Platteville 57 19
19) Coe 56 24
20) Franklin 49 T20
21) Illinois Wesleyan 41 13
22) Concordia-Moorhead 34 25
23) Waynesburg 19 NR
T24) Willamette 15 22
T24) Cortland St 15 NR
T24) St John Fisher 15 NR
Dropped Out: Alfred, Rowan
Also Receiving Votes: Wittenberg (13), Alfred (11), Elmhurst (11), Rowan (11), Delaware Valley (9), Louisiana College (9), Millsaps (5), Wheaton (5), Ohio Wesleyan (3), Pacific Lutheran (3)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bleedpurple, FCGrizzliesGrad, Ghostbuster, hazzben, newcardfan, short, smedindy
I haven't showed where each team placed on the ballots for a few weeks now. Here's the results... 36 teams on at least 1 ballot, 32 teams on multiple ballots, 17 teams on all eight ballots
1) Mount Union 199 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 193 ( 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3) Linfield 180 ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5)
4) St Thomas 177 ( 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5)
5) Wesley 168 ( 3, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 7)
6) UW-Oshkosh 158 ( 5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7)
7) Salisbury 153 ( 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 9)
8) Cal Lutheran 139 ( 6, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 13)
9) North Central 135 ( 8, 8, 8, 9, 10, 10, 10, 10)
10) Hobart 118 ( 8, 9, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 16)
11) Wabash 114 (10, 11, 11, 11, 12, 12, 13, 14)
12) Bethel 91 (11, 12, 12, 13, 13, 18, 18, 20)
13) Johns Hopkins 84 ( 8, 12, 14, 16, 16, 17, 20, 21)
14) UW-Whitewater 82 (11, 11, 14, 15, 15, 16, 18, --)
15) Widener 80 (11, 12, 14, 15, 15, 17, 21, 23)
16) Heidelberg 79 ( 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 24, --)
17) Huntingdon 69 (13, 13, 16, 17, 19, 20, 20, 21)
18) UW-Platteville 57 (13, 17, 17, 19, 20, 20, 21, 24)
19) Coe 56 (14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 22, 22, 25)
20) Franklin 49 (10, 14, 18, 18, 21, --, --, --)
21) Illinois Wesleyan 41 (19, 19, 19, 20, 20, 21, 23, --)
22) Concordia-Moorhead 34 (15, 16, 19, 22, 24, --. --. --)
23) Waynesburg 19 (12, 22, 25, --, --, --, --, --)
T24) Willamette 15 (15, 22, --, --, --, --, --, --)
T24) Cortland St 15 (17, 23, 25, 25, 25, --, --. --)
T24) St John Fisher 15 (18, 22, 23, --, --, --, --, --)
27) Wittenberg 13 (16, 23)
T28) Alfred 11 (19, 22)
T28) Elmhurst 11 (21, 23, 24, 25)
T28) Rowan 11 (15)
T31) Delaware Valley 9 (17)
T31) Louisiana College 9 (22, 23, 24)
T33) Millsaps 5 (21)
T33) Wheaton 5 (24, 24, 25)
T35) Ohio Wesleyan 3 (24, 25)
T35) Pacific Lutheran 3 (23)
Thanks for doing this. The top 10 is looking good, We'll see what this week-end brings.
Quote from: newcardfan on October 24, 2012, 06:17:25 AM
Thanks for doing this. The top 10 is looking good, We'll see what this week-end brings.
I agree +K FCGrizzliesGrad
We've had this conversation on the E8 board this week in reference to the site's Top 25 - interested in why voters have Fisher ranked higher than Alfred after a H2H result that is contrary, similar results against Salisbury, and large difference in results against Ithaca. Not that it matters more than window dressing since both are staring at ECAC bids for any postseason action.
Quote from: AUKaz00 on October 25, 2012, 10:40:12 AM
We've had this conversation on the E8 board this week in reference to the site's Top 25 - interested in why voters have Fisher ranked higher than Alfred after a H2H result that is contrary, similar results against Salisbury, and large difference in results against Ithaca. Not that it matters more than window dressing since both are staring at ECAC bids for any postseason action.
Looking at the ballots, 4 had neither, 2 had SJF but not Alfred, I had Alfred but not SJF, and 1 had both with Alfred being higher.
With each being on so few ballots it's difficult to get a consensus on who people think are better as opposed to say UWW vs UWP who are higher up in the polls. I also think part of it is that SJF started off the season 11th in this poll while Alfred didn't even receive a vote until they beat SJF then lost the next week. It's usually tough to work your way up the poll when you start off under the radar rather than if you're already high up there.
Quote from: AUKaz00 on October 25, 2012, 10:40:12 AM
We've had this conversation on the E8 board this week in reference to the site's Top 25 - interested in why voters have Fisher ranked higher than Alfred after a H2H result that is contrary, similar results against Salisbury, and large difference in results against Ithaca. Not that it matters more than window dressing since both are staring at ECAC bids for any postseason action.
Polls have more to do with expectations than actual results.
Whitewater was expected to be a national title contender. So even with a bad home loss to a barely average Buff State team, they remain pretty high after losing to Oshkosh.
SJF was expected to be better than Alfred, so the later Alfred loss makes their win over SJF look questionable.
Quote from: HScoach on October 25, 2012, 01:20:05 PM
Quote from: AUKaz00 on October 25, 2012, 10:40:12 AM
We've had this conversation on the E8 board this week in reference to the site's Top 25 - interested in why voters have Fisher ranked higher than Alfred after a H2H result that is contrary, similar results against Salisbury, and large difference in results against Ithaca. Not that it matters more than window dressing since both are staring at ECAC bids for any postseason action.
Polls have more to do with expectations than actual results.
Whitewater was expected to be a national title contender. So even with a bad home loss to a barely average Buff State team, they remain pretty high after losing to Oshkosh.
SJF was expected to be better than Alfred, so the later Alfred loss makes their win over SJF look questionable.
I agree, coach. That's the way I fill out my East Region Fan Poll ballot - expectations. But, in this case I think the results against common opponents would change expectations. Salisbury beat Fisher by 11 in Pittsford, Alfred by 3 at home. Fisher beat Ithaca by 4, Alfred over Ithaca by 24. And then there's the 13 point H2H result. Just peculiar.
how can you boys put Willamette ahead of PLU who beat the bearkitties already and have a much higher SOS .. PLU # 2 at .700 and the bearkitties #27 at .594? Just wait until tomorrow if the numbers are ture?
Quote from: desertcat1 on October 26, 2012, 03:17:58 PM
how can you boys put Willamette ahead of PLU who beat the bearkitties already and have a much higher SOS .. PLU # 2 at .700 and the bearkitties #27 at .594? Just wait until tomorrow if the numbers are ture?
They didn't get a point from me
Quote from: desertcat1 on October 26, 2012, 03:17:58 PM
how can you boys put Willamette ahead of PLU who beat the bearkitties already and have a much higher SOS .. PLU # 2 at .700 and the bearkitties #27 at .594? Just wait until tomorrow if the numbers are ture?
Of course, that was just a couple of pollsters, since only two had Willamette in their poll and only one PLU and people weigh H2H results with different lenses.
it was just a question ? 8-)
thanks boys , i forget it's east coast west coast too. ;D
You're always welcome to join in and submit your own ballot for the poll. Can never have too many pollsters 8-)
FCGG< ,thanks for the invite. :-* but, do you really want a serial smiter to join your group who would that look to the guru? :o
Quote from: AUKaz00 on October 25, 2012, 03:27:19 PM
Quote from: HScoach on October 25, 2012, 01:20:05 PM
Quote from: AUKaz00 on October 25, 2012, 10:40:12 AM
We've had this conversation on the E8 board this week in reference to the site's Top 25 - interested in why voters have Fisher ranked higher than Alfred after a H2H result that is contrary, similar results against Salisbury, and large difference in results against Ithaca. Not that it matters more than window dressing since both are staring at ECAC bids for any postseason action.
Polls have more to do with expectations than actual results.
Whitewater was expected to be a national title contender. So even with a bad home loss to a barely average Buff State team, they remain pretty high after losing to Oshkosh.
SJF was expected to be better than Alfred, so the later Alfred loss makes their win over SJF look questionable.
I agree, coach. That's the way I fill out my East Region Fan Poll ballot - expectations. But, in this case I think the results against common opponents would change expectations. Salisbury beat Fisher by 11 in Pittsford, Alfred by 3 at home. Fisher beat Ithaca by 4, Alfred over Ithaca by 24. And then there's the 13 point H2H result. Just peculiar.
Redacted. *sigh*
Poll coming out today? Asking for a friend...
Well, tell your "friend" that it will be up tonight. Still waiting on one ballot but it will be up tonight whether they're in or not. Plus we have 2 new pollsters this week. If that last ballot comes in it'll be the first time this season we've have 10 ballots.
2012 WEEK 9 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev Rank
1) Mount Union (8) 224 1
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor (1) 217 2
3) Linfield 206 3
4) St Thomas 196 4
5) Wesley 188 5
6) UW-Oshkosh 183 6
7) North Central 165 9
8) Cal Lutheran 161 8
9) Wabash 143 11
10) Hobart 142 10
11) Bethel 118 12
12) Johns Hopkins 112 13
13) Coe 95 19
T14) Widener 92 15
T14) Heidelberg 92 16
16) UW Platteville 87 18
17) Salisbury 75 7
18) Franklin 63 20
19) Cortland St 59 T24
20) Concordia-Moorhead 53 22
21) Huntingdon 49 17
T22) Waynesburg 35 23
T22) Elmhurst 35 NR
24) Wittenberg 34 NR
25) Baldwin-Wallace 22 NR
Dropped Out: UW-Whitewater, Illinois Wesleyan, St John Fisher, Willamette
Also Receiving Votes: Louisiana College (20), St John Fisher (19), Delaware Valley (10), Wheaton (7), Pacific Lutheran (6), Concordia-Chicago (5), Adrian (4), Utica (3), Rowan (2), Trinity (CT) (2), Framingham St (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bleedpurple, FCGrizzliesGrad, Ghostbuster, newcardfan, short, smedindy, and two new voters: desertcat1 and Mr. Ypsi
Poll will be up tonight. If people would get their ballots in by Tuesday like they're supposed to I'd have had it up last night ::) Just 7 ballots so far, come on people... we can make it to double digits once this season.
2012 WEEK 10 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev Rank
1) Mount Union (8) 224 1
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor (1) 217 2
3) Linfield 205 3
4) St Thomas 197 4
5) Wesley 187 5
6) UW-Oshkosh 184 6
7) Cal Lutheran 169 8
8) Hobart 156 10
9) Coe 123 13
10) Widener 120 T14
11) UW Platteville 116 16
12) Heidelberg 104 T14
13) Salisbury 98 17
14) Elmhurst 94 T22
15) Cortland St 89 19
T16) North Central 74 7
T16) Franklin 74 18
18) Wheaton 69 NR
19) Huntingdon 63 21
20) Waynesburg 61 T22
21) Wittenberg 51 24
22) Concordia-Moorhead 40 20
23) Bethel 38 11
24) Johns Hopkins 32 12
25) Louisiana College 31 NR
Dropped Out: Wabash, Baldwin-Wallace
Also Receiving Votes: Wabash (29), Concordia-Chicago (23), Delaware Valley (13), Pacific Lutheran (11), Adrian (6), Rowan (4), Baldwin-Wallace (3), Trinity (CT) (3), Framingham St (1), Ohio Wesleyan (1), St Olaf (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bleedpurple, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, hazzben, Mr. Ypsi, newcardfan, short, and smedindy
Edit: Ypsi, I knew at some point I'd do that. At least it didn't affect the standings.
Note: There will be one more poll next week, then a final poll after the playoffs are done
You might want to double-check Wittenberg: you have them at #21, AND as dropping out (and 2 points in the ARV). ;)
Poll will be up tomorrow night. Still waiting on 3 ballots as I only have 7 so far.
I like your poll guys keep up the good work! :)
Next year I may join in so that there is at least one east voter :P
2012 WEEK 11 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev Rank
1) Mount Union (7) 222 1
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor (1) 217 2
3) Linfield (1) 207 3
4) St Thomas 199 4
5) Wesley 187 5
6) UW-Oshkosh 183 6
7) Cal Lutheran 166 7
8) Hobart 158 8
9) Coe 129 9
10) Widener 124 10
11) Heidelberg 122 12
12) UW Platteville 116 11
13) Salisbury 114 13
14) Elmhurst 96 14
15) North Central 90 T16
16) Cortland St 83 15
17) Franklin 79 T16
18) Wheaton 75 18
19) Wittenberg 55 21
20) Bethel 53 23
21) Concordia-Moorhead 46 22
22) Louisiana College 45 25
23) Johns Hopkins 43 24
24) Pacific Lutheran 34 NR
T25) Adrian 21 NR
T25) Wabash 21 NR
Dropped Out: Huntingdon, Waynesburg
Also Receiving Votes: Concordia-Chicago (17), Rowan (13), Baldwin-Wallace (5), Trinity (CT) (2), Framingham St (1), Washington & Lee (1), Willamette (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bleedpurple, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, hazzben, Mr. Ypsi, newcardfan, short, and smedindy
Note: There will be no more polls until the playoffs have ended
With the end of the season nearly here the final BCS Standings D3 Top 25 Fan Poll will hopefully be posted sometime mid-week. Pollsters have been messaged to remind them of this prestigious and very important duty. ;)
I've received 7 ballots so far. I've sent a message to the remaining 3 and will post tonight even if they haven't responded.
2012 FINAL TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev Rank
1) Mount Union (7) 175 1
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 167 2
3) St Thomas 162 4
4) UW-Oshkosh 153 6
5) Linfield 147 3
6) Wesley 141 5
7) Hobart 122 8
8) Elmhurst 115 14
9) UW Platteville 113 12
10) North Central 108 15
11) Widener 107 10
12) Bethel 84 20
13) Wittenberg 82 19
14) Salisbury 74 13
T15) Cal Lutheran 68 7
T15) Coe 68 9
17) Pacific Lutheran 62 24
18) Franklin 46 17
T19) Cortland St 44 16
T19) Johns Hopkins 44 23
21) Concordia-Moorhead 41 21
22) Wheaton 39 18
23) Louisiana College 34 22
24) Heidelberg 30 11
25) Concordia-Chicago 19 NR
Dropped Out: Wabash and Adrian
Also Receiving Votes: Framingham St (8), Rowan (7), Washington & Lee (5), Trinity (CT) (4), Wabash (3), Adrian (1), Bridgewater St (1), Huntingdon (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, hazzben, Mr. Ypsi, newcardfan, and smedindy
There were issues with one ballot. I hope I got it correct
1) Mount Union 175 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 167 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3) St Thomas 162 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4) UW-Oshkosh 153 ( 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5)
5) Linfield 147 ( 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6)
6) Wesley 141 ( 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6)
7) Hobart 122 ( 7, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 11)
8) Elmhurst 115 ( 7, 7, 8, 9, 10, 10, 16)
9) UW-Platteville 113 ( 7, 8, 8, 8, 11, 12, 15)
10) North Central 108 ( 7, 7, 9, 9, 9, 14, 19)
11) Widener 107 ( 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 12, 14)
12) Bethel 84 (10, 10, 12, 13, 15, 15, 23)
13) Wittenberg 82 (11, 11, 13, 16, 16, 16, 17)
14) Salisbury 74 (11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 19, 20)
T15) Cal Lutheran 68 (13, 13, 14, 14, 15, 21, 24)
T15) Coe 68 (10, 12, 15, 17, 18, 19, 23)
17) Pacific Lutheran 62 (12, 13, 14, 19, 20, 21, 21)
18) Franklin 46 (12, 16, 18, 19, 22, 24, 25)
T19) Cortland St 44 (14, 17, 17, 17, 23, 24, --)
T19) Johns Hopkins 44 (11, 13, 20, 20, 23, 25, --)
21) Concordia-Moorhead 41 (15, 17, 17, 20, 21, 25, --)
22) Wheaton 39 (10, 26, 20, 22, 23, --, --)
23) Louisiana College 34 (18, 19, 19, 20, 22, 24, --)
24) Heidelberg 30 (18, 18, 21, 22, 24, 24, 25)
25) Concordia-Chicago 19 (18, 22, 22, 23, --, --, --)
26) Framingham St 8 (18)
27) Rowan 7 (21, 24)
28) Washington & Lee 5 (21)
29) Trinity (CT) 4 (22)
30) Wabash 3 (23)
T31) Adrian 1 (25)
T31) Bridgewater St 1 (25)
T31) Huntingdon 1 (25)
With all due respect to our pollsters...and I know only one person did this...how does one rank Linfield above Oshkosh when UWO won AT Linfield in the quarterfinals and had no loss other than UST in the semifinals? I understand that polls have an element of subjectivity and guesswork and sometimes we exercise the "I'm picking who I think would win if they played again on a neutral field" clause...but give me a break, UWO came from down 15 points on the road to win (and it's not as though they were out gained or outplayed and got a bunch of lucky bounces, at least judging from the box score).
It's one thing to rank UMHB over UST - I agree there; the teams did not play head to head and MHB gave UMU a sterner test in the semifinals than UST did in the Stagg. That makes perfect sense to me. But why overlook the head to head result in UWO vs Linfield?
I feel the same way with Elmhurst two spots above North Central. We handily beat them and it wouldn't matter at what point in the season the game (or games had we seen them again) took place. Had EC won or kept it close-diferent story. Fan polls :):)
Forgot to add-thanks for doing this-I'm sure it coud be frustrating at times. i enjoyed participating! +K!
Quote from: NCF on December 21, 2012, 06:11:43 AM
I feel the same way with Elmhurst two spots above North Central. We handily beat them and it wouldn't matter at what point in the season the game (or games had we seen them again) took place. Had EC won or kept it close-diferent story. Fan polls :):)
Yes and no.
You blew out EC, sure, but this is different because there are OTHER results on the schedule that cloud the H2H comparison (you guys did lose two regular season games, including one to a Wheaton team that EC beat). Sure you can make an argument that NCC was better, but it's really not a slam dunk because of your other two losses. The playoff resumes are roughly equal, if anything Elmhurst is a bit stronger with a victory and then a one-score loss on the road to an eventual Stagg participant.
I see absolutely no argument for Linfield over UWO, since UWO was undefeated at the time of the Linfield game and then won it, only to fall in the semifinals. Pretty big difference between the two situations.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on December 21, 2012, 08:00:12 AM
Quote from: NCF on December 21, 2012, 06:11:43 AM
I feel the same way with Elmhurst two spots above North Central. We handily beat them and it wouldn't matter at what point in the season the game (or games had we seen them again) took place. Had EC won or kept it close-diferent story. Fan polls :):)
Yes and no.
You blew out EC, sure, but this is different because there are OTHER results on the schedule that cloud the H2H comparison (you guys did lose two regular season games, including one to a Wheaton team that EC beat). Sure you can make an argument that NCC was better, but it's really not a slam dunk because of your other two losses. The playoff resumes are roughly equal, if anything Elmhurst is a bit stronger with a victory and then a one-score loss on the road to an eventual Stagg participant.
I see absolutely no argument for Linfield over UWO, since UWO was undefeated at the time of the Linfield game and then won it, only to fall in the semifinals. Pretty big difference between the two situations.
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that, because if we had the chance to play them again in the play-offs, the result would be the same. When Elmhurst can beat, or stay close to NC, then they move ahead, until then, no way (JMHO). However, I completely agree with you on putting Linfield over Oshkosh. It's a fan poll, just a place for people to voice their opinions, no more, no less.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on December 21, 2012, 05:52:17 AM
With all due respect to our pollsters...and I know only one person did this...how does one rank Linfield above Oshkosh when UWO won AT Linfield in the quarterfinals and had no loss other than UST in the semifinals? I understand that polls have an element of subjectivity and guesswork and sometimes we exercise the "I'm picking who I think would win if they played again on a neutral field" clause...but give me a break, UWO came from down 15 points on the road to win (and it's not as though they were out gained or outplayed and got a bunch of lucky bounces, at least judging from the box score).
I agree, it's inexcusable to have put Linfield a head of UWO. I would like hear his/her reasoning.
It's interesting what people placed Wheaton at. Talk about all over the board. As high as 10th...as low as unranked.
I personally put NCC a head of Elmhurst b/c of the head-to-head beat down. Both teams won one road playoff game, then lost on the road to the No. 1 team in their region. So it's tough to give Elmhurst the edge there. Especially with NCC having to travel further
and having a tougher first-round matchup. I don't think Coe was challenged during the regular season, the IIAC was way down this year.
Overall - as a group - I think we did a good job on the Final Poll.
(I'm happy that all 25 of my teams made the Top 25 :) )
Could be some idiot moron voter didn't double check his top 5 and concentrated on the bottom 15. ;)
How do I join the fan poll for next season. I like how everything is detailed throughout the year...good job!
Quote from: SUADC on December 21, 2012, 09:28:50 AM
How do I join the fan poll for next season. I like how everything is detailed throughout the year...good job!
By posting this, you probably just earned a spot as a Fan Pollster for next year. It's that easy 8-)
I'm sure FCGrizz can include you on the list for next year. So expect a personal message sometime in early September to get your pre-season poll in.
Quote from: smedindy on December 21, 2012, 09:09:25 AM
Could be some idiot moron voter didn't double check his top 5 and concentrated on the bottom 15. ;)
I think someone just implicitly confessed to being the 'idiot, moron voter'. ;D
I was the lone voter for Wabash; surprised to be so lonely (especially with two Indiana voters)!
I was also the #10 vote for Wheaton. I still believe it is essentially impossible to separate the CCIW 'triplets' - a logical case can be made for any ordering of Elmhurst, NCC, and Wheaton, but it is difficult to make a case for separating them very far. I crossed my fingers and voted them 8. Elmhurst, 9. NCC, and 10. Wheaton.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 21, 2012, 10:27:05 AM
Quote from: smedindy on December 21, 2012, 09:09:25 AM
Could be some idiot moron voter didn't double check his top 5 and concentrated on the bottom 15. ;)
I think someone just implicitly confessed to being the 'idiot, moron voter'. ;D
I was the lone voter for Wabash; surprised to be so lonely (especially with two Indiana voters)!
I was also the #10 vote for Wheaton. I still believe it is essentially impossible to separate the CCIW 'triplets' - a logical case can be made for any ordering of Elmhurst, NCC, and Wheaton, but it is difficult to make a case for separating them very far. I crossed my fingers and voted them 8. Elmhurst, 9. NCC, and 10. Wheaton.
Being a CCIW fan, you put all biases aside in this pick? ;) ;D
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on December 21, 2012, 10:31:38 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 21, 2012, 10:27:05 AM
Quote from: smedindy on December 21, 2012, 09:09:25 AM
Could be some idiot moron voter didn't double check his top 5 and concentrated on the bottom 15. ;)
I think someone just implicitly confessed to being the 'idiot, moron voter'. ;D
I was the lone voter for Wabash; surprised to be so lonely (especially with two Indiana voters)!
I was also the #10 vote for Wheaton. I still believe it is essentially impossible to separate the CCIW 'triplets' - a logical case can be made for any ordering of Elmhurst, NCC, and Wheaton, but it is difficult to make a case for separating them very far. I crossed my fingers and voted them 8. Elmhurst, 9. NCC, and 10. Wheaton.
Being a CCIW fan, you put all biases aside in this pick? ;) ;D
Of course. ;) Being an IWU fan, I hate all three of 'em! 8-)
(And I had WIAC teams at 4 and 7, so quit your grousin'!)
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on December 21, 2012, 05:52:17 AM
With all due respect to our pollsters...and I know only one person did this...how does one rank Linfield above Oshkosh when UWO won AT Linfield in the quarterfinals and had no loss other than UST in the semifinals? I understand that polls have an element of subjectivity and guesswork and sometimes we exercise the "I'm picking who I think would win if they played again on a neutral field" clause...but give me a break, UWO came from down 15 points on the road to win (and it's not as though they were out gained or outplayed and got a bunch of lucky bounces, at least judging from the box score).
It's one thing to rank UMHB over UST - I agree there; the teams did not play head to head and MHB gave UMU a sterner test in the semifinals than UST did in the Stagg. That makes perfect sense to me. But why overlook the head to head result in UWO vs Linfield?
Well, it was not ME this time.. (The only linfield fan on the poll i think ?)..
My top ten were, Mtu, umhb,ust,uwo,linfield,wesley,ncc,elm,beth,witt... hope that helps ..
join in next year and have your own vote count too.. DC1
Once we got outside the top 6, it got immensely more difficult. And this is seen in our voting pattern. No team in the top 6 was ranked lower than 6. From number 7 on, the spread's got wider and the subjectivity got greater.
Fun exercise, but it wasn't easy or infallible!
Thanks for taking point Griz +k
Quote from: hazzben on December 21, 2012, 01:32:27 PM
Once we got outside the top 6, it got immensely more difficult. And this is seen in our voting pattern. No team in the top 6 was ranked lower than 6. From number 7 on, the spread's got wider and the subjectivity got greater.
Fun exercise, but it wasn't easy or infallible!
Thanks for taking point Griz +k
How's the fan poll being set up this year?
Quote from: D3MAFAN on July 03, 2013, 11:10:28 AM
Quote from: hazzben on December 21, 2012, 01:32:27 PM
Once we got outside the top 6, it got immensely more difficult. And this is seen in our voting pattern. No team in the top 6 was ranked lower than 6. From number 7 on, the spread's got wider and the subjectivity got greater.
Fun exercise, but it wasn't easy or infallible!
Thanks for taking point Griz +k
How's the fan poll being set up this year?
1. Mount
2-25 - random teams
Quote from: PurpleSuit on July 03, 2013, 12:46:54 PM
Quote from: D3MAFAN on July 03, 2013, 11:10:28 AM
Quote from: hazzben on December 21, 2012, 01:32:27 PM
Once we got outside the top 6, it got immensely more difficult. And this is seen in our voting pattern. No team in the top 6 was ranked lower than 6. From number 7 on, the spread's got wider and the subjectivity got greater.
Fun exercise, but it wasn't easy or infallible!
Thanks for taking point Griz +k
How's the fan poll being set up this year?
1. Mount
2-25 - random teams
You can arguably put two or three teams in place of Mount Union and have Mount Union at number two. However, as defending champs and history telling us otherwise, you are right Mount Union number one and 24 other random teams.
I think with D3Football Top 25 Poll coming very soon. I think the teams on the front page poll are the most likely candidates as Top 10 teams?
Now that it's August it's time to start gearing up for football season. Registration is now OPEN for the Fan Poll.
To apply you must fill out a 42 page questionnaire in triplicate, have 6 forms of government ID, submit a urine and blood sample for drug testing, and pay a fee of $314.15... or you can just send me a PM if you've visited the Biogenesis lab and don't want tested ;) Let me know what conference/region you follow closest and I'll announce what kind of distribution we have this year.
You don't have to commit to anything, voters have a tendency to come and go during the season. Ballots are due on Tuesdays but if you are unable to get it submitted by then (or know you won't submit one that week) please send me a PM. I am willing to extend the deadline until Wednesday but it will absolutely go up by that point. The earlier you submit a ballot the sooner I can check it and respond if you've duplicated a team or appear to have left a team off and you can get it corrected before Tuesday. Also, please be impartial... no putting your 2-5 team in the top 10 or leaving an 8-0 Mount Union off your ballot.
Preseason ballot will be due Saturday August 31st.
Any other questions or comments please let me know
Sounds like a bargain...I'm in again
So far we've got 8 people who have confirmed participation and even 1 ballot in already. Still plenty of time to let me know. First ballot isn't due until August 31st. Would like to see some more balance in the regions though (read: people who don't live near the Great Lakes should apply immediately... I'm looking at you south and east regions ;))
I'm up to 9 confirmed participants and have 5 ballots in already. Still a week and a half to let me know if you'd like to participate and get those ballots in for the preseason poll.
I'm waiting for Kickoff to come out before submitting my ballot. I want to read up on some teams first.
There's still time to join in the fun. I have 9 confirmed participants but the more the merrier. Let me know if you'd like to participate. It's never too late to join, even if the season has already started.
Remember, preseason ballots are due on the 31st. Now that Kickoff is out I expect the ballots to come pouring in ;)
Just got back from helping move my 95-year-old mother from assisted living (NOT nursing home, thank you very much!) in Peoria to a similar facility in Aledo IL where my sister and several other relatives live. Moving day (yesterday) the heat index reached 105 by mid-afternoon - talk about exhausting work! I'm too beat to really study Kickoff tonight (haven't even opened it at all yet), and tomorrow is moving day for my son (but fortunately he needs my van more than he needs me!), but I'll try to get my ballot in either tomorrow or Saturday.
If not, my apologies; I'll definitely have a week one ballot, even if I miss the preseason.
Last day to get those preseason ballots in. We're up to 8 in with one more who said they'd participate. Send me a PM if you're interested in doing one.
2013 PRESEASON TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev Rank
1) Mount Union (5) 196 1
2) St Thomas (1) 189 3
3) Linfield (2) 187 5
4) Mary Hardin-Baylor 177 2
5) Wesley 171 6
6) North Central 148 10
7) Hobart 143 7
8) UW Platteville 138 9
9) Bethel 137 12
10) UW-Whitewater 129 NR
11) Wittenberg 123 13
12) Pacific Lutheran 105 17
13) UW-Oshkosh 92 4
14) Salisbury 83 14
15) Franklin 82 18
16) Wheaton 72 22
17) Heidelberg 67 24
18) Johns Hopkins 64 T19
19) Cal Lutheran 59 T15
20) Widener 42 11
21) Coe 33 T15
22) Wabash 32 NR
23) St John Fisher 30 NR
24) Baldwin-Wallace 23 NR
25) Illinois Wesleyan 16 NR
Dropped Out: Elmhurst, Cortland St, Concordia-Moorhead, Louisiana College, Concordia-Chicago
Also Receiving Votes: Delaware Valley (10), Rowan (10), Elmhurst (9), Central (6), Hardin-Simmons (6), Concordia-Moorhead (5), Louisiana College (5), Ohio Wesleyan (4), Cortland St (3), Franklin & Marshall (2), Framingham St (1), Lycoming (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, and smedindy plus new voters D3MAFAN and Scots13
Kind of shocked I'm the only one who gave Central any love (all 6 points came from me).
I wouldn't be surprised it they knock off Oshkosh at home this weekend (although I was too afraid to pick them in Pickems :-[ )
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 03, 2013, 01:28:30 PM
Kind of shocked I'm the only one who gave Central any love (all 6 points came from me).
I wouldn't be surprised it they knock off Oshkosh at home this weekend (although I was too afraid to pick them in Pickems :-[ )
I am sure if that happens, they will definitely make a jump into. However, they have to show me somthing this weekend.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 03, 2013, 01:28:30 PM
Kind of shocked I'm the only one who gave Central any love (all 6 points came from me).
I wouldn't be surprised it they knock off Oshkosh at home this weekend (although I was too afraid to pick them in Pickems :-[ )
Damn....I was one half of football away from looking like I knew what I was talking about.
When's this poll getting released?
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 10, 2013, 02:40:01 PM
When's this poll getting released?
I'd like to do it tonight. I've only gotten 7 ballots so far. The two outstanding ballots were sent a PM last night but no word from them yet.
2013 WEEK 1 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev Rank
1) Mount Union (4) 171 1
2) St Thomas (1) 166 2
3) Linfield (1) 162 3
4) Mary Hardin-Baylor (1) 156 4
5) Wesley 150 5
6) North Central 136 6
7) Hobart 127 7
8) UW Platteville 123 8
9) Bethel 122 9
10) Pacific Lutheran 101 12
11) Franklin 95 15
12) UW-Whitewater 89 10
13) UW-Oshkosh 80 13
14) Wittenberg 77 11
15) Wheaton 75 16
16) Heidelberg 70 17
17) Cal Lutheran 67 19
18) Johns Hopkins 66 18
19) St John Fisher 52 23
20) Wabash 42 22
21) Illinois Wesleyan 24 25
22) Coe 21 21
23) Baldwin-Wallace 20 24
24) Widener 18 20
25) Elmhurst 15 NR
Dropped Out: Salisbury
Also Receiving Votes: Delaware Valley (13), Salisbury (9), Willamette (9), Concordia-Moorhead (7), Christopher Newport (5), Bridgewater (VA) (3), Augsburg (1), Framingham St (1), Louisiana College (1), Ohio Wesleyan (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, and smedindy
2013 WEEK 2 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev Rank
1) Mount Union (3) 171 1
2) Linfield (3) 164 3
3) St Thomas 163 2
4) Mary Hardin-Baylor (1) 156 4
5) Wesley 150 5
6) North Central 136 6
7) Hobart 128 7
T8) Bethel 124 9
T8) UW Platteville 124 8
10) Pacific Lutheran 107 10
11) Franklin 98 11
12) UW-Oshkosh 86 13
13) UW-Whitewater 84 12
14) Wheaton 82 15
15) Johns Hopkins 68 18
T16) Heidelberg 66 16
T16) Wittenberg 66 14
18) Wabash 58 20
19) St John Fisher 57 19
20) Cal Lutheran 46 17
21) Coe 28 22
22) Widener 22 24
23) Illinois Wesleyan 21 21
T24) Baldwin-Wallace 19 23
T24) Delaware Valley 19 NR
Dropped Out: Elmhurst
Also Receiving Votes: Christopher Newport (10), Willamette (6), Concordia-Moorhead (5), Salisbury (5), Bridgewater (VA) (4), Augsburg (1), Buffalo St (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, and smedindy
Since there was some shakeups (and since I haven't done it this year) I'll post the rundown of votes sometime soon
2013 WEEK 3 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev Rank
1) Mount Union (3) 170 1
2) Linfield (3) 168 2
3) Mary Hardin-Baylor (1) 166 4
4) North Central 149 6
5) Bethel 140 T8
6) Hobart 137 7
7) UW Platteville 129 T8
8) Pacific Lutheran 111 10
9) St Thomas 108 3
10) UW-Whitewater 106 13
11) Franklin 103 11
12) UW-Oshkosh 101 12
13) Wesley 98 5
14) Wheaton 83 14
15) Heidelberg 80 T16
16) Johns Hopkins 75 15
17) Wittenberg 67 T16
18) Wabash 63 18
19) St John Fisher 54 19
20) Coe 31 21
21) St John's 27 NR
22) Widener 25 22
T23) Delaware Valley 21 T24
T23) Illinois Wesleyan 21 23
25) Christopher Newport 16 NR
Dropped Out: Cal Lutheran and Baldwin-Wallace
Also Receiving Votes: John Carroll (6), Concordia-Moorhead (5), Bridgewater (VA) (4), Cal Lutheran (4), Willamette (4), Emory & Henry (1), Salisbury (1), Thomas More (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, and smedindy
Out of six possible orderings of the top 3... the seven ballots had 5 of the six. The only ordering not represented was MHB, Linfield, UMU
1) Mount Union 170 ( 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3)
2) Linfield 168 ( 1, 1, 1, 2, 3, 3, 3)
3) Mary Hardin-Baylor 166 ( 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3)
4) North Central 149 ( 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6)
5) Bethel 140 ( 4, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7)
6) Hobart 137 ( 5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 9)
7) UW Platteville 129 ( 4, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13)
8) Pacific Lutheran 111 ( 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14)
9) St Thomas 108 ( 4, 8, 10, 12, 12, 13, 15)
10) UW-Whitewater 106 ( 6, 8, 10, 11, 11, 14, 16)
11) Franklin 103 ( 9, 10, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14)
12) UW-Oshkosh 101 ( 7, 9, 9, 9, 14, 16, 17)
13) Wesley 98 ( 8, 8, 11, 12, 13, 13, 19)
14) Wheaton 83 (10, 11, 13, 15, 16, 16, 18)
15) Heidelberg 80 ( 8, 10, 12, 14, 19, 19, 20)
16) Johns Hopkins 75 ( 9, 11, 15, 16, 16, 17, 23)
17) Wittenberg 67 (14, 15, 15, 17, 18, 18, 18)
18) Wabash 63 (12, 15, 17, 18, 18, 19, 20)
19) St John Fisher 54 (15, 17, 17, 19, 19, 20, 21)
20) Coe 31 (16, 18, 21, 22, 24, 24, --)
21) St John's 27 (17, 20, 21, 22, 24, 25, --)
22) Widener 25 (21, 21, 22, 23, 23, 23, 24)
T23) Delaware Valley 21 (20, 20, 22, 22, 25, --, --)
T23) Illinois Wesleyan 21 (14, 19, 24, --, --, --, --)
25) Christopher Newport 16 (20, 21, 23, 24, --, --, --)
26) John Carroll 6 (22, 24)
27) Concordia-Moorhead 5 (21)
T28) Bridgewater (VA) 4 (22)
T28) Cal Lutheran 4 (23, 25)
T28) Willamette 4 (23, 25)
T31) Emory & Henry 1 (25)
T31) Salisbury 1 (25)
T31) Thomas More 1 (25)
When was the last time there 16 teams with at least one top ten vote?
Quote from: NCF on September 25, 2013, 06:24:45 AM
When was the last time there 16 teams with at least one top ten vote?
It is strange to see 16 teams with a top 10 vote and that normally you would only see between 11 and 13 in the top 10. However, this year's teams (5-25) still have a lot a questions, which I think concluded in the number of teams with a top 10 vote.
I thought I was on a limb by still putting St. Thomas ahead of St. John's - guess not. I think the Tommies are better than the Johnnies and last week just...happened.
Quote from: smedindy on September 25, 2013, 06:39:34 PM
I thought I was on a limb by still putting St. Thomas ahead of St. John's - guess not. I think the Tommies are better than the Johnnies and last week just...happened.
Yeah, the Tom's lowest vote was above the John's highest vote. ;) I'm the non-vote for St. John's - waiting for this Saturday when the winner of Concordia-Moorhead @ St. John's suddenly jumps to the mid-teens on my ballot. (If a real clarification game is only a week away, I usually postpone any decision.)
I haven't forgotten about this. I've gotten all the ballots but I'm waiting to hear back from one because I think there may have been some omissions on it.
I know this week's poll hasn't been posted yet. The poll from September 25th looks good to me. The only team I see MUCH differently than the pollsters is Hobart. I don't see them beating anyone in the top 15. In My mind, at this point in the season, there is a drop-off after the top 14 and I would probably thrown Hobart into the mix for the 15th spot with St.John Fisher and Wabash. For whatever reason, St. John Fisher intrigues me this year. I am wondering if they, not Hobart, may be the best team in the east this year.
I don't want to delay this any longer but I still haven't heard back about that one ballot. So for the moment I am going to post this with just the other 6 ballots. If I finally hear back I'll update things.
2013 WEEK 4 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev Rank
1) Mount Union (4) 148 1
T2) Linfield (1) 142 2
T2) Mary Hardin-Baylor (1) 142 3
4) Bethel 121 5
5) North Central 120 4
6) UW Platteville 115 7
7) Hobart 114 6
8) UW-Whitewater 92 10
T9) St Thomas 91 9
T9) UW-Oshkosh 91 12
11) Wesley 90 13
12) Franklin 89 11
13) Pacific Lutheran 75 8
14) Heidelberg 70 15
15) Johns Hopkins 68 16
16) Wheaton 66 14
17) Wabash 62 18
18) Wittenberg 61 17
19) St John Fisher 49 19
20) Coe 28 20
21) Delaware Valley 23 T23
22) Concordia-Moorhead 19 NR
23) Christopher Newport 18 25
24) Illinois Wesleyan 17 T23
T25) John Carroll 9 NR
T25) Willamette 9 NR
Dropped Out: St John's and Widener
Also Receiving Votes: Thomas More (6), Bridgewater (VA) (5), Widener (5), Augsburg (2), St John's (2), Pacific (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, and smedindy
Thanks FCGG.
If that 7th voter ever comes on, it will break the three ties, but will almost certainly cause new ones with so many teams one apart (and that big logjam at 8-12).
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 02, 2013, 11:40:24 PM
I know this week's poll hasn't been posted yet. The poll from September 25th looks good to me. The only team I see MUCH differently than the pollsters is Hobart. I don't see them beating anyone in the top 15. In My mind, at this point in the season, there is a drop-off after the top 14 and I would probably thrown Hobart into the mix for the 15th spot with St.John Fisher and Wabash. For whatever reason, St. John Fisher intrigues me this year. I am wondering if they, not Hobart, may be the best team in the east this year.
I understand your sentiment there, however Hobart has a dominating defense and continues to pound the rock against teams and have a good nucleus from last years team, they have played against a variety of offenses this year and have done well. I think until someone actually beats them, they are still at least a Top 10 team. As for the other teams below them, it is only week 4/5 and they still have some big games to play. Also, there are some teams above them, other than a few that have lost or has not played a solid opponent. I think that drop off may be due to the "lack of" scoring, maybe.
I'll post the individual votes again next week once we're past the halfway mark of the season.
2013 WEEK 5 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev Rank
1) Mount Union (5) 173 1
2) Linfield (1) 167 T2
3) Mary Hardin-Baylor (1) 164 T2
4) Bethel 141 4
5) North Central 140 5
6) UW Platteville 135 6
7) Hobart 129 7
8) UW-Whitewater 116 8
9) St Thomas 112 T9
T10) Franklin 108 12
T10) Wesley 108 11
12) UW-Oshkosh 95 T9
13) Heidelberg 89 14
14) Johns Hopkins 85 15
15) Wabash 79 17
16) Wheaton 76 16
17) Wittenberg 71 18
18) Pacific Lutheran 61 13
19) St John Fisher 51 19
20) Coe 40 20
T21) Concordia-Moorhead 30 22
T21) John Carroll 30 T25
23) Thomas More 19 NR
24) Illinois Wesleyan 18 24
25) Willamette 15 T25
Dropped Out: Christopher Newport and Delaware Valley
Also Receiving Votes: Lycoming (8), Pacific (4), Augsburg (3), Hartwick (2), Illinois College (2), Ursinus (2), Huntingdon (1), St John's (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, and smedindy
I'm curious what Linfield did (or didn't do) for two voters to stop voting them #1 in week four? Looks like they jumped ship and voted Mount Union instead. Did Linfield not win at CWR by enough (45-0)? Mount, on the other hand, clobbered the winless OAC bottom feeder, Marietta (84-14). Was the putting up of 84 points that influential?
I believe Linfield is close to unbeatable this year (more so than Mount). They will finally come out of the West to get the Stagg Bowl.
Not trying to call out anyone, just sparking some conversation on the thread.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 08, 2013, 03:21:46 PM
They will finally come out of the West *again to get the Stagg Bowl.
*fixed (but I know what you're saying) ;)
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 08, 2013, 03:21:46 PM
I'm curious what Linfield did (or didn't do) for two voters to stop voting them #1 in week four? Looks like they jumped ship and voted Mount Union instead. Did Linfield not win at CWR by enough (45-0)? Mount, on the other hand, clobbered the winless OAC bottom feeder, Marietta (84-14). Was the putting up of 84 points that influential?
I believe Linfield is close to unbeatable this year (more so than Mount). They will finally come out of the West to get the Stagg Bowl.
Not trying to call out anyone, just sparking some conversation on the thread.
hey 02, I was one of those who changed his vote from Linfiled to Mt U after my trip to alliance last week ... :o I saw a machine that night for sure ,, Not to say they are not beatable in the Stagg by My beloved Wildcats this year.. ;D 8-) time will tell but until then ;)
Go Cats
Go Big D
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 08, 2013, 03:21:46 PM
I'm curious what Linfield did (or didn't do) for two voters to stop voting them #1 in week four? Looks like they jumped ship and voted Mount Union instead. Did Linfield not win at CWR by enough (45-0)? Mount, on the other hand, clobbered the winless OAC bottom feeder, Marietta (84-14). Was the putting up of 84 points that influential?
I believe Linfield is close to unbeatable this year (more so than Mount). They will finally come out of the West to get the Stagg Bowl.
Not trying to call out anyone, just sparking some conversation on the thread.
02, I have no doubt the Cats are playing really impressively. But don't write their ticket to Salem too early. After all, even though the polls won't reflect it, don't forget my mantra...WIWA. ;)
The only change I had was Concordia Moorhead out, Lebanon Valley in.
Quote from: smedindy on October 13, 2013, 07:16:17 PM
The only change I had was Concordia Moorhead out, Lebanon Valley in.
I didn't completely drop C-M, but they fell from 22 to 25. My change was #24 Augsburg out, replaced by #24 Willamette.
Pacific is on the verge of entering, and Salisbury is coming back strong. (And, yes, Leb Val definitely on the radar.)
I'm interested to see how Stevens Point does at home against Platteville this weekend. UWSP have been flying under the radar so far in the WIAC (4-1, 2-0)...they are lurking just beyond the top 3 big dogs in the conference.
They already had a respectable game at NCC, where they trailed the Cardinals 13-0 at the half. But went on to lose 27-7.
I'll get the individual votes up sometime in the next day or so
2013 WEEK 6 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev Rank
1) Mount Union (5) 173 1
2) Linfield (1) 167 2
3) Mary Hardin-Baylor (1) 164 3
4) North Central 148 5
5) Bethel 144 4
6) UW Platteville 134 6
7) Hobart 130 7
8) UW-Whitewater 117 8
9) Wesley 112 T10
10) Franklin 105 T10
11) St Thomas 102 9
12) UW-Oshkosh 94 12
13) Heidelberg 86 13
T14) Johns Hopkins 84 14
T14) Wabash 84 15
16) Wheaton 78 16
17) Wittenberg 69 17
18) Pacific Lutheran 64 18
19) St John Fisher 54 19
20) Coe 40 20
21) John Carroll 38 T21
22) Willamette 26 25
23) Illinois Wesleyan 23 24
T24) Concordia-Moorhead 7 T21
T24) Pacific 7 NR
Dropped Out: Thomas More
Also Receiving Votes: Salisbury (6), St John's (6), Christopher Newport (4), Illinois College (4), Huntingdon (2), Lebanon Valley (1), Ursinus (1), Wartburg (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, and smedindy
As promised, here are the individual votes for each team at the halfway mark of the regular season
1) Mount Union 173 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2)
2) Linfield 167 ( 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3)
3) Mary Hardin-Baylor 164 ( 1, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4) North Central 148 ( 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6)
5) Bethel 144 ( 4, 4, 4, 5, 7, 7, 7)
6) UW Platteville 134 ( 4, 4, 6, 7, 7, 8, 12)
7) Hobart 130 ( 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 9, 13)
8) UW-Whitewater 117 ( 5, 6, 9, 9, 10, 11, 15)
9) Wesley 112 ( 7, 8, 8, 8, 11, 11, 17)
10) Franklin 105 ( 8, 9, 10, 11, 11, 13, 15)
11) St Thomas 102 ( 6, 9, 11, 13, 13, 14, 14)
12) UW-Oshkosh 94 ( 8, 9, 12, 12, 14, 15, 18)
13) Heidelberg 86 ( 9, 10, 10, 14, 17, 17, 19)
T14) Johns Hopkins 84 ( 8, 10, 12, 15, 16, 18, 19)
T14) Wabash 84 (10, 11, 13, 14, 16, 17, 17)
16) Wheaton 78 (10, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18, 20)
17) Wittenberg 69 (13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 18, 19)
18) Pacific Lutheran 64 (12, 12, 16, 16, 18, 21, 23)
19) St John Fisher 54 (15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 20, 20)
20) Coe 40 (15, 19, 19, 20, 21, 22, --)
21) John Carroll 38 (17, 19, 20, 20, 22, 22, 24)
22) Willamette 26 (21, 21, 21, 21, 22, 24, --)
23) Illinois Wesleyan 23 (16, 21, 22, 24, 24, --, --)
T24) Concordia-Moorhead 7 (23, 23, 25, --, --, --, --)
T24) Pacific 7 (22, 23, --, --, --, --, --)
T26) Salisbury 6 (23, 24, 25)
T26) St John's 6 (23, 24, 25)
T28) Christopher Newport 4 (22)
T28) Illinois College 4 (23, 25)
30) Huntingdon 2 (24)
T31) Lebanon Valley 1 (25)
T31) Ursinus 1 (25)
T31) Wartburg 1 (25)
Interesting that we have consensus on 20 of the 25 teams, and almost full consensus on two additional teams.
This poll seems stable...almost TOO stable... ;)
Quote from: smedindy on October 16, 2013, 12:14:55 PM
Interesting that we have consensus on 20 of the 25 teams, and almost full consensus on two additional teams.
This poll seems stable...almost TOO stable... ;)
That will change in coming weeks. By coincidence(?), several conference schedules are extremely back-loaded this year (esp. OAC, CCIW, and WIAC); the 'big dogs' have been feasting on the also-rans, but go head-to-head soon.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 16, 2013, 12:31:04 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 16, 2013, 12:14:55 PM
Interesting that we have consensus on 20 of the 25 teams, and almost full consensus on two additional teams.
This poll seems stable...almost TOO stable... ;)
That will change in coming weeks. By coincidence(?), several conference schedules are extremely back-loaded this year (esp. OAC, CCIW, and WIAC); the 'big dogs' have been feasting on the also-rans, but go head-to-head soon.
I was surprised by the spread for some teams (i.e Pacific Lutheran).
Quote from: D3MAFAN on October 16, 2013, 12:34:00 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 16, 2013, 12:31:04 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 16, 2013, 12:14:55 PM
Interesting that we have consensus on 20 of the 25 teams, and almost full consensus on two additional teams.
This poll seems stable...almost TOO stable... ;)
That will change in coming weeks. By coincidence(?), several conference schedules are extremely back-loaded this year (esp. OAC, CCIW, and WIAC); the 'big dogs' have been feasting on the also-rans, but go head-to-head soon.
I was surprised by the spread for some teams (i.e Pacific Lutheran).
[/b]
Must be the east coast west coast thing.. The boys on the east coast just don't get how good PLU is ? :D 8-)
Quote from: desertcat1 on October 17, 2013, 05:02:12 PM
Quote from: D3MAFAN on October 16, 2013, 12:34:00 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 16, 2013, 12:31:04 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 16, 2013, 12:14:55 PM
Interesting that we have consensus on 20 of the 25 teams, and almost full consensus on two additional teams.
This poll seems stable...almost TOO stable... ;)
That will change in coming weeks. By coincidence(?), several conference schedules are extremely back-loaded this year (esp. OAC, CCIW, and WIAC); the 'big dogs' have been feasting on the also-rans, but go head-to-head soon.
I was surprised by the spread for some teams (i.e Pacific Lutheran).
[/b]
Must be the east coast west coast thing.. The boys on the east coast just don't get how good PLU is ? :D 8-)
I guess that helps balances the poll. ;D
I don't mean to call out one pollster because I REALLY appreciate you guys taking the time to do this each week. But I have a hard time understanding either the Fan poll pollster or the D3football.com pollster(s) who listed Ursinus in their top25. While they are 5-0, they just gave up 44 points to 0-5 Moravian College, a team that had not scored more than 14 points in any of their previous four games. In that game, Ursinus gave up 8.0 yards per carry rushing. And Moravian rushed 41 times! While I am admit to having a WIAC bias, I believe Stevens Point (0 votes) would beat Ursinus a lot to a little. Again, not trying to rip anyone. If any of you have Ursinus on your radar, I'd be interested in hearing the supporting data on their behalf.
If the pollster would come forward I'm sure they would say something along the lines of: Ursinus SOS rank is 136, while Stevens Point is 183. Besides the NCC game, UWSP has played some weak teams.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 18, 2013, 08:12:07 AM
If the pollster would come forward I'm sure they would say something along the lines of: Ursinus SOS rank is 136, while Stevens Point is 183. Besides the NCC game, UWSP has played some weak teams.
I can't say that I voted for them, but they did beat two teams that they had lost to last year that I had them losing to in the begining of the season, that is both Franklin & Marshall and Gettysburg. As for ranking them above UW-Stevens Point, as Warhawk pointed out, SOS at this point speaks for itself. Also, to say that UW-Stevens Point would beat Ursinus by a lot is all opionated since we really have nothing to compare the two. For me personally, I have played enough games collegiately to know that sometimes a team could be overlooking an opponent or the opponent could be hitting on all cylinders on that given day and sometimes it comes down to matchups. As for Stevens-Point, they currently have
three teams with no wins that they have played.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 16, 2013, 12:31:04 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 16, 2013, 12:14:55 PM
Interesting that we have consensus on 20 of the 25 teams, and almost full consensus on two additional teams.
This poll seems stable...almost TOO stable... ;)
That will change in coming weeks. By coincidence(?), several conference schedules are extremely back-loaded this year (esp. OAC, CCIW, and WIAC); the 'big dogs' have been feasting on the also-rans, but go head-to-head soon.
Tomorrow is guaranteed to shake-up the poll a bit. Three big games, and perhaps five (though
most of the top teams are still in 'feast on the also-rans' mode).
The biggie, of course, is #11 St. Thomas @ #5 Bethel. Others from our top 25 include t24 Pacific @ #18 Pac Lu (though I think it's a blow-out for Pac Lu) and #19 SJF @ #t26 Salisbury (which oughta be a barn-burner). Two others may figure in: Dubuque @ #20 Coe (I really think that's a toss-up) and #6 UW-Platteville @ UWSP (I am picking UWSP).
Beyond those five games, any loss by a top 25 team would IMO be a HUGE upset.
Lots of shuffling on my ballot, and not just from teams that lost. I majorly upgraded John Carroll and some stayed flat even with others losing above them.
Quote from: smedindy on October 20, 2013, 12:52:20 PM
Lots of shuffling on my ballot, and not just from teams that lost. I majorly upgraded John Carroll and some stayed flat even with others losing above them.
Agreed! I think the D3 pollster are going to have handful as well, you have some good teams with two losses and a good amount of quality teams with only one loss. It was really tough for me last night to do my ballot. I watch a quite a few games yesterday for some teams against quality opponents, and was impress with some and saw some flaws for others that help me distinguish as well.
When will the next ranking be posted?
As soon as I hear back from one more person about an oversight on their ballot
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 23, 2013, 08:32:09 PM
As soon as I hear back from one more person about an oversight on their ballot
For the last time, it's not an oversight. I purposely put Linfield ahead of Mount.
;D :D ;)
guess who screwed up .. sorry boys.. :-[ Life got in the way this time. :-* :'(
Sorry for the delay but I like to make sure everyone's ballots are accurate and aren't missing someone they didn't intend to omit. Had two cases this week to check on.
2013 WEEK 7 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev Rank
1) Mount Union (6) 174 1
2) Linfield (1) 167 2
3) Mary Hardin-Baylor 163 3
4) North Central 148 4
5) Bethel 147 5
6) Hobart 130 7
7) UW-Whitewater 129 8
8) UW Platteville 128 6
9) Franklin 117 10
10) UW-Oshkosh 110 12
11) Johns Hopkins 100 T14
12) Wabash 96 T14
13) Wheaton 89 16
14) Heidelberg 81 13
15) John Carroll 73 21
16) Wittenberg 69 17
T17) Pacific Lutheran 58 18
T17) St Thomas 58 11
19) Wesley 52 9
20) Willamette 41 22
21) Illinois Wesleyan 35 23
22) Salisbury 23 NR
23) Concordia-Moorhead 22 T24
24) St John's 19 NR
25) Lebanon Valley 11 NR
Dropped Out: St John Fisher, Coe, Pacific
Also Receiving Votes: Illinois College (9), St John Fisher (8), Millsaps (5), Hampden-Sydney (4), Pacific (3), Wartburg (3), Rowan (2), Delaware Valley (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, and smedindy
D3 has a nice article on the front page that breaks down the D3Football Top 25 wins against opponents with a winning percentage, .500, and losing percentage. I wonder how ours matches up.
It should be an interesting poll this week. I switched up my top 10 a little. I always had UWP at #4, but I've come to realize they don't have a top 4 team defense, so I dropped them down a spot this week. Also, with UWW winning in UWO, I bumped UWW past Hobart in my poll*.
With IL-Wesleyan and Pacific Lutheran winning against ranked teams, I bumped them up past Johns Hopkins. I dropped JH three spots even though they won. I don't like doing that, but other teams around JH are beating tougher opponents than they are right now. So I rewarded teams like IL-W and PL for the tougher wins.
*For the record, I filled out my top 25 before looking at D3football's top 25 ranking. I do that so I don't get any outside influence in my poll.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 28, 2013, 11:20:22 AM
It should be an interesting poll this week. I switched up my top 10 a little. I always had UWP at #4, but I've come to realize they don't have a top 4 team defense, so I dropped them down a spot this week. Also, with UWW winning in UWO, I bumped UWW past Hobart in my poll*.
With IL-Wesleyan and Pacific Lutheran winning against ranked teams, I bumped them up past Johns Hopkins. I dropped JH three spots even though they won. I don't like doing that, but other teams around JH are beating tougher opponents than they are right now. So I rewarded teams like IL-W and PL for the tougher wins.
*For the record, I filled out my top 25 before looking at D3football's top 25 ranking. I do that so I don't get any outside influence in my poll.
I had a chance to watch a few games from different regions and actually stayed up and watch the Redlands vs. Chapman game. I think my biggest move was Illinois Wesleyan. I moved some teams for the South Region and East Region that I felt based on the numerous games I watch into the bottom half of my Top 25.
It's nice to have all the ballots in and all issues taken care of and it's still only Monday ;D
2013 WEEK 8 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev Rank
1) Mount Union (6) 174 1
2) Linfield (1) 167 2
3) Mary Hardin-Baylor 163 3
T4) Bethel 148 5
T4) North Central 148 4
6) UW-Whitewater 133 7
7) Hobart 131 6
8) UW Platteville 128 8
9) Franklin 122 9
10) Wabash 100 12
11) Johns Hopkins 99 11
12) UW-Oshkosh 96 10
13) Heidelberg 82 14
14) John Carroll 79 15
15) Illinois Wesleyan 77 21
16) Wittenberg 76 16
17) Pacific Lutheran 62 T17
18) St Thomas 57 T17
19) Wheaton 52 13
20) Wesley 51 19
21) Concordia-Moorhead 30 23
22) Salisbury 27 22
23) St John's 23 24
24) Illinois College 10 NR
25) Willamette 9 20
Dropped Out: Lebanon Valley
Also Receiving Votes: Ithaca (8), Millsaps (5), Wartburg (5), Lebanon Valley (4), Pacific (4), Rowan (3), Maryville (1), Texas Lutheran (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, and smedindy
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 28, 2013, 12:46:41 PM
It's nice to have all the ballots in and all issues taken care of and it's still only Monday ;D
2013 WEEK 8 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev Rank
1) Mount Union (6) 174 1
2) Linfield (1) 167 2
3) Mary Hardin-Baylor 163 3
T4) Bethel 148 5
T4) North Central 148 4
6) UW-Whitewater 133 7
7) Hobart 131 6
8) UW Platteville 128 8
9) Franklin 122 9
10) Wabash 100 12
11) Johns Hopkins 99 11
12) UW-Oshkosh 96 10
13) Heidelberg 82 14
14) John Carroll 79 15
15) Illinois Wesleyan 77 21
16) Wittenberg 76 16
17) Pacific Lutheran 62 T17
18) St Thomas 57 T17
19) Wheaton 52 13
20) Wesley 51 19
21) Concordia-Moorhead 30 23
22) Salisbury 27 22
23) St John's 23 24
24) Illinois College 10 NR
25) Willamette 9 20
Dropped Out: Lebanon Valley
Also Receiving Votes: Ithaca (8), Millsaps (5), Wartburg (5), Lebanon Valley (4), Pacific (4), Rowan (3), Maryville (1), Texas Lutheran (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, and smedindy
Well done! I truly look forward to seeing this each week. I believe you have a great cross section on knowledgeable pollsters.
WHD
It's pretty remarkable how similar the 7 member fan poll and the 25 member d3f poll are. Except for the middle 1/3 of the top 25 which is a bit muddled anyways the polls are almost in agreement. Here's the results if you combine the votes of the two polls along with their respective rankings
Team Fan d3f Comb Points
Mount Union 1 1 783
Linfield 2 2 764
Mary Hardin-Baylor 3 3 754
North Central T4 4 681
Bethel T4 5 667
UW-Whitewater 6 6 628
Hobart 7 7 604
UW-Platteville 8 8 563
Heidelberg 13 9 498
Franklin 9 11 462
UW-Oshkosh 12 10 452
Johns Hopkins 11 12 436
Wabash 10 14 387
Illinois Wesleyan 15 13 372
John Carroll 14 15 353
Wittenberg 16 17 330
Pacific Lutheran 17 16 322
St Thomas 18 18 261
Wheaton 19 19 198
Wesley 20 20 182
Concordia-Moorhead 21 21 158
St John's 23 22 130
Salisbury 22 23 90
Illinois College 24 24 60
Willamette 25 25 54
Millsaps T27 26 39
Ithaca 26 T27 39
Wartburg T27 T27 36
Lebanon Valley T29 T29 19
Maryville T32 T29 16
Thomas More 31 13
Pacific T29 33 12
Coe 32 9
Trinity (CT) 34 5
Texas Lutheran T32 T35 4
Framingham St T35 3
Louisiana College T35 3
Redlands T35 3
Rowan 31 3
Wesleyan 39 1
I think we (Fan Poll) are more accurate with Heidelberg. No way they are a top 10 team, 13 may even be too high.
They have the second worst SOS in the country right now (230 out of 231 qualifying teams)! :o. The seven teams they've beaten have COMBINED for nine wins this year (less than 1.5 wins per team)!!! Also, considering they were upset at home last year in the first round of the playoffs, I don't think they've done anything to earn a spot in the top half of the poll.....yet.
I know I jumped John Carroll over them - their day of reckoning will come.
Moved the Berg back up above IWU and Wheaton. The West and North are dominating my rankings, as I think they are with most everyone.
I did throw something to Millsaps and Ithaca.
2013 WEEK 9 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev Rank
1) Mount Union (6) 174 1
2) Linfield (1) 167 2
3) Mary Hardin-Baylor 163 3
4) North Central 150 T4
5) Bethel 149 T4
6) UW-Whitewater 139 6
7) Hobart 131 7
8) Franklin 125 9
9) UW Platteville 103 8
10) Wabash 102 10
11) UW-Oshkosh 100 12
12) Johns Hopkins 98 11
13) John Carroll 95 14
14) Wittenberg 85 16
T15) Heidelberg 76 13
T15) Pacific Lutheran 76 17
17) Illinois Wesleyan 61 15
18) Wheaton 55 19
19) Wesley 49 20
20) St Thomas 39 18
21) Concordia-Moorhead 34 21
22) Illinois College 23 24
23) Lebanon Valley 21 NR
24) Millsaps 19 NR
25) Ithaca 14 NR
Dropped Out: Salisbury, St John's, Willamette
Also Receiving Votes: Pacific (9), Rowan (5), Texas Lutheran (5), Washington U (4), Framingham St (1), Maryville (1), Wesleyan (1), Willamette (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, and smedindy
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 05, 2013, 02:24:00 AM
2013 WEEK 9 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev Rank
1) Mount Union (6) 174 1
2) Linfield (1) 167 2
3) Mary Hardin-Baylor 163 3
4) North Central 150 T4
5) Bethel 149 T4
6) UW-Whitewater 139 6
7) Hobart 131 7
8) Franklin 125 9
9) UW Platteville 103 8
10) Wabash 102 10
11) UW-Oshkosh 100 12
12) Johns Hopkins 98 11
13) John Carroll 95 14
14) Wittenberg 85 16
T15) Heidelberg 76 13
T15) Pacific Lutheran 76 17
17) Illinois Wesleyan 61 15
18) Wheaton 55 19
19) Wesley 49 20
20) St Thomas 39 18
21) Concordia-Moorhead 34 21
22) Illinois College 23 24
23) Lebanon Valley 21 NR
24) Millsaps 19 NR
25) Ithaca 14 NR
Dropped Out: Salisbury, St John's, Willamette
Also Receiving Votes: Pacific (9), Rowan (5), Texas Lutheran (5), Washington U (4), Framingham St (1), Maryville (1), Wesleyan (1), Willamette (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, and smedindy
I am surprised to see Oskosh behind Platteville.
Quote from: D3MAFAN on November 05, 2013, 09:20:16 AM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 05, 2013, 02:24:00 AM
2013 WEEK 9 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev Rank
1) Mount Union (6) 174 1
2) Linfield (1) 167 2
3) Mary Hardin-Baylor 163 3
4) North Central 150 T4
5) Bethel 149 T4
6) UW-Whitewater 139 6
7) Hobart 131 7
8) Franklin 125 9
9) UW Platteville 103 8
10) Wabash 102 10
11) UW-Oshkosh 100 12
12) Johns Hopkins 98 11
13) John Carroll 95 14
14) Wittenberg 85 16
T15) Heidelberg 76 13
T15) Pacific Lutheran 76 17
17) Illinois Wesleyan 61 15
18) Wheaton 55 19
19) Wesley 49 20
20) St Thomas 39 18
21) Concordia-Moorhead 34 21
22) Illinois College 23 24
23) Lebanon Valley 21 NR
24) Millsaps 19 NR
25) Ithaca 14 NR
Dropped Out: Salisbury, St John's, Willamette
Also Receiving Votes: Pacific (9), Rowan (5), Texas Lutheran (5), Washington U (4), Framingham St (1), Maryville (1), Wesleyan (1), Willamette (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, and smedindy
I am surprised to see Oskosh behind Platteville.
Me too, I don't think Platteville is a top 10 team (anymore at least). I was wrong about them at the start of the season. I thought they would be an elite team...but they just don't have the defense, and the high-powered offense folds when up against a good defense.
I had Oskosh 12th and Platteville 13th. 9th seems high, but someone must love 'em!
it could have been me boys, :o I got my P and O mixed up (UW? )... ::) but, it's not the first time ? ;) it will all work out next week.. 8-),
Quote from: desertcat1 on November 05, 2013, 12:33:21 PM
it could have been me boys, :o I got my P and O mixed up (UW? )... ::) but, it's not the first time ? ;) it will all work out next week.. 8-),
Hey, I know what you mean. These message boards pwn me! :) ;) :D ;D 8-) ::)
Quote from: Ralph Turner on November 05, 2013, 12:44:08 PM
Quote from: desertcat1 on November 05, 2013, 12:33:21 PM
it could have been me boys, :o I got my P and O mixed up (UW? )... ::) but, it's not the first time ? ;) it will all work out next week.. 8-),
Hey, I know what you mean. These message boards pwn me! :) ;) :D ;D 8-) ::)
the serial smiter got you to 1499 buddy, :)
Quote from: desertcat1 on November 05, 2013, 12:52:57 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on November 05, 2013, 12:44:08 PM
Quote from: desertcat1 on November 05, 2013, 12:33:21 PM
it could have been me boys, :o I got my P and O mixed up (UW? )... ::) but, it's not the first time ? ;) it will all work out next week.. 8-),
Hey, I know what you mean. These message boards pwn me! :) ;) :D ;D 8-) ::)
the serial smiter got you to 1499 buddy, :)
Thanks, d'cat. And I pushed you over 800! :)
I jumbled around the middle of my 25 today with Wittenberg's and JC's very decisive victories, and Franklin losing yesterday. I realized I had JC and Wittenberg too low.
Also, because I never really ranked Hiedelberg very high, I had no problem dropping them out of the top 25 after two consecutive losses.
I've still got Heidi ranked, but they are #22. My most notable change was at the very top: the difference in Heidi results between UMU and JCU, combined with Franklin losing to a very bad team, meant I could no longer justify voting UMU above Linfield and UMHB. (I even toyed with dropping them below NCC, Bethel, and UWW, but that seemed overly harsh for an undefeated defending national champion!) If they solidly down JCU, they may be right back on top - we'll cross that bridge when we come to it.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 10, 2013, 03:39:28 PM
I've still got Heidi ranked, but they are #22. My most notable change was at the very top: the difference in Heidi results between UMU and JCU, combined with Franklin losing to a very bad team, meant I could no longer justify voting UMU above Linfield and UMHB. (I even toyed with dropping them below NCC, Bethel, and UWW, but that seemed overly harsh for an undefeated defending national champion!) If they solidly down JCU, they may be right back on top - we'll cross that bridge when we come to it.
Awesome...glad to see I'm not the only one - for once - who doesn't have Mount on top.
Welcome to the club :)
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 10, 2013, 04:10:52 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 10, 2013, 03:39:28 PM
I've still got Heidi ranked, but they are #22. My most notable change was at the very top: the difference in Heidi results between UMU and JCU, combined with Franklin losing to a very bad team, meant I could no longer justify voting UMU above Linfield and UMHB. (I even toyed with dropping them below NCC, Bethel, and UWW, but that seemed overly harsh for an undefeated defending national champion!) If they solidly down JCU, they may be right back on top - we'll cross that bridge when we come to it.
Awesome...glad to see I'm not the only one - for once - who doesn't have Mount on top.
Welcome to the club :)
Hello boys ,
I was thinking about joining your club but 8-), I listened to pat ??? one more week. :P BW always plays the mt.U tough and still wins the national title. ::) I think he will be wrong this year.. :-* ;D
they will have to get by JC first.. they looked pretty good yesterday to me.. :) time will tell.. ::) :-[
I also joined the club... but not surprisingly did it in my own unique way ;) And of the ballots I've received so far I seem to have dropped Franklin the furthest
I didn't drop 'em, but I didn't automatically put 'em at #1.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 10, 2013, 08:33:27 PM
I also joined the club... but not surprisingly did it in my own unique way ;) And of the ballots I've received so far I seem to have dropped Franklin the furthest
I know the feeling....I probably dropped whitewater the furthest (out of disgust) last season after they lost to buffalo St.
Quote from: smedindy on November 10, 2013, 08:39:20 PM
I didn't drop 'em, but I didn't automatically put 'em at #1.
Yeah, I'm not the sort who
automatically puts the defending champ #1 until they lose, but I do give deference to the title. They have to lose or look pretty bad in a win; UMU had done neither, UNTIL Franklin got beat by a team who was 2-6, AND JCU beat Heidi like a drum while UMU struggled.
I even toyed with the idea of dropping UMU to #3 in the North region (behind NCC and JCU), but couldn't quite pull the trigger.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 10, 2013, 08:54:37 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 10, 2013, 08:39:20 PM
I didn't drop 'em, but I didn't automatically put 'em at #1.
Yeah, I'm not the sort who automatically puts the defending champ #1 until they lose, but I do give deference to the title. They have to lose or look pretty bad in a win; UMU had done neither, UNTIL Franklin got beat by a team who was 2-6, AND JCU beat Heidi like a drum while UMU struggled.
I even toyed with the idea of dropping UMU to #3 in the North region (behind NCC and JCU), but couldn't quite pull the trigger.
I did see that Mount lost a first-place vote in the Top 25 today, but still has a firm grasp on the top spot.
Does anyone know what's happened to D3MAFAN? His account seems to be gone
Unfortunately we appear to have lost a voter. Spots are always open for any individuals who want to join in the fun. I think since it's so late in this season we'll just stay with the 6 we have so things aren't fluctuating with so few polls left, but if you're interested in next year let me know :)
I've added in at the end how the teams would have been ranked last week with just the 6 voters left
2013 WEEK 10 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev Prev 6
1) Linfield (2) 146 2 1
2) Mount Union (3) 145 1 2
3) Mary Hardin-Baylor 138 3 3
4) Bethel (1) 132 5 5
5) North Central 128 4 4
6) UW-Whitewater 118 6 6
7) Hobart 111 7 7
8) John Carroll 109 13 13
9) UW-Oshkosh 97 11 12
10) Wittenberg 93 14 14
T11) Johns Hopkins 85 12 11
T11) Pacific Lutheran 85 T15 15
13) UW Platteville 81 9 10
14) Illinois Wesleyan 71 17 17
15) St Thomas 63 20 20
16) Wesley 60 19 19
17) Wabash 58 10 9
18) Franklin 47 8 8
19) Lebanon Valley 34 23 24
20) Wheaton 33 18 18
T21) Heidelberg 30 T15 16
T21) Ithaca 30 25 T25
23) Millsaps 28 24 23
24) Washington U 6 NR NR
25) Rowan 5 NR NR
Dropped Out: Concordia-Moorhead and Illinois College
Also Receiving Votes: Concordia-Moorhead (4), Willamette (4), Framingham St (3), Thomas More (3), Chapman (2), Gallaudet (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, and smedindy
I've got no particular problem with Bethel at 4 and NCC at 5, but it seems an awfully weird time for Bethel to have jumped them! Bethel mauled a team who is now 1-8; NCC decisively beat a top 25 team! :o ::)
Anyone want to tackle that one (especially the voter who gave Bethel their first #1 vote right after they beat a 1-8 team)?
Hypothetically a voter could have decided to take a look at their top teams since there was some serious jumbling going on and decided that over the course of the season Bethel looked better to them than the teams they had previously had them behind... hypothetically of course ;)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 12, 2013, 09:22:55 PM
I've got no particular problem with Bethel at 4 and NCC at 5, but it seems an awfully weird time for Bethel to have jumped them! Bethel mauled a team who is now 1-8; NCC decisively beat a top 25 team! :o ::)
Anyone want to tackle that one (especially the voter who gave Bethel their first #1 vote right after they beat a 1-8 team)?
I came on to ask the same thing. I figured a disgruntled Bethel fan voted them #1 because they dropped a spot in the Top 25....but I don't think any Bethel fans are on this committee.
It's not me :o I still have beth at #5 behind NCC...Wow thanks for all the love for my cats :o I need to jump on that train too.. Maybe this week if JC pulls it off? :o
Quote from: desertcat1 on November 13, 2013, 10:08:55 AM
It's not me :o I still have beth at #5 behind NCC...Wow thanks for all the love for my cats :o I need to jump on that train too.. Maybe this week if JC pulls it off? :o
Yep, I have:
5. NCC
6. Bethel
7. UWW
You must have UWW at #4 then? I'm not that brave. At least not until their offense is a little more consistent. UWW's offense is still VERY young....not one senior starting.
Not yet , they(UWW) are still at #6 for me. I am waiting for someone at the top to fall first? ??? could be this week? :o
Quote from: desertcat1 on November 13, 2013, 10:40:41 AM
Not yet , they(UWW) are still at #6 for me. I am waiting for someone at the top to fall first? ??? could be this week? :o
I gotcha...duh. you have NCC at #4. I miss read your last post.
looks like a very tough road to salem from the west this year AGAIN. ;) I see our(cats) journey this way so far? tough PLU at home, then round 2 at home tough MIca 2nd place, the !/4 on the road to Mica champ, then semi on the road to UWW, Then on to salem Mighty MT.U or maybe JC ;D.. Could be a nice dream but very COLD.... ::) ;)
Quote from: desertcat1 on November 13, 2013, 11:03:33 AM
looks like a very tough road to salem from the west this year AGAIN. ;) I see our(cats) journey this way so far? tough PLU at home, then round 2 at home tough MIca 2nd place, the !/4 on the road to Mica champ, then semi on the road to UWW, Then on to salem Mighty MT.U or maybe JC ;D.. Could be a nice dream but very COLD.... ::) ;)
Slow your roll! I'm nervous on how Whitewater will do after round two. ;D
pound that rock , ;) hope to see you in Dec? ;D
Quote from: desertcat1 on November 13, 2013, 10:40:41 AM
Not yet , they(UWW) are still at #6 for me. I am waiting for someone at the top to fall first? ??? could be this week? :o
Linfield's going down to Pacific!!! ;D
Not really...
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 13, 2013, 11:06:30 AM
Quote from: desertcat1 on November 13, 2013, 11:03:33 AM
looks like a very tough road to salem from the west this year AGAIN. ;) I see our(cats) journey this way so far? tough PLU at home, then round 2 at home tough MIca 2nd place, the !/4 on the road to Mica champ, then semi on the road to UWW, Then on to salem Mighty MT.U or maybe JC ;D.. Could be a nice dream but very COLD.... ::) ;)
Slow your roll! I'm nervous on how Whitewater will do after round two. ;D
WIWA 02, WIWA! Just keep saying it over and over in your head and it'll sink in! 8-)
Quote from: desertcat1 on November 13, 2013, 11:03:33 AM
looks like a very tough road to salem from the west this year AGAIN. ;) I see our(cats) journey this way so far? tough PLU at home, then round 2 at home tough MIca 2nd place, the !/4 on the road to Mica champ, then semi on the road to UWW, Then on to salem Mighty MT.U or maybe JC ;D.. Could be a nice dream but very COLD.... ::) ;)
Presumptuous that there will be a second team from the MIAC (I assume you're talking about Minnesota there). St. Thomas and St. John's do not have mind blowing résumés for teams that are carrying two losses.
Quote from: MasterJedi on November 13, 2013, 11:33:02 AM
Quote from: desertcat1 on November 13, 2013, 10:40:41 AM
Not yet , they(UWW) are still at #6 for me. I am waiting for someone at the top to fall first? ??? could be this week? :o
Linfield's going down to Pacific!!! ;D
Not really...
I have a small farm for sale :o any takers From this world" MJ? :-*
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 13, 2013, 11:47:23 AM
Quote from: desertcat1 on November 13, 2013, 11:03:33 AM
looks like a very tough road to salem from the west this year AGAIN. ;) I see our(cats) journey this way so far? tough PLU at home, then round 2 at home tough MIca 2nd place, the !/4 on the road to Mica champ, then semi on the road to UWW, Then on to salem Mighty MT.U or maybe JC ;D.. Could be a nice dream but very COLD.... ::) ;)
Presumptuous that there will be a second team from the MIAC (I assume you're talking about Minnesota there). St. Thomas and St. John's do not have mind blowing résumés for teams that are carrying two losses.
2nd place Miac or wiac same thing.. ;)
Quote from: desertcat1 on November 13, 2013, 12:39:02 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 13, 2013, 11:47:23 AM
Quote from: desertcat1 on November 13, 2013, 11:03:33 AM
looks like a very tough road to salem from the west this year AGAIN. ;) I see our(cats) journey this way so far? tough PLU at home, then round 2 at home tough MIca 2nd place, the !/4 on the road to Mica champ, then semi on the road to UWW, Then on to salem Mighty MT.U or maybe JC ;D.. Could be a nice dream but very COLD.... ::) ;)
Presumptuous that there will be a second team from the MIAC (I assume you're talking about Minnesota there). St. Thomas and St. John's do not have mind blowing résumés for teams that are carrying two losses.
2nd place Miac or wiac same thing.. ;)
No. The 2nd WIAC team (winner of UWP/UWO) will have only one loss.
boys, you missed the point ;) MY DREAMS 8-) imho :-* WHAT I SEE A HEAD FOR THE Cats only ;D road to salem if and when? ;D ..
Here's the distribution of the votes this week in preview of the final non-secret regional rankings
1) Linfield 146 ( 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2)
2) Mount Union 145 ( 1, 1, 1, 2, 3, 3)
3) Mary Hardin-Baylor 138 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4) Bethel 132 ( 1, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5)
5) North Central 128 ( 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6)
6) UW-Whitewater 118 ( 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8)
7) Hobart 111 ( 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 10)
8) John Carroll 109 ( 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 11)
9) UW-Oshkosh 97 ( 8, 9, 10, 10, 10, 12)
10) Wittenberg 93 ( 9, 9, 10, 10, 12, 13)
T11) Johns Hopkins 85 ( 9, 9, 11, 12, 13, 17)
T11) Pacific Lutheran 85 ( 8, 9, 13, 13, 13, 15)
13) UW Platteville 81 (11, 11, 11, 12, 14, 16)
14) Illinois Wesleyan 71 (11, 12, 14, 14, 15, 19)
15) St Thomas 63 (14, 15, 15, 16, 16, 17)
16) Wesley 60 (12, 14, 15, 15, 18, 22)
17) Wabash 58 (13, 14, 16, 18, 18, 19)
18) Franklin 47 (16, 16, 17, 17, 20, 23)
19) Lebanon Valley 34 (19, 19, 21, 21, 21, 21)
20) Wheaton 33 (18, 20, 20, 20, 21, 24)
T21) Heidelberg 30 (18, 19, 19, 22, 22, --)
T21) Ithaca 30 (18, 20, 21, 22, 22, 23)
23) Millsaps 28 (17, 17, 22, 23, 24, 25)
24) Washington U 6 (20, --, --, --, --, --)
25) Rowan 5 (23, 24, --, --, --, --)
T26) Concordia-Moorhead 4 (24, 25, 25)
T26) Willamette 4 (23, 25)
T28) Framingham St 3 (24, 25)
T28) Thomas More 3 (23)
30) Chapman 2 (24)
31) Gallaudet 1 (25)
I think a team in the West will move to the North since the North may have to move East unless the committee really like Hobart.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 13, 2013, 12:41:39 PM
Quote from: desertcat1 on November 13, 2013, 12:39:02 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 13, 2013, 11:47:23 AM
Quote from: desertcat1 on November 13, 2013, 11:03:33 AM
looks like a very tough road to salem from the west this year AGAIN. ;) I see our(cats) journey this way so far? tough PLU at home, then round 2 at home tough MIca 2nd place, the !/4 on the road to Mica champ, then semi on the road to UWW, Then on to salem Mighty MT.U or maybe JC ;D.. Could be a nice dream but very COLD.... ::) ;)
Presumptuous that there will be a second team from the MIAC (I assume you're talking about Minnesota there). St. Thomas and St. John's do not have mind blowing résumés for teams that are carrying two losses.
2nd place Miac or wiac same thing.. ;)
No. The 2nd WIAC team (winner of UWP/UWO) will have only one loss.
number 2 = second place ;D one loss or 2 loss still second place ;)
How does our poll compare to the region rankings?
1) Linfield West 3
2) Mount Union North 1
3) Mary Hardin-Baylor South 1
4) Bethel West 2
5) North Central North 2
6) UW-Whitewater West 1
7) Hobart East 1
8) John Carroll North 3
9) UW-Oshkosh West 4
10) Wittenberg North 4
T11) Johns Hopkins South 2
T11) Pacific Lutheran West 6
13) UW Platteville West 5
14) Illinois Wesleyan North 5
15) St Thomas West 7
16) Wesley South 4
17) Wabash North 6
18) Franklin North T9
19) Lebanon Valley East 3
20) Wheaton North 7
T21) Heidelberg North T9
T21) Ithaca East 2
23) Millsaps South 3
24) Washington U South 8
25) Rowan East 4
T26) Concordia-Moorhead West 9
T26) Willamette West -
T28) Framingham St East 6
T28) Thomas More South 5
30) Chapman West -
31) Gallaudet East 5
Not receiving votes
Hope North 8
Wartburg West 8
St John's West 10
Alfred East T7
St John Fisher East T7
Salve Regina East 9
Brockport St East 10
Maryville South 6
Texas Lutheran South 7
Hampden-Sydney South 9
Wash & Jeff South 10
Hobart hasn't been in MUC's bracket since 2008. In 2011 they were in the Umhb one and last season they were paired with UST.
My guess is the Statesmen end up in a Bethel or UWW bracket, but that's just me. We'll have Duey Naatz on the show at 7:55 pm to ask him how the brackets came together.
Quote from: ITH radio on November 15, 2013, 08:19:11 AM
Hobart hasn't been in MUC's bracket since 2008. In 2011 they were in the Umhb one and last season they were paired with UST.
My guess is the Statesmen end up in a Bethel or UWW bracket, but that's just me. We'll have Duey Naatz on the show at 7:55 pm to ask him how the brackets came together.
Considering Hobart is the only East team that's undefeated this year, I'm guessing they will stay in the East. They were shipped North last year because Widener was also undefeated, and was chosen to stay and represent the East.
I'm guessing they will get #2 in the East (behind JC or UMU).
The above is completely incorrect (but the confusion is understandable since we talk about regions all season, then have regional rankings, then do away with that once the field of 32 is picked).
Hobart wasn't "shipped" anywhere. The Committee picked a Top 8 irrespective of regions and paired the 1's and 2's accordingly. Given UST's location in the bracket, they were either the #2 or #4 overall seed depending how you look at it - I'd argue UST was 4th and thus Hobart was arguably 5th (could have been 7th who knows), being 10-0 overall, which not a lot of teams nationally were at the time save for the usual suspects.
We missed #tbt but check out www.blogtalkradio.com/ith/2012/11/12/in-the-huddlle--liberty-league-football-talk-show
to hear it straight from Bankston, last year's Committee Chair
If you look at the brackets from 2012 (http://static.psbin.com/w/p/d6bwcg8y6h8uj9/2012-football-bracket.pdf) and 2011 (http://static.psbin.com/m/h/uhka1r4s29dmbg/bracket.pdf) you'll see pretty quickly that there really isn't an extreme regional identity to them. Last year, Linfield's quadrant had six West teams plus two North teams, but from these last two brackets, every other quadrant has been represented by at least three different geographic regions.
do you want a poll this week or wait until the playoffs are over ? ;)
We'll vote this week, then have one final poll when the playoffs finish
i'll get right on that.. ;) :-*
34 teams received votes this week... most since week 1
2013 WEEK 11 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev
1) Mount Union (4) 147 2
2) Linfield (1) 145 1
3) Mary Hardin-Baylor 137 3
4) Bethel (1) 131 4
5) North Central 128 5
6) UW-Whitewater 120 6
7) Hobart 112 7
8) John Carroll 103 8
9) Wittenberg 96 10
10) UW Platteville 91 13
11) Pacific Lutheran 88 T11
12) Johns Hopkins 87 T11
13) UW-Oshkosh 78 9
14) Illinois Wesleyan 73 14
15) Wesley 65 16
16) St Thomas 64 15
17) Wabash 59 17
18) Franklin 51 18
19) Wheaton 37 20
20) Heidelberg 34 T21
21) Concordia-Moorhead 20 NR
22) St John Fisher 13 NR
T23) Thomas More 12 NR
T23) Washington U 12 24
25) Rowan 10 25
Dropped Out: Lebanon Valley, Ithaca, Millsaps
Also Receiving Votes: Framingham St (9), Willamette (8), Lebanon Valley (7), Rhodes (5), Chapman (2), Millsaps (2), Redlands (2), Ithaca (1), Pacific (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, and smedindy
The East Implosion of Week 11 really affected these rankings.
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 02, 2013, 11:40:24 PM
I know this week's poll hasn't been posted yet. The poll from September 25th looks good to me. The only team I see MUCH differently than the pollsters is Hobart. I don't see them beating anyone in the top 15. In My mind, at this point in the season, there is a drop-off after the top 14 and I would probably thrown Hobart into the mix for the 15th spot with St.John Fisher and Wabash. For whatever reason, St. John Fisher intrigues me this year. I am wondering if they, not Hobart, may be the best team in the east this year.
Couldn't resist bringing this one back... ;D
Now I have to get to the emergency room to get treatment on my arm that got all messed up from patting myself on the back. ;)
Quote from: bleedpurple on December 06, 2013, 10:49:54 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 02, 2013, 11:40:24 PM
I know this week's poll hasn't been posted yet. The poll from September 25th looks good to me. The only team I see MUCH differently than the pollsters is Hobart. I don't see them beating anyone in the top 15. In My mind, at this point in the season, there is a drop-off after the top 14 and I would probably thrown Hobart into the mix for the 15th spot with St.John Fisher and Wabash. For whatever reason, St. John Fisher intrigues me this year. I am wondering if they, not Hobart, may be the best team in the east this year.
Couldn't resist bringing this one back... ;D
Now I have to get to the emergency room to get treatment on my arm that got all messed up from patting myself on the back. ;)
I think their may not be an elite team this year, except the team who wins the national championship... I think every and every team is capable of being beat this year, regardless of rank, region, etc...
Quote from: D3MAFAN on December 07, 2013, 04:00:12 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on December 06, 2013, 10:49:54 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 02, 2013, 11:40:24 PM
I know this week's poll hasn't been posted yet. The poll from September 25th looks good to me. The only team I see MUCH differently than the pollsters is Hobart. I don't see them beating anyone in the top 15. In My mind, at this point in the season, there is a drop-off after the top 14 and I would probably thrown Hobart into the mix for the 15th spot with St.John Fisher and Wabash. For whatever reason, St. John Fisher intrigues me this year. I am wondering if they, not Hobart, may be the best team in the east this year.
Couldn't resist bringing this one back... ;D
Now I have to get to the emergency room to get treatment on my arm that got all messed up from patting myself on the back. ;)
I think their may not be an elite team this year, except the team who wins the national championship... I think every and every team is capable of being beat this year, regardless of rank, region, etc...
100% agree, I think this is the first time in a long while that all 4 remaining teams have a legit shot at winning the Stagg.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on December 08, 2013, 02:24:43 PM
Quote from: D3MAFAN on December 07, 2013, 04:00:12 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on December 06, 2013, 10:49:54 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 02, 2013, 11:40:24 PM
I know this week's poll hasn't been posted yet. The poll from September 25th looks good to me. The only team I see MUCH differently than the pollsters is Hobart. I don't see them beating anyone in the top 15. In My mind, at this point in the season, there is a drop-off after the top 14 and I would probably thrown Hobart into the mix for the 15th spot with St.John Fisher and Wabash. For whatever reason, St. John Fisher intrigues me this year. I am wondering if they, not Hobart, may be the best team in the east this year.
Couldn't resist bringing this one back... ;D
Now I have to get to the emergency room to get treatment on my arm that got all messed up from patting myself on the back. ;)
I think their may not be an elite team this year, except the team who wins the national championship... I think every and every team is capable of being beat this year, regardless of rank, region, etc...
100% agree, I think this is the first time in a long while that all 4 remaining teams have a legit shot at winning the Stagg.
I agree with this. Obviously I know who I think will win it! ;D
But this is one of the few years that you could rank the teams in every conceivable order and make cogent arguments supporting each view.
I'm astounded by the front-page poll results (and, for that matter, the question itself). I voted "Ask me after the Stagg". UMHB and NCC each lost by one stinkin' point! Third on my ballot will be whichever one lost to the champ. UNLESS the Stagg is a blowout either way, in which case the semi loser to the champ may well get my 2nd place vote. And if it is truly a blowout, 3rd place may be either Wesley or Linfield, depending on the Stagg winner (though I'd probably keep the Stagg loser at 3, and put that team 4th). Except for homerism, I just don't see how anyone could answer other than 'Ask me after the Stagg'. ::)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 18, 2013, 09:02:50 PM
I'm astounded by the front-page poll results (and, for that matter, the question itself). I voted "Ask me after the Stagg". UMHB and NCC each lost by one stinkin' point! Third on my ballot will be whichever one lost to the champ. UNLESS the Stagg is a blowout either way, in which case the semi loser to the champ may well get my 2nd place vote. And if it is truly a blowout, 3rd place may be either Wesley or Linfield, depending on the Stagg winner (though I'd probably keep the Stagg loser at 3, and put that team 4th). Except for homerism, I just don't see how anyone could answer other than 'Ask me after the Stagg'. ::)
I went with NCC based on my believe that NCC would beat MHB. The only thing that might change my mind is if UWW crushes UMU tomorrow. However, I think it's safe to say that won't happen.
UWW and UMU had some tough games to get here. So, no matter the Stagg Bowl outcome they deserve to be 1 and 2 in my final ballot. With NCC 3 and MHB 4. After that it'll be tough.
Count me in the "ask me after the stagg" crowd. Can't really get an accurate picture until then.
I'm in the "ask me after the Stagg" camp, but that game isn't the only factor. Matchups and luck are a factor too.
Quote from: HScoach on December 19, 2013, 03:07:42 PM
I'm in the "ask me after the Stagg" camp, but that game isn't the only factor. Matchups and luck are a factor too.
Huge part of getting to the big game and winning it all. Like I say to my boys after we win a close game that shouldn't have been so close, "
sometimes it's better to be lucky than good". :o ;D
MUC didn't look like a Top 5 team tonight. The game really threw me off on a national scale. Also, UWW was is the elite team in Division III.
Wow...I was dead wrong. No way I vote Mount ahead of MHB (maybe even Linfield).
Not much of a fight from Mount today. Warhawks came ready...Mount, not so much.
Top 5
UWW
MHB
Linfield
Mt. Union
Wesley
Mt. Union gave up 151 points in their last 3 games. What happen?
I've got 3 ballots so far and none of them agree on Mount Union.
Also the only teams that have been agreed upon by all three are UWW and surprisingly Pacific Lutheran. Just 18 teams have been on all 3 and 33 teams have received votes. Still several more ballots to go.
One word on last night's game: OUCH.
All season I've seen the "WIWA" on several posts in the signature, and well, Whitewater is Whitewater Again. Without a doubt. Good Lord what a team.
Leipold and Maryville's Mike Rader are up for Liberty Mutual's Coach of the Year with Rader leading in the fan votes with one day of voting left. I'd think fan voting or not, Leipold is the winner. WW is not a no name team but after going 7-3 and missing the playoffs in 12, this year's team was unreal. That's one hell of a job to get a team back on top and make a STATEMENT in Salem.
I think this is the first time all year the Fan Poll has gone up before the D3F poll
2013 FINAL TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev
1) UW-Whitewater (7) 175 6
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 166 3
3) Mount Union 158 1
4) North Central 153 5
5) Linfield 152 2
6) Wesley 136 15
7) Bethel 132 4
8) St John Fisher 119 22
9) UW Platteville 106 10
10) Wittenberg 100 9
11) Pacific Lutheran 97 11
12) John Carroll 92 8
T13) Hobart 87 7
T13) UW-Oshkosh 87 13
15) Johns Hopkins 83 12
16) Franklin 69 18
17) Wartburg 57 NR
18) Hampden-Sydney 55 NR
19) St Thomas 43 16
T20) Illinois Wesleyan 37 14
T20) Wabash 37 17
22) Wheaton 24 19
23) Ithaca 19 NR
24) Rowan 18 25
25) Heidelberg 16 20
Dropped Out: Concordia-Moorhead, Thomas More, Washington U
Also Receiving Votes: Thomas More (10), Redlands (9), Washington U (9), Concordia-Moorhead (7), Framingham St (7), St John's (6), Washington and Jefferson (3), Willamette (2), Maryville (1.5), Chapman (1), Rhodes (1), Pacific (0.5)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, and smedindy
For as similar as we've been most of the year... no one agreed on much of anything now that the season is over
1) UW-Whitewater 175 C ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 166 SF ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3)
3) Mount Union 158 F ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5)
4) North Central 153 SF ( 2, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6)
5) Linfield 152 QF ( 3, 3, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5)
6) Wesley 136 QF ( 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 8, 9)
7) Bethel 132 QF ( 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 9)
8) St John Fisher 119 QF ( 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 10, 14)
9) UW Platteville 106 R2 ( 9, 9, 10, 11, 11, 11, 15)
10) Wittenberg 100 R2 ( 7, 8, 10, 12, 13, 14, 18)
11) Pacific Lutheran 97 R1 (10, 10, 11, 12, 14, 14, 14)
12) John Carroll 92 R1 (10, 10, 11, 12, 13, 13, 21)
T13) Hobart 87 R2 ( 7, 9, 13, 13, 14, 19, 20)
T13) UW-Oshkosh 87 NP ( 7, 12, 12, 13, 16, 17, 18)
15) Johns Hopkins 83 R1 ( 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17, 21)
16) Franklin 69 R2 ( 9, 15, 15, 17, 18, 18, 21)
17) Wartburg 57 R2 (12, 15, 16, 16, 18, 22, --)
18) Hampden-Sydney 55 R2 (11, 13, 15, 16, 20, --, --)
19) St Thomas 43 NP (16, 16, 17, 19, 22, 23, --)
T20) Illinois Wesleyan 37 R1 (17, 19, 19, 19, 22, 24, 25)
T20) Wabash 37 NP (15, 16, 18, 22, 23, 25, --)
22) Wheaton 24 NP (20, 20, 21, 22, 23, --, --)
23) Ithaca 19 R2 (17, 17, 25, --, --, --, --)
24) Rowan 18 R2 (19, 20, 21, --, --, --, --)
25) Heidelberg 16 NP (19, 20, 23, --, --, --, --)
26) Thomas More 10 NP (18, 24)
T27) Redlands 9 R1 (21, 24, 24)
T27) Washington U 9 R1 (21, 24, 24)
T29) Concordia-Moorhead 7 NP (22, 23)
T29) Framingham St 7 R1 (22, 23)
31) St John's 6 NP (20)
32) Wash & Jeff 3 R1 (23)
33) Willamette 2 NP (24)
34) Maryville 1.5 R1 (25, T25)
T35) Chapman 1 NP (25)
T35) Rhodes 1 NP (25)
37) Pacific 0.5 NP (T25)
ok which one of U put NCC 2nd?????? ::) HOW :o :o :o .. can you put them ahead of UMHB who played (held ) the NATIONAL CHAMPION to a one point victory? in the semi game? :P Please justify? ??? ::) :-*
OK TOO,, WHO did NOT put ST TOM in the top 25? C'MOM MAN? GET REAL ??? :-* what have you been smokingggggg ::)
Quote from: desertcat1 on December 22, 2013, 09:41:18 AM
ok which one of U put NCC 2nd?????? ::) HOW :o :o :o .. can you put them ahead of UMHB who played (held ) the NATIONAL CHAMPION to a one point victory? in the semi game? :P Please justify? ??? ::) :-*
Better yet, how can they put them ahead of a team they lost to (mount)?
NCF?
"It wasn't Me"
Nor I - my top ten were exactly as the poll came out. :o
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on December 22, 2013, 10:50:59 AM
Quote from: desertcat1 on December 22, 2013, 09:41:18 AM
ok which one of U put NCC 2nd?????? ::) HOW :o :o :o .. can you put them ahead of UMHB who played (held ) the NATIONAL CHAMPION to a one point victory? in the semi game? :P Please justify? ??? ::) :-*
Better yet, how can they put them ahead of a team they lost to (mount)?
NCF?
Nope, not me. I had them 6th with Wesley ahead of them and Bethel right behind.
Since we're down to just two by process of elimination (can I blame it on smed?) I'll cop to it. I went NCC at 2, UMHB 3, Mount 4
First, I don't place quite the emphasis on the playoffs as I think others do (neither Wesley (9) nor SJF (10) were in my top 8) as I keep it based on the full body of work.
Second, North Central got their only loss on the road to a top 5 team by a single point and they lead with a little over a minute left. That result in no way proves to me Mount is the better team. Looking at the full season I'm far more impressed by NCC (no win by less than 2 scores including over @IWU, @Wheaton, Platteville, @ Bethel) compared to Mount (who had to survive 1 score games against Franklin, John Carroll, Wesley, North Central and then were blown out by Whitewater). Honestly I'm quite surprised I'm the only person to have NCC in the top 3.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on December 22, 2013, 03:27:13 PM
Since we're down to just two by process of elimination (can I blame it on smed?) I'll cop to it. I went NCC at 2, UMHB 3, Mount 4
First, I don't place quite the emphasis on the playoffs as I think others do (neither Wesley (9) nor SJF (10) were in my top 8) as I keep it based on the full body of work.
Second, North Central got their only loss on the road to a top 5 team by a single point and they lead with a little over a minute left. That result in no way proves to me Mount is the better team. Looking at the full season I'm far more impressed by NCC (no win by less than 2 scores including over @IWU, @Wheaton, Platteville, @ Bethel) compared to Mount (who had to survive 1 score games against Franklin, John Carroll, Wesley, North Central and then were blown out by Whitewater). Honestly I'm quite surprised I'm the only person to have NCC in the top 3.
Interesting theory, the full body of work. But playoffs or not, UMHB, Linfield and Mount Union all played other top teams and were very good, and had the common result with UW-Whitewater to sway things. The Stagg Bowl changed NCC from a 2/3 team on my ballot to 5, and through no fault of their own.
Mount Union may have "survived" all those games, but they led John Carroll 35-13 and Wesley 31-0, so you could also make the argument that those games weren't as close as their final scores. Also the Heidelberg game followed a similar track.
In the end, UMU beat NCC head to head, and for me to go against an h2h result, there'd have to be something else really compelling going on. Certainly I've done it before, but UMU beat NCC, Wesley, John Carroll, Franklin, Wittenberg, Heidelberg and W&J, and lost to UW-W, which I think is a 6-1 mark against other teams on my ballot (no W&J). Pretty tough.
I finished with UWW, UMHB, Linfield, UMU and NCC as the top five. The Stagg Bowl really swayed how I viewed the previous weeks.
even though to some degree it was a game that got away from UMU.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on December 22, 2013, 03:27:13 PM
Since we're down to just two by process of elimination (can I blame it on smed?) I'll cop to it. I went NCC at 2, UMHB 3, Mount 4
First, I don't place quite the emphasis on the playoffs as I think others do (neither Wesley (9) nor SJF (10) were in my top 8) as I keep it based on the full body of work.
Second, North Central got their only loss on the road to a top 5 team by a single point and they lead with a little over a minute left. That result in no way proves to me Mount is the better team. Looking at the full season I'm far more impressed by NCC (no win by less than 2 scores including over @IWU, @Wheaton, Platteville, @ Bethel) compared to Mount (who had to survive 1 score games against Franklin, John Carroll, Wesley, North Central and then were blown out by Whitewater). Honestly I'm quite surprised I'm the only person to have NCC in the top 3.
Very interesting thought process. If that NCC/Mount game didn't indicate that Mount was the better team to you. What made you think NCC was then the better team....even though they lost? Was it just because they lead most of the game? For what it's worth, Mount held the better SOS during the season, 112 to 84.
Like Keith, I to think head-to-head games are very compelling when indicating who is better.
Thanks for doing this, looking forward to next season.
Time to start putting our poll together I assume? I'll probably wait till kickoff comes out to put mine together.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on July 16, 2014, 10:10:52 PM
Time to start putting our poll together I assume? I'll probably wait till kickoff comes out to put mine together.
No way would I start before then. The d3 football poll is a start, but I want more detail! (And, hopefully, reason to move IWU from 27 into the top 25.)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on July 16, 2014, 10:19:20 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on July 16, 2014, 10:10:52 PM
Time to start putting our poll together I assume? I'll probably wait till kickoff comes out to put mine together.
No way would I start before then. The d3 football poll is a start, but I want more detail! (And, hopefully, reason to move IWU from 27 into the top 25.)
Exactly, I won't even study d3's poll....I don't want to be influenced by it.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on July 16, 2014, 10:10:52 PM
Time to start putting our poll together I assume? I'll probably wait till kickoff comes out to put mine together.
Likewise.
You can start putting your poll together anytime you'd like. I probably won't make the official announcement until August 1st (which is when I start getting ready for the season and pickems and such) but I think Aug 31st would be a good target for the preseason poll. Hopefully we'll manage to hit at least 10 ballots on a consistent basis this season. Go badger your fellow posters and get them to vote ;D
The weather (at least around here) has been very September the past month so it's time for FOOTBALL!
If you're interested in being part of the Fan Poll this year just send me a PM. Ballots are due on Tuesdays during the season. If you need extra time or know you won't be able to get a ballot in that particular week please let me know as soon as you can. The earlier you submit a ballot the more time I'll have to check it and make sure you didn't make any errors or forget a team.
If you're in the south or east regions I strongly hope you'll join. There's usually a low turnout from those areas.
Preseason ballots are due Sunday August 31st.
2 weeks left until ballots are due and I've only had 6 confirmed participants. Still plenty of room for anyone who would like to be part of the poll. Just send me a PM to let me know.
With Kickoff being released today don't forget to start getting those ballots in. Preseason ballots are due Sunday.
Still sitting at 6 confirmed balloteers. Anyone can join so get those ballots together and have your voice heard
I've received ballots now from all 7 who were around at the end of last season. I'm going to go spam inquire in the east and south boards and see if we can't get a couple more involved from those areas.
Edit: Feelers have been put out in the east and south regional poll boards, plus ASC, E8, ODAC, SCIAC, and USAC. Hopefully there's some interest so we can both have more ballots and be more spread out. If anyone thinks any other boards would be a good recruiting ground feel free to try to drum up interest. I just didn't want to spam 30 boards with the same message if there wasn't much activity.
I'd like to get the preseason poll up by the 31st, but if I get some interest I can delay things a couple days. Be sure to PM me if you're interested :)
I'm happy to report that I've received interest from 3 new individuals so far. If everyone manages to stick around that would mean we're up to 10 ballots. That has to be some kind of record for the Fan Poll I think ;D
That's awesome...more the better
I assume no one else will be coming in with a ballot so here we go, the first poll of the season :)
2014 PRESEASON TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev
1) UW-Whitewater (10) 250 1
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 234 2
3) Mount Union 232 3
4) Linfield 219 5
5) Wesley 203 6
6) North Central 197 4
7) Bethel 195 7
T8) St John Fisher 174 8
T8) UW-Platteville 174 9
10) St Thomas 148 19
11) John Carroll 133 12
12) Hobart 120 T13
13) Wabash 119 T20
14) Wittenberg 116 10
15) Johns Hopkins 94 15
16) Pacific Lutheran 92 11
17) Wartburg 76 17
18) Hampden-Sydney 73 18
19) UW-Oshkosh 68 T13
20) Rowan 66 24
21) Heidelberg 48 25
22) Thomas More 43 NR
T23) Franklin 35 16
T23) Wheaton 35 22
25) Ithaca 25 23
Dropped Out: Illinois Wesleyan
Also Receiving Votes: Illinois Wesleyan (17), Millsaps (14), Concordia-Moorhead (10), Washington & Jefferson (7), Redlands (6), St John's (6), Chapman (4), Cortland St (4), Salisbury (4), Willamette (4), Christopher Newport (2), Muhlenberg (2), Baldwin-Wallace (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, smedindy as well as newcomers HSCTiger74, thewaterboy, and Upstate
1) UW-Whitewater 250 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 234 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
3) Mount Union 232 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4)
4) Linfield 219 ( 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5)
5) Wesley 203 ( 4, 4, 4, 4, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 10)
6) North Central 197 ( 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8, 8)
7) Bethel 195 ( 5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 8)
T8) St John Fisher 174 ( 6, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10)
T8) UW-Platteville 174 ( 5, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 11, 11, 11)
10) St Thomas 148 ( 9, 9, 9, 9, 10, 10, 11, 12, 15, 18)
11) John Carroll 133 ( 7, 12, 12, 12, 12, 13, 13, 14, 15, 17)
12) Hobart 120 (10, 10, 11, 13, 13, 13, 17, 17, 18, 18)
13) Wabash 119 ( 9, 9, 12, 13, 15, 15, 15, 16, 16, 21)
14) Wittenberg 116 (11, 11, 12, 12, 13, 14, 14, 15, 21, 21)
15) Johns Hopkins 94 (10, 11, 14, 14, 14, 14, 16, 21, --, --)
16) Pacific Lutheran 92 (11, 11, 16, 17, 17, 17, 18, 19, 19, 23)
17) Wartburg 76 (13, 15, 15, 16, 18, 18, 20, 20, 23, --)
18) Hampden-Sydney 73 (14, 14, 16, 18, 20, 20, 21, 21, 21, 22)
19) UW-Oshkosh 68 (12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 24, 25, --, --)
20) Rowan 66 (12, 16, 17, 17, 18, 19, 20, 23, --, --)
21) Heidelberg 48 (13, 15, 19, 20, 22, 22, 23, --, --, --)
22) Thomas More 43 (16, 17, 19, 21, 21, 22, 24, 25, --, --)
T23) Franklin 35 (10, 19, 22, 22, 24, 24, --, --, --, --)
T23) Wheaton 35 (14, 18, 20, 22, 23, 24, --, --, --, --)
25) Ithaca 25 (19, 19, 23, 23, 24, 24, 25, --, --, --)
26) Illinois Wesleyan 17 (16, 19)
27) Millsaps 14 (19, 20, 25)
28) Concordia-Moorhead 10 (21, 23, 24)
29) Washington & Jefferson 7 (20, 25)
T30) Redlands 6 (23, 25, 25, 25)
T30) St John's 6 (20)
T32) Chapman 4 (23, 25)
T32) Cortland St 4 (22)
T32) Salisbury 4 (22)
T32) Willamette 4 (22)
T36) Christopher Newport 2 (24)
T36) Muhlenberg 2 (24)
38) Baldwin-Wallace 1 (25)
My ballot:
1. UWW
2. UMHB
3 UMU
4. NCC
5. Linfield
6. Wesley
7. Bethel
8. SJF
9. Wabash
10 Franklin
11 UW-Platt
12 JCU
13 Witt
14 Wheaton
15 Heidi
16 Wartburg
17 Hobart
18 St. Thomas
19 IWU
20 Rowan
21 JHU
22 HSC
23 Pac LU
24 OW-Osh
25 Bald Wally
The only ones very far from the consensus are Franklin, Wheaton, and IWU. Franklin and IWU play in week one, so that will sort itself out. Otherwise, I will give no justification for my picks until they play a game! (Except to say: you are all crazy for your ranking of those three! ;D)
I'm currently waiting on one ballot to come in, but it's after 8:30pm so it might be past their bedtime :D Poll will be up either whenever the last ballot is sent or tomorrow night.
2014 WEEK 1 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev
1) UW-Whitewater 250 1
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 234 2
3) Mount Union 232 3
4) Linfield 219 4
5) Wesley 204 5
6) North Central 197 6
7) Bethel 196 7
8) St John Fisher 177 T8
9) UW Platteville 175 T8
10) John Carroll 146 11
11) Wabash 139 13
12) St Thomas 129 10
13) Johns Hopkins 114 15
T14) Hobart 108 12
T14) Wartburg 108 17
16) Pacific Lutheran 102 16
17) Heidelberg 90 21
18) Wittenberg 83 14
19) Wheaton 72 T23
20) Illinois Wesleyan 57 NR
21) Ithaca 30 25
22) Hampden-Sydney 28 18
23) Thomas More 27 22
24) Concordia-Moorhead 22 NR
25) St John's 21 NR
Dropped Out: UW-Oshkosh, Rowan, Franklin
Also Receiving Votes: Salisbury (12), UW-Oshkosh (12), Widener (12), Washington & Jefferson (10), Franklin (9), Lycoming (9), Redlands (9), Muhlenberg (5), Baldwin Wallace (4), Mount St Joseph (3), Framingham St (2), Willamette (2), Buffalo St (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, thewaterboy, and Upstate
1) UW-Whitewater 250 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 234 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
3) Mount Union 232 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4)
4) Linfield 219 ( 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5)
5) Wesley 204 ( 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 10)
6) North Central 197 ( 4, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8)
7) Bethel 196 ( 5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7)
8) St John Fisher 177 ( 6, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9)
9) UW Platteville 175 ( 5, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9, 10, 10, 12)
10) John Carroll 146 ( 9, 10, 10, 11, 11, 11, 12, 13, 13, 14)
11) Wabash 139 ( 9, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 13, 13, 14, 17)
12) St Thomas 129 (11, 11, 11, 12, 12, 13, 13, 14, 15, 19)
13) Johns Hopkins 114 ( 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 20, --)
T14) Hobart 108 (10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 15, 15, 16, 18, --)
T14) Wartburg 108 (10, 12, 14, 15, 15, 16, 17, 17, 18, 18)
16) Pacific Lutheran 102 (10, 11, 14, 16, 16, 16, 16, 17, 21, 21)
17) Heidelberg 90 (13, 14, 14, 16, 18, 19, 19, 19, 19, 19)
18) Wittenberg 83 (12, 13, 14, 15, 15, 15, 17, 24, --, --)
19) Wheaton 72 (12, 17, 17, 17, 18, 20, 21, 21, 21, 24)
20) Illinois Wesleyan 57 (16, 16, 18, 20, 20, 22, 22, 23, 23, 23)
21) Ithaca 30 (20, 21, 22, 22, 22, 22, 24, 25, --, --)
22) Hampden-Sydney 28 (19, 20, 23, 23, 23, 24, 24, 25, 25, --)
23) Thomas More 27 (18, 19, 20, 20, --, --, --, --, --, --)
24) Concordia-Moorhead 22 (19, 21, 21, 21, --, --, --, --, --, --)
25) St John's 21 (17, 20, 20, --, --, --, --, --, --, --)
T26) Salisbury 12 (18, 23, 25)
T26) UW-Oshkosh 12 (18, 24, 25, 25)
T26) Widener 12 (19, 23, 24)
29) Wash & Jeff 10 (18, 24)
T30) Franklin 9 (17)
T30) Lycoming 9 (22, 23, 25, 25)
T30) Redlands 9 (22, 22, 25)
33) Muhlenberg 5 (21)
34) Baldwin Wallace 4 (22)
35) Mount St Joseph 3 (23)
T36) Framingham St 2 (24)
T36) Willamette 2 (24)
38) Buffalo St 1 (25)
Does anyone know anything about Marian (Indiana)? They beat UW-Osh (#25 in the d3 poll) by 4 yesterday, but I don't know how much (if any) I should dock UWO for the loss. Is Marian NAIA or D2? Any good?
When Witt lost last week by 8 to D1 FCS Butler I didn't really hold it against them - just want to be consistent with UWO.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 14, 2014, 09:40:41 AM
Does anyone know anything about Marian (Indiana)? They beat UW-Osh (#25 in the d3 poll) by 4 yesterday, but I don't know how much (if any) I should dock UWO for the loss. Is Marian NAIA or D2? Any good?
When Witt lost last week by 8 to D1 FCS Butler I didn't really hold it against them - just want to be consistent with UWO.
Marian is NAIA and they won the title in 2012 but were just 6-5 last season including a 21 point loss to UWO.
I also know they're on the west side of Indy and have an excellent bowling program but I don't think that's the information you wanted to know.
Thanks, Griz. Last week I had UWO in my top 30, but not on the ballot; guess I'll keep 'em about the same. I'm really hoping I can find room for Adrian, who demolished a not-terrible Augie team on Saturday.
Adrian demolished Carthage, while Hope beat Augie.
Thanks - I caught that right after I posted, but hadn't yet made it back to amend.
I didn't add anyone new to my top 25 this week. Obviously Bethel dropped a little in mine, as well as giving Warburg a bump...but that's about it. I gave Widener a little bump as well...they are playing well against decent competition on the road.
I dropped Buff St and MSJ (don't think anyone else had given them any votes) and added Adrian and Rhodes. Adrian I felt good about, Rhodes was 'cause I couldn't find a decent alternative; I wanted to leave #25 vacant, but Griz frowns on that. ::) (Rhodes is 2-0 and demolished a decent WashU squad by 22). I'm just not yet sold on Thomas More, Lycoming, Widener, etc., though St. John's is very tempting.
Carthage is NOT a good team (though probably in the top half of D3), but Adrian annihilated them. They did the same to Defiance in week one, who is probably comparable to Carthage. This week they should annihilate Benedictine. Then it gets interesting with Olivet, a pretty good team who hiccupped against Elmhurst.
Hopefully the North will get clearer and clearer (there have been years where it got murkier and murkier :().
Everyone got their ballots in early this week :)
2014 WEEK 2 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev
1) UW-Whitewater (10) 250 1
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 235 2
3) Mount Union 233 3
4) Wesley 213 5
5) Linfield 209 4
6) North Central 205 6
7) St John Fisher 185 8
8) UW Platteville 181 9
9) Wartburg 166 T14
10) John Carroll 147 10
11) Wabash 140 11
12) St Thomas 132 12
13) Hobart 113 T14
14) Johns Hopkins 108 13
15) Pacific Lutheran 100 16
16) Wittenberg 93 18
17) Bethel 88 7
18) Heidelberg 84 17
19) Illinois Wesleyan 63 20
20) Wheaton 54 19
21) Thomas More 43 23
22) Ithaca 38 21
23) Widener 31 NR
24) Lycoming 27 NR
25) Hampden-Sydney 25 22
Dropped Out: Concordia-Moorhead and St John's
Also Receiving Votes: Concordia-Moorhead (23), St John's (19), Washington & Jefferson (16), Muhlenberg (11), Franklin (7), Baldwin Wallace (3), Adrian (2), Willamette (2), Chapman (1), Rhodes (1), Salisbury (1), Texas Lutheran (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, thewaterboy, and Upstate
1) UW-Whitewater 250 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 235 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
3) Mount Union 233 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4)
4) Wesley 213 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 8)
5) Linfield 209 ( 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7)
6) North Central 205 ( 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7)
7) St John Fisher 185 ( 5, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9)
8) UW Platteville 181 ( 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 10, 10)
9) Wartburg 166 ( 6, 7, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 10, 15)
10) John Carroll 147 ( 9, 9, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 12, 13, 15)
11) Wabash 140 ( 8, 9, 9, 11, 12, 13, 13, 14, 15, 16)
12) St Thomas 132 ( 9, 10, 11, 12, 12, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18)
13) Hobart 113 ( 9, 11, 12, 13, 13, 15, 15, 16, 17, --)
14) Johns Hopkins 108 (10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 15, 16, 20, --)
15) Pacific Lutheran 100 (10, 11, 14, 16, 16, 16, 17, 18, 21, 21)
16) Wittenberg 93 (10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, --, --)
17) Bethel 88 (12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 16, 17, 17, --, --)
18) Heidelberg 84 (14, 14, 14, 17, 17, 18, 18, 19, 19, --)
19) Illinois Wesleyan 63 (15, 17, 18, 19, 19, 21, 21, 21, 22, 24)
20) Wheaton 54 (12, 20, 20, 20, 20, 21, 21, 22, 24, --)
21) Thomas More 43 (13, 18, 18, 18, 22, 24, --, --, --, --)
22) Ithaca 38 (19, 19, 20, 20, 22, 23, 23, 24, --, --)
23) Widener 31 (16, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, --, --, --)
24) Lycoming 27 (18, 22, 23, 23, 23, 23, 24, 25, --, --)
25) Hampden-Sydney 25 (19, 20, 22, 23, 24, 25, 25, 25, --, --)
26) Concordia-Moorhead 23 (19. 19. 21. 22)
27) St John's 19 (17. 20. 23. 25)
28) Wash & Jeff 16 (14. 22)
29) Muhlenberg 11 (21. 22. 24)
30) Franklin 7 (19)
31) Baldwin Wallace 3 (23)
T32) Adrian 2 (24)
T32) Willamette 2 (24)
T34) Chapman 1 (25)
T34) Rhodes 1 (25)
T34) Salisbury 1 (25)
T34) Texas Lutheran 1 (25)
FWIW, my ballot:
1) UW-Whitewater 250 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 235 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
3) Mount Union 233 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4)
4) Wesley 213 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 8)
5) Linfield 209 ( 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7)
6) North Central 205 ( 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7)
7) St John Fisher 185 ( 5, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9)
8) UW Platteville 181 ( 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 10, 10)
9) Wartburg 166 ( 6, 7, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 10, 15)
10) John Carroll 147 ( 9, 9, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 12, 13, 15)
11) Wabash 140 ( 8, 9, 9, 11, 12, 13, 13, 14, 15, 16)
12) St Thomas 132 ( 9, 10, 11, 12, 12, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18)
13) Hobart 113 ( 9, 11, 12, 13, 13, 15, 15, 16, 17, --)
14) Johns Hopkins 108 (10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 15, 16, 20, --)
15) Pacific Lutheran 100 (10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, --, --) [I had Pac Lu at #21]
16) Wittenberg 93 (10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, --, --)
17) Bethel 88 (12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 16, 17, 17, --, --)
18) Heidelberg 84 (14, 14, 14, 17, 17, 18, 18, 19, 19, --)
19) Illinois Wesleyan 63 (15, 17, 18, 19, 19, 21, 21, 21, 22, 24)
20) Wheaton 54 (12, 20, 20, 20, 20, 21, 21, 22, 24, --)
21) Thomas More 43 (13, 18, 18, 18, 22, 24, --, --, --, --)
22) Ithaca 38 (19, 19, 20, 20, 22, 23, 23, 24, --, --)
23) Widener 31 (16, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, --, --, --)
24) Lycoming 27 (18, 22, 23, 23, 23, 23, 24, 25, --, --)
25) Hampden-Sydney 25 (19, 20, 22, 23, 24, 25, 25, 25, --, --)
26) Concordia-Moorhead 23 (19. 19. 21. 22)
27) St John's 19 (17. 20. 23. 25)
28) Wash & Jeff 16 (14. 22)
29) Muhlenberg 11 (21. 22. 24)
30) Franklin 7 (19)
31) Baldwin Wallace 3 (23)
T32) Adrian 2 (24)
T32) Willamette 2 (24)
T34) Chapman 1 (25)
T34) Rhodes 1 (25)
T34) Salisbury 1 (25)
T34) Texas Lutheran 1 (25)
[/font]
[/quote]
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 16, 2014, 05:01:44 PM
15) Pacific Lutheran 100 (10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, --, --) [I had Pac Lu at #21]
Fixed. I had Witt's votes on PLU.
PLU is better than the east coasters know? ::) .. :o credit where credit is due? maybe ? :P
good job FCG.. nothing gets by you .. :-*
Things are heating up...looks like a good debate is brewing on why teams should be ranked where they are. :)
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 16, 2014, 05:08:07 PM
[quote author=Mr. Ypsi link=topic=7065.msg1606358#msg1606358 date=1410901304]
15) Pacific Lutheran 100 (10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, --, --) [I had Pac Lu at #21]
Fixed. I had Witt's votes on PLU.
[/quote]
east coaster MR . Y 21 c'mon man????? 8-)
2014 WEEK 3 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev
1) UW-Whitewater (10) 250 1
T2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 234 2
T2) Mount Union 234 3
4) Wesley 213 4
5) Linfield 209 5
6) North Central 205 6
7) St John Fisher 190 7
8) John Carroll 170 10
9) Wartburg 167 9
10) Wabash 150 11
11) St Thomas 144 12
12) Hobart 138 13
13) Johns Hopkins 119 14
14) UW Platteville 116 8
15) Bethel 109 17
16) Pacific Lutheran 100 15
17) Wittenberg 87 16
18) Thomas More 62 21
19) Wheaton 60 20
20) Ithaca 59 22
21) Widener 39 23
22) Hampden-Sydney 37 25
23) Concordia-Moorhead 36 NR
24) Lycoming 35 24
T25) Heidelberg 19 18
T25) Muhlenberg 19 NR
Dropped Out: Illinois Wesleyan
Also Receiving Votes: Washington & Jefferson (15), Illinois Wesleyan (11), Franklin (6), Texas Lutheran (5), Adrian (3), Chapman (3), Rhodes (2), Willamette (2), Centre (1), UW-Stevens Point (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, thewaterboy, and Upstate
1) UW-Whitewater 250 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
T2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 234 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
T2) Mount Union 234 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4) Wesley 213 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 8)
5) Linfield 209 ( 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7)
6) North Central 205 ( 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7)
7) St John Fisher 190 ( 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 9)
8) John Carroll 170 ( 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 10, 11, 12)
9) Wartburg 167 ( 6, 7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10, 10, 12, 13)
10) Wabash 150 ( 8, 8, 9, 10, 11, 11, 11, 12, 13, 17)
11) St Thomas 144 ( 9, 9, 10, 10, 11, 11, 13, 13, 14, 16)
12) Hobart 138 ( 8, 10, 10, 12, 12, 12, 14, 14, 15, 15)
13) Johns Hopkins 119 ( 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 14, 15, 15, 18, 20)
14) UW Platteville 116 (10, 12, 13, 14, 14, 15, 16, 16, 16, 18)
15) Bethel 109 (11, 13, 14, 14, 15, 16, 17, 17, 17, 17)
16) Pacific Lutheran 100 (10, 11, 13, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 21, --)
17) Wittenberg 87 (12, 12, 13, 16, 16, 17, 18, 20, 23, --)
18) Thomas More 62 (14, 16, 18, 18, 19, 20, 20, 22, 25, --)
19) Wheaton 60 (11, 15, 19, 19, 20, 20, 21, 24, 25, --)
20) Ithaca 59 (15, 17, 18, 19, 19, 19, 21, 23, 24, --)
21) Widener 39 (19, 20, 20, 21, 21, 22, 23, 23, --, --)
22) Hampden-Sydney 37 (17, 19, 22, 22, 23, 23, 23, 24, 24, --)
23) Concordia-Moorhead 36 (18, 18, 18, 19, 24, 25, 25, 25, --, --)
24) Lycoming 35 (20, 21, 21, 21, 22, 22, 23, 24, 25, --)
T25) Heidelberg 19 (17, 21, 23, 24, --, --, --, --, --, --)
T25) Muhlenberg 19 (15, 22, 22, --, --, --, --, --, --, --)
27) Wash & Jeff 15 (16, 22, 25)
28) Illinois Wesleyan 11 (19, 22)
29) Franklin 6 (20)
30) Texas Lutheran 5 (21)
T31) Adrian 3 (23)
T31) Chapman 3 (24, 25)
T33) Rhodes 2 (24)
T33) Willamette 2 (24)
T35) Centre 1 (25)
T35) UW-Stevens Point 1 (25)
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 23, 2014, 06:02:10 PM
28) Illinois Wesleyan 11 (19, 22)
And
zero votes for the team that just beat them by 10?
(this is more of a "what is the rationale for keeping both IWU and Franklin ranked?" question than it is a plea for Simpson to be ranked)
My ballot this week...
Flame away ;D
1) UW Whitewater
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor
3) Linfield
4) Mount Union
5) North Central
6) Wesley
7) St. John Fisher
8) John Carroll
9) Johns Hopkins
10) Wabash
11) St. Thomas
12) Wartburg
13) Pacific Lutheran
14) Hobart
15) Wheaton (Ill)
16) UW-Platteville
17) Bethel
18) Concordia-Moorhead
19) Ithaca
20) Lycoming
21) Widener
22) Thomas More
23) Wittenberg
24) Hampden-Sydney
25) UW-Stevens Point
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 24, 2014, 02:38:19 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 23, 2014, 06:02:10 PM
28) Illinois Wesleyan 11 (19, 22)
And zero votes for the team that just beat them by 10?
(this is more of a "what is the rationale for keeping both IWU and Franklin ranked?" question than it is a plea for Simpson to be ranked)
Touche!
To my shame(?), I confess to being 7 of IWU's votes and ALL of Franklin's votes. It is still so early in the season that I am heavily swayed by preseason expectations. While Simpson is now looking like a good candidate for #2 in the IIAC, they were only middle of the pack preseason. I just wasn't ready to raise them that high this soon. On the other hand, Franklin ranked very well (perhaps even top ten), and I don't want to 'deep six' them based on the evidence to date. (And IWU, in addition is
not only my
alma mater, they were also ranked, then beat Franklin.) In coming weeks, things may change drastically.
I haven't looked at the schedule yet, but if Simpson wins (even against "Liittle Sisters of the Poor", while either IWU or Franklin loses, I suspect they are both gone and Simpson is probably in.
Don't think I've revealed my ballot so far this year. What a shock that I'm the extreme on so many teams.
1) UW-Whitewater 250 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
T2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 234 * ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
T2) Mount Union 234 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4) Wesley 213 * ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 8)
5) Linfield 209 * ( 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7)
6) North Central 205 ( 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7)
7) St John Fisher 190 * ( 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 9)
8) John Carroll 170 ( 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 10, 11, 12)
9) Wartburg 167 * ( 6, 7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10, 10, 12, 13)
10) Wabash 150 * ( 8, 8, 9, 10, 11, 11, 11, 12, 13, 17)
11) St Thomas 144 ( 9, 9, 10, 10, 11, 11, 13, 13, 14, 16)
12) Hobart 138 ( 8, 10, 10, 12, 12, 12, 14, 14, 15, 15)
13) Johns Hopkins 119 ( 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 14, 15, 15, 18, 20)
14) UW Platteville 116 (10, 12, 13, 14, 14, 15, 16, 16, 16, 18)
15) Bethel 109 (11, 13, 14, 14, 15, 16, 17, 17, 17, 17)
16) Pacific Lutheran 100 (10, 11, 13, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 21, --)
17) Wittenberg 87 (12, 12, 13, 16, 16, 17, 18, 20, 23, --)
18) Thomas More 62 (14, 16, 18, 18, 19, 20, 20, 22, 25, --)
19) Wheaton 60 (11, 15, 19, 19, 20, 20, 21, 24, 25, --)
20) Ithaca 59 * (15, 17, 18, 19, 19, 19, 21, 23, 24, --)
21) Widener 39 (19, 20, 20, 21, 21, 22, 23, 23, --, --)
22) Hampden-Sydney 37 * (17, 19, 22, 22, 23, 23, 23, 24, 24, --)
23) Concordia-Moorhead 36 (18, 18, 18, 19, 24, 25, 25, 25, --, --)
24) Lycoming 35 (20, 21, 21, 21, 22, 22, 23, 24, 25, --)
T25) Heidelberg 19 (17, 21, 23, 24, --, --, --, --, --, --)
T25) Muhlenberg 19 * (15, 22, 22, --, --, --, --, --, --, --)
27) Wash & Jeff 15 (16, 22, 25)
28) Illinois Wesleyan 11 (19, 22)
29) Franklin 6 (20)
30) Texas Lutheran 5 * (21)
T31) Adrian 3 (23)
T31) Chapman 3 (24, 25)
T33) Rhodes 2 * (24)
T33) Willamette 2 (24)
T35) Centre 1 * (25)
T35) UW-Stevens Point 1 (25)
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 24, 2014, 02:38:19 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 23, 2014, 06:02:10 PM
28) Illinois Wesleyan 11 (19, 22)
And zero votes for the team that just beat them by 10?
(this is more of a "what is the rationale for keeping both IWU and Franklin ranked?" question than it is a plea for Simpson to be ranked)
I'm in the clear, i didn't place any of those the teams in my 25.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 24, 2014, 05:25:15 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 24, 2014, 02:38:19 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 23, 2014, 06:02:10 PM
28) Illinois Wesleyan 11 (19, 22)
And zero votes for the team that just beat them by 10?
(this is more of a "what is the rationale for keeping both IWU and Franklin ranked?" question than it is a plea for Simpson to be ranked)
Touche!
To my shame(?), I confess to being 7 of IWU's votes and ALL of Franklin's votes. It is still so early in the season that I am heavily swayed by preseason expectations. While Simpson is now looking like a good candidate for #2 in the IIAC, they were only middle of the pack preseason. I just wasn't ready to raise them that high this soon. On the other hand, Franklin ranked very well (perhaps even top ten), and I don't want to 'deep six' them based on the evidence to date. (And IWU, in addition is
not only my alma mater, they were also ranked, then beat Franklin.) In coming weeks, things may change drastically.
I haven't looked at the schedule yet, but if Simpson wins (even against "Liittle Sisters of the Poor", while either IWU or Franklin loses, I suspect they are both gone and Simpson is probably in.
Oh, I was pretty sure you had IWU 19 and Franklin 20 when I saw the poll.
I'm fine with not ranking Simpson just yet. What I disagree with is this idea that you must anchor a team somewhere near its preseason expectation. OK, Franklin started in it near your top 10. They're now 1-2, and one of those losses just came to an IWU team who scored THREE points against that Simpson team you're "just not ready to move that high yet." I don't like letting preconceived notions of who is supposed to be good supersede actual on field results that happened. Simpson is 3-0 and beat IWU head to head. If you're not ranking Simpson, whats the justification for ranking a team Simpson just beat AND a team that lost to that team? Can you imagine if we gave out playof bids this way? "Well, I know Simpson beat IWU, but I thought IWU was better, and that's my alma mater, so what the heck, let's put IWU in!"
Later in the season, this gets harder to stick to once you get some circular results where A beat B, B beat C, and C beat A. Then, judgement calls are necessary.
I think that the Simpson / IWU matchup, to me, signalled that IWU was probably overrated. By now, preseason hype should be out the window, dead and buried, cast down to the ocean floor. It's not pre-season for ANYONE anymore...
Impossible to tell how Oshkosh stacks up against D3 talent. They are 0-3 right now... will all three losses coming against top 25 scholarship-offering football programs.
I know there's no way you can keep an 0-3 team ranked, but I wouldn't doubt if they are better than 1/4 of the DIII ranked teams right now.
That'll wash out when they play D-3 schedule. If they wind up at 7-3, or even 6-4 with one close loss, we'll know!
Quote from: Upstate on September 24, 2014, 02:51:46 PM
My ballot this week...
Flame away ;D
1) UW Whitewater
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor
3) Linfield
4) Mount Union
5) North Central
6) Wesley
7) St. John Fisher
8) John Carroll
9) Johns Hopkins
10) Wabash
11) St. Thomas
12) Wartburg
13) Pacific Lutheran
14) Hobart
15) Wheaton (Ill)
16) UW-Platteville
17) Bethel
18) Concordia-Moorhead
19) Ithaca
20) Lycoming
21) Widener
22) Thomas More
23) Wittenberg
24) Hampden-Sydney
25) UW-Stevens Point
Yeah I saw today coming a mile away!
Quote from: Upstate on September 27, 2014, 06:21:27 PM
Quote from: Upstate on September 24, 2014, 02:51:46 PM
My ballot this week...
Flame away ;D
1) UW Whitewater
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor
3) Linfield
4) Mount Union
5) North Central
6) Wesley
7) St. John Fisher
8) John Carroll
9) Johns Hopkins
10) Wabash
11) St. Thomas
12) Wartburg
13) Pacific Lutheran
14) Hobart
15) Wheaton (Ill)
16) UW-Platteville
17) Bethel
18) Concordia-Moorhead
19) Ithaca
20) Lycoming
21) Widener
22) Thomas More
23) Wittenberg
24) Hampden-Sydney
25) UW-Stevens Point
Yeah I saw today coming a mile away!
Ahead of the curve.....we'll done
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 27, 2014, 09:29:13 PM
Quote from: Upstate on September 27, 2014, 06:21:27 PM
Quote from: Upstate on September 24, 2014, 02:51:46 PM
My ballot this week...
Flame away ;D
1) UW Whitewater
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor
3) Linfield
4) Mount Union
5) North Central
6) Wesley
7) St. John Fisher
8) John Carroll
9) Johns Hopkins
10) Wabash
11) St. Thomas
12) Wartburg
13) Pacific Lutheran
14) Hobart
15) Wheaton (Ill)
16) UW-Platteville
17) Bethel
18) Concordia-Moorhead
19) Ithaca
20) Lycoming
21) Widener
22) Thomas More
23) Wittenberg
24) Hampden-Sydney
25) UW-Stevens Point
Yeah I saw today coming a mile away!
Ahead of the curve.....we'll done
Well, except he still had #25 going against #5. It's not like he predicted the upset! ;D
I had to bump a team to add Stevens Point. I couldn't justify throwing North Central and St. Thomas out entirely. I also didn't add St. John's, because I know how rivalry games are, but I was tempted to.
Quote from: smedindy on September 28, 2014, 03:01:29 PM
I had to bump a team to add Stevens Point. I couldn't justify throwing North Central and St. Thomas out entirely. I also didn't add St. John's, because I know how rivalry games are, but I was tempted to.
I added both St. John's and UWSP in my top 25. It was hard dropping two out because nobody in the bottom of my poll lost. I dropped St. Thomas low enough to have St. John's ahead of them...however I kept Concordia-MH ahead of St. John's, because of there head-to-head game.
My biggest problem was where to rank UWP and NCC in relation to each other. I ended up with UWP 9 and NCC 12. I couldn't justify keeping NCC in the top 10 after losing to an unranked team. Since UWP lost to a better team, I didn't drop them as much last week. It was a tough call either way.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 28, 2014, 07:23:06 PM
My biggest problem was where to rank UWP and NCC in relation to each other. I ended up with UWP 9 and NCC 12. I couldn't justify keeping NCC in the top 10 after losing to an unranked team. Since UWP lost to a better team, I didn't drop them as much last week. It was a tough call either way.
I don't really like this logic.
Take team names off and just read the following:
Team A is 3-0, including a 34-27 win over Team B
Team B is 2-1 with a 28-7 win over Team C and the loss to Team A
Team C is 2-1 with a 28-7 loss to Team B
If we remove all preseason expectations and "where were they ranked at the time the game was played" notions, you'd probably look at this and rank Team A highest, Team B second, and Team C third.
IMO, UWSP should be ranked above NCC and UWP for now. NCC should remain above UWP.
If time proves that UWSP over NCC was a fluke, fine. But it drives me nuts to see teams get "anchored" to their preseason expectation instead of ranked based on actual results, like NCC ranked 5 spots ahead of UWSP in the top 25. In week 1, I get it, to a point. But now we're 30 percent of the way into the season for everybody.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 29, 2014, 06:48:53 AM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 28, 2014, 07:23:06 PM
My biggest problem was where to rank UWP and NCC in relation to each other. I ended up with UWP 9 and NCC 12. I couldn't justify keeping NCC in the top 10 after losing to an unranked team. Since UWP lost to a better team, I didn't drop them as much last week. It was a tough call either way.
I don't really like this logic.
Take team names off and just read the following:
Team A is 3-0, including a 34-27 win over Team B
Team B is 2-1 with a 28-7 win over Team C and the loss to Team A
Team C is 2-1 with a 28-7 loss to Team B
If we remove all preseason expectations and "where were they ranked at the time the game was played" notions, you'd probably look at this and rank Team A highest, Team B second, and Team C third.
IMO, UWSP should be ranked above NCC and UWP for now. NCC should remain above UWP.
If time proves that UWSP over NCC was a fluke, fine. But it drives me nuts to see teams get "anchored" to their preseason expectation instead of ranked based on actual results, like NCC ranked 5 spots ahead of UWSP in the top 25. In week 1, I get it, to a point. But now we're 30 percent of the way into the season for everybody.
I see your logic, but I can't see NCC dropping all the way down to the 20's after being #5. Or UWSP going from unranked to the mid teens. I don't think NCC is that bad to be in the 20's, nor is UWSP that good to be in the teens just so they can be ranked ahead of NCC.
There's pros and cons to either logic in this case.
Sometimes the better team doesn't win, and head to head is a fluke and happenstance. Would North Central beat Stevens Point three out of five?
Quote from: smedindy on September 29, 2014, 12:50:49 PM
Sometimes the better team doesn't win, and head to head is a fluke and happenstance. Would North Central beat Stevens Point three out of five?
It's kind of hard to answer that in this case. If it was a fluky win, something where the under dog got less than half the yards but won because of 5 turnovers then you can make that case. Here we had 20 yards total offense difference, UWSP had 4 more first downs, NCC's passing was bad, but UWSP's rushing was bad, penalties were mostly even, UWSP dominated time of possession, turnovers were mundane. The only stat that looks remotely fluky or out of place is third downs, where NCC stunk up the joint.
There is nothing to latch on to, other than past results, that makes you wonder if this is a huge fluke win. In that case, can you say USWP would lose 3 of the next 4 they played against NCC? Again, throwing past history and expectations out, it's really hard to make that call based on what actually happened on game day. Or at least as far as the stats can show.
So far I've received 9 of the 10 ballots... and all 6 possible combinations to order North Central, Platteville, and Stevens Point are represented.
2014 WEEK 4 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev
1) UW-Whitewater (10) 250 1
T2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 234 T2
T2) Mount Union 234 T2
4) Wesley 216 4
5) Linfield 213 5
6) St John Fisher 195 7
7) John Carroll 185 8
8) Wartburg 180 9
9) Wabash 167 10
10) Hobart 152 12
11) Johns Hopkins 136 13
12) Pacific Lutheran 128 16
13) North Central 124 6
14) Bethel 118 15
15) UW Platteville 99 14
16) Wittenberg 95 17
17) Wheaton 73 19
T18) Thomas More 70 18
T18) UW-Stevens Point 70 NR
20) Ithaca 68 20
21) Concordia-Moorhead 49 23
22) St Thomas 36 11
23) Widener 35 21
24) Hampden-Sydney 26 22
25) Lycoming 24 24
Dropped Out: Heidelberg and Muhlenberg
Also Receiving Votes: Heidelberg (20), St John's (19), Chapman (7), Texas Lutheran (7), Illinois Wesleyan (5), Franklin (4), Washington & Jefferson (4), Centre (3), Rhodes (2), Muhlenberg (1), Willamette (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, thewaterboy, and Upstate
1) UW-Whitewater 250 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
T2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 234 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
T2) Mount Union 234 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4) Wesley 216 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 7)
5) Linfield 213 ( 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6)
6) St John Fisher 195 ( 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8)
7) John Carroll 185 ( 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 9, 9, 11)
8) Wartburg 180 ( 5, 6, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9, 10, 10)
9) Wabash 167 ( 7, 7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 14)
10) Hobart 152 ( 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 11, 12, 12, 14, 14)
11) Johns Hopkins 136 ( 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18)
12) Pacific Lutheran 128 ( 9, 10, 11, 11, 12, 13, 14, 17, 17, 18)
13) North Central 124 (10, 12, 12, 13, 13, 13, 15, 15, 16, 17)
14) Bethel 118 (11, 12, 13, 13, 13, 14, 16, 16, 17, 17)
15) UW Platteville 99 ( 9, 12, 14, 15, 15, 15, 16, 18, 21, --)
16) Wittenberg 95 (10, 11, 12, 13, 16, 16, 17, 18, --, --)
17) Wheaton 73 (11, 14, 15, 19, 19, 19, 20, 20, 25, 25)
T18) Thomas More 70 (15, 15, 17, 18, 20, 20, 20, 21, 21, 23)
T18) UW-Stevens Point 70 (13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 24, 25, --)
20) Ithaca 68 (14, 15, 16, 18, 18, 19, 19, 22, 25, --)
21) Concordia-Moorhead 49 (17, 17, 19, 19, 19, 22, 22, 24, --, --)
22) St Thomas 36 (11, 18, 20, 22, 24, 25, --, --, --, --)
23) Widener 35 (18, 20, 21, 21, 22, 23, 24, 24, --. --)
24) Hampden-Sydney 26 (16, 20, 21, 23, 24, --, --, --, --, --)
25) Lycoming 24 (20, 21, 21, 22, 23, 25, --, --, --, --)
26) Heidelberg 20 (16, 23, 23)
27) St John's 19 (21, 22, 23, 24, 24, 24, 25)
T28) Chapman 7 (22, 23)
T28) Texas Lutheran 7 (19)
30) Illinois Wesleyan 5 (21)
T31) Franklin 4 (22)
T31) Wash & Jeff 4 (23, 25)
33) Centre 3 (23)
34) Rhodes 2 (24)
T35) Muhlenberg 1 (25)
T35) Willamette 1 (25)
Quote from: jknezek on September 29, 2014, 01:01:39 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 29, 2014, 12:50:49 PM
Sometimes the better team doesn't win, and head to head is a fluke and happenstance. Would North Central beat Stevens Point three out of five?
It's kind of hard to answer that in this case. If it was a fluky win, something where the under dog got less than half the yards but won because of 5 turnovers then you can make that case. Here we had 20 yards total offense difference, UWSP had 4 more first downs, NCC's passing was bad, but UWSP's rushing was bad, penalties were mostly even, UWSP dominated time of possession, turnovers were mundane. The only stat that looks remotely fluky or out of place is third downs, where NCC stunk up the joint.
There is nothing to latch on to, other than past results, that makes you wonder if this is a huge fluke win. In that case, can you say USWP would lose 3 of the next 4 they played against NCC? Again, throwing past history and expectations out, it's really hard to make that call based on what actually happened on game day. Or at least as far as the stats can show.
I didn't really mean to say the win was a fluke. Flukes happen, but this wasn't a total oddball win. It was plausible - not like North Park beating North Central.
The serious question is if you, as a voter, still think NC can beat UWSP three out of the next five?
Quote from: smedindy on September 29, 2014, 10:18:33 PM
The serious question is if you, as a voter, still think NC can beat UWSP three out of the next five?
This is kind of a cop out, isn't it? Don't we use this who would win the most out of seven or ten games to more or less dismiss an actual game result that doesn't jive with our preconceptions?
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 30, 2014, 11:12:36 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 29, 2014, 10:18:33 PM
The serious question is if you, as a voter, still think NC can beat UWSP three out of the next five?
This is kind of a cop out, isn't it? Don't we use this who would win the most out of seven or ten games to more or less dismiss an actual game result that doesn't jive with our preconceptions?
90% of the time, yes. It's one reason I just don't like early season, and especially preseason, polls. People get locked in, primarily based on history, and it is very hard to dislodge those conceptions. It gives us something to talk about, but it creates a tremendous bias.
I think you see that in some of the responses that say "well I can't move NCC that far down" or "I can't move UWSP that far up." That is the definition of poll bias and is the weakest argument you can make. It is not dependent on the data, it is simply dependent on what the voter thought originally and not wanting to be that "wrong" based on the latest data point. Yes, wrong in quotes since it's a poll and you can't be wrong on an opinion.
I will say that if you were starting the poll from scratch, today, based on what has happened in the last three weeks and nothing to do with history beyond that, there is no way you put NCC at 2-1 above 3-0 UWSP. You can't ignore the H2H based on this year's results only. Of course it is very hard to ignore everything else we know and think we know based on history and the upcoming schedules for both teams...
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 30, 2014, 11:12:36 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 29, 2014, 10:18:33 PM
The serious question is if you, as a voter, still think NC can beat UWSP three out of the next five?
This is kind of a cop out, isn't it? Don't we use this who would win the most out of seven or ten games to more or less dismiss an actual game result that doesn't jive with our preconceptions?
Yes. Always.
Quote from: jknezek on September 30, 2014, 11:34:07 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 30, 2014, 11:12:36 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 29, 2014, 10:18:33 PM
The serious question is if you, as a voter, still think NC can beat UWSP three out of the next five?
This is kind of a cop out, isn't it? Don't we use this who would win the most out of seven or ten games to more or less dismiss an actual game result that doesn't jive with our preconceptions?
90% of the time, yes. It's one reason I just don't like early season, and especially preseason, polls. People get locked in, primarily based on history, and it is very hard to dislodge those conceptions. It gives us something to talk about, but it creates a tremendous bias.
I think you see that in some of the responses that say "well I can't move NCC that far down" or "I can't move UWSP that far up." That is the definition of poll bias and is the weakest argument you can make. It is not dependent on the data, it is simply dependent on what the voter thought originally and not wanting to be that "wrong" based on the latest data point. Yes, wrong in quotes since it's a poll and you can't be wrong on an opinion.
I will say that if you were starting the poll from scratch, today, based on what has happened in the last three weeks and nothing to do with history beyond that, there is no way you put NCC at 2-1 above 3-0 UWSP. You can't ignore the H2H based on this year's results only. Of course it is very hard to ignore everything else we know and think we know based on history and the upcoming schedules for both teams...
The good thing is that at the end of the day, our champion is always decided on the field.
Also, and unequivocally, if you're using upcoming games to rank teams, you're doing it wrong.
Quote from: jknezek on September 30, 2014, 11:34:07 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 30, 2014, 11:12:36 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 29, 2014, 10:18:33 PM
The serious question is if you, as a voter, still think NC can beat UWSP three out of the next five?
This is kind of a cop out, isn't it? Don't we use this who would win the most out of seven or ten games to more or less dismiss an actual game result that doesn't jive with our preconceptions?
90% of the time, yes. It's one reason I just don't like early season, and especially preseason, polls. People get locked in, primarily based on history, and it is very hard to dislodge those conceptions. It gives us something to talk about, but it creates a tremendous bias.
I think you see that in some of the responses that say "well I can't move NCC that far down" or "I can't move UWSP that far up." That is the definition of poll bias and is the weakest argument you can make. It is not dependent on the data, it is simply dependent on what the voter thought originally and not wanting to be that "wrong" based on the latest data point. Yes, wrong in quotes since it's a poll and you can't be wrong on an opinion.
I will say that if you were starting the poll from scratch, today, based on what has happened in the last three weeks and nothing to do with history beyond that, there is no way you put NCC at 2-1 above 3-0 UWSP. You can't ignore the H2H based on this year's results only. Of course it is very hard to ignore everything else we know and think we know based on history and the upcoming schedules for both teams...
I don't think people get locked in to this notion. But rather they look at last season a little because there's not much data to go off of when doing a poll early on. We know to rank UWW, Mount, Linfield, NCC, Wesley and MHB towards the top...because
history tells us they are exceptional programs each year.
I like to look at who is returning at each program (this is where Kickoff helps me out a lot), that's why I ranked UMU over MHB for the #2 spot. Even though MHB was the runner up last year.
Quote from: jknezek on September 30, 2014, 11:34:07 AM
I think you see that in some of the responses that say "well I can't move NCC that far down" or "I can't move UWSP that far up." That is the definition of poll bias and is the weakest argument you can make. It is not dependent on the data, it is simply dependent on what the voter thought originally and not wanting to be that "wrong" based on the latest data point. Yes, wrong in quotes since it's a poll and you can't be wrong on an opinion.
I will say that if you were starting the poll from scratch, today, based on what has happened in the last three weeks and nothing to do with history beyond that, there is no way you put NCC at 2-1 above 3-0 UWSP.
Yup.
"I don't think NCC is that bad to be in the 20's, nor is UWSP that good to be in the teens just so they can be ranked ahead of NCC."
I just cannot wrap my head around this kind of logic. UWSP isn't good enough to be ranked ahead of a team
that they just beat?
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 30, 2014, 12:48:13 PM
Quote from: jknezek on September 30, 2014, 11:34:07 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 30, 2014, 11:12:36 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 29, 2014, 10:18:33 PM
The serious question is if you, as a voter, still think NC can beat UWSP three out of the next five?
This is kind of a cop out, isn't it? Don't we use this who would win the most out of seven or ten games to more or less dismiss an actual game result that doesn't jive with our preconceptions?
90% of the time, yes. It's one reason I just don't like early season, and especially preseason, polls. People get locked in, primarily based on history, and it is very hard to dislodge those conceptions. It gives us something to talk about, but it creates a tremendous bias.
I think you see that in some of the responses that say "well I can't move NCC that far down" or "I can't move UWSP that far up." That is the definition of poll bias and is the weakest argument you can make. It is not dependent on the data, it is simply dependent on what the voter thought originally and not wanting to be that "wrong" based on the latest data point. Yes, wrong in quotes since it's a poll and you can't be wrong on an opinion.
I will say that if you were starting the poll from scratch, today, based on what has happened in the last three weeks and nothing to do with history beyond that, there is no way you put NCC at 2-1 above 3-0 UWSP. You can't ignore the H2H based on this year's results only. Of course it is very hard to ignore everything else we know and think we know based on history and the upcoming schedules for both teams...
I don't think people get locked in to this notion. But rather they look at last season a little because there's not much data to go off of when doing a poll early on. We know to rank UWW, Mount, Linfield, NCC, Wesley and MHB towards the top...because history tells us they are exceptional programs each year.
I like to look at who is returning at each program (this is where Kickoff helps me out a lot), that's why I ranked UMU over MHB for the #2 spot. Even though MHB was the runner up last year.
Want to play Devil's advocate here, but aren't their teams that loss to UWW by 20+ points in the previous year and returned a good amount of their players not ranked or ranked less than number 2. Now that's where history is your vote to rank Mount #2. However, I think Mount back ups were probably better than majority of DIII starters, because they have so much playing time throughout the season within the OAC.
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on September 30, 2014, 01:01:52 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 30, 2014, 12:48:13 PM
Quote from: jknezek on September 30, 2014, 11:34:07 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 30, 2014, 11:12:36 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 29, 2014, 10:18:33 PM
The serious question is if you, as a voter, still think NC can beat UWSP three out of the next five?
This is kind of a cop out, isn't it? Don't we use this who would win the most out of seven or ten games to more or less dismiss an actual game result that doesn't jive with our preconceptions?
90% of the time, yes. It's one reason I just don't like early season, and especially preseason, polls. People get locked in, primarily based on history, and it is very hard to dislodge those conceptions. It gives us something to talk about, but it creates a tremendous bias.
I think you see that in some of the responses that say "well I can't move NCC that far down" or "I can't move UWSP that far up." That is the definition of poll bias and is the weakest argument you can make. It is not dependent on the data, it is simply dependent on what the voter thought originally and not wanting to be that "wrong" based on the latest data point. Yes, wrong in quotes since it's a poll and you can't be wrong on an opinion.
I will say that if you were starting the poll from scratch, today, based on what has happened in the last three weeks and nothing to do with history beyond that, there is no way you put NCC at 2-1 above 3-0 UWSP. You can't ignore the H2H based on this year's results only. Of course it is very hard to ignore everything else we know and think we know based on history and the upcoming schedules for both teams...
I don't think people get locked in to this notion. But rather they look at last season a little because there's not much data to go off of when doing a poll early on. We know to rank UWW, Mount, Linfield, NCC, Wesley and MHB towards the top...because history tells us they are exceptional programs each year.
I like to look at who is returning at each program (this is where Kickoff helps me out a lot), that's why I ranked UMU over MHB for the #2 spot. Even though MHB was the runner up last year.
Want to play Devil's advocate here, but aren't their teams that loss to UWW by 20+ points in the previous year and returned a good amount of their players not ranked or ranked less than number 2. Now that's where history is your vote to rank Mount #2. However, I think Mount back ups were probably better than majority of DIII starters, because they have so much playing time throughout the season within the OAC.
Exactly...this is a great example on where I used history AND current data to rank teams. In fact, I used some history as well as returning starters for ALL the teams in my top 25.
When I have a tough decision for ranking teams sometimes it comes down to a little test.
If Team A and Team B were to play today on a neutral field and you were forced to place a large bet on one of the teams winning the game who would you choose? That team is the team you should rank higher.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 30, 2014, 11:12:36 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 29, 2014, 10:18:33 PM
The serious question is if you, as a voter, still think NC can beat UWSP three out of the next five?
This is kind of a cop out, isn't it? Don't we use this who would win the most out of seven or ten games to more or less dismiss an actual game result that doesn't jive with our preconceptions?
While this is true for the most part I think we also need to remember teams evolve and change, sometimes dramatically, through the course of a year so results in weeks 1-4 may be entirely different later in the season for a number of reasons. We have some data on this as we occasionally see teams play each other again in the playoffs. In 2002 Wheaton lost @Alma by 7 to start the season, ran the table and ended up @Alma in the playoffs, beating them by 28. Mt Union beat Capital by 20+ in the regular season in 2005 and had to come from behind to win by 3 in the playoffs. NCC lost to Concordia, WI by 6 to start the 2006 season and beat them by 29 in the playoffs, etc. etc. And of course we find teams like the 2008 Wheaton and 2011 St John Fisher who lose to weak teams during the season and become world beaters in the playoffs, making it to the semi's despite 2 regular season losses. Mt Union won the title in 2005 after losing at home mid-season to ONU.
So it's not necessarily misplaced conjecture to try and anticipate how teams change over the course of a season and how that would affect repeat results. We have to be careful of absolutes. This rankings game is fun but it is part art part science.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 30, 2014, 12:53:58 PM
Quote from: jknezek on September 30, 2014, 11:34:07 AM
I think you see that in some of the responses that say "well I can't move NCC that far down" or "I can't move UWSP that far up." That is the definition of poll bias and is the weakest argument you can make. It is not dependent on the data, it is simply dependent on what the voter thought originally and not wanting to be that "wrong" based on the latest data point. Yes, wrong in quotes since it's a poll and you can't be wrong on an opinion.
I will say that if you were starting the poll from scratch, today, based on what has happened in the last three weeks and nothing to do with history beyond that, there is no way you put NCC at 2-1 above 3-0 UWSP.
Yup.
"I don't think NCC is that bad to be in the 20's, nor is UWSP that good to be in the teens just so they can be ranked ahead of NCC."
I just cannot wrap my head around this kind of logic. UWSP isn't good enough to be ranked ahead of a team that they just beat?
Since I was the one who said that, I guess I'll try and defend myself here. I suppose I've fallen victim to reviewing college football polls since I was a kid (back when I was a Notre Dame freak), and knowing how the Top 25 usually rounds out from week to week.
I've learned that if a #5 team loses to an un-ranked team, they will almost never drop far enough to be placed behind the team that just beat them. I'm not saying that's right or wrong (however, you can certainly make a strong case why that's wrong), but that's just how these polls usually end up. Judging how the voting went this week in our poll, I'm far from alone in voting that way:
13) North Central 124 (10, 12, 12, 13, 13, 13, 15, 15, 16, 17)
18) UW-Stevens Point 70 (13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 24, 25, --)
Also, the D3football.com poll seemed to go in the same direction:
13 North Central (Ill.) 2-1 289 5
17 UW-Stevens Point 3-0 188 --
The requirement for Stevens Point to be ranked ahead of North Central today should not include them having to beat Whitewater later on or North Central losing again later on. Might future results lead us to rank North Central higher down the road? Of course they might. But as of this minute there isn't a single logical reason for North Central to be ranked ahead of Stevens Point other than "meh, I'm not buying it". They didn't lose at the buzzer on a 50-yard field goal. They didn't lose because their coach ran into the huddle at the end of the game. No, no. In the words of Teddy KGB: "He byeat me. Straight up. Pay that man hees money."
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 30, 2014, 01:35:35 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 30, 2014, 12:53:58 PM
Quote from: jknezek on September 30, 2014, 11:34:07 AM
I think you see that in some of the responses that say "well I can't move NCC that far down" or "I can't move UWSP that far up." That is the definition of poll bias and is the weakest argument you can make. It is not dependent on the data, it is simply dependent on what the voter thought originally and not wanting to be that "wrong" based on the latest data point. Yes, wrong in quotes since it's a poll and you can't be wrong on an opinion.
I will say that if you were starting the poll from scratch, today, based on what has happened in the last three weeks and nothing to do with history beyond that, there is no way you put NCC at 2-1 above 3-0 UWSP.
Yup.
"I don't think NCC is that bad to be in the 20's, nor is UWSP that good to be in the teens just so they can be ranked ahead of NCC."
I just cannot wrap my head around this kind of logic. UWSP isn't good enough to be ranked ahead of a team that they just beat?
Since I was the one who said that, I guess I'll try and defend myself here. I suppose I've fallen victim to reviewing college football polls since I was a kid (back when I was a Notre Dame freak), and knowing how the Top 25 usually rounds out from week to week.
I've learned that if a #5 team loses to an un-ranked team, they will almost never drop far enough to be placed behind the team that just beat them. I'm not saying that's right or wrong (however, you can certainly make a strong case why that's wrong), but that's just how these polls usually end up. Judging how the voting went this week in our poll, I'm far from alone in voting that way:
13) North Central 124 (10, 12, 12, 13, 13, 13, 15, 15, 16, 17)
18) UW-Stevens Point 70 (13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 24, 25, --)
Also, the D3football.com poll seemed to go in the same direction:
13 North Central (Ill.) 2-1 289 5
17 UW-Stevens Point 3-0 188 --
Well, that's dumb. You're ranking teams according to how you're used to seeing polls adjust whatever team in whatever year after whatever game? That's dumb. Just rank the teams.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 30, 2014, 01:17:57 PM
When I have a tough decision for ranking teams sometimes it comes down to a little test.
If Team A and Team B were to play today on a neutral field and you were forced to place a large bet on one of the teams winning the game who would you choose? That team is the team you should rank higher.
A regular Bill James.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 30, 2014, 01:35:35 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 30, 2014, 12:53:58 PM
Quote from: jknezek on September 30, 2014, 11:34:07 AM
I think you see that in some of the responses that say "well I can't move NCC that far down" or "I can't move UWSP that far up." That is the definition of poll bias and is the weakest argument you can make. It is not dependent on the data, it is simply dependent on what the voter thought originally and not wanting to be that "wrong" based on the latest data point. Yes, wrong in quotes since it's a poll and you can't be wrong on an opinion.
I will say that if you were starting the poll from scratch, today, based on what has happened in the last three weeks and nothing to do with history beyond that, there is no way you put NCC at 2-1 above 3-0 UWSP.
Yup.
"I don't think NCC is that bad to be in the 20's, nor is UWSP that good to be in the teens just so they can be ranked ahead of NCC."
I just cannot wrap my head around this kind of logic. UWSP isn't good enough to be ranked ahead of a team that they just beat?
Since I was the one who said that, I guess I'll try and defend myself here. I suppose I've fallen victim to reviewing college football polls since I was a kid (back when I was a Notre Dame freak), and knowing how the Top 25 usually rounds out from week to week.
I've learned that if a #5 team loses to an un-ranked team, they will almost never drop far enough to be placed behind the team that just beat them. I'm not saying that's right or wrong (however, you can certainly make a strong case why that's wrong), but that's just how these polls usually end up. Judging how the voting went this week in our poll, I'm far from alone in voting that way:
13) North Central 124 (10, 12, 12, 13, 13, 13, 15, 15, 16, 17)
18) UW-Stevens Point 70 (13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 24, 25, --)
Also, the D3football.com poll seemed to go in the same direction:
13 North Central (Ill.) 2-1 289 5
17 UW-Stevens Point 3-0 188 --
Oh, you're far from alone in thinking that way, I agree.
You're just
all wrong :)
Being serious, I know where you got the idea, and you're absolutely right that's the way that major college polls have operated. It's a phenomenon known in the social sciences as "anchoring-and-adjustment" - people use the prior beliefs as an "anchor" and then "adjust" rankings based on new results - but they tend to adjust insufficiently, resulting in the final answer being closer to the anchor than it would have been if they were starting from scratch.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 30, 2014, 01:42:02 PM
The requirement for Stevens Point to be ranked ahead of North Central today should not include them having to beat Whitewater later on or North Central losing again later on. Might future results lead us to rank North Central higher down the road? Of course they might. But as of this minute there isn't a single logical reason for North Central to be ranked ahead of Stevens Point other than "meh, I'm not buying it".
Yup
Quote from: BashDad on September 30, 2014, 01:43:23 PM
Well, that's dumb. You're ranking teams according to how you're used to seeing polls adjust whatever team in whatever year after whatever game? That's dumb. Just rank the teams.
I did. With the loss I still think NCC is a top 15 team...while I don't think UWSP is, yet.
At least I wasn't the one who left UWSP off the ballot completely. I'm not that out of touch. ;D
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 30, 2014, 01:42:02 PM
The requirement for Stevens Point to be ranked ahead of North Central today should not include them having to beat Whitewater later on or North Central losing again later on. Might future results lead us to rank North Central higher down the road? Of course they might. But as of this minute there isn't a single logical reason for North Central to be ranked ahead of Stevens Point other than "meh, I'm not buying it".
But yet they are.
Because of dumb people.
Quote from: USee on September 30, 2014, 01:27:39 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 30, 2014, 11:12:36 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 29, 2014, 10:18:33 PM
The serious question is if you, as a voter, still think NC can beat UWSP three out of the next five?
This is kind of a cop out, isn't it? Don't we use this who would win the most out of seven or ten games to more or less dismiss an actual game result that doesn't jive with our preconceptions?
While this is true for the most part I think we also need to remember teams evolve and change, sometimes dramatically, through the course of a year so results in weeks 1-4 may be entirely different later in the season for a number of reasons. We have some data on this as we occasionally see teams play each other again in the playoffs. In 2002 Wheaton lost @Alma by 7 to start the season, ran the table and ended up @Alma in the playoffs, beating them by 28. Mt Union beat Capital by 20+ in the regular season in 2005 and had to come from behind to win by 3 in the playoffs. NCC lost to Concordia, WI by 6 to start the 2006 season and beat them by 29 in the playoffs, etc. etc. And of course we find teams like the 2008 Wheaton and 2011 St John Fisher who lose to weak teams during the season and become world beaters in the playoffs, making it to the semi's despite 2 regular season losses. Mt Union won the title in 2005 after losing at home mid-season to ONU.
So it's not necessarily misplaced conjecture to try and anticipate how teams change over the course of a season and how that would affect repeat results. We have to be careful of absolutes. This rankings game is fun but it is part art part science.
I want to give a nod to this post while also disagreeing with the conclusion.
I'll concede the point that, indeed, teams change and evolve over the course of a season.
I disagree that we should make speculation about that part of the rankings.
I'd rather rank the teams based on what's
actually happened, then correct the rankings later when we have results to demonstrate that a team has evolved for the better or changed for the worse.
If time proves that NCC is better than UWSP and that result was a fluke, or a team not fully developed, fine. That will be reflected down the line. But I don't get why today's rankings should include that speculation.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 30, 2014, 02:02:29 PM
Quote from: USee on September 30, 2014, 01:27:39 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 30, 2014, 11:12:36 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 29, 2014, 10:18:33 PM
The serious question is if you, as a voter, still think NC can beat UWSP three out of the next five?
This is kind of a cop out, isn't it? Don't we use this who would win the most out of seven or ten games to more or less dismiss an actual game result that doesn't jive with our preconceptions?
While this is true for the most part I think we also need to remember teams evolve and change, sometimes dramatically, through the course of a year so results in weeks 1-4 may be entirely different later in the season for a number of reasons. We have some data on this as we occasionally see teams play each other again in the playoffs. In 2002 Wheaton lost @Alma by 7 to start the season, ran the table and ended up @Alma in the playoffs, beating them by 28. Mt Union beat Capital by 20+ in the regular season in 2005 and had to come from behind to win by 3 in the playoffs. NCC lost to Concordia, WI by 6 to start the 2006 season and beat them by 29 in the playoffs, etc. etc. And of course we find teams like the 2008 Wheaton and 2011 St John Fisher who lose to weak teams during the season and become world beaters in the playoffs, making it to the semi's despite 2 regular season losses. Mt Union won the title in 2005 after losing at home mid-season to ONU.
So it's not necessarily misplaced conjecture to try and anticipate how teams change over the course of a season and how that would affect repeat results. We have to be careful of absolutes. This rankings game is fun but it is part art part science.
I want to give a nod to this post while also disagreeing with the conclusion.
I'll concede the point that, indeed, teams change and evolve over the course of a season.
I disagree that we should make speculation about that part of the rankings.
I'd rather rank the teams based on what's actually happened, then correct the rankings later when we have results to demonstrate that a team has evolved for the better or changed for the worse.
If time proves that NCC is better than UWSP and that result was a fluke, or a team not fully developed, fine. That will be reflected down the line. But I don't get why today's rankings should include that speculation.
Today's might not but you will eventually be faced with the fact that NCC pounded UWP and lost to UWSP. What if UWP beats UWW? Then what? right now we have recent data and I agree the polls should reflect that. As weeks transpire the data becomes complex and at that point teams may indeed be different. Ranked teams lose to unranked teams and then beat more highly ranked teams. That happens. Right now we have clear data. In a couple of weeks it will almost decidedly be less clear.
I actually digressed from my original point which was I don't think its wrong to project a team winning a rematch in the rankings. It actually happens.
Quote from: USee on September 30, 2014, 02:07:06 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 30, 2014, 02:02:29 PM
Quote from: USee on September 30, 2014, 01:27:39 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 30, 2014, 11:12:36 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 29, 2014, 10:18:33 PM
The serious question is if you, as a voter, still think NC can beat UWSP three out of the next five?
This is kind of a cop out, isn't it? Don't we use this who would win the most out of seven or ten games to more or less dismiss an actual game result that doesn't jive with our preconceptions?
While this is true for the most part I think we also need to remember teams evolve and change, sometimes dramatically, through the course of a year so results in weeks 1-4 may be entirely different later in the season for a number of reasons. We have some data on this as we occasionally see teams play each other again in the playoffs. In 2002 Wheaton lost @Alma by 7 to start the season, ran the table and ended up @Alma in the playoffs, beating them by 28. Mt Union beat Capital by 20+ in the regular season in 2005 and had to come from behind to win by 3 in the playoffs. NCC lost to Concordia, WI by 6 to start the 2006 season and beat them by 29 in the playoffs, etc. etc. And of course we find teams like the 2008 Wheaton and 2011 St John Fisher who lose to weak teams during the season and become world beaters in the playoffs, making it to the semi's despite 2 regular season losses. Mt Union won the title in 2005 after losing at home mid-season to ONU.
So it's not necessarily misplaced conjecture to try and anticipate how teams change over the course of a season and how that would affect repeat results. We have to be careful of absolutes. This rankings game is fun but it is part art part science.
I want to give a nod to this post while also disagreeing with the conclusion.
I'll concede the point that, indeed, teams change and evolve over the course of a season.
I disagree that we should make speculation about that part of the rankings.
I'd rather rank the teams based on what's actually happened, then correct the rankings later when we have results to demonstrate that a team has evolved for the better or changed for the worse.
If time proves that NCC is better than UWSP and that result was a fluke, or a team not fully developed, fine. That will be reflected down the line. But I don't get why today's rankings should include that speculation.
Today's might not but you will eventually be faced with the fact that NCC pounded UWP and lost to UWSP. What if UWP beats UWW? Then what? right now we have recent data and I agree the polls should reflect that. As weeks transpire the data becomes complex and at that point teams may indeed be different. Ranked teams lose to unranked teams and then beat more highly ranked teams. That happens. Right now we have clear data. In a couple of weeks it will almost decidedly be less clear.
Exactly! We're saying the same thing!
In a couple of weeks, if UWP beats UWSP,
then we can try to untangle which of the teams is best. But right now we do have clear data. UWSP beat NCC. NCC beat UWP. For now, UWSP>NCC>UWP, until there is an actual data point contradicting that. That may well occur
in a few weeks but it has not happened yet, and setting up the rankings by guessing such a result is a fool's errand. Actually, all rankings are probably fool's errands.
Ironically enough, today's SI.com Power Rankings for D1 address this very topic we are bandying about:
http://www.si.com/college-football/2014/09/30/college-football-power-rankings
Teams that aren't playing like top 25 teams don't belong there based on their preseason rankings alone. That's why there's a new No. 1 once again and why so many teams have shuffled. As SI.com's Andy Staples wrote in his Punt, Pass & Pork this week, "We may still have the wrong idea, but five weeks of data have provided a few hints."
Quote from: BashDad on September 30, 2014, 01:59:14 PM
Because of dumb people.
Feel free to submit a poll then o' wise one.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 30, 2014, 01:47:08 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 30, 2014, 01:35:35 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 30, 2014, 12:53:58 PM
Quote from: jknezek on September 30, 2014, 11:34:07 AM
I think you see that in some of the responses that say "well I can't move NCC that far down" or "I can't move UWSP that far up." That is the definition of poll bias and is the weakest argument you can make. It is not dependent on the data, it is simply dependent on what the voter thought originally and not wanting to be that "wrong" based on the latest data point. Yes, wrong in quotes since it's a poll and you can't be wrong on an opinion.
I will say that if you were starting the poll from scratch, today, based on what has happened in the last three weeks and nothing to do with history beyond that, there is no way you put NCC at 2-1 above 3-0 UWSP.
Yup.
"I don't think NCC is that bad to be in the 20's, nor is UWSP that good to be in the teens just so they can be ranked ahead of NCC."
I just cannot wrap my head around this kind of logic. UWSP isn't good enough to be ranked ahead of a team that they just beat?
Since I was the one who said that, I guess I'll try and defend myself here. I suppose I've fallen victim to reviewing college football polls since I was a kid (back when I was a Notre Dame freak), and knowing how the Top 25 usually rounds out from week to week.
I've learned that if a #5 team loses to an un-ranked team, they will almost never drop far enough to be placed behind the team that just beat them. I'm not saying that's right or wrong (however, you can certainly make a strong case why that's wrong), but that's just how these polls usually end up. Judging how the voting went this week in our poll, I'm far from alone in voting that way:
13) North Central 124 (10, 12, 12, 13, 13, 13, 15, 15, 16, 17)
18) UW-Stevens Point 70 (13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 24, 25, --)
Also, the D3football.com poll seemed to go in the same direction:
13 North Central (Ill.) 2-1 289 5
17 UW-Stevens Point 3-0 188 --
Oh, you're far from alone in thinking that way, I agree.
You're just all wrong :)
Being serious, I know where you got the idea, and you're absolutely right that's the way that major college polls have operated. It's a phenomenon known in the social sciences as "anchoring-and-adjustment" - people use the prior beliefs as an "anchor" and then "adjust" rankings based on new results - but they tend to adjust insufficiently, resulting in the final answer being closer to the anchor than it would have been if they were starting from scratch.
Actually that's exactly what I do. I would consider re-evaluating my philosophy if my picks were totally titling our poll one way or the other. However, my picks are pretty consistent to what our composite results are.
I don't think one way is better than another, it's just a matter of opinion and interpretation.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 30, 2014, 02:35:55 PM
I don't think one way is better than another, it's just a matter of opinion and interpretation.
You can have an opinion and interpretation about anything. It's just difficult to defend one when the data says you are wrong. UWSP was better than NCC last week. That's the data point. UWSP is 3-0, no blemishes yet to diminish the win. In order to put NCC ahead of UWSP you have to ignore the result on the field, the most important piece of data, and the only relevant ancillary data we have this year (overall record).
There are a lot of people here in Alabama that would like to crown Auburn the National Champion last year. It's easy to do if you ignore the most important piece of data...
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 30, 2014, 11:12:36 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 29, 2014, 10:18:33 PM
The serious question is if you, as a voter, still think NC can beat UWSP three out of the next five?
This is kind of a cop out, isn't it? Don't we use this who would win the most out of seven or ten games to more or less dismiss an actual game result that doesn't jive with our preconceptions?
NO! It's not a cop out. Weird results and outliers would pollute our rankings. Say Kenyon upsets Wittenberg. We'd never rank Kenyon ahead of Wittenberg.
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 02:42:46 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 30, 2014, 11:12:36 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 29, 2014, 10:18:33 PM
The serious question is if you, as a voter, still think NC can beat UWSP three out of the next five?
This is kind of a cop out, isn't it? Don't we use this who would win the most out of seven or ten games to more or less dismiss an actual game result that doesn't jive with our preconceptions?
NO! It's not a cop out. Weird results and outliers would pollute our rankings. Say Kenyon upsets Wittenberg. We'd never rank Kenyon ahead of Wittenberg.
Ridiculous. Kenyon has mitigating data in terms of other losses. UWSP is undefeated. There isn't any mitigating data. You just want to ignore the result.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 30, 2014, 01:42:02 PM
The requirement for Stevens Point to be ranked ahead of North Central today should not include them having to beat Whitewater later on or North Central losing again later on. Might future results lead us to rank North Central higher down the road? Of course they might. But as of this minute there isn't a single logical reason for North Central to be ranked ahead of Stevens Point other than "meh, I'm not buying it". They didn't lose at the buzzer on a 50-yard field goal. They didn't lose because their coach ran into the huddle at the end of the game. No, no. In the words of Teddy KGB: "He byeat me. Straight up. Pay that man hees money."
For the record, I didn't rank NC ahead of Stevens Point. I do, though, fail to see how it can be a COP OUT if you don't think that one result, which can be a fluke, happenstance, circumstance, bad weather, injuries, nefariousness, rivalries, etc.
It's not dumb people, and can't be a simple yes / no. It's complicated at times.
And I'm talking IN GENERAL, not in this ultra-specific instance. Some want to say you can NEVER rank a team higher than a team that beat them. Not the case at all.
Quote from: jknezek on September 30, 2014, 02:44:31 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 02:42:46 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 30, 2014, 11:12:36 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 29, 2014, 10:18:33 PM
The serious question is if you, as a voter, still think NC can beat UWSP three out of the next five?
This is kind of a cop out, isn't it? Don't we use this who would win the most out of seven or ten games to more or less dismiss an actual game result that doesn't jive with our preconceptions?
NO! It's not a cop out. Weird results and outliers would pollute our rankings. Say Kenyon upsets Wittenberg. We'd never rank Kenyon ahead of Wittenberg.
Ridiculous. Kenyon has mitigating data in terms of other losses. UWSP is undefeated. There isn't any mitigating data. You just want to ignore the result.
False assumption on your part, my friend.
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 02:46:57 PM
Quote from: jknezek on September 30, 2014, 02:44:31 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 02:42:46 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 30, 2014, 11:12:36 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 29, 2014, 10:18:33 PM
The serious question is if you, as a voter, still think NC can beat UWSP three out of the next five?
This is kind of a cop out, isn't it? Don't we use this who would win the most out of seven or ten games to more or less dismiss an actual game result that doesn't jive with our preconceptions?
NO! It's not a cop out. Weird results and outliers would pollute our rankings. Say Kenyon upsets Wittenberg. We'd never rank Kenyon ahead of Wittenberg.
Ridiculous. Kenyon has mitigating data in terms of other losses. UWSP is undefeated. There isn't any mitigating data. You just want to ignore the result.
False assumption on your part, my friend.
Kenyon is 0-4. I'm not assuming anything. If Kenyon was undefeated and beat Witt, then yes, I would rank them ahead of Witt.
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 02:46:57 PM
I do, though, fail to see how it can be a COP OUT if you don't think that one result, which can be a fluke, happenstance, circumstance, bad weather, injuries, nefariousness, rivalries, etc.
As near as we can tell, none of these fluke happenstances occurred. So why rank UWSP behind NCC?
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 02:42:46 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 30, 2014, 11:12:36 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 29, 2014, 10:18:33 PM
The serious question is if you, as a voter, still think NC can beat UWSP three out of the next five?
This is kind of a cop out, isn't it? Don't we use this who would win the most out of seven or ten games to more or less dismiss an actual game result that doesn't jive with our preconceptions?
NO! It's not a cop out. Weird results and outliers would pollute our rankings. Say Kenyon upsets Wittenberg. We'd never rank Kenyon ahead of Wittenberg.
In the words of William Wallace: "Why? Why is that impossible?"
Why would you "never rank Kenyon ahead of Wittenberg" if Kenyon had actually beaten Wittenberg? Rank the teams based on
what actually happens on the field, not the teams that you thought were good before the season! If there is other data within that same season to support it - i.e. Kenyon losing to several other teams that Wittenberg has beaten already - then, of course you consider those data points as well, and conclude that a larger body of evidence proves that Wittenberg is better than Kenyon.
In the specific cases we're arguing about, that data does not exist. There is no result that supersedes UWSP 34, NCC 27. If UWSP loses down the road to UWP, fine, the rankings will appropriately reflect how everyone weighs those results later.
Quote from: jknezek on September 30, 2014, 02:49:16 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 02:46:57 PM
Quote from: jknezek on September 30, 2014, 02:44:31 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 02:42:46 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 30, 2014, 11:12:36 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 29, 2014, 10:18:33 PM
The serious question is if you, as a voter, still think NC can beat UWSP three out of the next five?
This is kind of a cop out, isn't it? Don't we use this who would win the most out of seven or ten games to more or less dismiss an actual game result that doesn't jive with our preconceptions?
NO! It's not a cop out. Weird results and outliers would pollute our rankings. Say Kenyon upsets Wittenberg. We'd never rank Kenyon ahead of Wittenberg.
Ridiculous. Kenyon has mitigating data in terms of other losses. UWSP is undefeated. There isn't any mitigating data. You just want to ignore the result.
False assumption on your part, my friend.
Kenyon is 0-4. I'm not assuming anything. If Kenyon was undefeated and beat Witt, then yes, I would rank them ahead of Witt.
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 02:46:57 PM
I do, though, fail to see how it can be a COP OUT if you don't think that one result, which can be a fluke, happenstance, circumstance, bad weather, injuries, nefariousness, rivalries, etc.
As near as we can tell, none of these fluke happenstances occurred. So why rank UWSP behind NCC?
I didn't. THAT was your false assumption. You made it personal and I was not talking my personal rankings but a thought process.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 30, 2014, 02:49:37 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 02:42:46 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 30, 2014, 11:12:36 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 29, 2014, 10:18:33 PM
The serious question is if you, as a voter, still think NC can beat UWSP three out of the next five?
This is kind of a cop out, isn't it? Don't we use this who would win the most out of seven or ten games to more or less dismiss an actual game result that doesn't jive with our preconceptions?
NO! It's not a cop out. Weird results and outliers would pollute our rankings. Say Kenyon upsets Wittenberg. We'd never rank Kenyon ahead of Wittenberg.
In the words of William Wallace: "Why? Why is that impossible?"
Why would you "never rank Kenyon ahead of Wittenberg" if Kenyon had actually beaten Wittenberg? Rank the teams based on what actually happens on the field, not the teams that you thought were good before the season! If there is other data within that same season to support it - i.e. Kenyon losing to several other teams that Wittenberg has beaten already - then, of course you consider those data points as well, and conclude that a larger body of evidence proves that Wittenberg is better than Kenyon.
In the specific cases we're arguing about, that data does not exist. There is no result that supersedes UWSP 34, NCC 27. If UWSP loses down the road to UWP, fine, the rankings will appropriately reflect how everyone weighs those results later.
Some argue or imply that that is what you do. Rank teams ahead of teams they beat, the hell with the other data points.
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 02:51:36 PM
Some argue or imply that that is what you do. Rank teams ahead of teams they beat, the hell with the other data points.
Who has argued that? Please, quote a specific instance of someone in this thread saying that.
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 02:50:53 PM
Quote from: jknezek on September 30, 2014, 02:49:16 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 02:46:57 PM
Quote from: jknezek on September 30, 2014, 02:44:31 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 02:42:46 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 30, 2014, 11:12:36 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 29, 2014, 10:18:33 PM
The serious question is if you, as a voter, still think NC can beat UWSP three out of the next five?
This is kind of a cop out, isn't it? Don't we use this who would win the most out of seven or ten games to more or less dismiss an actual game result that doesn't jive with our preconceptions?
NO! It's not a cop out. Weird results and outliers would pollute our rankings. Say Kenyon upsets Wittenberg. We'd never rank Kenyon ahead of Wittenberg.
Ridiculous. Kenyon has mitigating data in terms of other losses. UWSP is undefeated. There isn't any mitigating data. You just want to ignore the result.
False assumption on your part, my friend.
Kenyon is 0-4. I'm not assuming anything. If Kenyon was undefeated and beat Witt, then yes, I would rank them ahead of Witt.
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 02:46:57 PM
I do, though, fail to see how it can be a COP OUT if you don't think that one result, which can be a fluke, happenstance, circumstance, bad weather, injuries, nefariousness, rivalries, etc.
As near as we can tell, none of these fluke happenstances occurred. So why rank UWSP behind NCC?
I didn't. THAT was your false assumption. You made it personal and I was not talking my personal rankings but a thought process.
Hmm. Apologies. The statement I made "you want to ignore the result" wasn't really targeted at what you may or may not have done but in the way the argument put forth is designed to allow someone to ignore the result. It was not meant to be a personal attack so much as part of the general arguments. I should have worded it better. Sorry.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 30, 2014, 02:55:39 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 02:51:36 PM
Some argue or imply that that is what you do. Rank teams ahead of teams they beat, the hell with the other data points.
Who has argued that? Please, quote a specific instance of someone in this thread saying that.
There's a strong implication in some of the comments above through the entire thread where those who take a more nuanced view of a H2H result may be called out. I went extreme with Kenyon / Wittenberg, but the St. Thomas / St. John's game is probably a better example where since it's a rivalry game, and St. John's has a loss as well, where the H2H between the two may NOT be as black and white as some would think. On that given day St. Thomas lost. Who is the better team, though? The loss to C-M by St. John's still lingers. IF C-M beats St. Thomas, then all in the MIAC is aligned.
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 02:58:53 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 30, 2014, 02:55:39 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 02:51:36 PM
Some argue or imply that that is what you do. Rank teams ahead of teams they beat, the hell with the other data points.
Who has argued that? Please, quote a specific instance of someone in this thread saying that.
There's a strong implication in some of the comments above through the entire thread.
I haven't picked up on that, but there are different ways to read everything. Witness my apology above. I think some of the problem is ExTP and I are talking about this specific instance while smedindy is being more general. I certainly agree there are other circumstances that have to be weighted. I just don't see any for this instance. So we're probably mostly in agreement here and just not doing a good job of understanding exactly what each one of us is referring to. Especially since the posts, and some modifications, are coming quickly.
As above, since I revised and extended my remarks for the record.
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 02:58:53 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 30, 2014, 02:55:39 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 02:51:36 PM
Some argue or imply that that is what you do. Rank teams ahead of teams they beat, the hell with the other data points.
Who has argued that? Please, quote a specific instance of someone in this thread saying that.
There's a strong implication in some of the comments above through the entire thread where those who take a more nuanced view of a H2H result may be called out. I went extreme with Kenyon / Wittenberg, but the St. Thomas / St. John's game is probably a better example where since it's a rivalry game, and St. John's has a loss as well, where the H2H between the two may NOT be as black and white as some would think. On that given day St. Thomas lost. Who is the better team, though? The loss to C-M by St. John's still lingers. IF C-M beats St. Thomas, then all in the MIAC is aligned.
C-M isn't exactly a bad loss. They are 4-0, 2-0. Will they beat St. Thomas? I don't know, but it's not like St. Johns lost to a hopeless team. Why is this mitigating before the St. Thomas - CM Game? Wouldn't you take both games at face value right now and rank C-M over St. Johns over St. Thomas? If any one of them loses again before the C-M / St. Thomas game you could re-evaluate then, but right now why mess up what seems a series of credible results on the field? Is there a reason to believe St. Thomas is significantly better than C-M? No common opponents so far. Are we relying on history, preconceptions? Where is the smoking gun that makes either the C-M win or the St. Johns win a fluke in relation to St. Thomas's quality?
Quote from: jknezek on September 30, 2014, 02:44:31 PM
Ridiculous. Kenyon has mitigating data in terms of other losses. UWSP is undefeated. There isn't any mitigating data. You just want to ignore the result.
I don't think anyone's ignoring the result. There's a reason North Central went from 533 points in the polls to 289 while Stevens-Point went from 0 to 188. People clearly think more of Stevens-Point and less of North Central then they did last week. The result's not being ignored, it's just not being weighed as heavily as you'd like it to be by everyone
Quote from: Bombers798891 on September 30, 2014, 03:13:01 PM
Quote from: jknezek on September 30, 2014, 02:44:31 PM
Ridiculous. Kenyon has mitigating data in terms of other losses. UWSP is undefeated. There isn't any mitigating data. You just want to ignore the result.
I don't think anyone's ignoring the result. There's a reason North Central went from 533 points in the polls to 289 while Stevens-Point went from 0 to 188. People clearly think more of Stevens-Point and less of North Central then they did last week. The result's not being ignored, it's just not being weighed as heavily as you'd like it to be by everyone
I know. The question a few of us are asking is why? Why aren't people using the result on the field?
Quote from: jknezek on September 30, 2014, 03:15:51 PM
Quote from: Bombers798891 on September 30, 2014, 03:13:01 PM
Quote from: jknezek on September 30, 2014, 02:44:31 PM
Ridiculous. Kenyon has mitigating data in terms of other losses. UWSP is undefeated. There isn't any mitigating data. You just want to ignore the result.
I don't think anyone's ignoring the result. There's a reason North Central went from 533 points in the polls to 289 while Stevens-Point went from 0 to 188. People clearly think more of Stevens-Point and less of North Central then they did last week. The result's not being ignored, it's just not being weighed as heavily as you'd like it to be by everyone
I know. The question a few of us are asking is why? Why aren't people using the result on the field?
I think everyone is. Hence NCC dropping a ton, and UWSP getting added. It's just not being used to your liking.
Quote from: jknezek on September 30, 2014, 03:11:24 PM
C-M isn't exactly a bad loss. They are 4-0, 2-0. Will they beat St. Thomas? I don't know, but it's not like St. Johns lost to a hopeless team. Why is this mitigating before the St. Thomas - CM Game? Wouldn't you take both games at face value right now and rank C-M over St. Johns over St. Thomas? If any one of them loses again before the C-M / St. Thomas game you could re-evaluate then, but right now why mess up what seems a series of credible results on the field? Is there a reason to believe St. Thomas is significantly better than C-M?
Exactly. Same rationale I've been trying to use for UWSP > NCC > UWP.
If another result actually contradicts this order, adjust the rankings
when that happens. Not in anticipation that it
will happen.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 30, 2014, 03:20:49 PM
I think everyone is. Hence NCC dropping a ton, and UWSP getting added. It's just not being used to your liking.
Perhaps. But again, I just haven't seen anyone provide a reason why NCC should be above UWSP based on the data from this year. Either game data showing it was a fluky win or season data showing why the win shouldn't be considered the deciding factor on which team is better. I've seen people point out other instances, argue that polls can't move that much, or that good teams can't drop that far, or that hypothetically UWSP would not win again. But nothing data based on this season.
Without that data it is confusing that the result on the field is not the arbiter of "better team". From the pollsters point of view, why was the game played if it didn't determine who the better team was?
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 30, 2014, 03:22:11 PM
Exactly. Same rationale I've been trying to use for UWSP > NCC > UWP.
If another result actually contradicts this order, adjust the rankings when that happens. Not in anticipation that it will happen.
Now I assume this thinking goes out the door if NCC loses again, right? No way should you keep dropping UWP further and further down just so they're behind NCC, correct?
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 30, 2014, 03:31:17 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 30, 2014, 03:22:11 PM
Exactly. Same rationale I've been trying to use for UWSP > NCC > UWP.
If another result actually contradicts this order, adjust the rankings when that happens. Not in anticipation that it will happen.
Now I assume this thinking goes out the door if NCC loses again, right? No way should you keep dropping UWP further and further down just so they're behind NCC, correct?
Yes! I've said that several times already (*edit: heck, it was even
in that post - "If another result contradicts this order...").
A direct quote from a few posts back:
"If there is other data within that same season to support it - i.e. Kenyon losing to several other teams that Wittenberg has beaten already - then, of course you consider those data points as well, and conclude that a larger body of evidence proves that Wittenberg is better than Kenyon.
In the specific cases we're arguing about, that data does not exist. There is no result that supersedes UWSP 34, NCC 27. If UWSP loses down the road to UWP, fine, the rankings will appropriately reflect how everyone weighs those results later."
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 30, 2014, 03:34:59 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 30, 2014, 03:31:17 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 30, 2014, 03:22:11 PM
Exactly. Same rationale I've been trying to use for UWSP > NCC > UWP.
If another result actually contradicts this order, adjust the rankings when that happens. Not in anticipation that it will happen.
Now I assume this thinking goes out the door if NCC loses again, right? No way should you keep dropping UWP further and further down just so they're behind NCC, correct?
Yes! I've said that several times already. A direct quote from a few posts back:
"If there is other data within that same season to support it - i.e. Kenyon losing to several other teams that Wittenberg has beaten already - then, of course you consider those data points as well, and conclude that a larger body of evidence proves that Wittenberg is better than Kenyon.
In the specific cases we're arguing about, that data does not exist. There is no result that supersedes UWSP 34, NCC 27. If UWSP loses down the road to UWP, fine, the rankings will appropriately reflect how everyone weighs those results later."
sorry...trying my best to get some work done and talk D3 football at the same time. Losing track of some posts. :)
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 30, 2014, 03:39:35 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 30, 2014, 03:34:59 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 30, 2014, 03:31:17 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 30, 2014, 03:22:11 PM
Exactly. Same rationale I've been trying to use for UWSP > NCC > UWP.
If another result actually contradicts this order, adjust the rankings when that happens. Not in anticipation that it will happen.
Now I assume this thinking goes out the door if NCC loses again, right? No way should you keep dropping UWP further and further down just so they're behind NCC, correct?
Yes! I've said that several times already. A direct quote from a few posts back:
"If there is other data within that same season to support it - i.e. Kenyon losing to several other teams that Wittenberg has beaten already - then, of course you consider those data points as well, and conclude that a larger body of evidence proves that Wittenberg is better than Kenyon.
In the specific cases we're arguing about, that data does not exist. There is no result that supersedes UWSP 34, NCC 27. If UWSP loses down the road to UWP, fine, the rankings will appropriately reflect how everyone weighs those results later."
sorry...trying my best to get some work done and talk D3 football at the same time. Losing track of some posts. :)
No worries. They're coming hot and heavy, and I'm probably neglecting my work a little too much for this discussion as well.
+K for the spirited discussion.
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 02:58:53 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 30, 2014, 02:55:39 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 02:51:36 PM
Some argue or imply that that is what you do. Rank teams ahead of teams they beat, the hell with the other data points.
Who has argued that? Please, quote a specific instance of someone in this thread saying that.
There's a strong implication in some of the comments above through the entire thread where those who take a more nuanced view of a H2H result may be called out. I went extreme with Kenyon / Wittenberg, but the St. Thomas / St. John's game is probably a better example where since it's a rivalry game, and St. John's has a loss as well, where the H2H between the two may NOT be as black and white as some would think. On that given day St. Thomas lost. Who is the better team, though? The loss to C-M by St. John's still lingers. IF C-M beats St. Thomas, then all in the MIAC is aligned.
Nuance is good! I'm all for nuance. More nuance, please.
But it truly is dumb to rank teams according to
how you expect other people to rank them or because
this is how polls my whole life have reflected similar results or because so-and-so plays so-and-so in week 8 and will surely lose. These are dumb ways to qualify teams in relation to each other. Dumb especially when you're arguing against a result on the field that has little additional data to mitigate the clearest of who-would-win-between-so-and-so answers: the scoreboard.
Quote from: BashDad on September 30, 2014, 03:41:21 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 02:58:53 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 30, 2014, 02:55:39 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 02:51:36 PM
Some argue or imply that that is what you do. Rank teams ahead of teams they beat, the hell with the other data points.
Who has argued that? Please, quote a specific instance of someone in this thread saying that.
There's a strong implication in some of the comments above through the entire thread where those who take a more nuanced view of a H2H result may be called out. I went extreme with Kenyon / Wittenberg, but the St. Thomas / St. John's game is probably a better example where since it's a rivalry game, and St. John's has a loss as well, where the H2H between the two may NOT be as black and white as some would think. On that given day St. Thomas lost. Who is the better team, though? The loss to C-M by St. John's still lingers. IF C-M beats St. Thomas, then all in the MIAC is aligned.
Nuance is good! I'm all for nuance. More nuance, please.
But it truly is dumb to rank teams according to how you expect other people to rank them or because this is how polls my whole life have reflected similar results or because so-and-so plays so-and-so in week 8 and will surely lose. These are dumb ways to qualify teams in relation to each other. Dumb especially when you're arguing against a result on the field that has little additional data to mitigate the clearest of who-would-win-between-so-and-so answers: the scoreboard.
We'll be looking forward to your poll next week.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 30, 2014, 03:22:11 PM
Quote from: jknezek on September 30, 2014, 03:11:24 PM
C-M isn't exactly a bad loss. They are 4-0, 2-0. Will they beat St. Thomas? I don't know, but it's not like St. Johns lost to a hopeless team. Why is this mitigating before the St. Thomas - CM Game? Wouldn't you take both games at face value right now and rank C-M over St. Johns over St. Thomas? If any one of them loses again before the C-M / St. Thomas game you could re-evaluate then, but right now why mess up what seems a series of credible results on the field? Is there a reason to believe St. Thomas is significantly better than C-M?
Exactly. Same rationale I've been trying to use for UWSP > NCC > UWP.
If another result actually contradicts this order, adjust the rankings when that happens. Not in anticipation that it will happen.
The rivalry game factor is part of the equation. There's a lot of antipathy between the teams and that can affect play one way or another. If it was just a *normal* game, I would weigh this H2H a lot more, but you all missed the rivalry game part of my comment.
THAT is the nuance.
If this was the last game either team would play, which team would be ranked higher ?? UWSP or NCC
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 03:47:59 PM
The rivalry game factor is part of the equation. There's a lot of antipathy between the teams and that can affect play one way or another. If it was just a *normal* game, I would weigh this H2H a lot more, but you all missed the rivalry game part of my comment.
THAT is the nuance.
I wouldn't buy it, but I'll concede the valid point... +K
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 30, 2014, 03:47:39 PM
Quote from: BashDad on September 30, 2014, 03:41:21 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 02:58:53 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 30, 2014, 02:55:39 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 02:51:36 PM
Some argue or imply that that is what you do. Rank teams ahead of teams they beat, the hell with the other data points.
Who has argued that? Please, quote a specific instance of someone in this thread saying that.
There's a strong implication in some of the comments above through the entire thread where those who take a more nuanced view of a H2H result may be called out. I went extreme with Kenyon / Wittenberg, but the St. Thomas / St. John's game is probably a better example where since it's a rivalry game, and St. John's has a loss as well, where the H2H between the two may NOT be as black and white as some would think. On that given day St. Thomas lost. Who is the better team, though? The loss to C-M by St. John's still lingers. IF C-M beats St. Thomas, then all in the MIAC is aligned.
Nuance is good! I'm all for nuance. More nuance, please.
But it truly is dumb to rank teams according to how you expect other people to rank them or because this is how polls my whole life have reflected similar results or because so-and-so plays so-and-so in week 8 and will surely lose. These are dumb ways to qualify teams in relation to each other. Dumb especially when you're arguing against a result on the field that has little additional data to mitigate the clearest of who-would-win-between-so-and-so answers: the scoreboard.
We'll be looking forward to your poll next week.
No, dude. There's no way I know enough about the 50 or so teams in consideration to order them in any kind of respectable way. And you don't either, along with everyone else. It's an impossible, frivolous task at all levels and everywhere. It's all silly. You're just--on top of all that--doing it poorly.
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 03:47:59 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 30, 2014, 03:22:11 PM
Quote from: jknezek on September 30, 2014, 03:11:24 PM
C-M isn't exactly a bad loss. They are 4-0, 2-0. Will they beat St. Thomas? I don't know, but it's not like St. Johns lost to a hopeless team. Why is this mitigating before the St. Thomas - CM Game? Wouldn't you take both games at face value right now and rank C-M over St. Johns over St. Thomas? If any one of them loses again before the C-M / St. Thomas game you could re-evaluate then, but right now why mess up what seems a series of credible results on the field? Is there a reason to believe St. Thomas is significantly better than C-M?
Exactly. Same rationale I've been trying to use for UWSP > NCC > UWP.
If another result actually contradicts this order, adjust the rankings when that happens. Not in anticipation that it will happen.
The rivalry game factor is part of the equation. There's a lot of antipathy between the teams and that can affect play one way or another. If it was just a *normal* game, I would weigh this H2H a lot more, but you all missed the rivalry game part of my comment.
THAT is the nuance.
The reason why this doesn't matter is that it never won't be a rivalry game. Maybe it changes how you qualify one of the teams against the other non-rivalry-opponents in the poll, but it doesn't make sense to dismiss the information about the two teams who played each other.
I'm not talking specifically about SJU/UST by the way -- there's a loss involved, so knock yourself out with nuance, in that case. Go nuts.
Quote from: jknezek on September 30, 2014, 03:15:51 PM
Quote from: Bombers798891 on September 30, 2014, 03:13:01 PM
Quote from: jknezek on September 30, 2014, 02:44:31 PM
Ridiculous. Kenyon has mitigating data in terms of other losses. UWSP is undefeated. There isn't any mitigating data. You just want to ignore the result.
I don't think anyone's ignoring the result. There's a reason North Central went from 533 points in the polls to 289 while Stevens-Point went from 0 to 188. People clearly think more of Stevens-Point and less of North Central then they did last week. The result's not being ignored, it's just not being weighed as heavily as you'd like it to be by everyone
I know. The question a few of us are asking is why? Why aren't people using the result on the field?
They
are. That's what prompted the shift. They're just not using it
to the degree that you want.
People look at identical situations and interpret them differently.
Quote from: BashDad on September 30, 2014, 04:03:42 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 30, 2014, 03:47:39 PM
Quote from: BashDad on September 30, 2014, 03:41:21 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 02:58:53 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 30, 2014, 02:55:39 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 02:51:36 PM
Some argue or imply that that is what you do. Rank teams ahead of teams they beat, the hell with the other data points.
Who has argued that? Please, quote a specific instance of someone in this thread saying that.
There's a strong implication in some of the comments above through the entire thread where those who take a more nuanced view of a H2H result may be called out. I went extreme with Kenyon / Wittenberg, but the St. Thomas / St. John's game is probably a better example where since it's a rivalry game, and St. John's has a loss as well, where the H2H between the two may NOT be as black and white as some would think. On that given day St. Thomas lost. Who is the better team, though? The loss to C-M by St. John's still lingers. IF C-M beats St. Thomas, then all in the MIAC is aligned.
Nuance is good! I'm all for nuance. More nuance, please.
But it truly is dumb to rank teams according to how you expect other people to rank them or because this is how polls my whole life have reflected similar results or because so-and-so plays so-and-so in week 8 and will surely lose. These are dumb ways to qualify teams in relation to each other. Dumb especially when you're arguing against a result on the field that has little additional data to mitigate the clearest of who-would-win-between-so-and-so answers: the scoreboard.
We'll be looking forward to your poll next week.
No, dude. There's no way I know enough about the 50 or so teams in consideration to order them in any kind of respectable way. And you don't either, along with everyone else. It's an impossible, frivolous task at all levels and everywhere. It's all silly. You're just--on top of all that--doing it poorly.
You're right, it's not easy. It's just a weekly thing us fans do for fun.
There's no clear cut right or wrong.....It's not life or death....So relax a bit, OK? ::)
Quote from: BashDad on September 30, 2014, 04:09:59 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 03:47:59 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 30, 2014, 03:22:11 PM
Quote from: jknezek on September 30, 2014, 03:11:24 PM
C-M isn't exactly a bad loss. They are 4-0, 2-0. Will they beat St. Thomas? I don't know, but it's not like St. Johns lost to a hopeless team. Why is this mitigating before the St. Thomas - CM Game? Wouldn't you take both games at face value right now and rank C-M over St. Johns over St. Thomas? If any one of them loses again before the C-M / St. Thomas game you could re-evaluate then, but right now why mess up what seems a series of credible results on the field? Is there a reason to believe St. Thomas is significantly better than C-M?
Exactly. Same rationale I've been trying to use for UWSP > NCC > UWP.
If another result actually contradicts this order, adjust the rankings when that happens. Not in anticipation that it will happen.
The rivalry game factor is part of the equation. There's a lot of antipathy between the teams and that can affect play one way or another. If it was just a *normal* game, I would weigh this H2H a lot more, but you all missed the rivalry game part of my comment.
THAT is the nuance.
The reason why this doesn't matter is that it never won't be a rivalry game. Maybe it changes how you qualify one of the teams against the other non-rivalry-opponents in the poll, but it doesn't make sense to dismiss the information about the two teams who played each other.
I think it does matter, a bit. Crap happens in rivalry games with teams that are somewhat in the same league, talent wise. Last year the Johnnies beat the Tommies as well, but St. Thomas was still a better team, overall.
Wow, can't believe the board today. I started pretty early and was already four pages behind!
I haven't joined in because I see merit in both sides. I lean toward the H-T-H trumps all else (in the absence of other relevant evidence), but since I had NCC higher than UWSP on my ballot, couldn't really say anything.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 30, 2014, 08:36:31 PM
I lean toward the H-T-H trumps all else (in the absence of other relevant evidence)
Says the guy with 2-1 Illinois Wesleyan ranked and a 3-0 team that beat IWU still awaiting their first vote.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 30, 2014, 09:00:14 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 30, 2014, 08:36:31 PM
I lean toward the H-T-H trumps all else (in the absence of other relevant evidence)
Says the guy with 2-1 Illinois Wesleyan ranked and a 3-0 team that beat IWU still awaiting their first vote.
Yep. This early in the season, I still give some credence to
well-reasoned expectations as well. I said 'I lean' to H-T-H, not I bow down to HTH.
At this point, I still strongly suspect NCC is better than UWSP and IWU is better than Simpson. I can provide NO evidence to back that up, but it is my OPINION.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 30, 2014, 10:36:17 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 30, 2014, 09:00:14 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 30, 2014, 08:36:31 PM
I lean toward the H-T-H trumps all else (in the absence of other relevant evidence)
Says the guy with 2-1 Illinois Wesleyan ranked and a 3-0 team that beat IWU still awaiting their first vote.
Yep. This early in the season, I still give some credence to well-reasoned expectations as well. I said 'I lean' to H-T-H, not I bow down to HTH.
At this point, I still strongly suspect NCC is better than UWSP and IWU is better than Simpson. I can provide NO evidence to back that up, but it is my OPINION.
Tread lightly Mr. Y. :-X. ;)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 30, 2014, 10:36:17 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 30, 2014, 09:00:14 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 30, 2014, 08:36:31 PM
I lean toward the H-T-H trumps all else (in the absence of other relevant evidence)
Says the guy with 2-1 Illinois Wesleyan ranked and a 3-0 team that beat IWU still awaiting their first vote.
At this point, I still strongly suspect NCC is better than UWSP and IWU is better than Simpson. I can provide NO evidence to back that up, but it is my OPINION.
Here's my question, then:
If you "suspect" that is true but cannot "provide evidence" - your own words - why not set your current rankings to reflect the
current evidence, knowing that if your suspicions are correct, eventually IWU's cumulative season of winning will allow them to surpass Simpson?
Keeping them ahead now just seems like a subconscious justification for keeping them ahead down the line. Suppose both teams win out from here on; would you still have IWU ahead of Simpson (using some nonsense rationale like "they played a tougher schedule" as justification for dismissing H2H)? What if IWU has a "nice" CCIW season and goes 8-2 while Simpson finishes 9-1 with a close loss to Wartburg?
*Editing to add a comment:
If any voter still "strongly suspects" that NCC is better than UWSP, then UWSP will eventually lose to UWP, NCC will keep winning, and the UWP>UWSP result combined with NCC>UWP will give you ammo that trumps the h2h result of UWSP>NCC. But, IMO, you shouldn't be ranking those teams
in anticipation of that result happening
in a few weeks. Make that move
when it actually happens.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 01, 2014, 07:03:13 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 30, 2014, 10:36:17 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 30, 2014, 09:00:14 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 30, 2014, 08:36:31 PM
I lean toward the H-T-H trumps all else (in the absence of other relevant evidence)
Says the guy with 2-1 Illinois Wesleyan ranked and a 3-0 team that beat IWU still awaiting their first vote.
At this point, I still strongly suspect NCC is better than UWSP and IWU is better than Simpson. I can provide NO evidence to back that up, but it is my OPINION.
Here's my question, then:
If you "suspect" that is true but cannot "provide evidence" - your own words - why not set your current rankings to reflect the current evidence, knowing that if your suspicions are correct, eventually IWU's cumulative season of winning will allow them to surpass Simpson?
Keeping them ahead now just seems like a subconscious justification for keeping them ahead down the line. Suppose both teams win out from here on; would you still have IWU ahead of Simpson (using some nonsense rationale like "they played a tougher schedule" as justification for dismissing H2H)? What if IWU has a "nice" CCIW season and goes 8-2 while Simpson finishes 9-1 with a close loss to Wartburg?
Holding everything else true with Warburg, they will be in the playoffs, which I thought they were going to do last year.
Double-posting this here from NRFP since there is a parallel discussion...
I think digging into this stuff is informative because we learn how differently everyone's thought process works when ranking teams. Seeing the range of opinions - not just the rankings, but the "why?" that comes out of discussions like this - is informative because playoff selection committees are also made up of people, with opinions and preconceived notions just like the people here, and those things will undeniably influence their decisions come playoff time, selection criteria be damned.
It's a plausible scenario that Simpson and IWU could end up on the board at the same time in Pool C playoff selection. Let's pretend that Simpson goes 9-1 with a loss to Wartburg, and IWU goes 8-2 with losses to North Central and Simpson. Suppose that we're down to the final Pool C slot and those two teams are on the board. It's hard to imagine someone picking the 8-2 team with a h2h loss over a 9-1 team, but if someone here can formulate some mind-boggling explanation for why IWU should still be ranked ahead of Simpson, even if it's as dumb as "IWU beat Wheaton and we think Wheaton is better than Simpson, so we're going to assume IWU is better than Simpson even though Simpson actually played IWU and beat them" - undoubtedly someone on the committee could come to the same conclusion.
Or, suppose that NCC and UWSP/UWP are both on the board. It's 8-2 NCC (with a loss to undefeated Wheaton and 8-2 UWSP) against 8-2 UWSP (with losses to undefeated UWW and 8-2 UWP). Will they ignore the h2h result? Will they acknowledge it, but say NCC beat UWP who beat UWSP, so the common-opponent outweighs the actual game between the two? What if it's 8-2 NCC against 9-1 UWP (with a loss to UWW and a win over UWSP)? Does NCC's h2h win over UWP outweigh the fact that they have two losses, one of which came against a common opponent that UWP beat? That one is a lot more complicated, and there I can see a rational argument on both sides.
My flight was once again cancelled >:( and delayed 24hrs and I will not be arriving until late afternoon back in the U.S. :'(, therefore, I will miss a good amount of the games this week. Hope to get some good analysis from you guys.
2014 WEEK 5 TOP 25 FAN POLL
1) UW-Whitewater (10) 250 1
T2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 234 T2
T2) Mount Union 234 T2
4) Wesley 217 4
5) Linfield 214 5
6) Wartburg 191 8
7) John Carroll 184 7
8) Wabash 175 9
9) Hobart 165 10
10) Johns Hopkins 154 11
11) Bethel 141 14
12) North Central 138 13
T13) St John Fisher 110 6
T13) UW Platteville 110 15
T13) Wittenberg 110 16
16) UW-Stevens Point 84 T18
17) Wheaton 78 17
18) Ithaca 75 20
19) Pacific Lutheran 59 12
20) Widener 56 23
21) St Thomas 50 22
22) Lycoming 45 25
23) Wash & Jeff 34 NR
24) St John's 32 NR
25) Hampden-Sydney 31 24
Dropped Out: Concordia-Moorhead and Thomas More
Also Receiving Votes: Heidelberg (19), Concordia-Moorhead (16), Chapman (11), Texas Lutheran (11), Willamette (4), Centre (3), Delaware Valley (2), Gustavus Adolphus (2), Emory & Henry (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, thewaterboy, and Upstate
1) UW-Whitewater 250 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
T2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 234 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
T2) Mount Union 234 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4) Wesley 217 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5)
5) Linfield 214 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6)
6) Wartburg 191 ( 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 9)
7) John Carroll 184 ( 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 11)
8) Wabash 175 ( 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10, 13)
9) Hobart 165 ( 6, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14)
10) Johns Hopkins 154 ( 7, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 11, 13, 13, 17)
11) Bethel 141 ( 9, 10, 11, 11, 11, 12, 12, 13, 15, 15)
12) North Central 138 ( 9, 10, 11, 12, 12, 12, 13, 14, 14, 15)
T13) St John Fisher 110 (12, 12, 13, 15, 15, 16, 16, 17, 17, 17)
T13) UW Platteville 110 ( 8, 11, 14, 14, 15, 15, 16, 17, 17, 23)
T13) Wittenberg 110 ( 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 15, --, --)
16) UW-Stevens Point 84 (12, 14, 14, 16, 16, 18, 19, 19, 22, --)
17) Wheaton 78 (10, 13, 16, 18, 19, 19, 19, 19, 23, --)
18) Ithaca 75 (13, 13, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 24, 24)
19) Pacific Lutheran 59 (10, 14, 18, 18, 18, 22, 23, --, --, --)
20) Widener 56 (16, 18, 18, 18, 20, 22, 22, 23, 23, 24)
21) St Thomas 50 (10, 17, 20, 20, 22, 22, 23, 24, --, --)
22) Lycoming 45 (17, 19, 20, 20, 20, 21, 23, 25, 25, 25)
23) Wash & Jeff 34 (18, 21, 21, 22, 22, 24, 24, 24, 24, --)
24) St John's 32 (19, 20, 20, 21, 21, 23, --, --, --, --)
25) Hampden-Sydney 31 (15, 19, 20, 21, 25, 25, --, --, --, --)
26) Heidelberg 19 (16, 21, 22)
27) Concordia-Moorhead 16 (17, 23, 24, 25, 25)
T28) Chapman 11 (21, 21, 25)
T28) Texas Lutheran 11 (16, 25)
30) Willamette 4 (22)
31) Centre 3 (23)
T32) Delaware Valley 2 (24)
T32) Gustavus Adolphus 2 (24)
34) Emory & Henry 1 (25)
Wittenberg is a tough team to grasp. Ranked as high as 8th in someone's poll...and not even ranked by two pollsters.
Not trying to bash Pacific Lutheran, but after this past weekend performance against Linfield, wouldn't Chapman be ranked on on at least everyone's ballot. I was really high on the Lutes after their game in Texas, but was very disappointed in the score differential this past weekend. Also, someone has the Tommies at 10 ???
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 07, 2014, 10:12:26 AM
Not trying to bash Pacific Lutheran, but after this past weekend performance against Linfield, wouldn't Chapman be ranked on on at least everyone's ballot. I was really high on the Lutes after their game in Texas, but was very disappointed in the score differential this past weekend. Also, someone has the Tommies at 10 ???
IMO, Chapman losing a close game to Linfield isn't enough to put them in the top 25....along with two wins against average teams (no offense to Whitworth and CMS). I think there's so many more deserving top 25 teams than Chapman.
As for the Tommies in the top 10...I have no answer for that.
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 07, 2014, 10:12:26 AM
Not trying to bash Pacific Lutheran, but after this past weekend performance against Linfield, wouldn't Chapman be ranked on on at least everyone's ballot. I was really high on the Lutes after their game in Texas, but was very disappointed in the score differential this past weekend. Also, someone has the Tommies at 10 ???
LOTS OF NEW # for the cats in So. Cal :) first game jitters ... Redlands should be the champ from So. Cal. :) East coasters don't give PLU enough credit :-* :'( plu SHOULD /WILL GO 8-1.. (PLU not even on three ballots BIG MIStake) ::) ??? :o... they are a very Good team that got beat sat by a better cat team that's all. :-*.
DC1
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 07, 2014, 10:21:26 AM
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 07, 2014, 10:12:26 AM
Not trying to bash Pacific Lutheran, but after this past weekend performance against Linfield, wouldn't Chapman be ranked on on at least everyone's ballot. I was really high on the Lutes after their game in Texas, but was very disappointed in the score differential this past weekend. Also, someone has the Tommies at 10 ???
IMO, Chapman losing a close game to Linfield isn't enough to put them in the top 25....along with two wins against average teams (no offense to Whitworth and CMS). I think there's so many more deserving top 25 teams than Chapman.
As for the Tommies in the top 10...I have no answer for that.
[/b]
I agree with you 02... :-*
Quote from: desertcat1 on October 07, 2014, 01:19:16 PM
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 07, 2014, 10:12:26 AM
Not trying to bash Pacific Lutheran, but after this past weekend performance against Linfield, wouldn't Chapman be ranked on on at least everyone's ballot. I was really high on the Lutes after their game in Texas, but was very disappointed in the score differential this past weekend. Also, someone has the Tommies at 10 ???
LOTS OF NEW # for the cats in So. Cal :) first game jitters ... Redlands should be the champ from So. Cal. :) East coasters don't give PLU enough credit :-* :'( plu SHOULD /WILL GO 8-1.. (PLU not even on three ballots BIG MIStake) ::) ??? :o... they are a very Good team that got beat sat by a better cat team that's all. :-*.
DC1
Thanks for the info DC1, it is always difficult to judge them, since the only game that I can judge them is against Linfield, the games usually are pretty close, but when you guys beat them they way you did this past Saturday, I have to think more than twice. I think if they continue to play well, I think they are deserving, but at the same time. You may be right about the first game jitters, you guys have improved since then.
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 07, 2014, 02:32:50 PM
Quote from: desertcat1 on October 07, 2014, 01:19:16 PM
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 07, 2014, 10:12:26 AM
Not trying to bash Pacific Lutheran, but after this past weekend performance against Linfield, wouldn't Chapman be ranked on on at least everyone's ballot. I was really high on the Lutes after their game in Texas, but was very disappointed in the score differential this past weekend. Also, someone has the Tommies at 10 ???
LOTS OF NEW # for the cats in So. Cal :) first game jitters ... Redlands should be the champ from So. Cal. :) East coasters don't give PLU enough credit :-* :'( plu SHOULD /WILL GO 8-1.. (PLU not even on three ballots BIG MIStake) ::) ??? :o... they are a very Good team that got beat sat by a better cat team that's all. :-*.
DC1
Thanks for the info DC1, it is always difficult to judge them, since the only game that I can judge them is against Linfield, the games usually are pretty close, but when you guys beat them they way you did this past Saturday, I have to think more than twice. I think if they continue to play well, I think they are deserving, but at the same time. You may be right about the first game jitters, you guys have improved since then.
MG, as GHC say"s "PHONE IT IN " :-*
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 07, 2014, 10:21:26 AM
As for the Tommies in the top 10...I have no answer for that.
Without trying to dredge up last week's H2H discussion entirely, this has similar (not quite the same) reasoning behind it.
Someone looks at their loss to St. John's and says "Nah, I think UST is better than that" or "it's a rivalry game" or whatever other justification they use to keep UST ranked ahead of the St. John's team that beat them,
and the Concordia team that beat St. John's,
and the Bethel team that beat Concordia, even thought they all have the same 4-1 record (3-1 in Bethel's case) and UST is at the
bottom of that daisy-chain, not the top.
*Edited to add: after double-checking the individual rankings, they might not have UST ranked above Bethel, since Bethel does have a #9 vote.
Still: UST has one truly impressive win against UW-LaCrosse, a blowout of an undermanned St. Olaf team, a close shave against 0-4 UWEC, and the loss to St. John's.
That's a #10 resume? On November 2, if UST is 7-1 and has beaten Bethel and Concordia, then I'd somewhat understand UST being ranked pretty high. But for now, it's a very clear case of letting preseason expectations override actual on-field results.
The rivalry aspect to the Johnnies game shouldn't be just brushed off....
I have three MIAC teams ranked, none higher than #15. Can't tell much from wins over St. Olaf or Hamline. The MIAC could just eat itself all up, and have four teams that could be amongst the Top 25 and no way to really un-tie them.
Quote from: smedindy on October 07, 2014, 06:27:33 PM
The MIAC could just eat itself all up, and have four teams that could be amongst the Top 25 and no way to really un-tie them.
It could well go that way. In fact, I kind of expect that it will go that way, although Bethel is in the driver's seat for now and could straighten this all out for us.
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 02:58:53 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 30, 2014, 02:55:39 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2014, 02:51:36 PM
Some argue or imply that that is what you do. Rank teams ahead of teams they beat, the hell with the other data points.
Who has argued that? Please, quote a specific instance of someone in this thread saying that.
There's a strong implication in some of the comments above through the entire thread where those who take a more nuanced view of a H2H result may be called out. I went extreme with Kenyon / Wittenberg, but the St. Thomas / St. John's game is probably a better example where since it's a rivalry game, and St. John's has a loss as well, where the H2H between the two may NOT be as black and white as some would think. On that given day St. Thomas lost. Who is the better team, though? The loss to C-M by St. John's still lingers. IF C-M beats St. Thomas, then all in the MIAC is aligned.
From MIAC land, most consider the SJU win very legit. They ran all over UST. 200+ yds for Sura alone. Last year the result was a serious rivalry factor. This year, it definitely appeared SJU was better. There was nothing fluky going on.
As for SJU's loss to C-M, well, keep in mind, SJU was
starting their
3rd string QB and hence had no passing attack.
That being said, I think it's crazy you guys have UST as the highest ranked team of the 3 (with one person ranking them at #10 ???), with C-M being the only one of the three unranked. That's evidence of a broken poll, IMO. C-M lost on the road to a team that was ranked higher. And it was a very competitive game. The poll seems to be overly punitive to C-M for losing a game the pollsters thought they
should have lost. Is it just the Johnnie/Tommie name recognition that has them above C-M at this point? What on the field results leads to this slotting of teams?
My 2¢
Quote from: smedindy on October 07, 2014, 06:27:33 PM
The rivalry aspect to the Johnnies game shouldn't be just brushed off....
Yeah, and the Johnnies would also consider C-M and Bethel rivalries as well. As big as Johnnie/Tommie, not a chance. But there's serious intensity between all three of these teams. So how does that affect things?
I think you make too much out of the rivalry aspect. If it's an unexpected result that the other data points suggest is unusual, play the rivalry card. But when these teams finished the previous season at 7-3 and 8-2, and most expected a close fought game that could go either way, I don't think you can discount UST loss too heavily.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 07, 2014, 05:54:47 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 07, 2014, 10:21:26 AM
As for the Tommies in the top 10...I have no answer for that.
Still: UST has one truly impressive win against UW-LaCrosse, a blowout of an undermanned St. Olaf team, a close shave against 0-4 UWEC, and the loss to St. John's.
...and what exactly makes beating UWL impressive? I've watched all or a majority of all four UWL games and they are a very below average team in every facet of the game. I challenge you to name one thing about the this team that impresses you? In fact, I wouldn't pick them as the favorite in any of their remain WIAC games. So, it's a distinct possibility that they could finish off this season with a 9 game losing streak. That's hardly impressive. ::)
Quote from: BoBo on October 09, 2014, 07:53:13 AM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 07, 2014, 05:54:47 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 07, 2014, 10:21:26 AM
As for the Tommies in the top 10...I have no answer for that.
Still: UST has one truly impressive win against UW-LaCrosse, a blowout of an undermanned St. Olaf team, a close shave against 0-4 UWEC, and the loss to St. John's.
...and what exactly makes beating UWL impressive? I've watched all or a majority of all four UWL games and they are a very below average team in every facet of the game. I challenge you to name one thing about the this team that impresses you? In fact, I wouldn't pick them as the favorite in any of their remain WIAC games. So, it's a distinct possibility that they could finish off this season with a 9 game losing streak. That's hardly impressive. ::)
I guess it would be the fact that they won 46-0 compared to Mary Hardin-Baylor beating UWL 41-22 and UWW winning 38-7.
I think there's a lot of good teams in the MIAC but like the PAC 12 they may end up cannibalizing themselves and end up with a 2 loss champion.
Quote from: BoBo on October 09, 2014, 07:53:13 AM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 07, 2014, 05:54:47 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 07, 2014, 10:21:26 AM
As for the Tommies in the top 10...I have no answer for that.
Still: UST has one truly impressive win against UW-LaCrosse, a blowout of an undermanned St. Olaf team, a close shave against 0-4 UWEC, and the loss to St. John's.
...and what exactly makes beating UWL impressive? I've watched all or a majority of all four UWL games and they are a very below average team in every facet of the game. I challenge you to name one thing about the this team that impresses you? In fact, I wouldn't pick them as the favorite in any of their remain WIAC games. So, it's a distinct possibility that they could finish off this season with a 9 game losing streak. That's hardly impressive. ::)
If you read my post, you'd see that I am arguing UST should be ranked a lot
lower than they are. I'm not using the UWL game as a reason they should be ranked high, merely noting that's the best result on their schedule. While UWL may not be very good, UST rolled them 46-0 and outgained them 519-133, it's not like they struggled.
UMHB beat them 41-22 and outgained them 514-337 (although much of UWL's yardage came with the game already decided).
UWW beat them 38-7 and outgained them 619-155.
I don't like reading into stats from garbage time that much, but still, at least UST blew the doors off UWL just as easily as UMHB and UWW did. This is
not equivalent to saying that UST is just as good as UMHB and UWW based on that one game, either.
Also, I think evaluating UWL as below-average in every facet of the game is kind of hard to do when they've played a three-game stretch against that murderer's row. Every team outside the top 20-25 teams in Division III would look significantly below-average against those three. I'm not a WIAC fan, so I don't know enough to predict whether they'll go winless the rest of the way...but they did beat Dubuque on the road more easily than UWP beat Dubuque at home, so I'm not sure how UWL is
that hopeless.
And, as I said, even if they are a 2-8 team in the WIAC, rolling a team 46-0 and outgained them 4-to-1 is pretty thorough dominance. Doing that against any opponent from a tough conference is an OK win.
Quote from: hazzben on October 09, 2014, 01:27:04 AM
That being said, I think it's crazy you guys have UST as the highest ranked team of the 3 (with one person ranking them at #10 ???), with C-M being the only one of the three unranked. That's evidence of a broken poll, IMO. C-M lost on the road to a team that was ranked higher. And it was a very competitive game. The poll seems to be overly punitive to C-M for losing a game the pollsters thought they should have lost. Is it just the Johnnie/Tommie name recognition that has them above C-M at this point? What on the field results leads to this slotting of teams?
To be fair, UST isn't actually ranked the "highest" - Bethel is - and UST's ranking seems to be driven by that one #10 vote (the other ballots appear to have UST about the same as St. John's and C-M if that vote is removed). So it's not like everyone kept UST ranked high.
With that said, the bolded comment is the argument I've been making all along. Letting "what you think from last week's poll" or "what you thought in the preseason" dictate where you rank teams is silly when it contradicts actual games that happened. As I pointed out above, UST is at the bottom of the daisy-chain of MIAC results:
Bethel > C-M > St. John's > St. Thomas (without any "mitigating data" - if St. Thomas beats Bethel, fine, this no longer holds up!)
Most people seem to be adhering to this, actually. And the current D3fb Top 25 does, too: Bethel 11, C-M 23, SJU 24, UST 25.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 09, 2014, 08:20:55 AM
Quote from: hazzben on October 09, 2014, 01:27:04 AM
That being said, I think it's crazy you guys have UST as the highest ranked team of the 3 (with one person ranking them at #10 ???), with C-M being the only one of the three unranked. That's evidence of a broken poll, IMO. C-M lost on the road to a team that was ranked higher. And it was a very competitive game. The poll seems to be overly punitive to C-M for losing a game the pollsters thought they should have lost. Is it just the Johnnie/Tommie name recognition that has them above C-M at this point? What on the field results leads to this slotting of teams?
To be fair, UST isn't actually ranked the "highest" - Bethel is - and UST's ranking seems to be driven by that one #10 vote (the other ballots appear to have UST about the same as St. John's and C-M if that vote is removed). So it's not like everyone kept UST ranked high.
With that said, the bolded comment is the argument I've been making all along. Letting "what you think from last week's poll" or "what you thought in the preseason" dictate where you rank teams is silly when it contradicts actual games that happened. As I pointed out above, UST is at the bottom of the daisy-chain of MIAC results:
Bethel > C-M > St. John's > St. Thomas (without any "mitigating data" - if St. Thomas beats Bethel, fine, this no longer holds up!)
Most people seem to be adhering to this, actually. And the current D3fb Top 25 does, too: Bethel 11, C-M 23, SJU 24, UST 25.
Agreed.
And you're right, the UST at #10 is the outlier that is throwing things a bit. But it still doesn't explain the C-M slotting (of most pollsters) compared to SJU, who C-M beat handily H2H. (albeit with SJU's 3rd string QB, but injuries are a reality of football)
I'd like to argue that this will all get sorted out with more data points over the next few weeks. But actually, in the MIAC this could great really crazy. 5 teams (Bethel, C-M, SJU, UST, GAC - which is actually how I'd rank them right now) still have a very legit chance to win this league. I hope the Pool C candidate only has 1 loss, because I'd love to see how the conference stacks up in the post-season.
Quote from: hazzben on October 09, 2014, 11:30:11 AM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 09, 2014, 08:20:55 AM
Quote from: hazzben on October 09, 2014, 01:27:04 AM
That being said, I think it's crazy you guys have UST as the highest ranked team of the 3 (with one person ranking them at #10 ???), with C-M being the only one of the three unranked. That's evidence of a broken poll, IMO. C-M lost on the road to a team that was ranked higher. And it was a very competitive game. The poll seems to be overly punitive to C-M for losing a game the pollsters thought they should have lost. Is it just the Johnnie/Tommie name recognition that has them above C-M at this point? What on the field results leads to this slotting of teams?
To be fair, UST isn't actually ranked the "highest" - Bethel is - and UST's ranking seems to be driven by that one #10 vote (the other ballots appear to have UST about the same as St. John's and C-M if that vote is removed). So it's not like everyone kept UST ranked high.
With that said, the bolded comment is the argument I've been making all along. Letting "what you think from last week's poll" or "what you thought in the preseason" dictate where you rank teams is silly when it contradicts actual games that happened. As I pointed out above, UST is at the bottom of the daisy-chain of MIAC results:
Bethel > C-M > St. John's > St. Thomas (without any "mitigating data" - if St. Thomas beats Bethel, fine, this no longer holds up!)
Most people seem to be adhering to this, actually. And the current D3fb Top 25 does, too: Bethel 11, C-M 23, SJU 24, UST 25.
Agreed.
And you're right, the UST at #10 is the outlier that is throwing things a bit. But it still doesn't explain the C-M slotting (of most pollsters) compared to SJU, who C-M beat handily H2H. (albeit with SJU's 3rd string QB, but injuries are a reality of football)
I'd like to argue that this will all get sorted out with more data points over the next few weeks. But actually, in the MIAC this could great really crazy. 5 teams (Bethel, C-M, SJU, UST, GAC - which is actually how I'd rank them right now) still have a very legit chance to win this league. I hope the Pool C candidate only has 1 loss, because I'd love to see how the conference stacks up in the post-season.
Presumably the best chance at this happening is either
a) two of the teams that have already played (i.e. Bethel and Concordia) run the table cleanly so one (Bethel) takes Pool A and another is 9-1.
b) Gustavus Adolphus manages to finish 9-1 but however the tiebreakers break down, does not get the Pool A.
It's gonna get messy.
I'm still surprised St. John's isn't getting votes by some, I had them ranked since day one. Following the C-M game I started second guessing my thoughts about the Johnnies and dropped them out of my top 25. The following week I put them right back in after the impressive win over St. Thomas (ranking them just behind C-M).
I think this is one of the more interesting threads on these boards. It's interesting hearing everyone's thoughts on how teams should be ranked.
Tell the MIAC to be normal and stop beating up on each other!
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 09, 2014, 08:09:58 AM
Quote from: BoBo on October 09, 2014, 07:53:13 AM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 07, 2014, 05:54:47 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 07, 2014, 10:21:26 AM
As for the Tommies in the top 10...I have no answer for that.
Still: UST has one truly impressive win against UW-LaCrosse, a blowout of an undermanned St. Olaf team, a close shave against 0-4 UWEC, and the loss to St. John's.
...and what exactly makes beating UWL impressive? I've watched all or a majority of all four UWL games and they are a very below average team in every facet of the game. I challenge you to name one thing about the this team that impresses you? In fact, I wouldn't pick them as the favorite in any of their remain WIAC games. So, it's a distinct possibility that they could finish off this season with a 9 game losing streak. That's hardly impressive. ::)
If you read my post, you'd see that I am arguing UST should be ranked a lot lower than they are. I'm not using the UWL game as a reason they should be ranked high, merely noting that's the best result on their schedule. While UWL may not be very good, UST rolled them 46-0 and outgained them 519-133, it's not like they struggled.
UMHB beat them 41-22 and outgained them 514-337 (although much of UWL's yardage came with the game already decided).
UWW beat them 38-7 and outgained them 619-155.
I don't like reading into stats from garbage time that much, but still, at least UST blew the doors off UWL just as easily as UMHB and UWW did. This is not equivalent to saying that UST is just as good as UMHB and UWW based on that one game, either.
Also, I think evaluating UWL as below-average in every facet of the game is kind of hard to do when they've played a three-game stretch against that murderer's row. Every team outside the top 20-25 teams in Division III would look significantly below-average against those three. I'm not a WIAC fan, so I don't know enough to predict whether they'll go winless the rest of the way...but they did beat Dubuque on the road more easily than UWP beat Dubuque at home, so I'm not sure how UWL is that hopeless.
And, as I said, even if they are a 2-8 team in the WIAC, rolling a team 46-0 and outgained them 4-to-1 is pretty thorough dominance. Doing that against any opponent from a tough conference is an OK win.
I read your post and understood everything, but that sentence stopped me in my tracks. I just think you should know, because you won't get this from a casual glance at the team stats or score. UWL starting QB (Trent Cummings) has played 2 games this season, vs Dubuque, a 24-8 win in the season opener and last weeks 38-7 loss to UWW. He started 6 games last year in addition to the 2 this year. He got injured at DU and missed the UST game; his backup (Colton Peterson) started and played the entire game - it was his first collegiate start and first time in a game. During the week after that game, he was kicked off the team (his stat line of 6-13- 66 yards was not the reason, it was breaking team rules). So for UMHB, the Eagles turned to their third different QB (John Tackett) a freshman in his first collegiate start. He did OK, considering. But, anyways, three different games, 3 different QB's, two of them making their first collegiate start in some difficult circumstances, but basically the same result.
So, I can see that a observer seeing that this team has played 3 top 25 teams in the early season polls, would expect them to have little success. But, rather just looking at stats, I've watched La Crosse in every game this year. My evaluation is based on what I've seen this year with my own eyes playing against 1 really good team (UWW), one good team (UMHB) and one (UST) that I feel would finish 3rd or 4th in this years WIAC, as of right now & DU. I've watched and admired the Eagles program going back to the early 70's when they were the Indians (to me, they still are the Indians), through many conference and National Championships, and future NFL players on their roster. They are just the shell of what they used to be & not even that competitive like they were just a 1/2 dozen years ago. La Crosse was the gold standard, but not now. I don't speak for all WIAC fans, but for this one it's quite sad, really. The WIAC is much better with a strong UW-La Crosse football team.
However, when I think about it, I may have been premature saying they were below average in every facet of the game - they were very good in kick returning, while WW was uncharacteristically slack in their coverage unit. But, it's not a good thing getting as many opportunities as they did.
I dropped out Ithaca and Lycoming, with DePauw and Buff St replacing them. Otherwise, only minor tinkering.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 12, 2014, 08:52:40 PM
I dropped out Ithaca and Lycoming, with DePauw and Buff St replacing them. Otherwise, only minor tinkering.
Same here, with Delaware Valley and Texas Lutheran replacing them.
I dropped Ithaca and added both Buff St and Texas Lutheran.
I'm always a little skeptical about TLU for whatever reason. I dropped Ithaca and Lyco, added Del Val and Hampden-Sydney going off of the D3 Top 25 voters.
Buff State is close to getting there for me. They still need one more solid win IMO. Ithaca is convincing, but Cortland (1-4) seemed to have played them pretty tight in the opener, a close win over a Salisbury team that we dont know the quality of yet and a loss to 3-2 Alfred.
I have been messing around with the 6-8 positions on my ballot. This week I went Wartburg, Hobart and John Carroll. After the first five, every spot is up for grabs. Last week I had Hobart, Wartburg and JCU. JCU at 8 because of eeking by Ohio Northern.
I'd like y'alls take on a sincere question. Is TLU just eternally doomed in these national rankings due to their geographical location, unless they change their modus operandi or beat UMHB at some point? Obviously, that game holds merit based on UMHB's national credibility, but otherwise what else can they do that they have not already? They are 15-1 over the last two years, so it's not like this years 6-0 start is a flash in the pan. They have beaten every other "heavyweight" their geographical footprint will allow in those last two years (Trinity, HSU, LC, ETBU, MC, all on the road). Additionally, they've got the DIII national leader in rushing yards, 12th best team offense by ypg, and 16th best team rushing offense. Granted, statistically the defense struggles, but when you throw up 40 - 50 points a game with a hurry up quick strike offense, that's somewhat to be expected, solely on the volume of defensive plays you will see.
So without either slowing their offense down to make their defense look better, or playing UMHB closely/winning(something very few of the elites even do) are they just kind of SOL based on circumstance? Otherwise, what else can they do?
Quote from: timtlu on October 13, 2014, 10:54:06 PM
I'd like y'alls take on a sincere question. Is TLU just eternally doomed in these national rankings due to their geographical location, unless they change their modus operandi or beat UMHB at some point? Obviously, that game holds merit based on UMHB's national credibility, but otherwise what else can they do that they have not already? They are 15-1 over the last two years, so it's not like this years 6-0 start is a flash in the pan. They have beaten every other "heavyweight" their geographical footprint will allow in those last two years (Trinity, HSU, LC, ETBU, MC, all on the road). Additionally, they've got the DIII national leader in rushing yards, 12th best team offense by ypg, and 16th best team rushing offense. Granted, statistically the defense struggles, but when you throw up 40 - 50 points a game with a hurry up quick strike offense, that's somewhat to be expected, solely on the volume of defensive plays you will see.
So without either slowing their offense down to make their defense look better, or playing UMHB closely/winning(something very few of the elites even do) are they just kind of SOL based on circumstance? Otherwise, what else can they do?
For me its TLU's SOS that gets me. Coming in at 226 last year nationally. With only 3 conference games, that is kind of low IMO. You really need to go undefeated with that schedule. Giving up 73 points to a 4-6 Hardin Simmons team just doesnt cut it.
In terms of this year, I think TLU is a good team, but I am apprehensive about their narrow win against an LC team who proceeded to get dismantled by Wesley that could've easily been a loss had it not been for the coach. I think if they beat UMHB or at least play them close would go a long way in helping them with national recognition (at least IMO). Their schedule just isn't very impressive. Those individual stats, as good and as impressive as they may be, don't hold much bearing when the SOS is low.
Quote from: thewaterboy on October 13, 2014, 11:16:33 PM
For me its TLU's SOS that gets me. Coming in at 226 last year nationally. With only 3 conference games, that is kind of low IMO. You really need to go undefeated with that schedule. Giving up 73 points to a 4-6 Hardin Simmons team just doesnt cut it.
In terms of this year, I think TLU is a good team, but I am apprehensive about their narrow win against an LC team who proceeded to get dismantled by Wesley that could've easily been a loss had it not been for the coach. I think if they beat UMHB or at least play them close would go a long way in helping them with national recognition (at least IMO). Their schedule just isn't very impressive. Those individual stats, as good and as impressive as they may be, don't hold much bearing when the SOS is low.
I understand your stance, but you kind of make my point. Aside their game with UMHB, it sounds like you are saying there really is nothing else they can do to help them without leaving their geographical footprint, as there is no other way to further strengthen their SOS within it.
Quote from: timtlu on October 13, 2014, 10:54:06 PM
I'd like y'alls take on a sincere question. Is TLU just eternally doomed in these national rankings due to their geographical location, unless they change their modus operandi or beat UMHB at some point? Obviously, that game holds merit based on UMHB's national credibility, but otherwise what else can they do that they have not already? They are 15-1 over the last two years, so it's not like this years 6-0 start is a flash in the pan. They have beaten every other "heavyweight" their geographical footprint will allow in those last two years (Trinity, HSU, LC, ETBU, MC, all on the road). Additionally, they've got the DIII national leader in rushing yards, 12th best team offense by ypg, and 16th best team rushing offense. Granted, statistically the defense struggles, but when you throw up 40 - 50 points a game with a hurry up quick strike offense, that's somewhat to be expected, solely on the volume of defensive plays you will see.
So without either slowing their offense down to make their defense look better, or playing UMHB closely/winning(something very few of the elites even do) are they just kind of SOL based on circumstance? Otherwise, what else can they do?
if tlu has a respectable showing against UMHB, they'll likely get more love than they are now. If you listen to the around the nation podcast from this week, you'll find they are getting some love, just not love from everyone. Not playing UMHB last season while playing everyone else in the ASC and then getting manhandled by a bad HSU team didn't help. I watched the TLU ETBU game and the LC game both could have gone either way. Ask yourself what voters have to ask, "would i put either of those teams in the top 25?" TLU seems to be just a bit better. In 2 weeks, TLU gets its shot, at home, against UMHB with 2 weeks to prepare. Coach Padron knows the Cru well and will have them ready. If TLU is impressive, they will get love, i'd bet money on that. If they get monkey stomped, we'll have to see how impressive the play was.
Quote from: timtlu on October 13, 2014, 11:25:35 PM
Quote from: thewaterboy on October 13, 2014, 11:16:33 PM
For me its TLU's SOS that gets me. Coming in at 226 last year nationally. With only 3 conference games, that is kind of low IMO. You really need to go undefeated with that schedule. Giving up 73 points to a 4-6 Hardin Simmons team just doesnt cut it.
In terms of this year, I think TLU is a good team, but I am apprehensive about their narrow win against an LC team who proceeded to get dismantled by Wesley that could've easily been a loss had it not been for the coach. I think if they beat UMHB or at least play them close would go a long way in helping them with national recognition (at least IMO). Their schedule just isn't very impressive. Those individual stats, as good and as impressive as they may be, don't hold much bearing when the SOS is low.
I understand your stance, but you kind of make my point. Aside their game with UMHB, it sounds like you are saying there really is nothing else they can do to help them without leaving their geographical footprint, as there is no other way to further strengthen their SOS within it.
Or win playoff games, the way UMHB initially got that respect. And they have since expanded their footprint to go play UW-Whitewater and Wesley in regular season games, to keep their edge.
Quote from: Toby Taff on October 13, 2014, 11:27:26 PM
Not playing UMHB last season while playing everyone else in the ASC and then getting manhandled by a bad HSU team didn't help.
I would agree with that, and based on who is on their schedule, I'm just waiting until the UMHB game at this point.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 13, 2014, 11:31:10 PM
Or win playoff games, the way UMHB initially got that respect. And they have since expanded their footprint to go play UW-Whitewater and Wesley in regular season games, to keep their edge.
Again, I agree this would do it. But if this is the only other option, you are back to square one. Without playing UMHB tight (something anyone ranked outside the big 4/5 almost never do), you can't get into the playoffs. And if you can't get into the playoffs, you are back at your only chance getting in being in essence a top 5 team nationally by competing with UMHB. Catch 22.
I'm not being an apologist, I swear, just an honest critical thinker.
To play UMHB last year, who would UMHB have dropped from non-conference schedule? Wesley, Kean, Rowan, or Trinity? Again, back to the question of being landlocked. There are only so many teams to go around in the region.
And as a point of clarification regarding the end of the LC game, the coach didn't just make a bonehead move. The LC qb was in the process of rushing everyone to the line to clock the ball, as they had no timeouts and only 6 seconds on a ticking clock. However, they had already been forced into using all their timeouts, previously. So in essence, the poor kid clocks the ball on 4th down and ends the game, or the coach hopes he doesn't get a flag but has to get close enough to communicate to his qb he has to change course. An awkward ending, undoubtedly, but more a product of TLU putting themselves in a position to with three consecutive stops inside the ten, and forcing prior timeouts, than of the coach making a mistake. He just looks the goat without the proper context.
I agree that Louisiana College had less than a 50% chance of winning that game if Dunn stayed on the sidelines. They still have to get the play off and convert.
I am sure that last year, UMHB would simply have never picked someone up when TLU left the ASC. :) Not much of a devil's advocate there as all UMHB would have to do is show up to play in Week 5 as it was originally scheduled by the ASC office.
Any team wanting to 'prove' itself from a less-than-stellar conference has to knock off a known quantity and win in the playoffs, and then sustain it. There's just a lot of good teams clustered in some conferences. I mean, the MIAC (for example) has five teams that probably should be getting votes on many ballots. Five out of 25 spots! The one that's not really garnering much support now is Gustavus, who is like TLU in that they're not traditionally good and voters will be in 'show me' mode until they play the big boys in the MIAC.
Point taken, Pat.
And I agree, you have to beat someone to be considered, but that brings me all the way back to my original question. If the only "known quantity" within 600 miles truly is UMHB (because they have beaten everyone else), is there really a chance at making a statement without being one of the "super elite" teams in all of division III? I think we would all agree that competing with UMHB and some of these other schools competing with anyone ranked 6 - 25 are two entirely different undertakings.
It's tough but TLU may have to go travel. Many in the SCIAC or NWC schedule outside of the West Coast. I may look there. Playing teams like Redland or Pacific Lutheran can help. You could also test yourself against Wesley, perhaps. They're ALWAYS up for a game, though again it's a long way and they're in the UMHB class. Maybe a Wisconsin school (not Whitewater - Oshkosh, or Platteville, or Stevens Point) could be a good test.
Some other teams are getting frisky in scheduling as well.
Quote from: timtlu on October 13, 2014, 11:38:31 PM
Again, I agree this would do it. But if this is the only other option, you are back to square one. Without playing UMHB tight (something anyone ranked outside the big 4/5 almost never do), you can't get into the playoffs. And if you can't get into the playoffs, you are back at your only chance getting in being in essence a top 5 team nationally by competing with UMHB. Catch 22.
This isn't quite correct. Last year, when TLU didn't have to take the UMHB bullet, they were so in right up until they let Simmons hang a 70 burger on them. Don't lose that game, and TLU gets a chance to play in the playoffs. Probably against UMHB, but in the tournament in any case. TLU's path to the tournament is the same as everybody else's- don't lose.
2014 WEEK 6 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev
1) UW-Whitewater (10) 250 1
T2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 234 T2
T2) Mount Union 234 T2
4) Wesley 217 4
5) Linfield 214 5
6) Wartburg 193 6
7) John Carroll 180 7
8) Wabash 179 8
9) Hobart 164 9
10) Johns Hopkins 157 10
11) Bethel 143 11
12) North Central 133 12
13) St John Fisher 115 T13
14) UW Platteville 110 T13
T15) UW-Stevens Point 98 16
T15) Wittenberg 98 T13
17) Pacific Lutheran 78 19
18) Wheaton 77 17
19) Widener 66 20
20) St Thomas 51 21
21) Washington & Jefferson 48 23
22) St John's 41 24
23) Concordia-Moorhead 39 NR
T24) Delaware Valley 36 NR
T24) Hampden-Sydney 36 25
Dropped Out: Ithaca and Lycoming
Also Receiving Votes: Heidelberg (15), Texas Lutheran (13), Chapman (12), Buffalo St (4), Centre (4), Ithaca (4), Emory & Henry (3), DePauw (2), Gustavus Adolphus (2)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, thewaterboy, and Upstate
I guess we are going to have the head scratcher debate again how teams that beat this team is ranked higher than that team... ;)
1) UW-Whitewater 250 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
T2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 234 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
T3) Mount Union 234 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4) Wesley 217 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5)
5) Linfield 214 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6)
6) Wartburg 193 ( 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 9)
7) John Carroll 180 ( 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 10, 14)
8) Wabash 179 ( 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 12)
9) Hobart 164 ( 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 11, 12, 14)
10) Johns Hopkins 157 ( 7, 7, 8, 10, 10, 10, 10, 11, 13, 17)
11) Bethel 143 ( 8, 10, 10, 11, 11, 12, 12, 13, 15, 15)
12) North Central 133 ( 9, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 14, 14, 15, 16)
13) St John Fisher 115 (12, 12, 13, 13, 14, 16, 16, 16, 16, 17)
14) UW Platteville 110 (11, 12, 14, 15, 15, 15, 15, 16, 16, 21)
T15) UW-Stevens Point 98 (12, 13, 14, 15, 15, 17, 18, 18, 19, 21)
T15) Wittenberg 98 (10, 11, 11, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, --, --)
17) Pacific Lutheran 78 (10, 11, 13, 14, 17, 18, 21, --, --, --)
18) Wheaton 77 (10, 13, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 23)
19) Widener 66 (11, 17, 18, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 23, 24)
20) St Thomas 51 (12, 18, 19, 19, 21, 22, 22, 24, --, --)
21) Wash & Jeff 48 (17, 18, 18, 20, 21, 22, 22, 23, 23, --)
22) St John's 41 (18, 19, 19, 20, 21, 22, 22, --, --, --)
23) Concordia-Moorhead 39 (17, 18, 20, 20, 22, 23, 24, 25, --, --)
T24) Delaware Valley 36 (13, 20, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25, --, --, --)
T24) Hampden-Sydney 36 (15, 19, 19, 20, 23, 24, --, --, --, --)
26) Heidelberg 15 (16, 21)
27) Texas Lutheran 13 (17, 24, 25, 25)
28) Chapman 12 (20, 22, 24)
T29) Buffalo St 4 (25, 25, 25, 25)
T29) Centre 4 (22)
T29) Ithaca 4 (24, 25, 25)
32) Emory & Henry 3 (23)
T33) DePauw 2 (24)
T33) Gustavus Adolphus 2 (24)
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 14, 2014, 03:12:28 PM
I guess we are going to have the head scratcher debate again how teams that beat this team is ranked higher than that team... ;)
I guess there's some that still think very highly of St. Thomas.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 14, 2014, 03:17:48 PM
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 14, 2014, 03:12:28 PM
I guess we are going to have the head scratcher debate again how teams that beat this team is ranked higher than that team... ;)
I guess there's some that still think very highly of St. Thomas.
Like to know who is so proud of them(ST TOM) and why ? ???At 12 ::) would be nice ? :(
Still no respect by three for WEST COAST PLU? ??? ::) :o
Quote from: desertcat1 on October 14, 2014, 05:32:20 PM
Like to know who is so proud of them(ST TOM) and why ? ???At 12 ::) would be nice ? :(
Still no respect by three for WEST COAST PLU? ??? ::) :o
On one hand, I vaguely-sort-of-get-this. Beyond Mount, UWW, UMHB, and Wesley, I think UST's run of excellence from 2009-2012 (11-2, 12-1, 13-1, 14-1) probably earned them a little bit of benefit of the doubt entering this season. Sort of the way everyone knew that UWW should probably be ranked in 2013 even after "only" going 7-3 in 2012. I'd have been fine with ranking UST in the top ten entering the season, even if they didn't make the playoffs last year, because that four-year run is something that only the D3 giants can match.
But that residual goodwill
should have gone out the window with the second straight loss to the Johnnies. Not that they have to be discarded from the rankings entirely, but ranking them ahead of St. John's when SJU has an equivalent resume
this year and has now beaten the Tommies two years in a row is pretty inexplicable. That's just completely deciding which results to count and which ones not to based on what you think about a team in the preseason.
EXTP -
Don't assume the thought process of voters. The MIAC is such a knot and so even that the best team may NOT win on a given Saturday! Give people some credit and relax the rigidity!
NOTE: I'm not voting St Thomas that high...
Quote from: desertcat1 on October 14, 2014, 05:32:20 PM
Like to know who is so proud of them(ST TOM) and why ? ???At 12 ::) would be nice ? :(
Still no respect by three for WEST COAST PLU? ??? ::) :o
I'm not voting here, but I don't think I'd have PLU above #20 right now. If they look better and run the table on rest of the NWC (beside Linfield obviously), maybe back up around #15 in Nov.
Quote from: smedindy on October 14, 2014, 05:52:29 PM
NOTE: I'm not voting St Thomas that high...
It's just one voter. Around 19-22 is about right.
Quote from: desertcat1 on October 14, 2014, 05:32:20 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 14, 2014, 03:17:48 PM
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 14, 2014, 03:12:28 PM
I guess we are going to have the head scratcher debate again how teams that beat this team is ranked higher than that team... ;)
I guess there's some that still think very highly of St. Thomas.
Like to know who is so proud of them(ST TOM) and why ? ???At 12 ::) would be nice ? :(
Still no respect by three for WEST COAST PLU? ??? ::) :o
I'm one of the three who don't have PLU in... but to me they're not even the 2nd best team on the west coast. I think Chapman should be higher ranked than PLU. I'm surprised that so many have Pac Lutheran ranked but don't have Chapman on their ballot. Chapman's wins are against teams that are 6-8 while PLU's are against 2-13 teams. Then there's the Linfield game... both lost at home to Linfield but Chapman lost by just 7 while PLU lost by 27.
And on the St Thomas issue... I also don't have them on my ballot either.
Quote from: smedindy on October 14, 2014, 05:52:29 PM
EXTP -
Don't assume the thought process of voters. The MIAC is such a knot and so even that the best team may NOT win on a given Saturday! Give people some credit and relax the rigidity!
NOTE: I'm not voting St Thomas that high...
Oh, I know, you have that rule that "rivalry games" count differently from others in the standings. Or something.
Look, smed, I get that rivalry games have amped-up intensity and that funny things happen. I had played in conference games in back-to-back seasons where an eventual conference champion en route to an undefeated season barely survived an overtime game against a conference rival that finished the season with four losses (I was on the right side of that in 2006, against WashU and the wrong side of it in 2007, against Case Western). Really. I understand.
It's
still ridiculous to look at St. Thomas, who has the same record as St. John's, has lost to St. John's two years in a row,
and has a handy common opponent this year (St. John's 31, UWEC 7 vs. St. Thomas 22, UWEC 17 in consecutive weeks; St. Thomas' game was at home, St. John's was on the road), and decide "Nah, it was a rivaly game, I still think St. Thomas is better."
No, I'm not talking about ME. I didn't have St. Thomas that high. You're trying to read other's minds and assigning your rigidity to THEIR thinking. You can't have hard and fast rules here, especially when teams are so close in a conference that could have five teams fighting for the title. You're also insinuating they're not thinking critically, when they definitely could be. You don't know what the mindset of the voter who put them 12th and you're arbitrarily deciding what it is.
I'm not saying you shouldn't disagree but you're saying they're NOT taking the results into account when they definitely could be. That's my beef.
Just because I'm taking a position here doesn't mean I'm the one who voted them 12th...I definitely think that's too high.
My ballot this week is chalk with the teams that wound up ranked (not the exact placements). I think it's the first time that happened.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 14, 2014, 06:01:04 PM
Quote from: desertcat1 on October 14, 2014, 05:32:20 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 14, 2014, 03:17:48 PM
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 14, 2014, 03:12:28 PM
I guess we are going to have the head scratcher debate again how teams that beat this team is ranked higher than that team... ;)
I guess there's some that still think very highly of St. Thomas.
Like to know who is so proud of them(ST TOM) and why ? ???At 12 ::) would be nice ? :(
Still no respect by three for WEST COAST PLU? ??? ::) :o
I'm one of the three who don't have PLU in... but to me they're not even the 2nd best team on the west coast. I think Chapman should be higher ranked than PLU. I'm surprised that so many have Pac Lutheran ranked but don't have Chapman on their ballot. Chapman's wins are against teams that are 6-8 while PLU's are against 2-13 teams. Then there's the Linfield game... both lost at home to Linfield but Chapman lost by just 7 while PLU lost by 27.
And on the St Thomas issue... I also don't have them on my ballot either.
FCG,
Sorry to hear that. ::) i thought MORE of your Skills? :o
Well, aside from Northwest Conference bias/solidarity/whatever, when you look at the scores, give us the case for PLU over Chapman in 2014. I'll hang up and listen. :)
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 15, 2014, 10:12:59 AM
Well, aside from Northwest Conference bias/solidarity/whatever, when you look at the scores, give us the case for PLU over Chapman in 2014. I'll hang up and listen. :)
What he said ^^^^^
[quote author= ;D
Their is more to a game than just the score my friend,, If you only knew... 8-) ;D
DC1 " the serial smite Himself "
Now our favorite troika of Stevens Point vs. North Central vs. Platteville is a big ol' mess...
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 15, 2014, 10:43:45 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 15, 2014, 10:12:59 AM
Well, aside from Northwest Conference bias/solidarity/whatever, when you look at the scores, give us the case for PLU over Chapman in 2014. I'll hang up and listen. :)
What he said ^^^^^
Quote from: desertcat1 on October 15, 2014, 08:37:16 PM
[quote author= ;D
Their is more to a game than just the score my friend,, If you only knew... 8-) ;D
DC1 " the serial smite Himself "
I feel like we know a little more today.
Quote from: smedindy on October 18, 2014, 09:30:42 PM
Now our favorite troika of Stevens Point vs. North Central vs. Platteville is a big ol' mess...
NCC>UWP>UWSP>NCC>UWP>UWSP, etc..... It's tough to make an argument now which team should be ranked ahead of the other. Everyone is going to have a different opinion on how these teams will fall in the top 25.
In my opinion, I don't think UWSP is that good...however I can't explain what happened in that NCC game. The three point win against UWRF is a head scratcher.
I went with:
9. NCC
11. UWP
23. UWSP
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 20, 2014, 12:11:08 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 18, 2014, 09:30:42 PM
Now our favorite troika of Stevens Point vs. North Central vs. Platteville is a big ol' mess...
NCC>UWP>UWSP>NCC>UWP>UWSP, etc..... It's tough to make an argument now which team should be ranked ahead of the other. Everyone is going to have a different opinion on how these teams will fall in the top 25.
In my opinion, I don't think UWSP is that good...however I can't explain what happened in that NCC game. The three point win against UWRF is a head scratcher.
I went with:
9. NCC
11. UWP
23. UWSP
Yes, this situation has me in a little conundrum, maybe NCC is not as good as we think.
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 20, 2014, 07:07:11 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 20, 2014, 12:11:08 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 18, 2014, 09:30:42 PM
Now our favorite troika of Stevens Point vs. North Central vs. Platteville is a big ol' mess...
NCC>UWP>UWSP>NCC>UWP>UWSP, etc..... It's tough to make an argument now which team should be ranked ahead of the other. Everyone is going to have a different opinion on how these teams will fall in the top 25.
In my opinion, I don't think UWSP is that good...however I can't explain what happened in that NCC game. The three point win against UWRF is a head scratcher.
I went with:
9. NCC
11. UWP
23. UWSP
Yes, this situation has me in a little conundrum, maybe NCC is not as good as we think.
And that says what about UWP? Not sure that's the solution to the "conundrum". It should be noted the home team won each of these games. I never really think a team is "better" until they get a quality road win. None of these teams has done that yet.
Quote from: USee on October 21, 2014, 09:46:12 AM
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 20, 2014, 07:07:11 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 20, 2014, 12:11:08 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 18, 2014, 09:30:42 PM
Now our favorite troika of Stevens Point vs. North Central vs. Platteville is a big ol' mess...
NCC>UWP>UWSP>NCC>UWP>UWSP, etc..... It's tough to make an argument now which team should be ranked ahead of the other. Everyone is going to have a different opinion on how these teams will fall in the top 25.
In my opinion, I don't think UWSP is that good...however I can't explain what happened in that NCC game. The three point win against UWRF is a head scratcher.
I went with:
9. NCC
11. UWP
23. UWSP
Yes, this situation has me in a little conundrum, maybe NCC is not as good as we think.
And that says what about UWP? Not sure that's the solution to the "conundrum". It should be noted the home team won each of these games. I never really think a team is "better" until they get a quality road win. None of these teams has done that yet.
Yes, you are correct, no solution yet.
2014 WEEK 7 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev
1) UW-Whitewater (10) 250 1
T2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 234 T2
T2) Mount Union 234 T2
4) Wesley 219 4
5) Linfield 212 5
6) Wartburg 196 6
7) John Carroll 186 7
8) Wabash 177 8
9) Hobart 166 9
10) Johns Hopkins 154 10
11) Bethel 146 11
12) North Central 135 12
13) UW Platteville 125 14
14) St John Fisher 123 13
15) Wittenberg 109 T15
16) Wheaton 79 18
17) Widener 76 19
18) Wash & Jeff 68 21
19) St John's 60 22
20) Concordia-Moorhead 56 23
21) UW-Stevens Point 55 T15
22) St Thomas 52 20
T23) Delaware Valley 42 T24
T23) Hampden-Sydney 42 T24
25) Chapman 16 NR
Dropped Out: Pacific Lutheran
Also Receiving Votes: Texas Lutheran (14), Heidelberg (10), Pacific Lutheran (6), Buffalo St (3), Centre (3), Carroll (1), Pacific (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, thewaterboy, and Upstate
1) UW-Whitewater 250 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
T2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 234 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
T2) Mount Union 234 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4) Wesley 219 ( 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5)
5) Linfield 212 ( 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6)
6) Wartburg 196 ( 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8)
7) John Carroll 186 ( 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 10)
8) Wabash 177 ( 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10, 11)
9) Hobart 166 ( 7, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 13, 14)
10) Johns Hopkins 154 ( 8, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 10, 11, 12, 17)
11) Bethel 146 ( 8, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 12, 13, 13, 13)
12) North Central 135 ( 9, 9, 10, 12, 12, 14, 14, 14, 15, 16)
13) UW Platteville 125 (11, 12, 12, 13, 13, 14, 15, 15, 15, 15)
14) St John Fisher 123 (12, 12, 12, 13, 13, 14, 14, 15, 16, 16)
15) Wittenberg 109 (10, 11, 11, 13, 15, 15, 16, 16, 19, 25)
16) Wheaton 79 (10, 15, 17, 17, 17, 19, 19, 22, 22, 23)
17) Widener 76 (12, 16, 16, 16, 17, 18, 21, 22, 23, 23)
18) Wash & Jeff 68 (15, 17, 17, 18, 18, 20, 20, 20, 21, --)
19) St John's 60 (17, 17, 18, 19, 19, 20, 21, 21, 22, --)
20) Concordia-Moorhead 56 (18, 18, 18, 19, 20, 21, 21, 22, 23, 24)
21) UW-Stevens Point 55 (14, 16, 17, 19, 21, 21, 22, 23, --, --)
22) St Thomas 52 (13, 18, 18, 20, 20, 21, 22, 24, --, --)
T23) Delaware Valley 42 (14, 19, 20, 21, 23, 23, 23, 24, 25, --)
T23) Hampden-Sydney 42 (14, 18, 19, 19, 22, 24, 24, --, --, --)
25) Chapman 16 (20, 22, 24, 24, 25, 25, --, --, --, --)
26) Texas Lutheran 14 (20, 23, 24, 24, 25)
27) Heidelberg 10 (16)
28) Pacific Lutheran 6 (22, 24)
T29) Buffalo St 3 (25, 25, 25)
T29) Centre 3 (23)
T31) Carroll 1 (25)
T31) Pacific 1 (25)
With the road win, I jumped on the Chapman bandwagon. I entered them in my top 25 at #24.
I made one changed and again, the Top 25 emulated my ballot (not in the right places but the right teams). This isn't on purpose since I send my ballot in before the Top 25 is posted.
Quote from: smedindy on October 27, 2014, 12:44:06 PM
I made one changed and again, the Top 25 emulated my ballot (not in the right places but the right teams). This isn't on purpose since I send my ballot in before the Top 25 is posted.
Same here. I submitted my ballot before the Top 25 was released, and I found it consisted of the same teams (just different order).
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 27, 2014, 12:52:08 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 27, 2014, 12:44:06 PM
I made one changed and again, the Top 25 emulated my ballot (not in the right places but the right teams). This isn't on purpose since I send my ballot in before the Top 25 is posted.
Same here. I submitted my ballot before the Top 25 was released, and I found it consisted of the same teams (just different order).
Since you guys are used to "thinking nationally", I'd like to throw out a question to you.
I guess I would throw this out to anyone. Once you get past the top 5, who seem to be there every year, is there even a consistent "next level"? Bethel seems to be there. NCC has felt like a solid 4th thru 6th depending on the year. Some have felt recently they make it a "Top 6". So they might be the "Next Level" now. Bethel and NCC. Are there others that have been there enough in recent history to consider them a part of the "Next Level"? I guess the criteria I am thinking of is a team that is deservedly ranked 6-10 somewhat consistently over the years.
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 27, 2014, 04:44:11 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 27, 2014, 12:52:08 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 27, 2014, 12:44:06 PM
I made one changed and again, the Top 25 emulated my ballot (not in the right places but the right teams). This isn't on purpose since I send my ballot in before the Top 25 is posted.
Same here. I submitted my ballot before the Top 25 was released, and I found it consisted of the same teams (just different order).
Since you guys are used to "thinking nationally", I'd like to throw out a question to you.
I guess I would throw this out to anyone. Once you get past the top 5, who seem to be there every year, is there even a consistent "next level"? Bethel seems to be there. NCC has felt like a solid 4th thru 6th depending on the year. Some have felt recently they make it a "Top 6". So they might be the "Next Level" now. Bethel and NCC. Are there others that have been there enough in recent history to consider them a part of the "Next Level"? I guess the criteria I am thinking of is a team that is deservedly ranked 6-10 somewhat consistently over the years.
Tier 1:
UWW
UMU
MHB
Welsey
Linfield
Tier 2:
NCC - could almost be considered Tier 1, if it wasn't for this year.
Top MIAC school - depending on the year. St. John's had their run, then St. Thomas, now it seems Bethel is the king of the MIAC.
Wabash - quietly a consistent top 10 team.
Outside Wabash, it may be a stretch for some schools. Hobart can be considered, Thomas More maybe....
**Edit**
You can almost make the argument:
Tier 1:
UWW
UMU
Tier 2:
MHB
Welsey
Linfield
Tier 3...etc...
I'd say that the 'next level' may be more conference related at times since.
CCIW Winner - Wheaton or North Central
NCAC Winner - Wabash or Wittenberg
MIAC Winner
MAC Winner - Widener, Del Val, maybe Lycoming if they rise up
OAC Runner - Up
WIAC Runner - Up
E8 Winner
Then Hobart, Johns Hopkins (their conferences aren't deep) - that's the second tier. Many times these teams will run into a Purple and get derailed in the quarterfinals or Round of 16 but they're still second tier.
The ODAC beat up on each other too much for consistent ranking. Franklin's taken a step back or they could have been on the cusp.
Long but relevant post of mine on this topic earlier this season...obviously we know more about 2014 now (so St. Thomas and North Central might be dinged a little lower than I have them ranked here, etc), but I think some of the stats I dug up re: who made the final 8 and final 4 over the last 4-5 seasons help make the case for the respective tiers. I am comfortable with UMU/UWW as Tier 1, UMHB as Tier 1.5, Wesley/Linfield as Tier 2, and then some assortment of Bethel, St. Thomas, North Central, St. John Fisher, Hobart, Wabash, Wheaton, and Wartburg (this list could go on) depending on how this postseason shakes out. I think it's important to consider these tiers as more of a "program over the last five seasons" thing than a snap of who the best team is TODAY - i.e. Wartburg is probably better than St. Thomas right now, but UST's last five seasons kick the crap out of Wartburg's last five seasons overall, so it's not just a cut-and-dry Top 25 for the 2014 season.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 23, 2014, 12:25:01 PM
Tier 1: UMU, UWW, UMHB*
UMU and UWW require no explanation.
UMHB is interesting because they haven't actually beaten either of UWW or UMU recently (since 2004, anyway) and you could argue they should be a notch below...but given that their past 2 semifinal games have been 1) led UMU in the fourth quarter in 2012 and 2) lost by a point to UWW in 2013 (when that UWW team annihilated Mount in the Stagg), I'm comfortable putting them here, especially once we start looking at the Tier 2 candidates. You'll see their name pop up on some fun lists.
Tier 2: Linfield, Wesley, NCC
Linfield has been eliminated by a host of different postseason opponents (I was a little surprised to see how many different teams have knocked them out of the playoffs; it's not always one of those Tier 1 teams). If they were only losing to UWW and UMHB, that'd be a little different. But St. Thomas, Wesley, and UW-Oshkosh have all eliminated Linfield in recent playoff seasons...and yet, Linfield is one of only four teams to make the final eight in both 2012 and 2013 (Mount, UMHB, and Wesley being the others). Gotta be here.
Wesley has had a very high ceiling but also seems to have a low floor; they're capable of raising their game to give Mount or UMHB a scare, but they can lose to Rowan (2013) or Kean (2011) in years when neither of those teams ran the table in the NJAC (which raises an interesting point of its own: is Wesley going to miss the playoffs once in a while in the NJAC?). But if I try to talk myself out of them...extending the point above about Linfield: here's the list of teams that have been in the final eight for each of the last four seasons: Mount Union, UMHB, and Wesley. Gotta be here.
NCC, like Wesley, has dropped a regular-season game here and there (UW-LaCrosse to open 2012 season, Redlands to open 2011 regular season) but still was in the semifinals last year (losing by a point vs. Mount) and has been in the elite eight twice in the last four years.
The other teams who might have an argument about their exclusion from this tier:
St. Thomas almost definitely should be, but some recency bias (UST going 8-2 last year with a two-point loss to St. John's costing them a potential Pool C berth) has made us forget that UST was in the Stagg in 2012, semifinals in 2011, final 8 in 2010, final 8 in 2009. Probably a mistake to omit them from the original list when you look at that four year stretch of postseason that no one save Mount, UWW, and UMHB can really match.
Bethel (also on that very short list of teams that have made the elite eight twice in the last four years) beat UST last year and is a program with plenty of postseason history to its credit.
St. John Fisher also has two final-8 appearances in the last four years...but both came in seasons where they lost two regular-season games, and they missed the playoffs in the other two seasons. Linfield, Wesley, and NCC all have made each of the last four years, and UST's miss last year is countered by their superior body of work from 2009-2012 (which is better than anything the rest of Tier 2 offers, really). It can be argued that the Empire 8's difficulty is a factor here that some of the other Tier 1 and Tier 2 teams do not have to contend with, but I think UMU and UWW are so superior that doesn't really matter because they'd still win the E8.
I happen to agree with jknezek that I group the teams into tiers based on multiple seasons' worth of work, not just where they are in one season (i.e. I think St. Thomas belongs in this discussion of the top ten or so "programs" in the nation even if they weren't one of the 10 best teams last year, same with UWW in 2012, etc). If you look at other teams floating around the 6-15 spots of the current poll, none can really be argued as belonging in "Tier 2" because they haven't been at that level long enough or consistently enough. UW-Platteville's playoff win last year was their first in this site's timeline. Wartburg's playoff win last year was their first since 2008.
To recap:
Tier 1: UMU, UWW, UMHB
Tier 2: Linfield, Wesley, NCC, St. Thomas
Tier 3: Bethel, St. John Fisher, Hobart...a few others, no doubt, not listing them all here because it's hard to say exactly where we draw the line (you can make a case for teams like Wabash, Wheaton, and several others, and then of course UWP, Wartburg, and a few other teams "on the rise" could nose their way into this discussion with 1-2 more good years)
2014 WEEK 8 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev
1) UW-Whitewater (10) 250 1
T2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 234 T2
T2) Mount Union 234 T2
4) Wesley 219 4
5) Linfield 211 5
6) Wartburg 197 6
7) John Carroll 185 7
8) Wabash 179 8
9) Hobart 166 9
10) Johns Hopkins 153 10
11) Bethel 148 11
12) St John Fisher 132 14
13) Wheaton 120 16
14) UW Platteville 116 13
15) Wittenberg 115 15
16) Widener 83 17
17) Wash & Jeff 79 18
18) UW-Stevens Point 72 21
19) St John's 69 19
20) Concordia-Moorhead 63 20
21) Delaware Valley 59 T23
22) Hampden-Sydney 50 T23
23) North Central 45 12
24) Chapman 27 25
25) Centre 13 NR
Dropped Out: St Thomas
Also Receiving Votes: Heidelberg (10), Pacific Lutheran (7), St Thomas (5), Carroll (3), Thomas More (3), Muhlenberg (2), Montclair St (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, thewaterboy, and Upstate
1) UW-Whitewater 250 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
T2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 234 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
T2) Mount Union 234 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4) Wesley 219 ( 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5)
5) Linfield 211 ( 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6)
6) Wartburg 197 ( 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8)
7) John Carroll 185 ( 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9)
8) Wabash 179 ( 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10, 10)
9) Hobart 166 ( 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10, 13, 14)
10) Johns Hopkins 153 ( 8, 8, 9, 10, 10, 11, 11, 11, 12, 17)
11) Bethel 148 ( 8, 10, 10, 11, 12, 12, 12, 12, 12, 13)
12) St John Fisher 132 (11, 11, 12, 12, 13, 13, 13, 13, 15, 15)
13) Wheaton 120 ( 9, 10, 11, 14, 14, 15, 15, 16, 16, 20)
14) UW Platteville 116 (11, 12, 12, 13, 14, 14, 15, 15, 17, 21)
15) Wittenberg 115 (10, 10, 11, 13, 14, 14, 15, 16, 19, 23)
16) Widener 83 (11, 15, 16, 16, 16, 19, 19, 20, 22, 23)
17) Wash & Jeff 79 (14, 15, 16, 17, 17, 18, 18, 19, 21, --)
18) UW-Stevens Point 72 (13, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 20, 20, 21, --)
19) St John's 69 (16, 17, 18, 18, 18, 18, 18, 20, 22, --)
20) Concordia-Moorhead 63 (17, 17, 17, 19, 20, 21, 21, 21, 21, 23)
21) Delaware Valley 59 (14, 18, 19, 19, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 25)
22) Hampden-Sydney 50 (14, 17, 18, 19, 22, 22, 22, 24, --, --)
23) North Central 45 (13, 17, 20, 21, 22, 23, 23, 25, 25, --)
24) Chapman 27 (20, 22, 22, 23, 23, 23, 24, 25, 25, --)
25) Centre 13 (22, 23, 24, 24, 25, 25, --, --, --, --)
26) Heidelberg 10 (16)
27) Pacific Lutheran 7 (21, 24)
28) St Thomas 5 (24, 24, 25)
T29) Carroll 3 (24, 25)
T29) Thomas More 3 (23)
31) Muhlenberg 2 (24)
32) Montclair St 1 (25)
It blows me away that one voter thinks Heidelberg is the 16th best team in D3. They aren't. They'd fold like a freshly laundered shirt against any team in the top 25.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 27, 2014, 10:31:43 PM
It blows me away that one voter thinks Heidelberg is the 16th best team in D3. They aren't. They'd fold like a freshly laundered shirt against any team in the top 25.
It blows me away that SJU is ahead of Concordia, and that someone has SJU outside their Top 25.
Then again, maybe the guy who has Heidelberg at 16 forgot to rank SJU ;D ;)
Seriously though, thanks for doing this each week guys. Wish I had the time to do it this year.
Quote from: hazzben on October 27, 2014, 10:51:39 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 27, 2014, 10:31:43 PM
It blows me away that one voter thinks Heidelberg is the 16th best team in D3. They aren't. They'd fold like a freshly laundered shirt against any team in the top 25.
It blows me away that SJU is ahead of Concordia, and that someone has SJU outside their Top 25.
Then again, maybe the guy who has Heidelberg at 16 forgot to rank SJU ;D ;)
Seriously though, thanks for doing this each week guys. Wish I had the time to do it this year.
Nope. I'm the guy with Heidi at #16; I had SJU at #18.
I don't know if Heidi is worthy of #16, but they are DESTROYING everyone who isn't JCU or UMU.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 31, 2014, 04:15:32 PM
Quote from: hazzben on October 27, 2014, 10:51:39 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 27, 2014, 10:31:43 PM
It blows me away that one voter thinks Heidelberg is the 16th best team in D3. They aren't. They'd fold like a freshly laundered shirt against any team in the top 25.
It blows me away that SJU is ahead of Concordia, and that someone has SJU outside their Top 25.
Then again, maybe the guy who has Heidelberg at 16 forgot to rank SJU ;D ;)
Seriously though, thanks for doing this each week guys. Wish I had the time to do it this year.
Nope. I'm the guy with Heidi at #16; I had SJU at #18.
I don't know if Heidi is worthy of #16, but they are DESTROYING everyone who isn't JCU or UMU.
And getting DESTROYED by everyone who IS. That's the point.
Yeah, but there are a lot of teams in the top 25 who would be destroyed by UMU and JCU.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 01, 2014, 01:27:11 PM
Yeah, but there are a lot of teams in the top 25 who would be destroyed by UMU and JCU.
UMU, yes. JCU...well, that didn't play out last year in the playoffs.
2014 JCU > 2013 JCU
Quote from: smedindy on November 01, 2014, 02:09:19 PM
2014 JCU > 2013 JCU
Let's see what they do vs UMU or the playoffs first...
Quote from: smedindy on November 01, 2014, 02:09:19 PM
2014 JCU > 2013 JCU
You are a Wabash fan, correct? So I'm assuming you haven't watched every John Carroll game this year. Therefore, how can you say they are better than last year? If you are going by the final scores then I suggest you look at what they did last year again. It was the same story. Absolutely obliterating teams in the OAC.
Some of us watch games other than our teams, ya know...
Quote from: smedindy on November 01, 2014, 07:19:14 PM
Some of us watch games other than our teams, ya know...
I hate when people are contrarian. Unless you are Pat, Keith and a very select few others, the chances are you haven't watched enough of teams outside of Wabash, like JCU, to make such statements. I have watched the following teams this year outside of my team/conference/general vicinity:
St. John's
St. Thomas
Wartburg
Baldwin Wallace
Mary Hardin Baylor
And the following teams I would have no business saying are better or worse than last year based off the game or two I saw:
St. John's
St. Thomas
Wartburg
Baldwin Wallace
Mary Hardin Baylor
Unless you tell me that you watched a majority of John Carroll's games last year, and you've seen a majority of their games this year...you saying they are better this year doesn't hold much water.
Really? Pat and Keith (and the very select few others who shall remain nameless) are the only people that can have a credible opinion on D3 football? Come on now.
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 01, 2014, 07:44:54 PM
Really? Pat and Keith (and the very select few others who shall remain nameless) are the only people that can have a credible opinion on D3 football? Come on now.
Pretty much eliminates all the voters for d3.com
Quote from: boobyhasgameyo on November 01, 2014, 07:39:25 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 01, 2014, 07:19:14 PM
Some of us watch games other than our teams, ya know...
I hate when people are contrarian.
I hate when people state no one can have any opinions on teams outside of their league or rooting interest, even though they've followed the sport intently since this site was live (and even before) and do their best to be nationally informed.
Wow, ok I see I have to break this down even further. Polls are largely comprised of individuals making inferences based on limited data. That is why there are constant fluctuations in polls, because peoples data sets keep expanding and they can make more educated assumptions. You can infer that a team is better or worse based on what you see in a box score or if you have seen a team play once or twice. Some teams can make it easier to go beyond an inference by having a significant leap or dropoff in performance to the previous year. John Carroll has not done either of those. They are doing the same thing this year that they did last year. In the cases of Heidelberg and Ohio Northern game, they've actually done noticeably worse this year. Therefore, again unless you have seen them play enough times this year compared to last, how can you definitively say they are better? You cannot.
This isn't a difficult concept to grasp.
Damn you, MIAC for throwing wrenches into an orderly Top 25 again. Ok, so the WIAC did too, and so did Willamette...
I do prefer chaos to order, but as a voter, it's tough...
Or alternatively, why don't you inform me why John Carroll is better Smedindy. I should have started there.
Quote from: boobyhasgameyo on November 01, 2014, 07:57:56 PM
Wow, ok I see I have to break this down even further. Polls are largely comprised of individuals making inferences based on limited data. That is why there are constant fluctuations in polls, because peoples data sets keep expanding and they can make more educated assumptions. You can infer that a team is better or worse based on what you see in a box score or if you have seen a team play once or twice. Some teams can make it easier to go beyond an inference by having a significant leap or dropoff in performance to the previous year. John Carroll has not done either of those. They are doing the same thing this year that they did last year. In the cases of Heidelberg and Ohio Northern game, they've actually done noticeably worse this year. Therefore, again unless you have seen them play enough times this year compared to last, how can you definitively say they are better? You cannot.
This isn't a difficult concept to grasp.
The concept is that you invalidated ANYONE's right to have an opinion. That's wrong on many levels, unjust and unfair.
The data sets change with every game. So do perceptions. But we all have opinions and people on this board tend to be intelligent, and not "HOMER" and not provincial and certainly NOT elitist in nature.
JCU was ahead of 'Berg 43-10 before a late TD. Last year it was 48-7. Whoop, big. That's barely a difference.
ONU is better than they were last year, too. Teams don't hold constant from one year to the next. So I don't put any stock at all at what last year's JCU team did to last year's ONU team when comparing this year's JCU and ONU team. I feel JCU is better this year. Maybe it's a slight margin, maybe a big margin.
But I get to express my opinion, and I feel it is as valid as anyone else's. Pat and Keith and Ryan do have a more national approach and I think Pat and Ryan get to view a couple more games (I work at my school's game here in Washington, so I miss some of the later games), but many in this board follow everything as much as we can. You are NOT the arbiter of opinion validity.
I guess Wally should stop his Pool C analysis since it has been written by the arbitrer of opinions that since he doesn't watch ALL of the "C" contenders he can't make a judgement.
Got it, so it's as I thought. You don't have a real basis for making such a definitive statement. I am fine and dandy with people saying what they think, I do it a million times. But your initial approach was almost as if you were speaking in absolutes (2014 JCU > 2013 JCU is pretty emphatic and definitive) ...when really there is no justification that you can give to your argument.
And since I see that you wrote Wally can stop all Pool C analysis because he hasn't seen all of the teams, it's evident this entire point has flown over your head. Opinions are fine. Substantiated ones are even better. Presenting an opinion based on your gut instinct after not watching a team play, and passing it off as if it is a fact? Nah.
You say I haven't watched them play. False. You lose. Good day sir.
You also said that their 'Berg result in 2014 was worse than 2013. A garbage time score doesn't matter. Dominated in 2014 just as much.
The ONU game is where I swapped Wabash and JCU in my North rankings and my Top 25. Yet I know enough of OAC football that the second tier OAC group (JCU, B-W, ONU, now Otterbein) play each other it's pretty fierce. An isolated result like that doesn't sway me that this group in 2014 is better than the 2013 squad. Maybe not by much, but they are better.
That game in Ada was also played in bad weather, windy and cold. Odd results can happen in the face of strong winds.
More to analyzing team than watching them on video, and seeing them blow out the dregs of the OAC won't help much.
Yeah, again when I say watch I mean more than once or twice. Not personally attacking you Smedindy, as a matter of fact this is my last post on the topic.
Let's take the Ari Gold approach and hug it out.
Sorry I'm not riveted to when JCU plays Wilmington. That game is foregone.
As I said above in my re-write, this years ONU JCU game was played in wind and cold and stuff happens there. You don't get to walk away from belittling someone's opinion because they're not Pat especially when they take the time to take a broad view of the D3 landscape. Being a West Coastie has advantages as well.
Maybe my 2014>2013 was a bit flip but I get so tired of people who can't look an OAC or North region team past Mt. Union. It's the worst knee jerk reaction. There's no doubt they underperformed in the playoffs, but again SJF was probably under-seeded.
Yes, and I feel bad at this point for going on such a rant. I'm a nice person, I swear. I even cheer on Wabash :)
Sorry for taking up an entire page worth of posts everyone! Smedindy, one day we will be good friends and have a nice laugh about this.
2015 Booby and Smedindy's friendship > 2014 Booby and Smedindy's friendship.
Ah, it just touched a nerve. Much like "stick to sports" or "what do you know, you never played the game at X level", or "it's a conspiracy against us.." or "We don't get any respect from the (voters, coaches, NCAA...)
Quote from: USee on November 01, 2014, 12:12:32 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 31, 2014, 04:15:32 PM
Quote from: hazzben on October 27, 2014, 10:51:39 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 27, 2014, 10:31:43 PM
It blows me away that one voter thinks Heidelberg is the 16th best team in D3. They aren't. They'd fold like a freshly laundered shirt against any team in the top 25.
It blows me away that SJU is ahead of Concordia, and that someone has SJU outside their Top 25.
Then again, maybe the guy who has Heidelberg at 16 forgot to rank SJU ;D ;)
Seriously though, thanks for doing this each week guys. Wish I had the time to do it this year.
Nope. I'm the guy with Heidi at #16; I had SJU at #18.
I don't know if Heidi is worthy of #16, but they are DESTROYING everyone who isn't JCU or UMU.
And getting DESTROYED by everyone who IS. That's the point.
If not getting embarassed by UMU and JCU is a requirement to be top 25, I fear the top 25 will become the top 12! :P
Quote from: smedindy on November 01, 2014, 08:36:17 PM
Maybe my 2014>2013 was a bit flip but I get so tired of people who can't look an OAC or North region team past Mt. Union. It's the worst knee jerk reaction.
I love that you're bemoaning someone getting in your face over your opinion and feeling belittled by what he said.
And
in the same post, you're doing essentially the same thing to me! I do
not think Mount is the only worthy team from the North region (NB: I've actually played
and coached against some pretty good ones). Nor do I think JCU is in any way, shape or form a garbage team. I'm just not convinced they are anywhere near Mount's level. Hence, my doubts about Heidelberg's quality as a team. When a team gets plastered by Mount, I don't take it to mean they're sub-par. I've seen and been associated with some very good (Top 10 caliber) D3 teams that got plastered by Mount. But show me the history of very good D3 teams that have gotten plastered by JCU. And then show me the evidence for why we should consider them very good.
Since your JCU 2014 > 2013 comment was directed at me, am I right to assume you are also directing the italicized at me as well (you seem to clearly imply a connection). I didn't realize not considering JCU elite until they make some noise outside of the OAC and in the playoffs means I'm ignorant of things concerning the north region. I'll try to refrain from my uniformed, knee jerk reactions in the future ::)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 01, 2014, 09:10:10 PM
Quote from: USee on November 01, 2014, 12:12:32 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 31, 2014, 04:15:32 PM
Quote from: hazzben on October 27, 2014, 10:51:39 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 27, 2014, 10:31:43 PM
It blows me away that one voter thinks Heidelberg is the 16th best team in D3. They aren't. They'd fold like a freshly laundered shirt against any team in the top 25.
It blows me away that SJU is ahead of Concordia, and that someone has SJU outside their Top 25.
Then again, maybe the guy who has Heidelberg at 16 forgot to rank SJU ;D ;)
Seriously though, thanks for doing this each week guys. Wish I had the time to do it this year.
Nope. I'm the guy with Heidi at #16; I had SJU at #18.
I don't know if Heidi is worthy of #16, but they are DESTROYING everyone who isn't JCU or UMU.
And getting DESTROYED by everyone who IS. That's the point.
If not getting embarassed by UMU and JCU is a requirement to be top 25, I fear the top 25 will become the top 12! :P
You cannot equate UMU and JCU. It's not credible.
Quote from: hazzben on November 01, 2014, 09:39:50 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 01, 2014, 08:36:17 PM
Maybe my 2014>2013 was a bit flip but I get so tired of people who can't look an OAC or North region team past Mt. Union. It's the worst knee jerk reaction.
I love that you're bemoaning someone getting in your face over your opinion and feeling belittled by what he said.
And in the same post, you're doing essentially the same thing to me! I do not think Mount is the only worthy team from the North region (NB: I've actually played and coached against some pretty good ones). Nor do I think JCU is in any way, shape or form a garbage team. I'm just not convinced they are anywhere near Mount's level. Hence, my doubts about Heidelberg's quality as a team. When a team gets plastered by Mount, I don't take it to mean they're sub-par. I've seen and been associated with some very good (Top 10 caliber) D3 teams that got plastered by Mount. But show me the history of very good D3 teams that have gotten plastered by JCU. And then show me the evidence for why we should consider them very good.
Since your JCU 2014 > 2013 comment was directed at me, am I right to assume you are also directing the italicized at me as well (you seem to clearly imply a connection). I didn't realize not considering JCU elite until they make some noise outside of the OAC and in the playoffs means I'm ignorant of things concerning the north region. I'll try to refrain from my uniformed, knee jerk reactions in the future ::)
Wait just a minute sir!
All I said was:
"JCU 2014 > JCU 2013" - I think this club is better than last year. Same way I think this year's teams at Wabash, Hiram and DPU are better. I think Denison's better. No whoopde - no judgement. It wasn't directed at anyone, much less you, since a couple people had commented. I didn't even know who replied, So hold your horses there.
Just stating that applying any judgement on JCU 2014 based on the SJF game from last year is hasty because I think it's better. That's all!
And in general, people look down a bit at some teams in the North and the rest of the OAC because they're not at Mt. Union's level. They get forgotten in the purple haze.
History is only as good as this year. I really could not care about how JCU in 2004 played, or 2012 when discussing this year. This year is the relevant one, so the history book thing is meaningless.
I also don't have Heidelberg in my Top 25. They're good, not great. We've had quite the row about 'Berg in the North Region. I think they're among the Top 10 in the region, because there are some shaky teams there that should be better, I can't trust the MIAA and they're definitely #3 in the OAC.
The BEEF was that he was stating we shouldn't have opinions on teams outside of our tiny little narrow box. THAT"S the issue. That's what I have a HUGE problem with because no one should be shut off from opining on the D3 universe. My opinions have been called all kinds of things - but I've rarely been told I'm not qualified to have them because I don't meet some random janky criteria.
Yeesh....one small comment and people get all twisty.
I'm in. I had to jigsaw this one together...
Quote from: USee on November 01, 2014, 11:17:37 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 01, 2014, 09:10:10 PM
Quote from: USee on November 01, 2014, 12:12:32 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 31, 2014, 04:15:32 PM
Quote from: hazzben on October 27, 2014, 10:51:39 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 27, 2014, 10:31:43 PM
It blows me away that one voter thinks Heidelberg is the 16th best team in D3. They aren't. They'd fold like a freshly laundered shirt against any team in the top 25.
It blows me away that SJU is ahead of Concordia, and that someone has SJU outside their Top 25.
Then again, maybe the guy who has Heidelberg at 16 forgot to rank SJU ;D ;)
Seriously though, thanks for doing this each week guys. Wish I had the time to do it this year.
Nope. I'm the guy with Heidi at #16; I had SJU at #18.
I don't know if Heidi is worthy of #16, but they are DESTROYING everyone who isn't JCU or UMU.
And getting DESTROYED by everyone who IS. That's the point.
If not getting embarassed by UMU and JCU is a requirement to be top 25, I fear the top 25 will become the top 12! :P
You cannot equate UMU and JCU. It's not credible.
I was not equating UMU and JCU, just noting that either one could beat many (most?) top 25 teams by huge margins.
I sent in my ballot yesterday. Dropped Linfield from 5 to 9, and dropped HSC, UWSP and Concordia-Moorhead out completely, replacing them with Washington & Jefferson, Ithaca, and Franklin. If more teams fall out in coming weeks, I'm in trouble - I'm running low on credible backups!
IWU showed that Franklin did not take a bad loss to them IF they are not playing their #4 qb! Jack Warner came back from mono yesterday and, after falling behind 21-0 in the first quarter while Jack shook off the rust, they only trailed NCC by a single TD after three quarters. 2014 will forever be known to Titan fans as the year that mono wrecked a promising season.
I know zero about the teams Linfield has played but none of them are in the top 25. Were they ranked so high through week 8 based on what they did last year? Or are the teams they have played this year decent but not good enough to crack the top 25?
bashgiant:
Linfield played down at Chapman in the first game of the year and won 21-14. Chapman is currently ranked in the D 3 rankings.
Quote from: bashgiant on November 02, 2014, 01:31:47 PM
I know zero about the teams Linfield has played but none of them are in the top 25. Were they ranked so high through week 8 based on what they did last year? Or are the teams they have played this year decent but not good enough to crack the top 25?
Linfield is ranked where they are because they are traditionally pretty awesome. Linfield is the last team not named Whitewater or Mount Union to win a Stagg Bowl. They had a few 6-3 years in there, but since 2008, Linfield makes the tournament and they're only getting knocked out by the best. Whitewater a few times, St. Thomas, at Wesley once. Linfield is legit.
I assume Linfield will beat Pacific and still win the NWC, but the really interesting thing about taking that loss is that it might put Linfield on the road this year instead of teams traveling out to Oregon for the first couple of weeks of the tournament (at least). Some people sort of bemoaned a four team pod that included Linfield, UMHB, the SCIAC champ and some random fourth team, with what we assume would feed into a Linfield @ UMHB game in the second round. Linfield losing could make that kind of pod sensible with respect to seeding.
Quote from: dahlby on November 02, 2014, 01:37:14 PM
bashgiant:
Linfield played down at Chapman in the first game of the year and won 21-14. Chapman is currently ranked in the D 3 rankings.
You are correct sir. My apologies.
Linfield also beat Pac Lu, which was previously ranked.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 02, 2014, 12:17:21 PM
IWU showed that Franklin did not take a bad loss to them IF they are not playing their #4 qb! Jack Warner came back from mono yesterday and, after falling behind 21-0 in the first quarter while Jack shook off the rust, they only trailed NCC by a single TD after three quarters. 2014 will forever be known to Titan fans as the year that mono wrecked a promising season.
This is the most laughably homerific thing I've ever read.
1) IWU, with Warner still healthy, scored three points against Simpson.
Simpson just lost to Loras.
2) Being "within a touchdown of North Central in the fourth quarter before losing by 21" is a pretty charitable assessment of the ceiling of this team. That isn't "undefeated and bound for the semifinals" North Central. That's a two-loss North Central whose playoff hopes are on life support.
3) Fourth-string QB or not, the Titans lost to a couple of really bad teams. Even the world's biggest CCIW homer should be able to look at the league's noncoference results and see that it is not up to the usual standards. Top 25-caliber teams ought to beat Carthage and Augustana with their fourth-string QB in the game by handing the ball off 60 times.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 02, 2014, 12:08:27 PM
Quote from: USee on November 01, 2014, 11:17:37 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 01, 2014, 09:10:10 PM
Quote from: USee on November 01, 2014, 12:12:32 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 31, 2014, 04:15:32 PM
Quote from: hazzben on October 27, 2014, 10:51:39 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 27, 2014, 10:31:43 PM
It blows me away that one voter thinks Heidelberg is the 16th best team in D3. They aren't. They'd fold like a freshly laundered shirt against any team in the top 25.
It blows me away that SJU is ahead of Concordia, and that someone has SJU outside their Top 25.
Then again, maybe the guy who has Heidelberg at 16 forgot to rank SJU ;D ;)
Seriously though, thanks for doing this each week guys. Wish I had the time to do it this year.
Nope. I'm the guy with Heidi at #16; I had SJU at #18.
I don't know if Heidi is worthy of #16, but they are DESTROYING everyone who isn't JCU or UMU.
And getting DESTROYED by everyone who IS. That's the point.
If not getting embarassed by UMU and JCU is a requirement to be top 25, I fear the top 25 will become the top 12! :P
You cannot equate UMU and JCU. It's not credible.
I was not equating UMU and JCU, just noting that either one could beat many (most?) top 25 teams by huge margins.
I understand Mt Union but "most" means somewhere between half and 75% in my book. I really don't thinkbyhere is any data to suggest JCU would beat 12-17 teams in the til 25 by huge margins. I hi me that's a huge stretch
Huge margins is rather odd. The margins of teams after, say, Wesley, are very tight. Heck, Linfield just lost to a conference opponent that was kind of shocking. Any game amongst Top 25 teams playing at even strength should be good (weather permitting).
Wesley 2014 > Wesley 2013. Oh boy, here we go.
I'll allow it! :D
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 02, 2014, 02:11:47 PM
I assume Linfield will beat Pacific and still win the NWC, but the really interesting thing about taking that loss is that it might put Linfield on the road this year instead of teams traveling out to Oregon for the first couple of weeks of the tournament (at least). Some people sort of bemoaned a four team pod that included Linfield, UMHB, the SCIAC champ and some random fourth team, with what we assume would feed into a Linfield @ UMHB game in the second round. Linfield losing could make that kind of pod sensible with respect to seeding.
Agreed; Linfield will be fine and should win out and host an opening-round game. They are now more likely to travel to UMHB in round two (rather than maybe in round three). That'd be a tough draw for both squads.
Quote from: d-train on November 02, 2014, 08:30:21 PM
Agreed; Linfield will be fine and should win out and host an opening-round game. They are now more likely to travel to UMHB in round two (rather than maybe in round three). That'd be a tough draw for both squads.
Hoo-boy. A second round fight between UMHB and Linfield. That would be intense. You know Linfield is gonna bounce back mad, and UMHB got a pretty big wake up call from HSU, too. I'll be surprised if both teams don't put up some big numbers this weekend.
2014 WEEK 9 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev
1) UW-Whitewater (9) 249 1
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor (1) 235 T2
3) Mount Union 234 T2
4) Wesley 222 4
5) Wartburg 205 6
6) John Carroll 194 7
7) Wabash 188 8
8) Hobart 177 9
9) Johns Hopkins 163 10
10) Bethel 156 11
11) St John Fisher 139 12
12) Linfield 134 5
13) Wheaton 133 13
14) Wittenberg 129 15
15) Widener 104 16
16) Wash & Jeff 98 17
17) St John's 86 19
18) UW Platteville 74 14
19) Delaware Valley 70 21
20) North Central 69 23
21) Chapman 47 24
22) Centre 40 25
23) St Thomas 24 NR
24) Montclair St 16 NR
25) Heidelberg 10 NR
Dropped Out: UW-Stevens Point, Concordia-Moorhead, Hampden-Sydney
Also Receiving Votes: Concordia-Moorhead (8), Thomas More (8), Muhlenberg (7), Pacific Lutheran (7), UW-Oshkosh (5), Ithaca (4), MIT (4), Willamette (4), Rowan (3), Emory & Henry (1), Framingham St (1), Franklin (1), St Scholastica (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, thewaterboy, and Upstate
Is this the most teams receiving votes in the Fan Poll? 38 teams...
1) UW-Whitewater 249 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 235 ( 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
3) Mount Union 234 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4) Wesley 222 ( 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4)
5) Wartburg 205 ( 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7)
6) John Carroll 194 ( 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 9)
7) Wabash 188 ( 5, 5, 6, 6, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9)
8) Hobart 177 ( 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 11, 14)
9) Johns Hopkins 163 ( 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 10, 10, 10, 11, 17)
10) Bethel 156 ( 7, 9, 9, 10, 11, 11, 11, 12, 12, 12)
11) St John Fisher 139 (10, 11, 11, 11, 12, 12, 12, 12, 15, 15)
12) Linfield 134 ( 9, 10, 10, 13, 13, 13, 13, 14, 15, 16)
13) Wheaton 133 ( 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 14, 14, 14, 18)
14) Wittenberg 129 ( 9, 10, 10, 11, 13, 13, 14, 14, 17, 20)
15) Widener 104 (10, 12, 15, 15, 15, 16, 17, 18, 18, 20)
16) Wash & Jeff 98 (12, 13, 13, 16, 16, 17, 17, 17, 18, 23)
17) St John's 86 (15, 16, 16, 16, 17, 17, 17, 18, 19, 23)
18) UW Platteville 74 (14, 14, 15, 15, 16, 19, 19, 22, --, --)
19) Delaware Valley 70 (15, 16, 18, 19, 19, 19, 19, 20, 21, 24)
20) North Central 69 (13, 17, 18, 18, 18, 19, 20, 20, 22, --)
21) Chapman 47 (18, 20, 20, 21, 21, 21, 21, 22, 23, --)
22) Centre 40 (19, 20, 20, 21, 21, 22, 22, 23, --, --)
23) St Thomas 24 (20, 21, 22, 22, 23, 24, --, --, --, --)
24) Montclair St 16 (21, 23, 23, 23, 24, --, --, --, --, --)
25) Heidelberg 10 (16, --, --, --, --, --, --, --, --, --)
T26) Concordia-Moorhead 8 (21, 24, 25)
T26) Thomas More 8 (22, 23, 25)
T28) Muhlenberg 7 (22, 24, 25)
T28) Pacific Lutheran 7 (19)
30) UW-Oshkosh 5 (22, 25)
T31) Ithaca 4 (24. 24)
T31) MIT 4 (24, 24)
T31) Willamette 4 (24, 25, 25)
34) Rowan 3 (23)
T35) Emory & Henry 1 (25)
T35) Framingham St 1 (25)
T35) Franklin 1 (25)
T35) St Scholastica 1 (25)
Quote from: smedindy on November 03, 2014, 08:22:10 PM
Is this the most teams receiving votes in the Fan Poll? 38 teams...
I'm not sure about past years, but we had 38 the first couple polls of this season as well.
Wow....totally expected to be the lone Oshkosh voter. :o
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 03, 2014, 09:31:56 PM
Wow....totally expected to be the lone Oshkosh voter. :o
I was that other voter, got to watch them over the last couple weeks and can see them winning their way into the playoffs somehow.
Ypsi single handily gets Heidelberg in the top 25 ;).
Looking at the OAC lines that mr_mom puts out each week (and not just for UMU and JCU games), it's incredible how non-competitive the bottom 1/2 of that conference is.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 04, 2014, 04:59:01 PM
Ypsi single handily gets Heidelberg in the top 25 ;).
Looking at the OAC lines that mr_mom puts out each week (and not just for UMU and JCU games), it's incredible how non-competitive the bottom 1/2 of that conference is.
Perhaps this is the time to approach them for a stipend! ;D
There was some shufflin'...
Quote from: smedindy on November 09, 2014, 03:25:47 PM
There was some shufflin'...
For sure. I just submitted mine after spending a good amount of time on it.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 09, 2014, 04:00:27 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 09, 2014, 03:25:47 PM
There was some shufflin'...
For sure. I just submitted mine after spending a good amount of time on it.
I'll be working mine tonight and will probably get it to Grizz tomorrow, but I agree with you both about all the shuffling we'll see.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 09, 2014, 04:00:27 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 09, 2014, 03:25:47 PM
There was some shufflin'...
For sure. I just submitted mine after spending a good amount of time on it.
It had gotten really difficult after 14, I spent additional time trying to see who was better, since it I had some teams lose to team b and beat team c, but have team c beat team b.
Hey -- will you guys accept one of the founders of the MIT program as a voter in the Fan poll? I've seen every one of their games this year, and watched a number of the other d3 programs, including Chapman, Redlands, Pomona-Pitzer, Whittier, and Johns Hopkins...
Quote from: wcrosby on November 10, 2014, 10:27:39 PM
Hey -- will you guys accept one of the founders of the MIT program as a voter in the Fan poll? I've seen every one of their games this year, and watched a number of the other d3 programs, including Chapman, Redlands, Pomona-Pitzer, Whittier, and Johns Hopkins...
We'll stick with the 10 we have had all season for consistency, but next year I'm open to expanding a bit more. We can always use some more east and west coast voters.
Wow, tough crowd. Take the new guy. Who cares if it's 11.
2014 WEEK 10 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev
1) UW-Whitewater (9) 249 1
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor (1) 235 2
3) Mount Union 234 3
4) Wesley 221 4
5) Wartburg 209 5
6) John Carroll 193 6
7) Johns Hopkins 176 9
8) Hobart 175 8
9) Wittenberg 161 14
10) Linfield 153 12
11) Wheaton 152 13
12) St John's 128 17
13) Widener 123 15
14) Wabash 120 7
15) Wash & Jeff 113 16
16) UW Platteville 98 18
17) Bethel 90 10
18) Delaware Valley 89 19
19) North Central 73 20
20) Chapman 52 21
21) Centre 40 22
22) St Thomas 27 23
23) St John Fisher 26 11
24) Ithaca 23 NR
25) Thomas More 17 NR
Dropped Out: Heidelberg and Montclair St
Also Receiving Votes: UW-Oshkosh (13), Heidelberg (12), Concordia-Moorhead (11), Pacific Lutheran (9), Muhlenberg (8), MIT (6), Framingham St (5), Pacific (5), St Scholastica (2), Emory & Henry (1), Franklin (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, thewaterboy, and Upstate
Quote from: USee on November 11, 2014, 12:41:58 AM
Wow, tough crowd. Take the new guy. Who cares if it's 11.
Consistency cares. An MIT grad would know about making sure measurable data is observed in a consistent manner. But we welcome him for next year for sure!
Quote from: smedindy on November 11, 2014, 03:46:02 PM
Quote from: USee on November 11, 2014, 12:41:58 AM
Wow, tough crowd. Take the new guy. Who cares if it's 11.
Consistency cares. An MIT grad would know about making sure measurable data is observed in a consistent manner. But we welcome him for next year for sure!
Agreed
Quote from: smedindy on November 11, 2014, 03:46:02 PM
Quote from: USee on November 11, 2014, 12:41:58 AM
Wow, tough crowd. Take the new guy. Who cares if it's 11.
Consistency cares. An MIT grad would know about making sure measurable data is observed in a consistent manner. But we welcome him for next year for sure!
This is a fan poll, not an MIT science project right? I don't really care either way just seems like no big deal. So an 11th vote skews the data and MIT gets an ORV instead of Heidleberg and Linfield is 9th instead of Witt at 10? Is that the result? Doesn't seem like a big deal.
1) UW-Whitewater 249 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 235 ( 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
3) Mount Union 234 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4) Wesley 221 ( 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5)
5) Wartburg 209 ( 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6)
6) John Carroll 193 ( 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 14)
7) Johns Hopkins 176 ( 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 10, 15)
8) Hobart 175 ( 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 11, 12)
9) Wittenberg 161 ( 7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10, 11, 11, 12, 13)
10) Linfield 153 ( 8, 9, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 13, 14, 15)
11) Wheaton 152 ( 6, 7, 9, 11, 11, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15)
12) St John's 128 ( 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 13, 13, 16, 17, 18)
13) Widener 123 ( 7, 11, 12, 12, 13, 14, 16, 16, 17, 19)
14) Wabash 120 (10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 15, 15, 17, 18)
15) Wash & Jeff 113 ( 9, 10, 10, 14, 15, 16, 16, 16, 17, 24)
16) UW Platteville 98 (12, 13, 13, 13, 14, 15, 17, 19, 20, --)
17) Bethel 90 (12, 14, 14, 16, 17, 18, 18, 19, 21, 21)
18) Delaware Valley 89 (10, 15, 16, 16, 17, 18, 18, 18, 20, 23)
19) North Central 73 (11, 15, 17, 18, 19, 19, 19, 19, 24, --)
20) Chapman 52 (16, 19, 20, 20, 20, 20, 21, 21, 25, --)
21) Centre 40 (19, 20, 21, 21, 21, 21, 22, 23, --, --)
22) St Thomas 27 (18, 20, 22, 22, 23, 24, --, --, --, --)
23) St John Fisher 26 (18, 22, 22, 22, 24, 24, 25, 25, --, --)
24) Ithaca 23 (20, 20, 22, 23, 24, 24, --, --, --, --)
25) Thomas More 17 (21, 22, 23, 23, 25, 25, --, --, --, --)
26) UW-Oshkosh 13 (17, 23, 25)
27) Heidelberg 12 (14)
28) Concordia-Moorhead 11 (19, 23, 25)
29) Pacific Lutheran 9 (17)
30) Muhlenberg 8 (22, 23, 25)
31) MIT 6 (22, 24)
T32) Framingham St 5 (21)
T32) Pacific 5 (23, 24)
34) St Scholastica 2 (24)
T35) Emory & Henry 1 (25)
T35) Franklin 1 (25)
WOW, D3 football.com has TLU at what would be 26th. AFCA has them at 20th and they do not get a single vote in the top 36 of the Top 25 fan Poll.
hey FCG,
Is it the same ballot That has uww at 2, and Mtu at 4, and Heidi at 14 by any chance? ??? care to (spline) lucy? ::)
Quote from: desertcat1 on November 11, 2014, 04:44:04 PM
hey FCG,
Is it the same ballot That has uww at 2, and Mtu at 4, and Heidi at 14 by any chance? ??? care to (spline) lucy? ::)
Lucy always has a lot of 'splainin to do... but one of them isn't that. Two separate ballots.
Quote from: RLW on November 11, 2014, 04:19:46 PM
WOW, D3 football.com has TLU at what would be 26th. AFCA has them at 20th and they do not get a single vote in the top 36 of the Top 25 fan Poll.
Well, they didn't get a single Top 25 vote. I'm sure many of us would have had them in the top 30. I always have them hovering around...
I gave a lot of love to Oshkosh, after a reboot, and I still have Muhlenberg in my Top 25.
Quote from: RLW on November 11, 2014, 04:19:46 PM
WOW, D3 football.com has TLU at what would be 26th. AFCA has them at 20th and they do not get a single vote in the top 36 of the Top 25 fan Poll.
They got destroyed by the only good team they've played. Heidelberg is in the same category for me...huge losses to JCU and UMU but with no wins impressing me.
Quote from: RLW on November 11, 2014, 04:19:46 PM
WOW, D3 football.com has TLU at what would be 26th. AFCA has them at 20th and they do not get a single vote in the top 36 of the Top 25 fan Poll.
This baffles me as well. Somebody is obviously wrong, whether it be the pollsters or the fan poll. That discrepancy is too large. Or, I guess it could theoretically be that all of the fan poll members have them ranked 26th as well, garnering them 0 counting points.
It becomes even more interesting when you look at the first week's regional rankings from the south. The fans poll very cleanly follows the top 4 (UMHB, Wesley, John Hopkins, W&J), then the large TLU discrepancy (tied 5th in regional rankings along with Centre), followed by another clean comparison to the regional rankings with 5 - 7 (Centre, Muhlenburg, Thomas More) all receiving multiple fan votes.
I wonder exactly where the differing interpretation is on the data/results that makes these gaps so wide?
Quote from: desertcat1 on November 11, 2014, 04:44:04 PM
hey FCG,
Is it the same ballot That has uww at 2, and Mtu at 4, and Heidi at 14 by any chance? ??? care to (spline) lucy? ::)
I doubt that's all the same ballot. The person voting Heidelberg at 14 (I know who it is from a prior conversation) is going to be someone that thinks the OAC's top two are light-years ahead of the rest of the country.
I'm a firm believer that the polls should represent the opinions of the individual voters themselves - i.e. I respect that someone sticks for what they believe without voting because of
how they think others will vote in the poll. With that said, I still think Heidelberg at #14 is a loony vote. I can excuse a blowout loss to one of the nation's ruling class (Mount, UWW, UMHB, Wesley), but...well, John Carroll's ranking may or may not be legitimate; I think JCU is a very good team that
might be one of the nation's top 10, but I also think they're being over-ranked because they've been crushing everyone in an unusually bad OAC (remember, they did this last year, and then they lost at home against a two-loss Pool C team in the first round of the playoffs). We don't know for sure that JCU is a top-10 team nationally just yet, and Heidelberg got curb-stomped by them, too, not just by Mount.
must be the buckeye boys ? maybe? ???
Is this thing a secret ballot? ;D you can post mine, i would like to see the others ... 8-)
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 11, 2014, 04:59:50 PM
They got destroyed by the only good team they've played.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on November 11, 2014, 05:01:20 PM
I can excuse a blowout loss to one of the nation's ruling class (Mount, UWW, UMHB, Wesley)
Shows just how nuanced and fickle this situation is.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 11, 2014, 04:59:50 PM
Quote from: RLW on November 11, 2014, 04:19:46 PM
WOW, D3 football.com has TLU at what would be 26th. AFCA has them at 20th and they do not get a single vote in the top 36 of the Top 25 fan Poll.
They got destroyed by the only good team they've played. Heidelberg is in the same category for me...huge losses to JCU and UMU but with no wins impressing me.
This. It's one thing to get blown out by a good team, but they gave up
72 points at home and if you look at their wins, they give up a crapload of points in all of them. This isn't some team that has eight blowout wins and one bad loss; they beat 3-6 Trinity by seven, 4-5 ETBU by six, and they've given up a lot of points in almost every game, against opponents of varying quality. Their only impressive win came in week 2 against Hardin-Simmons. Where's the evidence they can stop anyone with a decent offense?
I think a lot of people get a little too defensive about their own teams when lobbying for Top 25 votes, which is understandable. Everyone wants to think that their team is the fringe-second-level-powerhouse. But if you got totally blown out by the best team you played, you'd better have a few positive scalps to earn a spot here. Either a string of blowout wins against lesser opposition, or at least one or two high-quality wins to show you can step up against someone that can hit back.
It's hard to get into the top 25 with so many teams, which is what I think people don't always get. A lack of top 25 votes doesn't mean that your team gets zero respect. The top 25 are the top 10% of teams in Division III.
Quote from: timtlu on November 11, 2014, 05:06:23 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 11, 2014, 04:59:50 PM
They got destroyed by the only good team they've played.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on November 11, 2014, 05:01:20 PM
I can excuse a blowout loss to one of the nation's ruling class (Mount, UWW, UMHB, Wesley)
Shows just how nuanced and fickle this situation is.
Indeed. There are blowout losses, and then there is what TLU did against UMHB.
Berg was down 23-7 at half against JCU and 27-10 against Mount. The final scores (43-16 and 58-17) were blowouts, but they traded a punch or two.
TLU was down 45-6 by halftime.
I hate parsing apart the levels of blowout just by margin of victory, but it's pretty obvious which of those games was more competitive.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on November 11, 2014, 05:01:20 PM
Quote from: desertcat1 on November 11, 2014, 04:44:04 PM
hey FCG,
Is it the same ballot That has uww at 2, and Mtu at 4, and Heidi at 14 by any chance? ??? care to (spline) lucy? ::)
I doubt that's all the same ballot. The person voting Heidelberg at 14 (I know who it is from a prior conversation) is going to be someone that thinks the OAC's top two are light-years ahead of the rest of the country.
I'm a firm believer that the polls should represent the opinions of the individual voters themselves - i.e. I respect that someone sticks for what they believe without voting because of how they think others will vote in the poll. With that said, I still think Heidelberg at #14 is a loony vote. I can excuse a blowout loss to one of the nation's ruling class (Mount, UWW, UMHB, Wesley), but...well, John Carroll's ranking may or may not be legitimate; I think JCU is a very good team that might be one of the nation's top 10, but I also think they're being over-ranked because they've been crushing everyone in an unusually bad OAC (remember, they did this last year, and then they lost at home against a two-loss Pool C team in the first round of the playoffs). We don't know for sure that JCU is a top-10 team nationally just yet, and Heidelberg got curb-stomped by them, too, not just by Mount.
I agree but , being the ONLY one who thinks that put them way out in left field sometime smoking with willie. :o. been there done that. ;D
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on November 11, 2014, 05:08:45 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 11, 2014, 04:59:50 PM
Quote from: RLW on November 11, 2014, 04:19:46 PM
WOW, D3 football.com has TLU at what would be 26th. AFCA has them at 20th and they do not get a single vote in the top 36 of the Top 25 fan Poll.
They got destroyed by the only good team they've played. Heidelberg is in the same category for me...huge losses to JCU and UMU but with no wins impressing me.
This. It's one thing to get blown out by a good team, but they gave up 72 points at home and if you look at their wins, they give up a crapload of points in all of them. This isn't some team that has eight blowout wins and one bad loss; they beat 3-6 Trinity by seven, 4-5 ETBU by six, and they've given up a lot of points in almost every game, against opponents of varying quality. Their only impressive win came in week 2 against Hardin-Simmons. Where's the evidence they can stop anyone with a decent offense?
I think a lot of people get a little too defensive about their own teams when lobbying for Top 25 votes, which is understandable. Everyone wants to think that their team is the fringe-second-level-powerhouse. But if you got totally blown out by the best team you played, you'd better have a few positive scalps to earn a spot here. Either a string of blowout wins against lesser opposition, or at least one or two high-quality wins to show you can step up against someone that can hit back.
It's hard to get into the top 25 with so many teams, which is what I think people don't always get. A lack of top 25 votes doesn't mean that your team gets zero respect. The top 25 are the top 10% of teams in Division III.
[/b]
again i agree .. 8-) With all the evidence you have listed.. good work .. :)
I Was thinking he/she would want to justify the action that's all. ??? But i understand in this matter they can't ... (Just a homer ) :-*
Quote from: smedindy on November 11, 2014, 03:46:02 PM
Quote from: USee on November 11, 2014, 12:41:58 AM
Wow, tough crowd. Take the new guy. Who cares if it's 11.
Consistency cares. An MIT grad would know about making sure measurable data is observed in a consistent manner. But we welcome him for next year for sure!
I respect your opinion. Plus, I haven't watched enough of the midwest teams yet.
Quote from: desertcat1 on November 11, 2014, 05:04:30 PM
must be the buckeye boys ? maybe? ???
Is this thing a secret ballot? ;D you can post mine, i would like to see the others ... 8-)
I do my best not to reveal how anyone voted, but individuals are free to reveal their ballots if they choose.
The votes that stand out the most to me are
1) Heidelberg... which has already been discussed
2) Pac Lutheran... I'd like to hear the explanation from that voter about that one in comparison to the other west coast teams like Chapman and Pacific.
3) UW-Platteville off of a ballot
There were 2 voters who had the same 25 teams as the final poll. Usually ballots average 2 or 3 in the ORV.
Quote from: timtlu on November 11, 2014, 05:06:23 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 11, 2014, 04:59:50 PM
They got destroyed by the only good team they've played.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on November 11, 2014, 05:01:20 PM
I can excuse a blowout loss to one of the nation's ruling class (Mount, UWW, UMHB, Wesley)
Shows just how nuanced and fickle this situation is.
To be honest, I don't think there's much nuance or fickleness at all. There is general consistency with how TLU is ranked everywhere except the Regional Advisory Committee. And why might the committee's general opinion of TLU be a little higher than the others?
Just as any parent sees their children at their greatest potential and in the best light, so too a coach is fond of the team that he put together and leads. TLU's head coach, Danny Padron, is one of the 8 members of the RAC. As is the HC Loren Dawson of conference mate Austin, last week's opponent. See page 11 of the following:
http://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/PreChamps_DIII_Football_2014_Revised2.pdf
Coach Dawson is also co-chair of the RAC and is therefore one of the 8 members of the National Committee that will select the tournament teams. (pg 10)
Based on this information, the fallout will be very interesting were TLU to be included over an undefeated team, and possibly because their victories were over 4-5 & 3-6 teams rather than 2-7 & 1-8 teams (SOS).
My observation stirred up a lot of interest. I agree/understand that TLU has made its bed and must now sleep in it. As another observation TLU was listed as 74th in Kickoff so to be where they are now in any of the polls/rankings they have come along ways. I think the team and coaches have done very well. I thank everyone for their TLU well wishes and compliments.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 11, 2014, 05:38:31 PM
Quote from: desertcat1 on November 11, 2014, 05:04:30 PM
must be the buckeye boys ? maybe? ???
Is this thing a secret ballot? ;D you can post mine, i would like to see the others ... 8-)
I do my best not to reveal how anyone voted, but individuals are free to reveal their ballots if they choose.
The votes that stand out the most to me are
1) Heidelberg... which has already been discussed
2) Pac Lutheran... I'd like to hear the explanation from that voter about that one in comparison to the other west coast teams like Chapman and Pacific.
3) UW-Platteville off of a ballot
There were 2 voters who had the same 25 teams as the final poll. Usually ballots average 2 or 3 in the ORV.
Surprise, surprise. it's not me this time. :o
i made my picks at 11/09/14... at 7:44a.m.
uww, mt u, UMHB,wart, wesley,Jc, Hobart,J hop, Linfield, St John,Witt, wheat, widen, beth, wabash,w& J,uwp,del val,Ncc, Chapman,centre,st tom, Con More, pacific, Tom More... ;D have at it boys . :-* Although i do think PLU is a better team than the others .. :P inside info... :-X :-*
Quote from: timtlu on November 11, 2014, 05:00:43 PM
It becomes even more interesting when you look at the first week's regional rankings from the south. The fans poll very cleanly follows the top 4 (UMHB, Wesley, John Hopkins, W&J), then the large TLU discrepancy (tied 5th in regional rankings along with Centre), followed by another clean comparison to the regional rankings with 5 - 7 (Centre, Muhlenburg, Thomas More) all receiving multiple fan votes.
I wonder exactly where the differing interpretation is on the data/results that makes these gaps so wide?
The regional rankings at time are based on some semi-rigid criteria (regional record, D3 record, SOS). The other polls can be more liberal with their interpretations.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on November 11, 2014, 05:01:20 PM
I think JCU is a very good team that might be one of the nation's top 10, but I also think they're being over-ranked because they've been crushing everyone in an unusually bad OAC (remember, they did this last year, and then they lost at home against a two-loss Pool C team in the first round of the playoffs). We don't know for sure that JCU is a top-10 team nationally just yet, and Heidelberg got curb-stomped by them, too, not just by Mount.
Last year is not this year. I think this year's JCU team is better, and I'll duck now in order not to restart THAT argument.
Quote from: desertcat1 on November 11, 2014, 06:32:10 PM
Although i do think PLU is a better team than the others .. :P inside info... :-X :-*
PLU had a funny way of showing they were better, you know, by losing to Pacific and all :D
Quote from: smedindy on November 11, 2014, 07:05:23 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on November 11, 2014, 05:01:20 PM
I think JCU is a very good team that might be one of the nation's top 10, but I also think they're being over-ranked because they've been crushing everyone in an unusually bad OAC (remember, they did this last year, and then they lost at home against a two-loss Pool C team in the first round of the playoffs). We don't know for sure that JCU is a top-10 team nationally just yet, and Heidelberg got curb-stomped by them, too, not just by Mount.
Last year is not this year. I think this year's JCU team is better, and I'll duck now in order not to restart THAT argument.
Oh, sure, I know. But I am saying that last year we went into the playoffs thinking JCU was all that and a bag of potato chips...and they lost at home in Round 1. Therefore, we do not yet know that JCU is anything more than a very good #2 in the OAC. If they'd won a couple playoff games last year, I might be willing to buy into the notion that they're a superpower that blows everyone off the field, and thus even top 25 teams can be forgiven a lopsided loss to them.
But, keeping Heidelberg ranked (14th!!!!) because they lost to two really good teams only makes much sense if we're really sure that those two teams are, like, #2 and #5 in the nation. Are we really sure that John Carroll is #5 in the nation? Right now they're ranked up there because most everyone else that would have been a contender for that spot has lost and JCU has remained undefeated. The same was true last year. Believe me, I would love to see JCU make a playoff run, but until I actually see that happen, I'll hold off on forgiving Heidelberg a blowout loss to them.
If you must know, I may have anti-homered Wabash. That stretch of the ballot was tough for me.,
ETP -
I'm not that 'Berg voter! I have them 8th in the North behind Franklin!
I have JCU 6th now. I think they're not as good as Wartburg but better than the other undefeated teams aside from THE power four.
If Mount ends up destroying JCU, then TLU will have a very similar resume to the Streaks:
1. One loss
2. Losing big to a top ranked team
3. Looking good against (at best) average competition
4. Zero wins against current top 25 teams
Not sure if I have a point, but it's interesting considering where both teams sit in the rankings. Of course that'll change if a blowout occurs in Aliance Saturday.
Warhawk,
I do think that JCU's wins over Heidelberg, BW, and ONU (even Otterbein) outweigh TLU's wins over Hardin-Simmons, ETBU, and Austin (or Louisiana College). With so little common data and just one non-conference game in the OAC, it's hard to get a full picture, Massey has Heidelberg and Hardin Simmons in the same neighborhoods rankings wise.
Mind you, I don't mean to pile on TLU, I love that they're a new name making noise in the South these last two years, and I hope they keep it up!
Quote from: smedindy on November 11, 2014, 07:14:44 PM
ETP -
I'm not that 'Berg voter! I have them 8th in the North behind Franklin!
I have JCU 6th now. I think they're not as good as Wartburg but better than the other undefeated teams aside from THE power four.
I AM the #14 Heidi voter. I agree that they have no quality wins, and two (fairly conclusive) losses, but if losing decisively to UMU and JCU is disqualifying, I fear we would have a top 12 instead of a top 25. I put them #14 for the simple reason that I suspect (can't prove, obviously) that they would beat everyone I ranked below them. (BTW, I have UMU and JCU as #3 and #6.)
And that is all the justification I can give for my vote. (In the North I had Heidi 7th, Franklin 8th.)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 11, 2014, 07:55:24 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 11, 2014, 07:14:44 PM
ETP -
I'm not that 'Berg voter! I have them 8th in the North behind Franklin!
I have JCU 6th now. I think they're not as good as Wartburg but better than the other undefeated teams aside from THE power four.
I AM the #14 Heidi voter. I agree that they have no quality wins, and two (fairly conclusive) losses, but if losing decisively to UMU and JCU is disqualifying, I fear we would have a top 12 instead of a top 25. I put them #14 for the simple reason that I suspect (can't prove, obviously) that they would beat everyone I ranked below them. (BTW, I have UMU and JCU as #3 and #6.)
And that is all the justification I can give for my vote. (In the North I had Heidi 7th, Franklin 8th.)
So do you have the same six teams above Heidi in your top 25 poll, as you do in your North poll?
I think some of you are a little defensive about your prognostications. Please reread my post. I stated that somebody is obviously wrong, be it the polls/regional rankings or the fan poll here. I never even hinted at which one of those it might be. To try and determine that, I inquired as to where the difference in interpretation might be to help explain the large disparity. I am able to tease out some of your opinions through your defense, but I find it interesting how contradictory some of the responses are. As I read it, the two driving points that have been made here are 1. the blowout loss to UMHB and 2. the slanted (bordering on collusive) view of the regional ranking committee.
Yet I've also read here on multiple occasions that margin of victory really is irrelevant once you get past 40 or so, especially against the "super elite". Backups are in on both sides, yada yada yada. I apologize, but I don't really feel like quoting the many times this has been stated. Likewise, the regional rankings are dismissed based on subjectiveness in one breath, but their rigidity and the objectivity of strength of schedule are praised in the next breath. If these are indeed the two reasons you hang your hat on, so be it. That answers the question I asked, where is the difference in interpretation of the stats/results. As I have stated earlier, the whimsical nature of these defenses in particular, just show how thin a line there is between being able to objectively differentiate teams 18 - 40. That may come across attacking in nature, but if you could remove yourself from the parent role of your child poll, and look at the information from an objective standpoint, everything above stated is, indeed, the truth.
No one is wrong. We only have ten voters right now, not the number in Pat's poll. With more voters, you're going to have more teams in consideration, possibly. The Coaches' poil has been laughable at times in the past. If you want to join next year, I'm sure there's a spot available. We need more representation from other regions. I myself am bifurcated, with my College in the North and my residence in the West (though I'm either closest to PLU, Whitworth or Puget Sound. I haven't measured...)
I think we here are all looking objectively. Don't think we're not, please. And don't call someone WRONG when we care enough to consider all 200+ teams here That's insulting.
Regional rankings ARE a different beast. They have different criteria they must take into consideration and their rankings are not congruent to any Top 25. So you can't really compare them. There have been a lot of teams that are high in regional rankings and low or not even in the Top 25. Someone with time and not piles of reports to do tomorrow could check RRs vs Top 25s and see the disconnects.
The main issue with TLU when comparing regional rankings is the region they are in. Fifth in the south is nice, but fifth in the North was Wittenberg and fifth in the West was either Chapman (around TLU's neighborhood) or St. John's, which just beat Bethel. There's no rational way to put TLU in with Witt or St. John's, really.
I think Muhlenberg is better. I think Centre is better. I think Chapman is better. I think Ithaca is better. I think SJF is better. I think Bethel is better. I think North Central is better. I don't have St. Thomas in my Top 25, but I think they're better than TLU. Not by much, mind you. These are marginal differences. I think TLU is about the 27th best team in D3. That ain't hay.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 11, 2014, 08:00:47 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 11, 2014, 07:55:24 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 11, 2014, 07:14:44 PM
ETP -
I'm not that 'Berg voter! I have them 8th in the North behind Franklin!
I have JCU 6th now. I think they're not as good as Wartburg but better than the other undefeated teams aside from THE power four.
I AM the #14 Heidi voter. I agree that they have no quality wins, and two (fairly conclusive) losses, but if losing decisively to UMU and JCU is disqualifying, I fear we would have a top 12 instead of a top 25. I put them #14 for the simple reason that I suspect (can't prove, obviously) that they would beat everyone I ranked below them. (BTW, I have UMU and JCU as #3 and #6.)
And that is all the justification I can give for my vote. (In the North I had Heidi 7th, Franklin 8th.)
So do you have the same six teams above Heidi in your top 25 poll, as you do in your North poll?
Yes.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 11, 2014, 09:29:51 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 11, 2014, 08:00:47 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 11, 2014, 07:55:24 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 11, 2014, 07:14:44 PM
ETP -
I'm not that 'Berg voter! I have them 8th in the North behind Franklin!
I have JCU 6th now. I think they're not as good as Wartburg but better than the other undefeated teams aside from THE power four.
I AM the #14 Heidi voter. I agree that they have no quality wins, and two (fairly conclusive) losses, but if losing decisively to UMU and JCU is disqualifying, I fear we would have a top 12 instead of a top 25. I put them #14 for the simple reason that I suspect (can't prove, obviously) that they would beat everyone I ranked below them. (BTW, I have UMU and JCU as #3 and #6.)
And that is all the justification I can give for my vote. (In the North I had Heidi 7th, Franklin 8th.)
So do you have the same six teams above Heidi in your top 25 poll, as you do in your North poll?
Yes.
I admire your consistency, albiet one that seems a bit top-heavy. ;)
Quote from: smedindy on November 11, 2014, 09:32:09 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 11, 2014, 09:29:51 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 11, 2014, 08:00:47 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 11, 2014, 07:55:24 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 11, 2014, 07:14:44 PM
ETP -
I'm not that 'Berg voter! I have them 8th in the North behind Franklin!
I have JCU 6th now. I think they're not as good as Wartburg but better than the other undefeated teams aside from THE power four.
I AM the #14 Heidi voter. I agree that they have no quality wins, and two (fairly conclusive) losses, but if losing decisively to UMU and JCU is disqualifying, I fear we would have a top 12 instead of a top 25. I put them #14 for the simple reason that I suspect (can't prove, obviously) that they would beat everyone I ranked below them. (BTW, I have UMU and JCU as #3 and #6.)
And that is all the justification I can give for my vote. (In the North I had Heidi 7th, Franklin 8th.)
So do you have the same six teams above Heidi in your top 25 poll, as you do in your North poll?
Yes.
I admire your consistency, albiet one that seems a bit top-heavy. ;)
The top six in the North were
unanimously top six.
Still doesn't mean that #6 in the North is the #13th best team, even if everyone has unanimity on those teams. It's looking at a micro-set versus the full universe
One or the other is wrong, by virtue of them being different. Unless the views aren't different (another possibility, I originally acknowledged). Your personal ranking backs up this stance. By the way it works, we will likely never know which diverging view is most correct. Also, by no means take my response as belittling or insulting your efforts. The two views of TLU's merit are indeed, mutually exclusive, so they can not both be right. There are far too many teams and far too many comparisons between them, for anyone to be right, anyhow. I appreciate your efforts and the time and energy that go behind them, but I genuinely was trying to rectify the difference in positions (if there is actually one), given the same set of data, to gain insight as to why the fan poll is so vastly different to the top 25 and regional rankings in this one particular area. By contrast, they are actually very similar in regards to all the other top south teams. I really don't have a forum to garner the other side's position. I also understand there are only ten of you, but I lean on that striking similarity between the other 7 teams to conclude this is not a difference simply based on sample size. The responses, however, I feel were completely copout in nature; collectively speaking out of both sides of your mouth. Talking points are preached when convenient, but dismissed when they fly in the face of your (I use this pronoun generically) given logic.
From my vantage, much of this debate comes down to philosophy. You say you think Centre and Muhlenberg are better. Why? Centre has beaten two teams with a winning record, zero regionally ranked. Their strength of schedule is decidedly lower. Muhlenberg has beaten one team with a winning record, zero regionally ranked. Their strength of schedule is also decidedly lower. TLU has beaten three teams with winning record, one regionally ranked, with a decidedly higher strength of schedule. Do Centre and Muhlenberg get the nod simply because they don't have a blowout loss to one of the four super elites? Is their lack of schedule rewarded? If so, so be it. That is a concrete objective reason, open to interpretation by differing philosophies. Or, perhaps there is another entirely different reason. I have my own personal reasoning for where I believe TLU should stand, but it is based on objective reasoning.
The prevailing thought to answer the original question, however, was to defensively attack with cries of homerism and/or corruption, or cherry pick a margin of victory defense when it suits your (again, generic) current opinion, but goes against everything else that has ever been used in these forums to defend margin of victory and results against the "super elites".
Quote from: timtlu on November 11, 2014, 08:54:25 PM
I think some of you are a little defensive about your prognostications. Please reread my post. I stated that somebody is obviously wrong, be it the polls/regional rankings or the fan poll here. I never even hinted at which one of those it might be. To try and determine that, I inquired as to where the difference in interpretation might be to help explain the large disparity. I am able to tease out some of your opinions through your defense, but I find it interesting how contradictory ??? some of the responses are. As I read it, the two driving points that have been made here are 1. the blowout loss to UMHB and 2. the slanted (bordering on collusive) view of the regional ranking committee.
Yet I've also read here on multiple occasions that margin of victory really is irrelevant once you get past 40 or so, especially against the "super elite". Backups are in on both sides, yada yada yada. I apologize, but I don't really feel like quoting the many times this has been stated. Likewise, the regional rankings are dismissed based on subjectiveness in one breath, but their rigidity and the objectivity of strength of schedule are praised in the next breath. If these are indeed the two reasons you hang your hat on, so be it. That answers the question I asked, where is the difference in interpretation of the stats/results. As I have stated earlier, the whimsical nature of these defenses in particular, just show how thin a line there is between being able to objectively differentiate teams 18 - 40. That may come across attacking in nature, but if you could remove yourself from the parent role of your child poll, and look at the information from an objective standpoint, everything above stated is, indeed, the truth.
I'd like to make sure there are no misunderstandings from my earlier post regarding the makeup of the RAC. Since that was my only post, there couldn't have been any contradictions on my part. I agree that, at some point, you must disregard extremely large margins of victory. So stop at the half- 45-6 after 2 quarters. Still not so good.
TLU's SOS is impressive. And were you comparing two teams, each with one defeat, then SOS would likely carry more weight. But that's absolutely not the case.
Besides TLU's SOS is being propped up by UMHB's 9 victories. If you remove those from the equation, a quick calculation changes the SOS to a more pedestrian .48. Not sure the committee will take it this far, but why should a team get credit for a scheduling a tough game that was lost? It's been mentioned in these forums numerous times before: "it's who you beat, not who you lose to."
I also can't rationalize a win over a RR#10 (Hardin-Simmons) who likely isn't any better than Centre-foe Rhodes (and who may not even remain at #10 after what should be a competitive game vs Louisiana College this week.) But remember, it is the RAC that provides the regional rankings that determine RR wins. ;) So I'm not so sure we'll be seeing Rhodes hit the list next week
So after discovering the South RAC's 8 members included a bubble team's HC, the HC from one of the other 3 teams in the conference and, incidentally, Louisiana College's HC (all 3 teams play each other), it made a lot more sense.
Politics, like other things in life, happens. Make no mistake about it. This is Texas, you know. 8-)
First, I don't like the NCAA's SOS calculations. And regional rankings are NCAA playoff selection criteria, not Top 25 voting criteria. I don't even pay attention to those.
Muhlenberg's Massey ranking is superior to TLU's and their Massey SOS IS higher and that's an objective data set and algorithm based on MOV (which definitely has a diminishing returns, so mega blowouts are rather muted). Muhlenberg popped on the radar when they gave Johns Hopkins a game. They probably would be higher in my eyes had they not had a close win over Susquehanna, which I think was a hangover game. Then again, JHU also had a close one to Susquehanna, go figure.
In Massey's algorithm Muhlenberg is a better team and has played a tougher schedule.
As for Centre, their Massey SOS turned out lower, but it's not like they scheduled hacks and frauds. We've discussed that before somewhere else. Centre's problem is that four of their opponents (Hanover, W&L, Wash U and Millsaps) decided to have a collective stink this year. B-Southern is also not good compared to their past. Yes, Centre didn't play someone of UMHB's caliper, but they're 9-0 and I gotta give them some credit for that.
What's really sticking with me with TLU is their games before and after UMHB. I thought they should have been better against ETBU, Trinity and Austin. Wins all, yes, and I can excuse a close game against a lesser light, but those three give me pause.
Also, they are NOT mutually exclusive views when you look at the ENTIRE universe of D3. Rating someone 24th or 25th best, or 27th or 28th best, is a marginal difference. It's entirely plausible that given 15 other voters TLU gets some votes. I'm surprised no one on Pat's panel voted for Oshkosh, but I'm not having a hissy fit about it, calling them wrong, questioning their motives or logic.
Please understand that regional rankings ARE NOT CONGRUENT to any Top 25 rankings. Never have been. Dismiss them for anything but playoff discussions. They have guidelines that they have to follow.
We will never really see who is 'right' or not, anyway. Not all Top 25 teams will make the playoffs. If TLU does I'd bet they're on the road to Belton, again, because the NCAA is O'Bannoned. Meanwhile, if Centre makes it there are several teams that they can play within 500 miles.
Smed-
Now you're answering my questions and proving your mettle. I'll let your work of a validated defense for Muhlenberg negate the petty hissy fit comment at the end. Where have I ever claimed anything, much less cried about it? That's the type of attack I was alluding to when I claimed defensiveness about your (again collective, just assume this from here on out, unfair as it probably is) fan rankings.
Don't go and undermine your work of making a case for Muhlenberg by trying to make a case for Centre. I'm not accusing them of scheduling hacks, just seeing it as you put it, as it is. They played multiple teams that happen to be bad this year, and beat them. TLU has played teams that have been better this year, and beat them. Had TLU scheduled any of Centre's opponents this year, there is a very good liklihood they would also be 9-0, with a better Massey ranking, which you are hanging your hat on. So we're right back to you ranking them higher as a reward for not scheduling UMHB. Fair enough. My philosophy differs in this case.
As for the mutually exclusiveness, they are by the original premise Ralph brought up (TLU not being one of the top 36 teams). From the get go I acknowledged that might not actually be the case, however, if every fan voter in actuality had them right outside their top 25. Again, your personal ranking validates this second premise. Other responses, as I have expanded upon, did not.
D3parent-
I can follow most of your logic, I just find issue with your politics statement. I can see on the surface how this looks, but the defense AGAINST the regional rankings is that they are so rigid based on criteria. You're wanting it both ways by claiming subjectivity here. I agree, this picture gets cleared up with the result of HSU/LC. If HSU takes care of LC, would that then change your stance? Or do you just fall back on the same defense, now using LC's coach to validate HSU as well as TLU?
Quote from: timtlu on November 11, 2014, 10:13:36 PM
By the way it works, we will likely never know which diverging view is most correct.
Quote from: smedindy on November 11, 2014, 10:53:58 PM
We will never really see who is 'right' or not, anyway.
Turns out we agree, after all. :o
And until HSU, Trinity, LC, or another ASC/SCAC team pick up the banner to give this region 3 playoff teams, that will unfortunately be true for the forseeable future.
Quote from: timtlu on November 11, 2014, 11:22:45 PM
Smed-
Now you're answering my questions and proving your mettle. I'll let your work of a validated defense for Muhlenberg negate the petty hissy fit comment at the end. Where have I ever claimed anything, much less cried about it? That's the type of attack I was alluding to when I claimed defensiveness about your (again collective, just assume this from here on out, unfair as it probably is) fan rankings.
It smacked of a hissy fit, "WHY ISN'T MYYYYYY TEAM RANKED BY 10 RANDOM D3 FANS???"
I see it with some Wabash fans, "D3 Footballand the NCAA disrespect us." No, they don't. I have to tell some Wabash fans to stop whining. The NCAA hates all teams equally. D3 Football pays a lot of attention to Wabash - unlike say Beloit or Benedictine or Bates.
If you would have not stated we were WRONG in our rankings I probably wouldn't have used that phrase. WRONG is the most incorrect phrase in the world when discussing something like this, especially when it's been acknowledged that TLU is in the neighborhood. It's not like we're raking Buena Vista over TLU or anything.
Quote from: timtlu on November 11, 2014, 11:22:45 PM
Don't go and undermine your work of making a case for Muhlenberg by trying to make a case for Centre. I'm not accusing them of scheduling hacks, just seeing it as you put it, as it is. They played multiple teams that happen to be bad this year, and beat them. TLU has played teams that have been better this year, and beat them. Had TLU scheduled any of Centre's opponents this year, there is a very good liklihood they would also be 9-0, with a better Massey ranking, which you are hanging your hat on. So we're right back to you ranking them higher as a reward for not scheduling UMHB. Fair enough. My philosophy differs in this case.
No, that IS NOT the case. I am NOT ranking them higher because of not scheduling UMHB. How did you ever infer that???? You're reading what you want to read into it. That's NOT my reasoning for Centre's ranking. Washington & Jefferson didn't schedule UMHB, Wesley or Mt. Union, and they're even higher....
I just said they didn't play someone of UMHB's caliper. That's true, but it's not why I ranked Centre higher.
Centre's Massey ratings are worse than TLU. But I don't use Massey as my be-all, else I would just copy it. Remove UMHB from TLU's schedule and their Massey SOS rating goes down for sure. I don't know about their overall power ranking. I think Centre's is diminished by their game with W&L. But that's just one data point.
The games BEFORE and AFTER the UMHB are the games giving me pause. It's the entire universe, NOT just the drubbing. I have to weigh THE ENTIRE BODY OF WORK of TLU against not only Centre, but Chapman, North Central, St. Thomas, Concorida-Moorhead, Oshkosh, Pacific, et. al.
Assumption. I'd suggest you go back and read again.
For what it's worth, against your assumption I actually think, if they are not actually ranked correctly (20 - 26), TLU is if anything over ranked in the regional rankings and top 25 polls/fan polls. Keep on shouting homerism though, the hills will listen. But again, I have objective reasons for my thoughts. My rationale does not include two sided defenses about strength of schedule and margin of defeat against UMHB. That result, especially, is irrelevant to anyone ranked outside the top 15 or so. My reasoning is actually similar to yours. Having seen every game in person, their offense after the UMHB beatdown is not the same offense it was before the beat down. Their defense has always been suspect, but in actuality is a relative strength of theirs at this point in the season. Their offense was always what made them a possible top 15 - 25 team, however, it definitively has not been that over the last 1/4 of their season. I still consider their ETBU result a point of strength. They won that game in the manner that would validate a top 25 ranking based on their team identity. Outscore 'em.
But even given that stance, I still can't understand the rationale that gives the stark edge to Centre, both in the top 25 and fan polls. In essence, both teams have beaten who they were supposed to beat, with TLU having done so against better competition. Either you are awarding Centre for not playing anyone, or you are punishing TLU for taking on UMHB. Unless there is another explanation?
Quote from: timtlu on November 11, 2014, 05:00:43 PM
Somebody is obviously wrong, whether it be the pollsters or the fan poll. That discrepancy is too large. Or, I guess it could theoretically be that all of the fan poll members have them ranked 26th as well, garnering them 0 counting points.
It becomes even more interesting when you look at the first week's regional rankings from the south. The fans poll very cleanly follows the top 4 (UMHB, Wesley, John Hopkins, W&J), then the large TLU discrepancy (tied 5th in regional rankings along with Centre), followed by another clean comparison to the regional rankings with 5 - 7 (Centre, Muhlenburg, Thomas More) all receiving multiple fan votes.
I wonder exactly where the differing interpretation is on the data/results that makes these gaps so wide?
Oy vey.
You don't call a group of people wrong when questioning their opnions about the team you root for and escape homerism. You can't. You won't. Also, you were stating the RRs and the NCAA SOS and wondering about OUR poll, compared to the RRs. Two different animals.
I don't think TLU's competition is vastly superior to Centre's, outside of UMHB. So both of your assumptions on ,y ranking of Centre are incorrect. UMHB skews the SOS calculation so much. But how different are Austin and Wash U? It's not like TLU has played a Empire 8 or WIAC schedule.
I am not rewarding Centre for not playing anyone. I avoid that. Normally, a 9-0 team would be near the top 10 to 15. W&J is barely there. Centre's way down there, considering they are 9-0. Carroll was never in the mix even by being undefeated. There's no way I'm voting for Macalester, even as I applaud them for 9-1.
The whapping UMHB gave TLU is contextual to their results against LC and HSU. LC gave them a game after the first quarter. HSU had a halftime lead. TLU was never there. That gives me a bit of a pause. Then the Austin and Trinity games happened. Then you look at ETBU, and you wonder...
Again, for the billionth time. THE GAPS AREN'T WIDE. 26th or 27th best versus 22nd or 23rd? MINUTE.
It is my firm belief that if two people disagree on a subject, it will never be resolved by exchanging post/emails. Sitting behind a computer screen in the privacy of you home/office will never come to an agreement. Go sit face to face discuss the issue calmly to come to an conclusion/resolution. Before you take offense to this, I will admit this is only my opinion.
But then the concept of message boards goes asunder...we may as well close this up...
We could go in circles forever. Yes HSU had a halftime lead on UMHB. They must be really good. TLU handled HSU. And?
Quote from: timtlu on November 11, 2014, 05:00:43 PM
Somebody is obviously wrong, whether it be the pollsters or the fan poll. That discrepancy is too large. Or, I guess it could theoretically be that all of the fan poll members have them ranked 26th as well, garnering them 0 counting points.
It becomes even more interesting when you look at the first week's regional rankings from the south. The fans poll very cleanly follows the top 4 (UMHB, Wesley, John Hopkins, W&J), then the large TLU discrepancy (tied 5th in regional rankings along with Centre), followed by another clean comparison to the regional rankings with 5 - 7 (Centre, Muhlenburg, Thomas More) all receiving multiple fan votes.
I wonder exactly where the differing interpretation is on the data/results that makes these gaps so wide?
I'll leave it at this, because you're obviously entrenched into to your defensiveness. I don't know how to point it out any clearer than this. Bolded acknowledgement. Bolded acknowledgment. Bolded neutral question. Get over yourself. The actuality at this point is you look at my screenname and assume homerism instead of objectively answering the question, whether it be from historical perspective a la Wabash or an internal doubt of your own due diligence to properly rank them.
I have answered the question, and I'm not the one being defensive. You inferred opinions were wrong when they were well thought out and are just conjectural opinions. Neither set has to be right OR wrong. You conflated the NCAA SOS and RRs with real, actual, rankings that have contextual rigor behind them. The gaps are NOT wide. I went through my logic, though I can't speak for the other nine. And you have no right to disparage my due diligence or anyone else's because the result didn't meet with your rigor.
A stark edge to Centre, who on my ballot is in the 20's over a team that is also in the 20's but not in the top 25? That's STARK?
Stark is the difference between Heidelberg and Muskingum; between Wittenberg and Hiram; between North Park and North Central...
Quote from: timtlu on November 11, 2014, 10:13:36 PM
Unless the views aren't different (another possibility, I originally acknowledged). Your personal ranking backs up this stance.
Quote from: timtlu on November 11, 2014, 11:22:45 PM
I'll let your work of a validated defense for Muhlenberg ......
Again, your personal ranking validates this second premise. Other responses, as I have expanded upon, did not.
Quote from: timtlu on November 12, 2014, 12:14:44 AM
The actuality at this point is you look at my screenname and assume homerism instead of objectively answering the question, whether it be from historical perspective a la Wabash or an internal doubt of your own due diligence to properly rank them.
Quote from: smedindy on November 12, 2014, 12:18:07 AM
And you have no right to disparage my due diligence or anyone else's because the result didn't meet with your rigor.
Or. It's a very powerful word. It's almost as if I keep trying to help you make your point, but you refuse to let me; entrenching yourself further and further into defensiveness. Whatever the case, I've got to get up in the morning. My rationality often perturbs those who are more emotional, so no harm taken from this end. I have numerous times shown that I understand/value some of your positions; some of the others, I don't jive with. I am, however, still interested on how others reconcile the difference (let me be clear here, if there actually is one). After all, this is a
discussion board, is it not?
Quote from: timtlu on November 11, 2014, 10:13:36 PM
collectively speaking out of both sides of your mouth. Talking points are preached when convenient, but dismissed when they fly in the face of your (I use this pronoun generically) given logic.
Dude, you're funny. I have to let you know, however, that you can't take the independent thoughts of two people, "collect" them, then say that they're "collectively speaking out of both sides of your mouth" when those thoughts differ. I admire your spunk. But that's just against the rules of rational discourse. ;)
Quote from: timtlu on November 11, 2014, 11:22:45 PM
Now you're answering my questions and proving your mettle. (Congrats @smedindy for proving that mettle!) I'll let your work of a validated defense for Muhlenberg negate the petty hissy fit comment at the end. Where have I ever claimed anything, much less cried about it?
Actually I think @smedindy's comment was both accurate and humorous.
Quote from: timtlu on November 11, 2014, 11:22:45 PM
Or, perhaps there is another entirely different reason. I have my own personal reasoning for where I believe TLU should stand, but it is based on objective reasoning.
You come across just a bit dismissive of others and, oh I'll just say *slightly* too impressed with your own "rational" (of course) thought process. ::)
Quote from: timtlu on November 11, 2014, 11:22:45 PM
I can follow most of your logic, I just find issue with your politics statement.
OK. I'm trying to imagine the world you live in where politics aren't so tangible you can almost reach out and touch it. From your tone and opinions, I'm guessing you're either a student or make your living in academia- not that there's anything wrong with that. But there's another reality off campus- especially in Texas politics and football polls! 8-)
Quote from: timtlu on November 11, 2014, 11:22:45 PM
but the defense AGAINST the regional rankings is that they are so rigid based on criteria. You're wanting it both ways by claiming subjectivity here.
Sorry bud. I've never defended RR. If I follow you correctly, though, I guess in this instance I'm being "collectively" hypocritical. The only cure to collective hypocrisy, as I can best imagine, is for me to start a thread, then close it immediately after one post. I'll try that next time so nobody makes me a talk out of the other side of my mouth without me knowing.
Not sure if you're familiar with Bennett Rank -http://www.bennettrank.com/- but they have Centre @ 23, Rhodes 51, LC 63, TLU 65, HSU 67. Unless HSU blows out LC, the game result won't change my mind, which is that Rhodes is likely a better team than HS, and might even be better than TLU (not that I'm saying they should be ranked higher). The anomaly that exits related to TLU's ranking higher than an undefeated team resides in one place.
Quote from: timtlu on November 11, 2014, 11:47:52 PM
My rationale does not include two sided defenses about strength of schedule and margin of defeat against UMHB. That result, especially, is irrelevant to anyone ranked outside the top 15 or so.
Wrong. It's relevant in two ways. 1) TLU lost. This fact alone is likely all that matters here. 2) TLU lost BADLY. Down 39 after 2 quarters. I realize UMHB is on a higher level than TLU, Centre, Muhlenberg, etc. But in no way do I believe that Centre loses so badly.
Quote from: timtlu on November 11, 2014, 11:22:45 PM
Had TLU scheduled any of Centre's opponents this year, there is a very good liklihood they would also be 9-0
Hey Pot. Kettle here. Now you're showing your homerism. I'm glad you're so confident in your assessment. I am not so confident. AGAIN, please refer to my earlier post: Remove UMHB's 9-0 record from TLU's SOS and we're comparing 4.41 to slightly under 4.8. I'm going to call that insignificant. Now you want to "hang your hat" on that? Plus a loss? A "RR win" from a #10. All of that's enough for you to send 9-1 over a 10-0?
To him, it's about ethics in D3 Top 25 voting journalism....#top25gate
Quote from: timtlu on November 11, 2014, 10:13:36 PM
One or the other is wrong, by virtue of them being different. Unless the views aren't different (another possibility, I originally acknowledged). Your personal ranking backs up this stance. By the way it works, we will likely never know which diverging view is most correct. Also, by no means take my response as belittling or insulting your efforts. The two views of TLU's merit are indeed, mutually exclusive, so they can not both be right. There are far too many teams and far too many comparisons between them, for anyone to be right, anyhow. I appreciate your efforts and the time and energy that go behind them, but I genuinely was trying to rectify the difference in positions (if there is actually one), given the same set of data, to gain insight as to why the fan poll is so vastly different to the top 25 and regional rankings in this one particular area. By contrast, they are actually very similar in regards to all the other top south teams. I really don't have a forum to garner the other side's position. I also understand there are only ten of you, but I lean on that striking similarity between the other 7 teams to conclude this is not a difference simply based on sample size. The responses, however, I feel were completely copout in nature; collectively speaking out of both sides of your mouth. Talking points are preached when convenient, but dismissed when they fly in the face of your (I use this pronoun generically) given logic.
From my vantage, much of this debate comes down to philosophy. You say you think Centre and Muhlenberg are better. Why? Centre has beaten two teams with a winning record, zero regionally ranked. Their strength of schedule is decidedly lower. Muhlenberg has beaten one team with a winning record, zero regionally ranked. Their strength of schedule is also decidedly lower. TLU has beaten three teams with winning record, one regionally ranked, with a decidedly higher strength of schedule. Do Centre and Muhlenberg get the nod simply because they don't have a blowout loss to one of the four super elites? Is their lack of schedule rewarded? If so, so be it. That is a concrete objective reason, open to interpretation by differing philosophies. Or, perhaps there is another entirely different reason. I have my own personal reasoning for where I believe TLU should stand, but it is based on objective reasoning.
The prevailing thought to answer the original question, however, was to defensively attack with cries of homerism and/or corruption, or cherry pick a margin of victory defense when it suits your (again, generic) current opinion, but goes against everything else that has ever been used in these forums to defend margin of victory and results against the "super elites".
The RRs and the top 25s are different because, as stated, the rules by which they are put together are different. More to the point, the RACs have no option but to swallow the heaping spoonful of BS that is the NCAAs strength of schedule metric and top 25 voters can do what they will with that number up to and including ignoring it completely.
In the case of Texas Lutheran, top 25 voters can see that they haven't beaten anybody of any particular substance and in their showcase game they lost by over 50. Top 25 voters can also see that TLU genrally gives up a boatload of points, and teams that do that generally don't fit in the top 25 (check your ncaa stats...you'll see a stronger correlation to win percentages and total defense than you will to win percentages and total offense...good teams defend, almost without exception).
But here's the best part of this four page debate to me- being mad about the polls and where people vote for your team is silly. It's triple silly when we get deep enough into the season to have regional rankings and your team is ranked WAY higher than the polls would have indicated because at the end of today timmytlu, those NCAAS rankings really, really matter. The polls couldn't matter less. You're ahead, man. Your Bulldogs gave up 70 and lost by 50+ and they are still in really good shape to make the tournament. That should never ever happen and yet here we are. Celebrate it. Go to Belton next Saturday and check out that stadium and enjoy the playoff experience. And who knows- if the Bulldogs can figure out a way to not lose by 50, they might even get a vote or two here.
That is a long winded way of saying that the regional rankings and the polls are two completely different entities and shouldn't be compared to one another really at all, let alone use one to validate the other. Apples and oranges here.
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 12, 2014, 02:14:10 AM
Quote from: timtlu on November 11, 2014, 10:13:36 PM
One or the other is wrong, by virtue of them being different. Unless the views aren't different (another possibility, I originally acknowledged). Your personal ranking backs up this stance. By the way it works, we will likely never know which diverging view is most correct. Also, by no means take my response as belittling or insulting your efforts. The two views of TLU's merit are indeed, mutually exclusive, so they can not both be right. There are far too many teams and far too many comparisons between them, for anyone to be right, anyhow. I appreciate your efforts and the time and energy that go behind them, but I genuinely was trying to rectify the difference in positions (if there is actually one), given the same set of data, to gain insight as to why the fan poll is so vastly different to the top 25 and regional rankings in this one particular area. By contrast, they are actually very similar in regards to all the other top south teams. I really don't have a forum to garner the other side's position. I also understand there are only ten of you, but I lean on that striking similarity between the other 7 teams to conclude this is not a difference simply based on sample size. The responses, however, I feel were completely copout in nature; collectively speaking out of both sides of your mouth. Talking points are preached when convenient, but dismissed when they fly in the face of your (I use this pronoun generically) given logic.
From my vantage, much of this debate comes down to philosophy. You say you think Centre and Muhlenberg are better. Why? Centre has beaten two teams with a winning record, zero regionally ranked. Their strength of schedule is decidedly lower. Muhlenberg has beaten one team with a winning record, zero regionally ranked. Their strength of schedule is also decidedly lower. TLU has beaten three teams with winning record, one regionally ranked, with a decidedly higher strength of schedule. Do Centre and Muhlenberg get the nod simply because they don't have a blowout loss to one of the four super elites? Is their lack of schedule rewarded? If so, so be it. That is a concrete objective reason, open to interpretation by differing philosophies. Or, perhaps there is another entirely different reason. I have my own personal reasoning for where I believe TLU should stand, but it is based on objective reasoning.
The prevailing thought to answer the original question, however, was to defensively attack with cries of homerism and/or corruption, or cherry pick a margin of victory defense when it suits your (again, generic) current opinion, but goes against everything else that has ever been used in these forums to defend margin of victory and results against the "super elites".
The RRs and the top 25s are different because, as stated, the rules by which they are put together are different. More to the point, the RACs have no option but to swallow the heaping spoonful of BS that is the NCAAs strength of schedule metric and top 25 voters can do what they will with that number up to and including ignoring it completely.
In the case of Texas Lutheran, top 25 voters can see that they haven't beaten anybody of any particular substance and in their showcase game they lost by over 50. Top 25 voters can also see that TLU genrally gives up a boatload of points, and teams that do that generally don't fit in the top 25 (check your ncaa stats...you'll see a stronger correlation to win percentages and total defense than you will to win percentages and total offense...good teams defend, almost without exception).
But here's the best part of this four page debate to me- being mad about the polls and where people vote for your team is silly. It's triple silly when we get deep enough into the season to have regional rankings and your team is ranked WAY higher than the polls would have indicated because at the end of today timmytlu, those NCAAS rankings really, really matter. The polls couldn't matter less. You're ahead, man. Your Bulldogs gave up 70 and lost by 50+ and they are still in really good shape to make the tournament. That should never ever happen and yet here we are. Celebrate it. Go to Belton next Saturday and check out that stadium and enjoy the playoff experience. And who knows- if the Bulldogs can figure out a way to not lose by 50, they might even get a vote or two here.
That is a long winded way of saying that the regional rankings and the polls are two completely different entities and shouldn't be compared to one another really at all, let alone use one to validate the other. Apples and oranges here.
Hey Wally,
Are we the Apples or Oranges Here? ??? :-*
Quote from: RLW on November 12, 2014, 12:11:06 AM
It is my firm belief that if two people disagree on a subject, it will never be resolved by exchanging post/emails. Sitting behind a computer screen in the privacy of you home/office will never come to an agreement. Go sit face to face discuss the issue calmly to come to an conclusion/resolution. Before you take offense to this, I will admit this is only my opinion.
I disagree. I think that we should resolve our disagreement about whether things can be resolved through posts and emails by exchanging some posts and emails to decide whether we can come to an agreement about whether disagreements can be resolved through posts and emails.
Not that I disagree strongly with the ranking of St John's, but just to add some info to those who voted them either #16, #17 or #18. They have one loss to a team receiving votes in the Poll (Concordia). That loss came without their starting QB, early in the year, and they mounted a not quite good enough comeback bid, once he got his footing. They also beat a team (Bethel) that had one loss to the #4 ranked team (Wartburg) The was Bethel's first game of the season, Wart's second. Personally, I would rank them anywhere from #10 to #12, so I'm baffled by those who have ranked them well below that.
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 12, 2014, 02:14:10 AM
Quote from: timtlu on November 11, 2014, 10:13:36 PM
One or the other is wrong, by virtue of them being different. Unless the views aren't different (another possibility, I originally acknowledged). Your personal ranking backs up this stance. By the way it works, we will likely never know which diverging view is most correct. Also, by no means take my response as belittling or insulting your efforts. The two views of TLU's merit are indeed, mutually exclusive, so they can not both be right. There are far too many teams and far too many comparisons between them, for anyone to be right, anyhow. I appreciate your efforts and the time and energy that go behind them, but I genuinely was trying to rectify the difference in positions (if there is actually one), given the same set of data, to gain insight as to why the fan poll is so vastly different to the top 25 and regional rankings in this one particular area. By contrast, they are actually very similar in regards to all the other top south teams. I really don't have a forum to garner the other side's position. I also understand there are only ten of you, but I lean on that striking similarity between the other 7 teams to conclude this is not a difference simply based on sample size. The responses, however, I feel were completely copout in nature; collectively speaking out of both sides of your mouth. Talking points are preached when convenient, but dismissed when they fly in the face of your (I use this pronoun generically) given logic.
From my vantage, much of this debate comes down to philosophy. You say you think Centre and Muhlenberg are better. Why? Centre has beaten two teams with a winning record, zero regionally ranked. Their strength of schedule is decidedly lower. Muhlenberg has beaten one team with a winning record, zero regionally ranked. Their strength of schedule is also decidedly lower. TLU has beaten three teams with winning record, one regionally ranked, with a decidedly higher strength of schedule. Do Centre and Muhlenberg get the nod simply because they don't have a blowout loss to one of the four super elites? Is their lack of schedule rewarded? If so, so be it. That is a concrete objective reason, open to interpretation by differing philosophies. Or, perhaps there is another entirely different reason. I have my own personal reasoning for where I believe TLU should stand, but it is based on objective reasoning.
The prevailing thought to answer the original question, however, was to defensively attack with cries of homerism and/or corruption, or cherry pick a margin of victory defense when it suits your (again, generic) current opinion, but goes against everything else that has ever been used in these forums to defend margin of victory and results against the "super elites".
The RRs and the top 25s are different because, as stated, the rules by which they are put together are different. More to the point, the RACs have no option but to swallow the heaping spoonful of BS that is the NCAAs strength of schedule metric and top 25 voters can do what they will with that number up to and including ignoring it completely.
In the case of Texas Lutheran, top 25 voters can see that they haven't beaten anybody of any particular substance and in their showcase game they lost by over 50. Top 25 voters can also see that TLU genrally gives up a boatload of points, and teams that do that generally don't fit in the top 25 (check your ncaa stats...you'll see a stronger correlation to win percentages and total defense than you will to win percentages and total offense...good teams defend, almost without exception).
But here's the best part of this four page debate to me- being mad about the polls and where people vote for your team is silly. It's triple silly when we get deep enough into the season to have regional rankings and your team is ranked WAY higher than the polls would have indicated because at the end of today timmytlu, those NCAAS rankings really, really matter. The polls couldn't matter less. You're ahead, man. Your Bulldogs gave up 70 and lost by 50+ and they are still in really good shape to make the tournament. That should never ever happen and yet here we are. Celebrate it. Go to Belton next Saturday and check out that stadium and enjoy the playoff experience. And who knows- if the Bulldogs can figure out a way to not lose by 50, they might even get a vote or two here.
That is a long winded way of saying that the regional rankings and the polls are two completely different entities and shouldn't be compared to one another really at all, let alone use one to validate the other. Apples and oranges here.
Amen, Amen, and Amen. Well said Wally.
I would add (and this is not new) that the tournament is decidedly not designed to pick the 32 best teams. The RAC's recognized this because the winner of the NACC is going to get hammered by the winner of the WIAC in the first round (as a proxy). We can't change that because the system allows 24 teams an automatic bid. So we are left to haggle and argue about the at large bids. That system, driven by the RAC's and eventually the national committee, is set up to alleviate the inequality of quality teams in stronger conferences getting a chance. It also allows non AQ teams a chance (see Centre). This isn't the exact point you guys are debating but I think its an important concept to understand what drives the RR vs the Top 25.
Voters in polls are trying to determine the absolute best teams. The RR are trying to supplement the AQ (or equal access system) with the best remaining teams. The system is, by design, limited and the poll system is much more unconstrained.
Quote from: retagent on November 12, 2014, 10:13:45 AM
Not that I disagree strongly with the ranking of St John's, but just to add some info to those who voted them either #16, #17 or #18. They have one loss to a team receiving votes in the Poll (Concordia). That loss came without their starting QB, early in the year, and they mounted a not quite good enough comeback bid, once he got his footing. They also beat a team (Bethel) that had one loss to the #4 ranked team (Wartburg) The was Bethel's first game of the season, Wart's second. Personally, I would rank them anywhere from #10 to #12, so I'm baffled by those who have ranked them well below that.
I have them at #13. But I can tell you this, I was agonizing from 12 on below. I think everyone else was, too. Enough carnage happened for me to reassess everything, really. You've got Wheaton, Del Val, and W&J that are unblemished. Wabash has the same record. Chapman does too. What to do with Platteville and Oshkosh? Lots of good teams fighting for those spots, so #18 isn't unreasonable...
Quote from: smedindy on November 12, 2014, 12:44:21 PM
Quote from: retagent on November 12, 2014, 10:13:45 AM
Not that I disagree strongly with the ranking of St John's, but just to add some info to those who voted them either #16, #17 or #18. They have one loss to a team receiving votes in the Poll (Concordia). That loss came without their starting QB, early in the year, and they mounted a not quite good enough comeback bid, once he got his footing. They also beat a team (Bethel) that had one loss to the #4 ranked team (Wartburg) The was Bethel's first game of the season, Wart's second. Personally, I would rank them anywhere from #10 to #12, so I'm baffled by those who have ranked them well below that.
I have them at #13. But I can tell you this, I was agonizing from 12 on below. I think everyone else was, too. Enough carnage happened for me to reassess everything, really. You've got Wheaton, Del Val, and W&J that are unblemished. Wabash has the same record. Chapman does too. What to do with Platteville and Oshkosh? Lots of good teams fighting for those spots, so #18 isn't unreasonable...
Seems like a tight spread between 12-19 and then a drop off. Maybe 3 tiers of teams right now? Or even 4?
Quote from: retagent on November 12, 2014, 10:13:45 AM
Not that I disagree strongly with the ranking of St John's, but just to add some info to those who voted them either #16, #17 or #18. They have one loss to a team receiving votes in the Poll (Concordia). That loss came without their starting QB, early in the year, and they mounted a not quite good enough comeback bid, once he got his footing. They also beat a team (Bethel) that had one loss to the #4 ranked team (Wartburg) The was Bethel's first game of the season, Wart's second. Personally, I would rank them anywhere from #10 to #12, so I'm baffled by those who have ranked them well below that.
I'm the 18 so I can comment. Of the 17 teams I have ahead of them... there's 12 unbeatens (UWW, Mount Union, Wesley, UMHB, Wartburg, John Carroll, Johns Hopkins, Hobart, W&J, Wheaton, Widener, DelVal), Witt (who is unbeaten in D3), Wabash who's only loss is to Witt, Linfield, UW-Platteville, and North Central. I can see arguments for St John's being higher than the last three of those. It's not that I don't think they're not a #10-12, it's that there's quite a few other teams that are also #10-12 worthy.
On a scale of 1-100 I could think the top three teams are 100, 98, 95 but their rankings would be spread out on the ballot the same as say #13-15 who might be rated 89.6, 89.55, 89.5.
Thanks. Good explanations. Just trying to provide some context. I'm glad I'm not voting, but it looks as though you're splitting hairs, which is never easy.
I for one have St. John's at #9, I think they've more than earned to be a top 10 team based on their body of work.
Sorry.... I'm not ranking a team that gives up 70+ points, and I don't care who it was against.
Ok pollsters, Wesley lost to FCS Charlotte 38-33. Do they drop on your ballot?
Not mine.
Quote from: thewaterboy on November 15, 2014, 03:52:58 PM
Ok pollsters, Wesley lost to FCS Charlotte 38-33. Do they drop on your ballot?
Not on mine due to that result, but JCU has just tied UMU 24 -24 in the 4th. IF JCU wins it, they'd jump Wesley and UMU would still stay ahead.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 15, 2014, 04:08:00 PM
Quote from: thewaterboy on November 15, 2014, 03:52:58 PM
Ok pollsters, Wesley lost to FCS Charlotte 38-33. Do they drop on your ballot?
Not on mine due to that result, but JCU has just tied UMU 24 -24 in the 4th. IF JCU wins it, they'd jump Wesley and UMU would still stay ahead.
Nope they played the best opponent than any other team today.
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on November 15, 2014, 04:36:04 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 15, 2014, 04:08:00 PM
Quote from: thewaterboy on November 15, 2014, 03:52:58 PM
Ok pollsters, Wesley lost to FCS Charlotte 38-33. Do they drop on your ballot?
Not on mine due to that result, but JCU has just tied UMU 24 -24 in the 4th. IF JCU wins it, they'd jump Wesley and UMU would still stay ahead.
Nope they played the best opponent than any other team today.
Moot point now. UMU survived 31-24; JCU had the ball first and goal at the UMU 7, but the clock ran out on them. (JCU took the kickoff with no time outs and 1:16 to go; ALMOST took it all the way for the tie or win. I guess we'll never know if Coach Tom Arth would have gone for one to go to OT or two for the immediate win.)
My ballot will remain (assuming UWW and UMHB win) UWW, UMHB, UMU, Wesley; assuming Wartburg wins, a tough call on 5 and 6). With the
possible exception of Wesley's loss today, JCU's loss may have been the most impressive loss of the season. (I think it is an open question whether UMU or a D1 team in only its second year of existence is better.)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 15, 2014, 05:15:17 PM
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on November 15, 2014, 04:36:04 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 15, 2014, 04:08:00 PM
Quote from: thewaterboy on November 15, 2014, 03:52:58 PM
Ok pollsters, Wesley lost to FCS Charlotte 38-33. Do they drop on your ballot?
Not on mine due to that result, but JCU has just tied UMU 24 -24 in the 4th. IF JCU wins it, they'd jump Wesley and UMU would still stay ahead.
Nope they played the best opponent than any other team today.
Moot point now. UMU survived 31-24; JCU had the ball first and goal at the UMU 7, but the clock ran out on them. (JCU took the kickoff with no time outs and 1:16 to go; ALMOST took it all the way for the tie or win. I guess we'll never know if Coach Tom Arth would have gone for one to go to OT or two for the immediate win.)
My ballot will remain (assuming UWW and UMHB win) UWW, UMHB, UMU, Wesley; assuming Wartburg wins, a tough call on 5 and 6). With the possible exception of Wesley's loss today, JCU's loss may have been the most impressive loss of the season. (I think it is an open question whether UMU or a D1 team in only its second year of existence is better.)
I'd have to think UWW's win was the least impressive win of the top 5 teams....
Quote from: MonroviaCat on November 15, 2014, 05:21:38 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 15, 2014, 05:15:17 PM
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on November 15, 2014, 04:36:04 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 15, 2014, 04:08:00 PM
Quote from: thewaterboy on November 15, 2014, 03:52:58 PM
Ok pollsters, Wesley lost to FCS Charlotte 38-33. Do they drop on your ballot?
Not on mine due to that result, but JCU has just tied UMU 24 -24 in the 4th. IF JCU wins it, they'd jump Wesley and UMU would still stay ahead.
Nope they played the best opponent than any other team today.
Moot point now. UMU survived 31-24; JCU had the ball first and goal at the UMU 7, but the clock ran out on them. (JCU took the kickoff with no time outs and 1:16 to go; ALMOST took it all the way for the tie or win. I guess we'll never know if Coach Tom Arth would have gone for one to go to OT or two for the immediate win.)
My ballot will remain (assuming UWW and UMHB win) UWW, UMHB, UMU, Wesley; assuming Wartburg wins, a tough call on 5 and 6). With the possible exception of Wesley's loss today, JCU's loss may have been the most impressive loss of the season. (I think it is an open question whether UMU or a D1 team in only its second year of existence is better.)
I'd have to think UWW's win was the least impressive win of the top 5 teams....
No doubt...they will lose a handful of first place votes
WOW - UWW's closest game of the year is to a 3-7 team that LOST to 3-7 Simpson and LOST to 2-8 Stout! But UWRF seems to have a habit of that - their losses to what are generally considered the 3 best WIAC teams were by a grand total of 16 points. I guess that is what makes the WIAC the WIAC - even the bottom feeders can throw a scare into you!
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 15, 2014, 05:46:40 PM
WOW - UWW's closest game of the year is to a 3-7 team that LOST to 3-7 Simpson and LOST to 2-8 Stout! But UWRF seems to have a habit of that - their losses to what are generally considered the 3 best WIAC teams were by a grand total of 16 points. I guess that is what makes the WIAC the WIAC - even the bottom feeders can throw a scare into you!
+k. Ypsi gets it
Quote from: thewaterboy on November 15, 2014, 03:52:58 PM
Ok pollsters, Wesley lost to FCS Charlotte 38-33. Do they drop on your ballot?
yes THEY DO ON MINE ;
remember boys as the little guru says " it's not who you lose to , it's who you beat" ;D
Don't forget to submit your ballot for this week. This will be the final poll until after the playoffs.
Quote from: thewaterboy on November 15, 2014, 03:52:58 PM
Ok pollsters, Wesley lost to FCS Charlotte 38-33. Do they drop on your ballot?
Not on mine. I watched the game on local TV and they gave as good as they got.
After spot number 14 this weeks ballot gets difficult.
Quote from: desertcat1 on November 15, 2014, 09:00:24 PM
Quote from: thewaterboy on November 15, 2014, 03:52:58 PM
Ok pollsters, Wesley lost to FCS Charlotte 38-33. Do they drop on your ballot?
yes THEY DO ON MINE ;
remember boys as the little guru says " it's not who you lose to , it's who you beat" ;D
Little guru? K. Well, anyway, that phrase is meant for teams who have beaten nobody all year. Wesley is not on that list.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 17, 2014, 01:53:16 AM
Quote from: desertcat1 on November 15, 2014, 09:00:24 PM
Quote from: thewaterboy on November 15, 2014, 03:52:58 PM
Ok pollsters, Wesley lost to FCS Charlotte 38-33. Do they drop on your ballot?
yes THEY DO ON MINE ;
remember boys as the little guru says " it's not who you lose to , it's who you beat" ;D
Little guru? K. Well, anyway, that phrase is meant for teams who have beaten nobody all year. Wesley is not on that list.
TLU
I'll get it up late tonight. Been swamped the past few days.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 19, 2014, 07:55:43 AM
I'll get it up late tonight. Been swamped the past few days.
I think they make a pill for that...
2014 WEEK 11 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev
1) UW-Whitewater (7) 246 1
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor (2) 238 2
3) Mount Union (1) 234 3
4) Wesley 218 4
5) Wartburg 208 5
6) John Carroll 197 6
7) Johns Hopkins 179 7
8) Hobart 173 8
9) Wittenberg 165 9
10) Linfield 161 10
11) Wheaton 160 11
12) St John's 137 12
13) Widener 133 13
14) Wabash 130 14
15) North Central 93 19
16) Chapman 77 20
T17) St John Fisher 61 23
T17) St Thomas 61 22
19) Wash & Jeff 60 15
20) Centre 55 21
21) Delaware Valley 54 18
22) UW-Oshkosh 52 NR
23) Thomas More 34 25
24) Muhlenberg 22 NR
25) Texas Lutheran 20 NR
Dropped Out: UW-Platteville, Bethel, and Ithaca
Also Receiving Votes: Heidelberg (16), Concordia-Moorhead (15), Bethel (14), Pacific Lutheran (10), UW-Platteville (7), MIT (6), Framingham St (5), Franklin (4), Lycoming (2), St Scholastica (2), Amherst (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, thewaterboy, and Upstate
Whatever happens in the Stagg next week, I already know one thing - JCU will be above Wesley! In UMU's first 14 games, only one team has lost by less than 41 - and JCU TWICE lost by just one score. (BTW, the next closest team to UMU was Heidi. ;))
So is Wheaton ahead of Wesley too? ;D
This will be an interesting top 25!
Quote from: USee on December 13, 2014, 03:49:41 PM
So is Wheaton ahead of Wesley too? ;D
This will be an interesting top 25!
I hadn't gotten that far in my thinking yet, but I would say probably yes.
My bottom 15 or so is pretty well set in my mind, but with the UWW-Linfield game still undecided there are still too many possible permutations of the top 10 to get into yet. ;)
Quote from: USee on December 13, 2014, 03:49:41 PM
So is Wheaton ahead of Wesley too? ;D
This will be an interesting top 25!
Does Wheaton IL lose to UNC-Charlotte by a touchdown?
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 13, 2014, 07:58:03 PM
Quote from: USee on December 13, 2014, 03:49:41 PM
So is Wheaton ahead of Wesley too? ;D
This will be an interesting top 25!
Does Wheaton IL lose to UNC-Charlotte by a touchdown?
Never seen UNC-Charlotte, so can't say. But Wheaton has NEVER (in several games) fallen behind UMU by 70-0. :o
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 13, 2014, 08:07:55 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 13, 2014, 07:58:03 PM
Quote from: USee on December 13, 2014, 03:49:41 PM
So is Wheaton ahead of Wesley too? ;D
This will be an interesting top 25!
Does Wheaton IL lose to UNC-Charlotte by a touchdown?
Never seen UNC-Charlotte, so can't say. But Wheaton has NEVER (in several games) fallen behind UMU by 70-0. :o
56-0 at the half.
A psychological smackdown.
What does this say about the East Region?
Is any East Region team worthy of the Top 15-20?
The Linfield score certainly boosts the Island schools in the playoffs, Linfield, UMHB and Texas Lutheran.
Not so fast, Ralph. As of this season, Wesley was still a South Region team! ;D
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 13, 2014, 08:36:27 PM
Not so fast, Ralph. As of this season, Wesley was still a South Region team! ;D
:)
I know! Look at these scores at relative points in the playoffs.
Wesley 41 Hobart 13!
JHU 24 Rowan 16
Linfield 45 Widener 7
CNU 29 Del Valley 26
So far I've received 7 ballots... and there's 36 teams with votes which is the same number of teams in the poll before the tournament. Shouldn't the playoffs have cleared things up a bit?
I don't think it cleared up the bottom, where the non-playoff teams mingle in with the playoff teams. Oshkosh, Platteville, SJF, etc.
Plus pre-conceived notions still will linger. You still may not be sold on Muhlenberg, for instance, because of the 'national footprint' or "illusionary competitiveness' or some such nonsense.
Quote from: smedindy on December 22, 2014, 04:51:56 PM
I don't think it cleared up the bottom, where the non-playoff teams mingle in with the playoff teams. Oshkosh, Platteville, SJF, etc.
Plus pre-conceived notions still will linger. You still may not be sold on Muhlenberg, for instance, because of the 'national footprint' or "illusionary competitiveness' or some such nonsense.
Correct. The top half jumbled big time, but the bottom half of my ballot didn't change as much.
All the playoffs really did was shuffle things around somewhat. For every team near the bottom that dropped off, another lower-end team moved in to take its place.
I didn't even move anyone out or in; my 19-25 remained exactly the same, but only three others remained in the same spot.
One voter hasn't responded yet. If they submit a ballot I'll update the poll.
2014 FINAL TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev
1) UW-Whitewater (9) 225 1
2) Mount Union 214 3
3) Linfield 203 10
4) Wartburg 200 5
5) John Carroll 186 6
6) Mary Hardin-Baylor 182 2
7) Wesley 167 4
8) Wheaton 161 11
9) Hobart 153 8
10) Johns Hopkins 136 7
11) St John's 128 12
12) Widener 127 13
13) Wabash 120 14
14) North Central 100 15
15) Wash & Jeff 90 19
16) Wittenberg 89 9
17) St Thomas 68 T17
18) UW-Oshkosh 66 22
19) Chapman 59 16
20) St John Fisher 56 T17
21) Texas Lutheran 42 25
22) Muhlenberg 31 24
23) Centre 27 20
24) Thomas More 16 23
25) Bethel 15 NR
Dropped Out: Delaware Valley
Also Receiving Votes: Pacific Lutheran (14), Concordia-Moorhead (9), UW-Platteville (9), Heidelberg (8), Ithaca (5), Christopher Newport (4), Franklin (4), MIT (4), Delaware Valley (3), Amherst (2), Lycoming (2)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, and thewaterboy
Wheaton>Wesley
1) UW-Whitewater 225 C ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2) Mount Union 214 F ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 4)
3) Linfield 203 SF ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4)
4) Wartburg 200 QF ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 6, 6)
5) John Carroll 186 QF ( 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 7)
6) Mary Hardin-Baylor 182 R2 ( 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7)
7) Wesley 167 SF ( 4, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 12)
8) Wheaton 161 R2 ( 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 10, 11)
9) Hobart 153 QF ( 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 12)
10) Johns Hopkins 136 R2 ( 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 11, 11, 11, 17)
11) St John's 128 R2 ( 8, 10, 11, 12, 12, 13, 13, 13, 14)
12) Widener 127 QF (10, 10, 11, 11, 12, 13, 13, 13, 14)
13) Wabash 120 R2 (10, 10, 12, 12, 12, 13, 13, 15, 17)
14) North Central 100 NP ( 9, 14, 14, 15, 15, 16, 16, 16, 19)
15) Wash & Jeff 90 R2 (12, 13, 14, 14, 14, 14, 15, 22, --)
16) Wittenberg 89 R1 (11, 11, 14, 15, 17, 17, 18, 20, 22)
17) St Thomas 68 R1 (15, 15, 15, 17, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23)
18) UW-Oshkosh 66 NP (16, 16, 16, 16, 16, 19, 20, 23, --)
19) Chapman 59 R1 (17, 17, 18, 18, 19, 19, 19, 23, 25)
20) St John Fisher 56 NP (15, 18, 18, 20, 21, 21, 21, 21, 23)
21) Texas Lutheran 42 R1 (18, 18, 19, 20, 20, 21, 24, --, --)
22) Muhlenberg 31 R1 (17, 19, 20, 22, 23, 25, 25, --, --)
23) Centre 27 R1 (20, 20, 22, 23, 23, 23, 24, --, --)
24) Thomas More 16 NP (17, 21, 24, --, --, --, --, --, --)
25) Bethel 15 NP (19, 22, 22, --, --, --, --, --, --)
26) Pacific Lutheran 14 NP (16, 23, 25)
T27) Concordia-Moorhead 9 NP (19, 25, 25)
T27) UW-Platteville 9 NP (21, 24, 24)
29) Heidelberg 8 NP (18)
30) Ithaca 5 R1 (21)
T31) Christopher Newport 4 R2 (24, 25, 25)
T31) Franklin 4 R1 (22)
T31) MIT 4 R2 (22)
34) Delaware Valley 3 R1 (24, 25)
T35) Amherst 2 NP (24)
T35) Lycoming 2 NP (24)
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on December 24, 2014, 09:07:39 PM
Wheaton>Wesley
That's like, your opinion...man...
/white russian please
Quote from: smedindy on December 25, 2014, 02:10:32 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on December 24, 2014, 09:07:39 PM
Wheaton>Wesley
That's like, your opinion...man...
/white russian please
I think I put Wesley at 6. Wheaton at 8-9.... Cant find my notes. Despite Wesley's terrible performance in Alliance, IMO it was not indicative of how good this year's Wesley team was. No one could have predicted that outcome, and with good reason. The way that game went almost seems like an anomaly to me out of all the possibilities of what could have happened in that game (but I AM a Wesley fan so I could be totally biased). Does Mount win everytime? Yeah maybe. But do they go up 70-0 like they were playing Wilmington? No I'd like to think not.
It's August which means it's time to get ready for FOOTBALL. I'll send a reminder to last year's voters at some point in the future.
If you're interested in being part of the Fan Poll this year just send me a PM. Ballots are due on Tuesdays during the season. If you need extra time or know you won't be able to get a ballot in that particular week please let me know as soon as you can. The earlier you submit a ballot the more time I'll have to check it and make sure you didn't make any errors or forget a team (and there's usually one every two or three weeks).
If you're in the south or east regions I strongly hope you'll join. There's usually a low turnout from those areas.
Preseason ballots are due Sunday August 30th which will give time for people to study Kickoff which comes out the 25th.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on August 01, 2015, 09:09:14 AM
It's August which means it's time to get ready for FOOTBALL. I'll send a reminder to last year's voters at some point in the future.
If you're interested in being part of the Fan Poll this year just send me a PM. Ballots are due on Tuesdays during the season. If you need extra time or know you won't be able to get a ballot in that particular week please let me know as soon as you can. The earlier you submit a ballot the more time I'll have to check it and make sure you didn't make any errors or forget a team (and there's usually one every two or three weeks).
If you're in the south or east regions I strongly hope you'll join. There's usually a low turnout from those areas.
Preseason ballots are due Sunday August 30th which will give time for people to study Kickoff which comes out the 25th.
FC,
I am a go for this year. Again thanks for doing this as always.
As of right now I have 5 ballots (which doesn't include me). I'll send a message to those from last year I haven't heard from. Anyone else is free to join us as well. We can always use some more people especially from the south and east.
I'm up to 7 ballots plus 1 voter abstaining from the preseason. Today is your last chance to get your ballots in as I'll be posting the poll tonight.
I received 7 ballot, have an 8th person who abstained, and a 9th person who said they were participating but haven't heard back from in a while. The top 25 teams from the final poll last year are the same 25 teams to start the year.
2015 PRESEASON TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev
1) UW-Whitewater (6) 172 1
2) Mount Union (1) 166 2
3) Linfield 164 3
4) Mary Hardin-Baylor 151 6
5) Wartburg 146 4
6) Wesley 142 7
7) St John's 124 11
8) Wheaton 119 8
T9) North Central 106 14
T9) Wabash 106 13
11) John Carroll 101 5
12) Johns Hopkins 96 10
13) St Thomas 95 17
14) Widener 80 12
15) St John Fisher 62 20
16) UW-Oshkosh 59 18
17) Wittenberg 58 16
18) Wash & Jeff 55 15
19) Bethel 52 25
20) Texas Lutheran 48 21
21) Hobart 45 9
T22) Chapman 22 19
T22) Muhlenberg 22 22
24) Thomas More 21 24
25) Centre 19 23
Dropped Out: none
Also Receiving Votes: Rowan (17), UW-Platteville (8), Ithaca (4), Salisbury (4), Christopher Newport (3), Franklin (3), St Lawrence (2), Framingham St (1), UW-Stevens Point (1), Whitworth (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HSCTiger74, NCF, and thewaterboy
I'm out, sorry. I need to focus on my phoney baloney job, since we're upgrading our alumni and online giving site, and developing new reports and metrics. So duty calls, alas.
Interesting results considering in my West Fan Poll I had three people rank Linfield over UWW to start the season (and the votes didn't all come from Linfield fans). Here nobody shared that sentiment.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 02, 2015, 12:31:21 PM
Interesting results considering in my West Fan Poll I had three people rank Linfield over UWW to start the season (and the votes didn't all come from Linfield fans). Here nobody shared that sentiment.
I put Linfield at 2. To me, Whitewater has to lose its way out of the #1 spot. They have proven they can reload all too easily, except for the anomaly that was the 2012 season.
Everyone got their ballots in early so it's an early poll for you :)
2015 WEEK 1 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev
1) UW-Whitewater (7) 199 1
2) Mount Union (1) 190 2
3) Linfield 186 3
4) Mary Hardin-Baylor 175 4
5) Wesley 162 6
6) Wartburg 159 5
7) Wheaton 157 8
8) St John's 147 7
9) Wabash 136 T9
10) Johns Hopkins 119 12
11) North Central 116 T9
12) St Thomas 114 13
13) John Carroll 106 11
14) Wash & Jeff 90 18
15) Thomas More 83 24
T16) Bethel 67 19
T16) Hobart 67 21
18) Wittenberg 61 17
T19) Rowan 58 NR
T19) Texas Lutheran 58 20
T21) Centre 30 25
T21) Muhlenberg 30 T22
23) Chapman 22 T22
24) UW-Oshkosh 20 16
25) UW-Platteville 13 NR
Dropped Out: Widener and St John Fisher
Also Receiving Votes: Delaware Valley (9), Widener (8), Framingham St (6), Illinois Wesleyan (4), Ithaca (4), Christopher Newport (2), Pacific (1), Whitworth (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, and thewaterboy
2015 WEEK 2 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev
1) UW-Whitewater (7) 199 1
T2) Linfield 188 3
T2) Mount Union (1) 188 2
4) Mary Hardin-Baylor 175 4
5) Wesley 162 5
6) Wartburg 160 6
7) Wheaton 157 7
8) St John's 146 8
9) Wabash 136 9
10) Johns Hopkins 119 10
T11) North Central 115 11
T11) St Thomas 115 12
13) John Carroll 111 13
14) Thomas More 91 15
15) Wash & Jeff 83 14
16) Hobart 70 T16
17) Wittenberg 69 18
18) Rowan 64 T19
T19) Centre 42 T21
T19) UW-Oshkosh 42 24
21) Bethel 39 T16
22) UW-Platteville 34 25
23) Hardin-Simmons 32 NR
24) Texas Lutheran 13 T19
25) Illinois Wesleyan 11 NR
Dropped Out: Muhlenberg and Chapman
Also Receiving Votes: Cortland St (10), Ithaca (10), Widener (8), Concordia-Moorhead (3), Guilford (2), Stevenson (2), Chapman (1), Morrisville St (1), Pacific (1), Whitworth (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, and thewaterboy
1) UW-Whitewater 199 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2)
T2) Linfield 188 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3)
T2) Mount Union 188 ( 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4) Mary Hardin-Baylor 175 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5)
5) Wesley 162 ( 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7)
6) Wartburg 160 ( 4, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8)
7) Wheaton 157 ( 4, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8)
8) St John's 146 ( 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9)
9) Wabash 136 ( 8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 10)
10) Johns Hopkins 119 (10, 10, 10, 11, 11, 11, 13, 13)
T11) North Central 115 (10, 10, 11, 11, 12, 12, 13, 14)
T11) St Thomas 115 ( 9, 11, 12, 12, 12, 12, 12, 13)
13) John Carroll 111 (10, 10, 11, 12, 13, 13, 13, 15)
14) Thomas More 91 (14, 14, 14, 14, 15, 15, 15, 16)
15) Wash & Jeff 83 (11, 15, 16, 16, 16, 16, 17, 18)
16) Hobart 70 (13, 14, 15, 15, 16, 18, 23, 24)
17) Wittenberg 69 (14, 14, 17, 17, 17, 18, 19, 23)
18) Rowan 64 (15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 19, 19, 21)
T19) Centre 42 (19, 19, 20, 20, 20, 21, 23, 24)
T19) UW-Oshkosh 42 (16, 18, 19, 20, 20, 21, --, --)
21) Bethel 39 (17, 18, 18, 22, 22, 23, 23, --)
22) UW-Platteville 34 (18, 20, 22, 22, 22, 22, 22, --)
23) Hardin-Simmons 32 (17, 20, 21, 21, 22, 23, --, --)
24) Texas Lutheran 13 (20, 21, 24, --, --, --, --, --)
25) Illinois Wesleyan 11 (21, 23, 24, 25, --, --, --, --)
T26) Cortland St 10 (19, 23)
T26) Ithaca 10 (17, 25)
28) Widener 8 (21, 24, 25)
29) Concordia-Moorhead 3 (24, 25)
T30) Guilford 2 (24)
T30) Stevenson 2 (24)
T32) Chapman 1 (25)
T32) Morrisville St 1 (25)
T32) Pacific 1 (25)
T32) Whitworth 1 (25)
I'm interested to hear some thoughts about UWO, because I noticed two didn't rank them at all. They narrowly lost on the road to a top 15* scholarship-offering football program in week one.
*Robert Morris is ranked 11th in the latest NAIA poll.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 15, 2015, 12:57:05 PM
I'm interested to hear some thoughts about UWO, because I noticed two didn't rank them at all. They narrowly lost on the road to a top 15* scholarship-offering football program in week one.
*Robert Morris is ranked 11th in the latest NAIA poll.
And they beat a first year program. I don't have a problem with people who have or haven't ranked them, I'm just not sure their resume so far is conclusive either way. We don't have a lot of context for Robert Morris versus the better D3 teams. Is that loss better than Bethel's loss to Wartburg? Bethel is near the bottom of the poll right now as well, unranked by one person, and their win over UW-Stout is certainly more impressive than beating Finlandia.
Quote from: jknezek on September 15, 2015, 01:38:41 PM
We don't have a lot of context for Robert Morris versus the better D3 teams. Is that loss better than Bethel's loss to Wartburg? Bethel is near the bottom of the poll right now as well, unranked by one person, and their win over UW-Stout is certainly more impressive than beating Finlandia.
That, I think, is the biggest problem with the out-of-division games as far as voters -and more importantly regional advisory committee members and national selection committee members- go. I don't think people know exactly what to do with a result against Robert Morris or Morningside or whatever else it might be. The easy way out is to say that school A gives scholarships,
ergo school A is better than a D3 team and any close loss by a D3 team should count as a positive. But that's not really always the case. And I don't think any of us really know where that NAIA/D3 intersection is which makes dealing with those D3 vs. NAIA results more or less impossible.
I'm one of the non-voters for Oshkosh. So far they have not accomplished anything. I don't know how to evaluate Robert Morris (and UWO DID lose the game); they annihilated Finlandia, but so did Alma who has won 6 games total in the last four years. UWO remains so far an unknown quantity - perhaps they should be 15th, perhaps they should be 50th. They are definitely on my radar, but I just couldn't vote for them yet.
Yea, I understand it's very hard to gauge where Oshkosh falls...I would agree to that. The non-conference games they've lost over the years have all been to highly ranked NAIA teams, a D1 program and Mount Union. I think next week's game of UWW and Morningside will give us a good indication on where the NAIA ranks compared to D3. If Morningside just blows out Whitewater then that might suggest the top level NAIA teams are better than the top level of D3 teams. But one game is a small sample size.
But if that would to occur, then Oshkosh's loss to Robert Morris may not seem as bad then. Especially if they go on to do well in the WIAC.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 15, 2015, 01:58:52 PM
Quote from: jknezek on September 15, 2015, 01:38:41 PM
We don't have a lot of context for Robert Morris versus the better D3 teams. Is that loss better than Bethel's loss to Wartburg? Bethel is near the bottom of the poll right now as well, unranked by one person, and their win over UW-Stout is certainly more impressive than beating Finlandia.
That, I think, is the biggest problem with the out-of-division games as far as voters -and more importantly regional advisory committee members and national selection committee members- go. I don't think people know exactly what to do with a result against Robert Morris or Morningside or whatever else it might be. The easy way out is to say that school A gives scholarships, ergo school A is better than a D3 team and any close loss by a D3 team should count as a positive. But that's not really always the case. And I don't think any of us really know where that NAIA/D3 intersection is which makes dealing with those D3 vs. NAIA results more or less impossible.
Last year the Massey Ratings had the top NAIA team (Southern Oregon) comparable to Elite D2, fairly good 1-AA and UMass, a bad 1A team. Marian was the fourth best, I think, and they were around Linfield's ranking. However, that's the elite. The 10th through 12th . The best NAIA squad was around a middling D2 team and about 10 spots ahead of Bethel. The 15th best around St. John Fisher and North Central.
I think the best NAIA teams are probably a tick better than a comparable D3 team, but as you move down it's pretty even. "Scholarships" in NAIA land may be very small grants.
2015 WEEK 3 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev
1) UW-Whitewater (7) 199 1
T2) Linfield 188 T2
T2) Mount Union (1) 188 T2
4) Mary Hardin-Baylor 176 4
5) Wesley 165 5
6) Wheaton 158 7
7) Wartburg 152 6
8) St John's 149 8
9) Wabash 136 9
10) Johns Hopkins 121 10
11) St Thomas 113 T11
12) Thomas More 108 14
T13) John Carroll 100 13
T13) UW-Platteville 100 22
15) Wash & Jeff 85 15
16) Wittenberg 73 17
17) Rowan 66 18
18) North Central 62 T11
19) UW-Oshkosh 47 T19
20) Ithaca 44 NR
21) Centre 42 T19
22) Bethel 40 21
23) Hardin-Simmons 32 23
24) Cortland St 18 NR
25) Illinois Wesleyan 15 25
Dropped Out: Hobart and Texas Lutheran
Also Receiving Votes: Texas Lutheran (6), Stevenson (5), Guilford (3), Albright (2), Concordia-Moorhead (2), Hobart (2), Whitworth (2), Chapman (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, and thewaterboy
1) UW-Whitewater 199 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2)
T2) Linfield 188 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3)
T2) Mount Union 188 ( 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4) Mary Hardin-Baylor 176 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5)
5) Wesley 165 ( 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 7)
6) Wheaton 158 ( 4, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8)
7) Wartburg 152 ( 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8)
8) St John's 149 ( 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 9)
9) Wabash 136 ( 8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 10)
10) Johns Hopkins 121 (10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 12, 12, 13)
11) St Thomas 113 ( 9, 11, 11, 11, 11, 12, 15, 15)
12) Thomas More 108 (10, 11, 11, 12, 13, 13, 14, 16)
T13) John Carroll 100 (10, 11, 11, 12, 13, 14, 14, 23)
T13) UW-Platteville 100 (12, 12, 13, 13, 14, 14, 15, 15)
15) Wash & Jeff 85 (13, 14, 14, 15, 15, 17, 17, 18)
16) Wittenberg 73 (13, 15, 16, 16, 17, 17, 19, 22)
17) Rowan 66 (15, 16, 17, 18, 18, 18, 19, 21)
18) North Central 62 (14, 16, 16, 17, 18, 20, 22, 23)
19) UW-Oshkosh 47 (16, 17, 19, 20, 20, 21, 24, 24)
20) Ithaca 44 (12, 18, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24, --)
21) Centre 42 (18, 19, 19, 20, 20, 22, 23, 25)
22) Bethel 40 (16, 19, 19, 21, 22, 22, 23, --)
23) Hardin-Simmons 32 (19, 20, 20, 21, 21, 23, --, --)
24) Cortland St 18 (17, 22, 23, 24, --, --, --, --)
25) Illinois Wesleyan 15 (20, 22, 24, 24, 25, --, --, --)
26) Texas Lutheran 6 (21, 25)
27) Stevenson 5 (21)
28) Guilford 3 (23)
T29) Albright 2 (25, 25)
T29) Concordia-Moorhead 2 (24)
T29) Hobart 2 (25, 25)
T29) Whitworth 2 (24)
33) Chapman 1 (25)
Wow...Someone doesn't think much of John Carroll this year. I thought I ranked them relatively low at 13th...but 23rd!! :o However, I'm cool with them as tied for 13 in our poll. I don't think they're a top 10 team like the D3 poll has them at.
I'm also glad to see NCC only dropped to 18th here. Dropping from 13th to 22nd (behind Centre and Ithaca) after a quality OT road loss seems a bit drastic in the D3 poll.
2015 WEEK 4 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev
1) UW-Whitewater (7) 199 1
2) Mount Union (1) 188 T2
3) Linfield 187 T2
4) Mary Hardin-Baylor 174 4
5) Wesley 168 5
6) Wheaton 160 6
7) Wartburg 150 7
8) Wabash 146 9
9) St Thomas 137 11
10) Johns Hopkins 126 10
11) Thomas More 115 12
12) UW-Platteville 113 T13
13) John Carroll 92 T13
14) Wash & Jeff 91 15
15) St John's 74 8
16) Rowan 70 17
17) North Central 69 18
18) Ithaca 56 20
19) Bethel 55 22
20) UW-Oshkosh 51 19
21) Hardin-Simmons 49 23
T22) Cortland St 25 24
T22) Wittenberg 25 16
24) Albright 14 NR
25) Texas Lutheran 11 NR
Dropped Out: Centre and Illinois Wesleyan
Also Receiving Votes: Illinois Wesleyan (10), Maryville (9), Guilford (7), Whitworth (7), Hobart (6.5), Trinity (TX) (6), Chicago (4), Concordia-Moorhead (3), Franklin & Marshall (2), Cal Lutheran (0.5)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, and thewaterboy
1) UW-Whitewater 199 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2)
2) Mount Union 188 ( 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4)
3) Linfield 187 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4) Mary Hardin-Baylor 174 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6)
5) Wesley 168 ( 3, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6)
6) Wheaton 160 ( 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8)
7) Wartburg 150 ( 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9)
8) Wabash 146 ( 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9)
9) St Thomas 137 ( 6, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10)
10) Johns Hopkins 126 ( 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 11, 11, 12)
11) Thomas More 115 (10, 11, 11, 11, 12, 12, 12, 14)
12) UW-Platteville 113 ( 9, 11, 11, 12, 12, 13, 13, 14)
13) John Carroll 92 (10, 11, 13, 13, 15, 16, 16, 22)
14) Wash & Jeff 91 (13, 14, 14, 14, 15, 15, 15, 17)
15) St John's 74 (12, 12, 13, 15, 18, 19, 20, 25)
16) Rowan 70 (15, 16, 17, 17, 17, 17, 19, 20)
17) North Central 69 (13, 14, 16, 16, 16, 18, 20, --)
18) Ithaca 56 (13, 17, 17, 20, 21, 21, 21, 22)
19) Bethel 55 (14, 18, 18, 19, 20, 20, 21, 23)
20) UW-Oshkosh 51 (14, 15, 18, 19, 19, 22, 24, --)
21) Hardin-Simmons 49 (16, 18, 18, 19, 20, 21, 21, --)
T22) Cortland St 25 (16, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, --, --)
T22) Wittenberg 25 (15, 20, 23, 23, 25, 25, --, --)
24) Albright 14 (18, 22, 24, --, --, --, --, --)
25) Texas Lutheran 11 (19, 22, --, --, --, --, --, --)
26) Illinois Wesleyan 10 (22, 24, 24, 24)
27) Maryville 9 (17)
T28) Guilford 7 (23, 23, 25)
T28) Whitworth 7 (19)
30) Hobart 6.5 (21, 25, T25)
31) Trinity (TX) 6 (22, 24)
32) Chicago 4 (23, 25)
33) Concordia-Moorhead 3 (23)
34) Franklin & Marshall 2 (24)
35) Cal Lutheran 0.5 (T25)
I was reading the north region fan poll thread, and I noticed we have the same problem they did: Where to put NCC?
At face value, I would agree that it's hard putting a 1-2 team in the top 25. However, given their body of work, it's tough to be too hard on them because of who they lost to. Especially considering that both losses went down to the final possession.
I put them at 16. Even though they are under .500 I still think they're better than a bunch of teams in the top 25.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 29, 2015, 09:42:59 AM
I was reading the north region fan poll thread, and I noticed we have the same problem they did: Where to put NCC?
At face value, I would agree that it's hard putting a 1-2 team in the top 25. However, given their body of work, it's tough to be too hard on them because of who they lost to. Especially considering that both losses went down to the final possession.
I put them at 16. Even though they are under .500 I still think they're better than a bunch of teams in the top 25.
What about their "Game Control"?
Rank Team Conference
1 UW-Whitewater (21) WIAC
2 Mount Union (2) OAC
3 Linfield (2) NWC
4 Mary Hardin-Baylor ASC
5 Wesley NJAC
6 Wartburg IIAC
7 St. Thomas MIAC
8 Wheaton (Ill.) CCIW
9 UW-Platteville WIAC
10 UW-Oshkosh WIAC
11 North Central (Ill.) CCIW
12 Concordia-Moorhead MIAC
13 St. John's MIAC
14 Wabash NCAC
15 Bethel MIAC
16 Rowan NJAC
17 Hardin-Simmons ASC
18 Illinois Wesleyan CCIW
19 Wittenberg NCAC
20 Whitworth NWC
21 Johns Hopkins CC
22 Thomas More PAC
23 John Carroll OAC
24 Hobart LL
25 Chicago SAA
26 Cortland State E8
27 Washington and Jefferson PAC
I based my rankings on what I can tell is the relative strength of a conference given past performance in the playoffs. The top 4 teams in the WIAC and MIAC would most likely beat the #1 or #2 place teams in the NCAC, NJAC (excluding Wesley), CC, PAC, and OAC (other than MU).
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 05, 2015, 02:49:42 PM
I based my rankings on what I can tell is the relative strength of a conference given past performance in the playoffs. The top 4 teams in the WIAC and MIAC would most likely beat the #1 or #2 place teams in the NCAC, NJAC (excluding Wesley), CC, PAC, and OAC (other than MU).
Not sure on that. I don't see the 4th team in the WIAC doing much damage in those conferences. After UWW, UWP and UWO there's a big drop off this year. I might agree with you if you said that about the top
3 WIAC teams though.
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 05, 2015, 02:49:42 PM
Rank Team Conference
1 UW-Whitewater (21) WIAC
2 Mount Union (2) OAC
3 Linfield (2) NWC
4 Mary Hardin-Baylor ASC
5 Wesley NJAC
6 Wartburg IIAC
7 St. Thomas MIAC
8 Wheaton (Ill.) CCIW
9 UW-Platteville WIAC
10 UW-Oshkosh WIAC
11 North Central (Ill.) CCIW
12 Concordia-Moorhead MIAC
13 St. John's MIAC
14 Wabash NCAC
15 Bethel MIAC
16 Rowan NJAC
17 Hardin-Simmons ASC
18 Illinois Wesleyan CCIW
19 Wittenberg NCAC
20 Whitworth NWC
21 Johns Hopkins CC
22 Thomas More PAC
23 John Carroll OAC
24 Hobart LL
25 Chicago SAA
26 Cortland State E8
27 Washington and Jefferson PAC
I based my rankings on what I can tell is the relative strength of a conference given past performance in the playoffs. The top 4 teams in the WIAC and MIAC would most likely beat the #1 or #2 place teams in the NCAC, NJAC (excluding Wesley), CC, PAC, and OAC (other than MU).
Putting my homer cap on, hold on.
[...]
Okay. You're nuts.
41 teams receiving a vote... I think that might be a record for the fan poll.
2015 WEEK 4 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev
1) UW-Whitewater (7) 199 1
2) Mount Union (1) 189 2
3) Linfield 186 3
4) Mary Hardin-Baylor 173 4
5) Wesley 168 5
6) Wheaton 159 6
7) Wartburg 149 7
8) Wabash 148 8
9) St Thomas 137 9
10) Johns Hopkins 127 10
11) Thomas More 123 11
12) UW-Platteville 104 12
13) UW-Oshkosh 91 20
14) St John's 89 15
15) Rowan 80 16
16) North Central 75 17
17) Hardin-Simmons 72 21
18) Wash & Jeff 57 14
19) Cortland St 37 T22
20) Concordia-Moorhead 33 NR
21) Wittenberg 29 T22
22) Albright 21 24
23) Whitworth 18 NR
24) Chicago 17 NR
T25) John Carroll 15 13
T25) Texas Lutheran 15 25
Dropped Out: Ithaca and Bethel
Also Receiving Votes: Hobart (13), Illinois Wesleyan (12), Ohio Northern (11), Maryville (10), Bethel (9), Pacific (9), Gustavus Adolphus (5), Ithaca (5), Gettysburg (4), Western New England (3), Albion (2), Salisbury (2), Utica (2), Amherst (1), Washington & Lee (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, and thewaterboy
1) UW-Whitewater 199 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2)
2) Mount Union 189 ( 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4)
3) Linfield 186 ( 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4) Mary Hardin-Baylor 173 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 7)
5) Wesley 168 ( 3, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6)
6) Wheaton 159 ( 4, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8)
7) Wartburg 149 ( 5, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8, 9, 10)
8) Wabash 148 ( 7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8)
9) St Thomas 137 ( 6, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10)
10) Johns Hopkins 127 ( 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 11, 11, 11)
11) Thomas More 123 ( 9, 9, 10, 11, 11, 11, 11, 13)
12) UW-Platteville 104 (12, 12, 12, 12, 12, 12, 16, 16)
13) UW-Oshkosh 91 (13, 13, 14, 14, 15, 15, 16, 17)
14) St John's 89 (11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 20)
15) Rowan 80 (13, 14, 15, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20)
16) North Central 75 (13, 13, 14, 14, 15, 19, 19, --)
17) Hardin-Simmons 72 (12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 17, 19, --)
18) Wash & Jeff 57 (13, 16, 17, 19, 19, 20, 21, --)
19) Cortland St 37 (15, 19, 20, 20, 22, 23, --, --)
20) Concordia-Moorhead 33 (18, 20, 21, 21, 21, 22, --, --)
21) Wittenberg 29 (18, 18, 18, 22, 25, --, --, --)
22) Albright 21 (17, 18, 22, --, --, --, --, --)
23) Whitworth 18 (14, 20, --, --, --, --, --, --)
24) Chicago 17 (21, 22, 23, 23, 24, --, --, --)
T25) John Carroll 15 (19, 21, 23, --, --, --, --, --)
T25) Texas Lutheran 15 (17, 20, --, --, --, --, --, --)
27) Hobart 13 (19, 23, 24, 25)
28) Illinois Wesleyan 12 (22, 24, 24, 24, 24)
29) Ohio Northern 11 (18, 23)
30) Maryville 10 (16)
T31) Bethel 9 (21, 23, 25)
T31) Pacific 9 (17)
T33) Gustavus Adolphus 5 (21)
T33) Ithaca 5 (22, 25)
35) Gettysburg 4 (22)
36) W New England 3 (23)
T37) Albion 2 (24)
T37) Salisbury 2 (25, 25)
T37) Utica 2 (24)
T40) Amherst 1 (25)
T40) Wash & Lee 1 (25)
Sad to see IWU drop out, but not surprised. Happy to see they still received votes from as many (or more) voters than anyone below #20. They stunk against a bad team, but DID score TWO TDs in the final 82 seconds to survive undefeated. Very good teams don't put themselves in that position, but good teams recover from it. I submit that IWU is a good team (probably top 10) but not a very good team. (Even if it not my alma mater, I allow every team I'm fairly sure is good to have one stinker before I drop them on the second.)
I don't understand JCU still ranked above ONU - they have played roughly equal schedules (in fact 2 of 3 opponents are the same), are both 3-1, and ONU won AT JCU. I admit a 3-point win is hardly decisive, but it was AT JCU.
Ypsi,
Your team won right? Why are you apologetic. They are 4-0 and a top 25 team in a tough league. Good teams can play stinker games. Remember last year's national champ? They scored with 26 seconds left in the final conference game @UWRF (3-7) to win. Didn't seem to affect their rankings or their season. Great teams find a way to win games, tough games, road games, stinker games, whatever.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 06, 2015, 01:08:27 AM
I don't understand JCU still ranked above ONU - they have played roughly equal schedules (in fact 2 of 3 opponents are the same), are both 3-1, and ONU won AT JCU. I admit a 3-point win is hardly decisive, but it was AT JCU.
Co-signed.
Now who voted for Amherst??? We don't do that here in the Fan Poll ;) ;D
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 05, 2015, 11:40:52 PM
4) Mary Hardin-Baylor 173 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 7)
I would like to hear the rationale for this.
Presumably this voter has Wesley, Wheaton, and Wartburg ahead of UMHB. I am especially puzzled by Wartburg. I suppose if you started with Wartburg ranked ahead of UMHB and do the "I don't like to drop a team in my rankings until they lose" thing you might still have Wartburg that high, but Wartburg has played four close games this year, only one of them against something resembling a playoff-caliber team (Bethel, who just lost to Concordia-Moorhead). Maybe the powerhouse of 2014 Wartburg is still lurking in there somewhere, but they have absolutely not shown it in 2015.
UMHB has only lost to teams ranked #1, 2, and 3 on this list in the last three years (in games decided by three points, one point, and a touchdown in the final 2 minutes, no less) and through four games this year, appears to be its usual juggernaut self. What am I missing here? I would be genuinely curious about the rationale for them at #7. Is there some concern about the team at a key position? Coaching turmoil? I just don't see any reason for them behind any of those three teams right now.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 06, 2015, 03:03:57 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 05, 2015, 11:40:52 PM
4) Mary Hardin-Baylor 173 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 7)
I would like to hear the rationale for this.
Presumably this voter has Wesley, Wheaton, and Wartburg ahead of UMHB. I am especially puzzled by Wartburg. I suppose if you started with Wartburg ranked ahead of UMHB and do the "I don't like to drop a team in my rankings until they lose" thing you might still have Wartburg that high, but Wartburg has played four close games this year, only one of them against something resembling a playoff-caliber team (Bethel, who just lost to Concordia-Moorhead). Maybe the powerhouse of 2014 Wartburg is still lurking in there somewhere, but they have absolutely not shown it in 2015.
UMHB has only lost to teams ranked #1, 2, and 3 on this list in the last three years (in games decided by three points, one point, and a touchdown in the final 2 minutes, no less) and through four games this year, appears to be its usual juggernaut self. What am I missing here? I would be genuinely curious about the rationale for them at #7. Is there some concern about the team at a key position? Coaching turmoil? I just don't see any reason for them behind any of those three teams right now.
That's not as weird to me as anybody voting for John Carroll at all. If you remove "2014 quarterfinalist" from their tapestry, they aren't even close to a top 25 team with their results so far this season.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 06, 2015, 03:35:32 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 06, 2015, 03:03:57 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 05, 2015, 11:40:52 PM
4) Mary Hardin-Baylor 173 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 7)
I would like to hear the rationale for this.
Presumably this voter has Wesley, Wheaton, and Wartburg ahead of UMHB. I am especially puzzled by Wartburg. I suppose if you started with Wartburg ranked ahead of UMHB and do the "I don't like to drop a team in my rankings until they lose" thing you might still have Wartburg that high, but Wartburg has played four close games this year, only one of them against something resembling a playoff-caliber team (Bethel, who just lost to Concordia-Moorhead). Maybe the powerhouse of 2014 Wartburg is still lurking in there somewhere, but they have absolutely not shown it in 2015.
UMHB has only lost to teams ranked #1, 2, and 3 on this list in the last three years (in games decided by three points, one point, and a touchdown in the final 2 minutes, no less) and through four games this year, appears to be its usual juggernaut self. What am I missing here? I would be genuinely curious about the rationale for them at #7. Is there some concern about the team at a key position? Coaching turmoil? I just don't see any reason for them behind any of those three teams right now.
That's not as weird to me as anybody voting for John Carroll at all. If you remove "2014 quarterfinalist" from their tapestry, they aren't even close to a top 25 team with their results so far this season.
Wally, you're breaking my heart! :'(
#1 UWW Until proven otherwise
#2 MUC Wish they would have tougher playoff games prior to the semi's or finals (excluding conference rematches where teams know each other)
#3/4/5/6 Linfield/UMHB/Wesley/MIAC winner/leader
#7 CCIW winner/leader which is Wheaton
#8 Wartburg
#9 WIAC #2 or MIAC #2
#10 WIAC #2 or MIAC #2
#11 WIAC # 3 or MIAC #3
#12 MIAC #3
#13 Wabash - Head to head Wabash is going to lose to 1-8 and most likely 9 and 10 (going on historical playoff results for their conference at 20-19... the last 5 years has seen some significant point spread losses in the playoffs)
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 06, 2015, 04:52:30 PM
#1 UWW Until proven otherwise
#2 MUC Wish they would have tougher playoff games prior to the semi's or finals (excluding conference rematches where teams know each other)
#3/4/5/6 Linfield/UMHB/Wesley/MIAC winner/leader
#7 CCIW winner/leader which is Wheaton
#8 Wartburg
#9 WIAC #2 or MIAC #2
#10 WIAC #2 or MIAC #2
#11 WIAC # 3 or MIAC #3
#12 MIAC #3
#13 Wabash - Head to head Wabash is going to lose to 1-8 and most likely 9 and 10 (going on historical playoff results for their conference at 20-19... the last 5 years has seen some significant point spread losses in the playoffs)
I think this is kind of lazy. Why is any random CCIW winner just automatically #7? You're evaluating leagues and not teams.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 06, 2015, 04:59:34 PM
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 06, 2015, 04:52:30 PM
#1 UWW Until proven otherwise
#2 MUC Wish they would have tougher playoff games prior to the semi's or finals (excluding conference rematches where teams know each other)
#3/4/5/6 Linfield/UMHB/Wesley/MIAC winner/leader
#7 CCIW winner/leader which is Wheaton
#8 Wartburg
#9 WIAC #2 or MIAC #2
#10 WIAC #2 or MIAC #2
#11 WIAC # 3 or MIAC #3
#12 MIAC #3
#13 Wabash - Head to head Wabash is going to lose to 1-8 and most likely 9 and 10 (going on historical playoff results for their conference at 20-19... the last 5 years has seen some significant point spread losses in the playoffs)
I think this is kind of lazy. Why is any random CCIW winner just automatically #7? You're evaluating leagues and not teams.
Just as lazy to call Wheaton a random CCIW winner isn't it?
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 06, 2015, 04:52:30 PM
#13 Wabash - Head to head Wabash is going to lose to 1-8 and most likely 9 and 10 (going on historical playoff results for their conference at 20-19... the last 5 years has seen some significant point spread losses in the playoffs)
Y'all are being nice. This is dumb. Watch a game.
These would be my current spreads for Wabash against the Top 10.
-13.5 v UWW
-10.5 v UMU
-12.5 v Linfield
-4.5 v UMHB
+2.5 v Wesley
-2.5 v Wheaton
+3.5 v Wartburg
+3.5 v St. Thomas
+13.5 v John Hopkins
Quote from: USee on October 06, 2015, 05:18:13 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 06, 2015, 04:59:34 PM
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 06, 2015, 04:52:30 PM
#1 UWW Until proven otherwise
#2 MUC Wish they would have tougher playoff games prior to the semi's or finals (excluding conference rematches where teams know each other)
#3/4/5/6 Linfield/UMHB/Wesley/MIAC winner/leader
#7 CCIW winner/leader which is Wheaton
#8 Wartburg
#9 WIAC #2 or MIAC #2
#10 WIAC #2 or MIAC #2
#11 WIAC # 3 or MIAC #3
#12 MIAC #3
#13 Wabash - Head to head Wabash is going to lose to 1-8 and most likely 9 and 10 (going on historical playoff results for their conference at 20-19... the last 5 years has seen some significant point spread losses in the playoffs)
I think this is kind of lazy. Why is any random CCIW winner just automatically #7? You're evaluating leagues and not teams.
Just as lazy to call Wheaton a random CCIW winner isn't it?
Not my words. If I'm reading WWW's process properly, he's saying any CCIW winner/leader is the 7th best team in D3. Could be Wheaton (it is at the moment) or it could be any other CCIW team. The main qualifier is that the team comes from the CCIW, which I think does a disservice to any good team from a league that we generally view as lesser than the CCIW.
I understand that. But your word is "random" not his. And your use of that word presupposes that it could be Carthage and it would still be #7. That presumption is your interpretation (which may be accurate) may not be true and I didn't read it that way. I read it as Wheaton is the CCIW leader at 7. If it was Millikin it may have been #10. I don't think #7 is coincidental with the CCIW leader/Wheaton's actual national rank this year.
Wally is correct. Until proven otherwise I don't feel that the NCAC champion is a Top 10 caliber team based on playoff results over the last 5 years. (rankings are from final Top 25 poll)
2010 - Wittenburg beats #8 ONU then loses to #3 North Central 28-9
2011 - Wabash beats #UR Illinois College, beats #8 North Central, Loses to #2 MUC 20-8
2012 - Wittenberg beats #19 Heidelberg, loses to #9 Hobart 35-10 who loses to #3 St Thomas 47-7
2013 - Wittenberg beats #UR Lebanon Valley then loses to #2 MUCH 56-21
2014 - Wittenberg loses to #14 W&J who loses to #2 MUC 67-0
2014 - Wabash beats #UR Franklin then loses to #1 UWW 38-14
I see 1 very good win (2011 vs North Central). 1 very good loss 2011 vs MUC. And a bunch of bad to very bad losses (especially when I consider what happened in the next rounds to teams that beat NCAC teams... )
Based on these results I'd say that the NCAC champion is normally the 3rd best team in either the WIAC or the MIAC.
The CCIW has shown much better in the playoffs over the past 5 years with deep runs by North Central.
Until the NCAC shows it in the playoffs they wouldn't get my vote to be in the Top 10 as they haven't proven that they are good enough year in year out.
How did all of those runners up and third place teams from your favorite leagues do? Are they doing better than an NCAC champion?
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 08, 2015, 09:33:46 PM
Wally is correct. Until proven otherwise I don't feel that the NCAC champion is a Top 10 caliber team based on playoff results over the last 5 years. (rankings are from final Top 25 poll)
2010 - Wittenburg beats #8 ONU then loses to #3 North Central 28-9
2011 - Wabash beats #UR Illinois College, beats #8 North Central, Loses to #2 MUC 20-8
2012 - Wittenberg beats #19 Heidelberg, loses to #9 Hobart 35-10 who loses to #3 St Thomas 47-7
2013 - Wittenberg beats #UR Lebanon Valley then loses to #2 MUCH 56-21
2014 - Wittenberg loses to #14 W&J who loses to #2 MUC 67-0
2014 - Wabash beats #UR Franklin then loses to #1 UWW 38-14
I see 1 very good win (2011 vs North Central). 1 very good loss 2011 vs MUC. And a bunch of bad to very bad losses (especially when I consider what happened in the next rounds to teams that beat NCAC teams... )
Based on these results I'd say that the NCAC champion is normally the 3rd best team in either the WIAC or the MIAC.
The CCIW has shown much better in the playoffs over the past 5 years with deep runs by North Central.
Until the NCAC shows it in the playoffs they wouldn't get my vote to be in the Top 10 as they haven't proven that they are good enough year in year out.
How would you rank them in the NWC?
Quote from: BashDad on October 06, 2015, 05:34:03 PM
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 06, 2015, 04:52:30 PM
#13 Wabash - Head to head Wabash is going to lose to 1-8 and most likely 9 and 10 (going on historical playoff results for their conference at 20-19... the last 5 years has seen some significant point spread losses in the playoffs)
Y'all are being nice. This is dumb. Watch a game.
These would be my current spreads for Wabash against the Top 10.
-13.5 v UWW
-10.5 v UMU
-12.5 v Linfield
-4.5 v UMHB
+2.5 v Wesley
-2.5 v Wheaton
+3.5 v Wartburg
+3.5 v St. Thomas
+13.5 v John Hopkins
r
I'm curious what a knowledgeable D3 fan - who didn't have a horse in this race - would set these lines at on a neutral field?
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 08, 2015, 10:28:25 PM
Quote from: BashDad on October 06, 2015, 05:34:03 PM
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 06, 2015, 04:52:30 PM
#13 Wabash - Head to head Wabash is going to lose to 1-8 and most likely 9 and 10 (going on historical playoff results for their conference at 20-19... the last 5 years has seen some significant point spread losses in the playoffs)
Y'all are being nice. This is dumb. Watch a game.
These would be my current spreads for Wabash against the Top 10.
-13.5 v UWW
-10.5 v UMU
-12.5 v Linfield
-4.5 v UMHB
+2.5 v Wesley
-2.5 v Wheaton
+3.5 v Wartburg
+3.5 v St. Thomas
+13.5 v John Hopkins
r
I'm curious what a knowledgeable D3 fan - who didn't have a horse in this race - would set these lines at on a neutral field?
Wabash (+17.5) vs UWW
Wabash (+14.5) vs UMU
Wabash (+14.5)vs Linfield
Wabash (+14.5) vs UMHB
Wabash (+10.5) vs Wesley
Wabash (EVEN) vs Wheaton
Wabash (EVEN) vs Wartburg
Wabash (+6.5) vs St Thomas
Wabash vs Johns Hopkins (+3.5)
Wabash (EVEN) vs Thomas More
They would be a clear #2 in the NWC using my criteria of past performance. We will know much more about Linfield, Whitworth, and Pacific in two weeks. Pacific losing to Dubuesqe makes it tough for me to give them any national love especially considering they lost at home to a team that was pounded by two other good programs. I am still uncertain about Whitworth and will know more after the 17th when we play them. The NWC is down this year with PLU and Willamette being unusually bad so far this year.
A good question on how the number two teams from the MIAC and WIAC have done. I will look into that more tomorrow. . The big challenge is that both are seeded in the West and you simply can't compare the East or North to the West in terms of strong teams in the playoffs. I'm basing that statement on final Top 25 rankings and cumulative score differential in the playoffs. I truly believe that if we had a playoff field seeded 1-32 based purely on how good a committee believes each team to be that the WIAC and MIAC would have a lot of first and second round victories.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 08, 2015, 11:04:22 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 08, 2015, 10:28:25 PM
Quote from: BashDad on October 06, 2015, 05:34:03 PM
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 06, 2015, 04:52:30 PM
#13 Wabash - Head to head Wabash is going to lose to 1-8 and most likely 9 and 10 (going on historical playoff results for their conference at 20-19... the last 5 years has seen some significant point spread losses in the playoffs)
Y'all are being nice. This is dumb. Watch a game.
These would be my current spreads for Wabash against the Top 10.
-13.5 v UWW
-10.5 v UMU
-12.5 v Linfield
-4.5 v UMHB
+2.5 v Wesley
-2.5 v Wheaton
+3.5 v Wartburg
+3.5 v St. Thomas
+13.5 v John Hopkins
r
I'm curious what a knowledgeable D3 fan - who didn't have a horse in this race - would set these lines at on a neutral field?
Wabash (+17.5) vs UWW
Wabash (+14.5) vs UMU
Wabash (+14.5)vs Linfield
Wabash (+14.5) vs UMHB
Wabash (+10.5) vs Wesley
Wabash (EVEN) vs Wheaton
Wabash (EVEN) vs Wartburg
Wabash (+6.5) vs St Thomas
Wabash vs Johns Hopkins (+3.5)
Wabash (EVEN) vs Thomas More
Ask and you shall receive
As an outsider I'd offer some minor tweaks as I do think this Wabash team, this year only, is better than I've seen before:
Wabash (+14.5) vs UWW
Wabash (+10.5) vs UMU
Wabash (+10.5)vs Linfield
Wabash (+9.5) vs UMHB
Wabash (+4.5) vs Wesley
Wabash (EVEN) vs Wheaton
Wabash vs Wartburg (+3.5)
Wabash (+3.5) vs St Thomas
Wabash vs Johns Hopkins (+8.5)
Wabash vs Thomas More (+3.5)
If you don't flip flop St. Thomas and Wartburg after today, you're doing it wrong.
Quote from: AO on October 10, 2015, 05:55:45 PM
If you don't flip flop St. Thomas and Wartburg after today, you're doing it wrong.
I have no plans to... but that's because I had St Thomas 6th and Wartburg 10th on my ballot ;D
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 10, 2015, 06:30:39 PM
Quote from: AO on October 10, 2015, 05:55:45 PM
If you don't flip flop St. Thomas and Wartburg after today, you're doing it wrong.
I have no plans to... but that's because I had St Thomas 6th and Wartburg 10th on my ballot ;D
I had Wartburg 8 and UST 9, but, yes, they will get flipped - though BOTH may get jumped by UW-Oshkosh. I've got some serious investigating/thinking to do! ::)
Like, how far to drop the defending national champions? (H-t-h is obviously a PRIME consideration, but UWO will NOT go above UWW on my ballot - a 3-point loss on the road is NOT decisive, and UWW's NAIA WIN was to a higher ranked team than UWO's loss.) At the moment, I'm thinking UWW goes 4th (behind UMU, Linfield, and UMHB), but that may change as the hours pass.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 10, 2015, 07:32:47 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 10, 2015, 06:30:39 PM
Quote from: AO on October 10, 2015, 05:55:45 PM
If you don't flip flop St. Thomas and Wartburg after today, you're doing it wrong.
I have no plans to... but that's because I had St Thomas 6th and Wartburg 10th on my ballot ;D
I had Wartburg 8 and UST 9, but, yes, they will get flipped - though BOTH may get jumped by UW-Oshkosh. I've got some serious investigating/thinking to do! ::)
Like, how far to drop the defending national champions? (H-t-h is obviously a PRIME consideration, but UWO will NOT go above UWW on my ballot - a 3-point loss on the road is NOT decisive, and UWW's NAIA WIN was to a higher ranked team than UWO's loss.) At the moment, I'm thinking UWW goes 4th (behind UMU, Linfield, and UMHB), but that may change as the hours pass.
Still considering as well about UWW. Right now, I dont have them dropping past 5 or 6 at the most. And while their win over Morningside was good and against a #1 team, no one else has played them in D3. Since Morningside is NAIA, I have difficulty determining the overall quality of the win. If they were Division II or FCS this would be a little easier because I feel like the NAIA holds an extremely wide range of talent.
I'd be hard pressed to drop uww all that much but I would be inclined to place uwo a single spot ahead of them as they did beat them head to head. It would be easier to do so if uwo was undefeated.
I'd expect the Top 10 to be:
Muc
Linfield
Mhb
Wesley
Wartburg
Wheaton
Uwo
Uww
St Thomas
Wabash
It sounds like this year's Wabash team may be a stronger than usual NCAC team although we won't know until Round 2 of the playoffs.
Wartburg doesn't seem to operating at the level I expected... Yet...
North Central needs to be ranked much higher than 17 considering both who they lost to and the manner of each loss. I'd put them at 11 followed by St Johns then UWP.
St Thomas may be a Top 5 team as I hate to drop the MIAC leader all that far. It will be interesting to see sos and regional rankings when they come out as the MIAC currently has five teams with at most two losses (Bethels losses to CM and Wartburg). That is one tough conference and not E8 tough but rather legitimate playoff contending tough.
Lol. You're going to give North Central so much credit for 2 good losses that you'll rank them AHEAD of the UWP team that beat them?
I agree that NCC deserves a high rabking, and probably just behind UWP, but this "they played a tough schedule, let's cut them some slack" stuff has reached a critical mass when we rank them ahead of a team that gave them one of this losses.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 10, 2015, 07:32:47 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 10, 2015, 06:30:39 PM
Quote from: AO on October 10, 2015, 05:55:45 PM
If you don't flip flop St. Thomas and Wartburg after today, you're doing it wrong.
I have no plans to... but that's because I had St Thomas 6th and Wartburg 10th on my ballot ;D
I had Wartburg 8 and UST 9, but, yes, they will get flipped - though BOTH may get jumped by UW-Oshkosh. I've got some serious investigating/thinking to do! ::)
Like, how far to drop the defending national champions? (H-t-h is obviously a PRIME consideration, but UWO will NOT go above UWW on my ballot - a 3-point loss on the road is NOT decisive, and UWW's NAIA WIN was to a higher ranked team than UWO's loss.) At the moment, I'm thinking UWW goes 4th (behind UMU, Linfield, and UMHB), but that may change as the hours pass.
To me it's a no brainer. UWW is going to struggle this year against any team that resembles a good defense. For that reason I have them 9th with UWO 8th. I'll have a tough time listening to any reasoning why UWO
shouldn't be ahead of UWW. It doesn't more definitive than a head to head match up on who's better.
If UWO had a "decisive" win against UWW, then you're talking UWO as a top tier team this year (with UWW a good 3 or 4 spots behind them).
2015 WEEK 6 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev
1) Mount Union (5) 196 2
2) Linfield (3) 195 3
3) Mary Hardin-Baylor 183 4
4) Wesley 171 5
T5) UW-Oshkosh 157 13
T5) Wheaton 157 6
7) UW-Whitewater 152 1
8) Wabash 151 8
9) St Thomas 146 9
10) Wartburg 129 7
11) Johns Hopkins 118 10
12) Thomas More 115 11
13) UW-Platteville 99 12
14) St John's 93 14
15) Hardin-Simmons 79 17
16) North Central 76 16
17) Wash & Jeff 65 18
18) Concordia-Moorhead 50 20
19) Illinois Wesleyan 39 NR
20) Salisbury 28 NR
21) Albright 26 22
22) Texas Lutheran 23 T25
23) Whitworth 21 23
24) John Carroll 20 T25
25) DePauw 19 NR
Dropped Out: Rowan, Cortland St, Wittenberg, and Chicago
Also Receiving Votes: Bethel (14), Rowan (13), Ithaca (11), Washington & Lee (10), Gustavus Adolphus (9), Western New England (7), Gettysburg (6), Albion (5), Ohio Northern (5), Cortland St (4), Berry (3), St Lawrence (2), Wittenberg (2), St Norbert (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, and thewaterboy
1) Mount Union 196 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3)
2) Linfield 195 ( 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3) Mary Hardin-Baylor 183 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4)
4) Wesley 171 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6)
T5) UW-Oshkosh 157 ( 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 8, 8, 9)
T5) Wheaton 157 ( 3, 5, 5, 7, 7, 7, 8, 9)
7) UW-Whitewater 152 ( 4, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 9, 12)
8) Wabash 151 ( 5, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8)
9) St Thomas 146 ( 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10)
10) Wartburg 129 ( 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 11)
11) Johns Hopkins 118 (11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 12, 12)
12) Thomas More 115 (10, 10, 11, 12, 12, 12, 12, 14)
13) UW-Platteville 99 (13, 13, 13, 13, 13, 14, 14, 16)
14) St John's 93 (12, 13, 14, 15, 15, 15, 15, 16)
15) Hardin-Simmons 79 (13, 14, 15, 16, 16, 17, 17, 21)
16) North Central 76 (14, 14, 14, 15, 16, 16, 17, --)
17) Wash & Jeff 65 (13, 16, 16, 17, 18, 18, 19, --)
18) Concordia-Moorhead 50 (17, 17, 18, 18, 19, 20, 23, --)
19) Illinois Wesleyan 39 (18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 22, 23, 24)
20) Salisbury 28 (18, 20, 21, 21, 24, 24, --, --)
21) Albright 26 (15, 17, 20, --, --, --, --, --)
22) Texas Lutheran 23 (15, 19, 23, 24, --, --, --, --)
23) Whitworth 21 (17, 18, 22, --, --, --, --, --)
24) John Carroll 20 (18, 19, 22, 25, --, --, --, --)
25) DePauw 19 (22, 22, 22, 22, 23, --, --, --)
26) Bethel 14 (19, 20, 25)
27) Rowan 13 (20, 23, 24, 25, 25)
28) Ithaca 11 (20, 21)
29) Wash & Lee 10 (21, 23, 24)
30) Gustavus Adolphus 9 (19, 25, 25)
31) W New England 7 (19)
32) Gettysburg 6 (20)
T33) Albion 5 (21)
T33) Ohio Northern 5 (21)
35) Cortland St 4 (23, 25)
36) Berry 3 (23)
T37) St Lawrence 2 (24)
T37) Wittenberg 2 (24)
39) St Norbert 1 (25)
My bad.. I should have put them in this order.. UWP, North Central, St Johns... North Central is a couple of plays away from being undefeated with 2 great wins over Wesley and UWP but they didn't get it done. What is sad is that if they lose to Wheaton they won't make the playoffs even though they will be a top 20 team while the UMAC gets an auto bid (along with a bunch of other terrible conferences)...
Interesting how my Top 10 more closely aligns with the D3 Top 25 versus the fan poll... Seems to be a lot of fan bias in the fan poll versus what is reality on the field
My bad.. I should have put them in this order.. UWP, North Central, St Johns... North Central is a couple of plays away from being undefeated with 2 great wins over Wesley and UWP but they didn't get it done. What is sad is that if they lose to Wheaton they won't make the playoffs even though they will be a top 20 team while the UMAC gets an auto bid (along with a bunch of other terrible conferences)...
Interesting how my Top 10 more closely aligns with the D3 Top 25 versus the fan poll... Seems to be a lot of fan bias in the fan poll versus what is reality on the field
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 12, 2015, 04:28:36 PM
My bad.. I should have put them in this order.. UWP, North Central, St Johns... North Central is a couple of plays away from being undefeated with 2 great wins over Wesley and UWP but they didn't get it done. What is sad is that if they lose to Wheaton they won't make the playoffs even though they will be a top 20 team while the UMAC gets an auto bid (along with a bunch of other terrible conferences)...
Interesting how my Top 10 more closely aligns with the D3 Top 25 versus the fan poll... Seems to be a lot of fan bias in the fan poll versus what is reality on the field
The two polls have the same 10 teams in basically the same order? I don't understand.
Not sure why the diss on the UMAC. Any UMAC team could have lost to Wesley and/or Platteville and still qualified for the tournament by winning their league- the same as North Central. What's not the same is that none of the teams in the UMAC could have lost those games and still be ranked in the top 20 nationally or be ranked in the top 10 in their region. So let's not cry for North Central. They get a pass for a lot of losing that 98% of the division wouldn't ever get.
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 12, 2015, 04:28:44 PM
What is sad is that if they lose to Wheaton they won't make the playoffs even though they will be a top 20 team while the UMAC gets an auto bid (along with a bunch of other terrible conferences)...
I expect that we'll have plenty of time to debate this in a few weeks if that actually happens, but I think it's probably worth getting this out there now:
If North Central does lose to Wheaton, beat Illinois Wesleyan, and finish 7-3 they will not make the playoffs. Are they a top 20 team? Yes, almost certainly, but there's also this: they will have played three games against teams who are in the field / on the bubble (Platteville is not a playoff lock right now, and they just gasped their way past a Stevens Point team that gave up 65 points to MIAA leader Albion, who plays in one of the leagues you're ****ting on with this nonsense) and lost all three of them. I am sympathetic to teams that play difficult schedule, but viewed another way they would be 0-3 (if we give them credit for Illinois Wesleyan being a bubble-type playoff team, 1-3) against playoff-esque teams.
In a tournament where the ultimate goal is determination of a national champion, doesn't that pass for sufficient evidence that North Central is
not the nation's best team? How many chances does a team get? If North Central loses by a point to Wesley in the playoffs, do they get to ask the officials to line up and keep playing because, gosh-darn-it, they were so close? Those three losses (still hypothetical in Wheaton's case) would have come against very, very good teams but probably not the #1, 2, and 3 teams in the nation. Let's suppose for the moment that Wesley is in fact #4, Wheaton #7, and UW-Platteville #13. Where do we draw the line?
In a humorous bit of reverse psychology, North Central scheduling and losing those 2 games has won them plenty of supporters that cannot wait to declare how unfair it is that they'll be left out of the playoffs, before that's even finalized. Welp, folks, they had a chance to win'em all (and still have the chance to win their way in via a league championship). What makes the D3 football season great, to me, is that (theoretically) when the season kicks off, every single team has a path to the playoffs. North Central still has that path available to them. Maybe if they want to win the national championship so badly, we should ask them to win their league title first? Seems pretty reasonable, no?
I understand "They're only a couple of plays from being 4-0" argument, but folks, that's why we keep score and declare the team who has more points at the end of the game the winner. Taking this to its logical conclusion, every team that loses a close game can petition for special consideration because, darn it folks, they almost won! Hold on, I'm going to call the NCAA and ask if they can retroactively put Wartburg back into the 2014 playoffs because they were just one play away from beating Whitewater. Oh, that's not how it works?
You can certainly use their late leads as evidence that they belong in the discussion with the nation's top teams, but still, they lost the games. How would you feel, if you were Wheaton, if you played your balls off to beat North Central for the league title (and deal them a
third loss), then had to play them again in the second round? Would it sit very well that your conference rival, who lost
three games and who you beat for the league title, gets another crack at you? This whole argument devalues the battle for conference championships (everyone's automatic, no-questions-asked path into the tournament) and the regular season as a whole.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 12, 2015, 04:42:05 PM
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 12, 2015, 04:28:36 PM
My bad.. I should have put them in this order.. UWP, North Central, St Johns... North Central is a couple of plays away from being undefeated with 2 great wins over Wesley and UWP but they didn't get it done. What is sad is that if they lose to Wheaton they won't make the playoffs even though they will be a top 20 team while the UMAC gets an auto bid (along with a bunch of other terrible conferences)...
Interesting how my Top 10 more closely aligns with the D3 Top 25 versus the fan poll... Seems to be a lot of fan bias in the fan poll versus what is reality on the field
The two polls have the same 10 teams in basically the same order? I don't understand.
Not sure why the diss on the UMAC. Any UMAC team could have lost to Wesley and/or Platteville and still qualified for the tournament by winning their league- the same as North Central. What's not the same is that none of the teams in the UMAC could have lost those games and still be ranked in the top 20 nationally or be ranked in the top 10 in their region. So let's not cry for North Central. They get a pass for a lot of losing that 98% of the division wouldn't ever get.
98% of the division wouldn't have had the results that North Central had. Losing those games by 60 isn't the same as losing by 1 and in OT. If St Scholastica had those same results they'd find a spot on my ballot.
Should North Central play Maranatha Baptist and Earlham instead of Wesley and Platteville? I'd rather teams play a tougher schedule and prove their abilities than play cupcakes like they do in D1 just to protect their record.
I've always been in favor of playoff eligibility being a combination of National/Regional Rankings plus conference performance. Simply winning a conference shouldn't equate to an automatic bid to the playoffs. I'd rather a team have to be ranked in the Top 25 to have the conference championship criteria matter.
As for my dissing on the UMAC, I'll refer to the preseason rankings where not a single UMAC team was ranked in the top 150... St Scholastica @ #164 was first and the rest were 184, 200, 226, 230, 239, 241, 243, 244 for an average ranking of 220. And the winner of that conference gets a bid to be crushed in the first round by the MIAC or WIAC winner. It would be one thing if a conference was working to get better each year which might be the case with the UMAC and St Scholastica specifically as the score last year was 35-10 against St. Johns. But repeated year after year playoff futility (defined as ending your season by being beaten by a significant margin with zero chance of being competitive) shouldn't be rewarded with a ribbon.
However, more on point to North Central. They play in a very difficult conference (as defined by having at least 3 if not 4 playoff caliber programs). Why they decided to schedule non conference games against Wesley and a top tier WIAC team is a good question? I'd expect that they have the same challenge as other top national programs in finding games. They shouldn't be penalized for scheduling and losing tough out of conference games. Otherwise there is little incentive to do so... however, no one else will play them.. so what are they to do? ... I know... win their conference...
That argument simply gets old when so many teams are not deserving of a playoff bid. But, we need to be fair to everyone and give them their participation trophy.
As for Wheaton having to play North Central in the 2nd round... There are very few easy games in the West past the first round. Would they rather play the MIAC or Linfield or the WIAC?
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 12, 2015, 08:49:32 PM
However, more on point to North Central. They play in a very difficult conference (as defined by having at least 3 if not 4 playoff caliber programs). Why they decided to schedule non conference games against Wesley and a top tier WIAC team is a good question? I'd expect that they have the same challenge as other top national programs in finding games. They shouldn't be penalized for scheduling and losing tough out of conference games. Otherwise there is little incentive to do so... however, no one else will play them.. so what are they to do? ... I know... win their conference...
What are they to do? Closing out the 4th quarter in games that matter would be a good start.
Again, the ethos and mission of D3 is inclusion. The UMAC is an example of that and I embrace it. I'd rather see the UMAC in instead of a 3-loss third place team. The end result will be exactly the same.
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 12, 2015, 08:49:32 PM
I've always been in favor of playoff eligibility being a combination of National/Regional Rankings plus conference performance. Simply winning a conference shouldn't equate to an automatic bid to the playoffs. I'd rather a team have to be ranked in the Top 25 to have the conference championship criteria matter.
However, more on point to North Central. They play in a very difficult conference (as defined by having at least 3 if not 4 playoff caliber programs). Why they decided to schedule non conference games against Wesley and a top tier WIAC team is a good question? I'd expect that they have the same challenge as other top national programs in finding games. They shouldn't be penalized for scheduling and losing tough out of conference games. Otherwise there is little incentive to do so... however, no one else will play them.. so what are they to do? ... I know... win their conference...
1. I completely agree with this first paragraph. There's a middle ground between awarding conference winners and giving teams proper credit for the relative strengths/weaknesses of said conferences.
2. But the bolded part I disagree with. We have to punish losses—it's the degree to which we punish them that can differ. You don't just get a game where if you win, it's this huge boost, but if you lose, it's irrelevant. Obviously, we don't punish a loss to Wesley as much as we would one to a mediocre team, but the idea that any school just gets a free pass for their tough OOC scheduling is ridiculous.
I agree, arguing over losses is difficult. What the AQ system sets up is virtually ZERO incentive for teams to schedule difficult non-conference games. Teams that are in bad (meaning non-competitive in the playoffs) AQ conferences don't need to schedule up. Teams that are in tough conferences - of which there are only a handful that are difficult in conference and relevant by Round 3 of the playoffs - can easily get themselves outside the 32 team bracket with a single non-conference loss.
North Central would have been better off to schedule 2 easy out of conference teams. That way if they stumbled in the CCIW they'd be 9-1 and most likely still receive a spot in the playoffs. But, I bet no one took their phone calls except for other top tier programs. They had no option but to schedule easily loseable games.
Let's say that they turn out to be 7-3 with close losses to Wesley, UWP, and Wheaton. They'd be a better team than 14-16 of the teams in the playoffs. But because they had the guts to schedule tough games they are on the outside looking in.
Meanwhile, a bunch of teams get AQ's and are blasted in rounds 1 & 2. Their only qualification for being included in the playoffs was that they won an easy conference... Yay!
I am curious as to why both Johns Hopkins & Thomas More are ranked so high. Thomas more got 59 more points that UWP whose only loss was to then #1 UWW by 10. Looking at past years playoff results both JH and TM don't do all that well past round 1 or 2. I'd be hard pressed to say that they are better than a 4-1 team from the WIAC or MIAC. $10 says that 2015 playoff results will reflect that BUT that the final Top 25 won't.
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 14, 2015, 08:01:32 PM
Teams that are in bad (meaning non-competitive in the playoffs) AQ conferences don't need to schedule up. Teams that are in tough conferences - of which there are only a handful that are difficult in conference and relevant by Round 3 of the playoffs - can easily get themselves outside the 32 team bracket with a single non-conference loss.
Do some digging here...find all of the instances where all of these teams from tough conferences (by whatever definition you want to use) are going deep into the tournament and share that.
My hunch is that you're going to find that it's the same team (not a bunch of teams from any one league) playing deep into the tournament and that what you're doing is giving credit to an entire conference's teams for the annual success of just one team.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 14, 2015, 09:56:39 PM
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 14, 2015, 08:01:32 PM
Teams that are in bad (meaning non-competitive in the playoffs) AQ conferences don't need to schedule up. Teams that are in tough conferences - of which there are only a handful that are difficult in conference and relevant by Round 3 of the playoffs - can easily get themselves outside the 32 team bracket with a single non-conference loss.
Do some digging here...find all of the instances where all of these teams from tough conferences (by whatever definition you want to use) are going deep into the tournament and share that.
My hunch is that you're going to find that it's the same team (not a bunch of teams from any one league) playing deep into the tournament and that what you're doing is giving credit to an entire conference's teams for the annual success of just one team.
Or at most two teams alternating (e.g., Wheaton and NCC; I keep hoping IWU can make it three teams, but in the d3football.com era we've only made the dance 3 or 4 times, and only once made it to the second round, when we beat Wabash but got squashed by UWW.)
Or if looking at the long term, it may be succeeding dynasties. UW-LaX was for a few years almost as dominant as UWW is now. Augustana is STILL the only team to win four consecutive Stagg Bowls, though they now usually finish in the bottom half of the CCIW.
But your basic point is well documented: an entire league cannot be judged by postseason results, because those are usually produced by only one team over any short period of time (and at most two). WWW's ranking of teams by postseason success of the league is (my apologies) ridiculous.
Finishing wally's and Ypsi's point above...let's go back a decade (2005-2014)
The CCIW has had playoff runs "past round 1 or 2" (which appears to be walla walla's threshold for counting as a really strong team, since Thomas More and Johns Hopkins haven't made it past round 1 or 2 enough for his taste) from:
2008 Wheaton
2008 North Central
2010 North Central
2013 North Central
(bet you're a little surprised by this one: the CCIW has only sent four total teams to the quarterfinals or beyond in the past decade. I was surprised, but Wheaton and NCC have both lost in the second round several times. Seems a little light for such a powerhouse league that you've decided merits an automatic spot in your top 10 rankings)
WIAC:
2005 UWW
2006 UWW
2007 UWW
2008 UWW
2009 UWW
2010 UWW
2011 UWW
2012 UWO
2013 UWW
2014 UWW
A worthwhile comment here: emma17 made an excellent point on the WIAC boards the other day that a key factor in getting people to believe the WIAC was more than a one-team league would be getting a second team into the playoffs, and having that team make a deep playoff run. Unfortunately, we haven't had many instances where the WIAC did get a second team into the field. Two things worth noting here: one is that the WIAC runner-up usually wasn't a viable candidate because they often ended up 7-3 overall; it's kinda their own fault if they drop a game to somebody from the lower half of the conference and that costs them a bid. The second, however, is that the WIAC hasn't done itself any favors when they did get a second team in. UWP lost to North Central by 28 points in the second round in 2013. UWSP lost in the first round to Wartburg in 2008. There's really not a long, illustrious history of WIAC second bananas making the playoffs and blowing through the field. I'd be more sympathetic to this entire argument if the WIAC runners-up that did make the playoffs actually won in the playoffs.
MIAC:
2006 St. John's
2007 Bethel
2010 Bethel
2010 St. Thomas
2011 St. Thomas
2012 St. Thomas
2013 Bethel
That's it. The MIAC is the only league that's sent more than two teams to the quarterfinals in the last decade, one of which has only one appearance that came 9 years ago. No conference is chock-full of a rotating cast of characters that run deep into the playoffs.
Surely there will be some crowing that the WIAC would have had a second team advancing much more if only the selection committee hadn't screwed them so many times. To which...well, we don't know that for sure, but the only 2 times I found a second WIAC team in the playoffs, they lost in round 2 (in a blowout) and round 1. I don't think there's much evidence supporting that claim.
I don't get this rationale that teams who have lost multiple games would be making deep playoff runs, tough competition or not. In the playoffs you go home when you lose; eight teams make the quarterfinals. I don't think any of those teams that have lost three games did so against three teams that made the quarterfinals. Most of them lost to at least one team who either didn't make the field, or lost in Round 1 or 2. Suddenly I'm supposed to believe that they're one of the eight best teams in the country? Why should we feel sorry for teams from tough leagues who play tough non-league games and lose them? Doesn't that already tell us they're not among the best teams in the country? If Wesley, UWP, and Wheaton all make the quarterfinals this year...that just means North Central lost to three teams that made the quarters. Why should they be rewarded for that? There have to be winners and losers, guys!
Really, the argument here is just a different version of everyone-gets-a-trophy. The people arguing to shut the lesser conferences out of the playoffs altogther decry the current system which allows those guys a place at the table, because they want to replace them with guys from their own league who have already lost. But that devalues the regular-season games in their own league. Why should Wheaton bust their asses to beat North Central in the regular season if NCC is just going to get a life preserver and show up in the playoffs anyway?
I take a slightly different tack here: rather than arguing for a system where we would change the bar for playoff inclusion to stipulate a team's ranking, I would prefer that we had a playoff of only conference champions. I would be completely fine if it was a prerequisite to win your league before competing for the national championship. I tolerate Pool C because it makes sense to have a round number provided by the 32-team bracket, so I can live with throwing a second chance to a couple of especially good teams who didn't win their league. But that's just what it is - a second chance - and it's funny to see people arguing on behalf of these teams who scheduled tough games and lost them, because darn it guys, life is hard!
There's one other important point I really want to get out there.
I've read a couple times that the current system doesn't incentivize scheduling tough non league games. That's only true if you look at this through the lens of Pool C, where a team with losses in those games probably sits at a disadvantage.
However, that ignores the fact that AQ's guarantee a team who schedules a loses a tough non league game still have a path to the playoffs. NCC's losses to UWP and Wesley do not preclude playoff berth, it just means they have to win their conference.
So the Pool A system does make it plenty viable to schedule tough non league games, even if you lose them. It guarantees that you'll still have a chance when conference play kicks off. And we don't talk about that enough - we just focus on "what a shame poor North Central scheduled those tough games and lost them, now they probably can't get a Pool C." We have people criticizing the fact that AQ's allow teams from "weak conferences" into the tournament while ignoring that the very same AQ system is what keeps North Central alive after those two non-league losses.
I agree with much of this but be careful exTartan you are close to skewing data to fit your thesis as much as the other side has done.
Part of being in a tough conference is having parity so that the bottom half is tough enough to make the top half play hard and this prepares them for the playoffs. The WIAC is a possible example here. UWW almost loses to 3-7 UWRF and then wins the title. MT Union for years had their toughest games w OAC #2 while winning titles. Wheaton lost 2 games in 2008 and made the semis as a pool C.
Also, the second round may or may not be a good benchmark. Lately the committee has spread around the teams so that may be a better indication. But for many years the North teams played Mt Union in round 2 at the latest. The CCIW has actually sent 7 of their 8 teams to the playoffs in the AQ era.
The fact that one league has sent more than 2 teams to the quarters in ten years doesn't necessarily mean anything other than you have to widen the sample set. How many teams from a league have made the playoffs at all? How many have won at least one game? How far have pool C teams gone vs their pool A counterparts. These are some questions I have and haven't had time to look at the data.
I have no axe to grind on this. I am not a big believer in league superiority but I do know the pile of such from the south hurt themselves this year by scheduling up. Some beleive the short term pain will result in title runs. We will see
Quote from: USee on October 15, 2015, 10:28:50 AM
Also, the second round may or may not be a good benchmark. Lately the committee has spread around the teams so that may be a better indication. But for many years the North teams played Mt Union in round 2 at the latest. The CCIW has actually sent 7 of their 8 teams to the playoffs in the AQ era.
I agree with this entirely - but walla walla wildcat has a problem with teams who can't get "past round 1 or round 2" apparently, so I wanted to see if any leagues actually were sending a couple different teams that deep. And the answer is no, not really, which goes back to wally's point that most of the "tough" leagues actually have 1 or 2 teams making deep playoff runs, not a bunch.
FWIW: I knew that CCIW stat and always found it a (generally) impressive statement about league depth. But, and this is really key, if a league perceived as a lesser one does that (let's take the MIAA: Adrian, Albion, Trine, Olivet, Hope, and Alma have all won the league since 2004, or 6 of the 7 current members) they don't get any credit for it. CCIW has sent 7/8 teams to the playoffs, but only 2 have advanced to the quarters. MIAA has sent 6/7 to the playoffs, and 0 have advanced to the quarters.
walla walla's position this entire discussion is that "the CCIW" (or any tough league of choice) is better than "the MIAA" (or any other league that doesn't get the golden pass) and that teams from "weak conferences" should not be able to get into the playoffs - but is that really true, or is it just that "the CCIW" has a couple of programs who have gone deep in the playoffs while the MIAA has none (to date)? And if that's the case, doesn't that suggest we should be looking at the teams individually, not just blindly slotting in "CCIW leader" into the top 10 because 2 CCIW teams have made it to that hallowed ground at some point?
Quote from: USee on October 15, 2015, 10:28:50 AM
How many teams from a league have made the playoffs at all? How many have won at least one game? How far have pool C teams gone vs their pool A counterparts.
I think these are really the important questions. Really, the 2 strongest suggestions that a league has multiple playoff-caliber teams would be:
1) Multiple different teams winning playoff games. Not just getting to the playoffs - like I said, the MIAA has had 6 of its 7 members win the AQ in the last couple of years and nobody is giving them any credit here. I would like to look at the CCIW teams and see how many of the others won at least one playoff game.
2) Better yet, playoff wins by their Pool C entrants. This really would bring home the bacon, right? Getting the second banana from your league into in the second and third round of the playoffs shows that you truly have multiple top-20-caliber programs, not just that you can cycle through different league champions. And that's where I was kind of surprised; I know that the WIAC has only gotten 2 Pool C entrants in that time frame, but one lost in the first round (against 8-2 Wartburg at home, no less!) and the other lost by 28 in the second round. If the WIAC had 3 or more top-15 programs every year, wouldn't the WIAC runners-up who do get in through Pool C be distinguishing themselves a little more? I didn't have time to look through this for every league, but the early-2000's OAC is probably the only time a league had a strong and consistent presence in Pool C that
always won a game or two.
The ODAC has sent 6 of the 7 teams that have been in the conference since '99 to the playoffs. Only Guilford has never been (and Shenandoah, but they've only completed 3 seasons in the ODAC). I wouldn't count the ODAC as a power conference but just one that has had good balance. I'm not sure this is the right measure as well.
Catholic (99), E&H (00), Bridgewater (00-05), W&L (06,10,12), RMC (08), H-SC (07,09,10,11,13,14)
One proposal that I would be willing to entertain: Pool C bids can only come from leagues that have won playoff games "recently" (say, the last four years), while maintaining the full AQ structure of a Pool A bid for every qualifying league. That would ensure every team still has playoff access (and each league still has a chance to win / earn itself continued Pool C access if they win a game in a 4-year period), but it would generally steer the C bids to teams from (theoretically) tougher leagues. Then we would start to see the really good leagues usually getting their second team in while avoiding this ugly debate about whether the system is unfair to teams that play in good leagues.
This system still has problems but I actually think it would do a little better job of funneling the "good conference" teams into Pool C while still preserving access for all. And a league would always have the chance to win its Pool C access back by winning a playoff game, which is important. As long as your conference champ occasionally wins a playoff game, you can make the case that your league is capable of producing more than one playoff entrant. But if your conference champ never wins a playoff game, while I still think you deserve the Pool A bid so everyone has access, I'm fine with taking the league out of Pool C.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 15, 2015, 11:54:51 AM
One proposal that I would be willing to entertain: Pool C bids can only come from leagues that have won playoff games "recently"
What happens if a team switches conferences the year after winning a playoff game? Which conference gets credit?
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 15, 2015, 11:19:45 AM
If the WIAC had 3 or more top-15 programs every year, wouldn't the WIAC runners-up who do get in through Pool C be distinguishing themselves a little more? I didn't have time to look through this for every league, but the early-2000's OAC is probably the only time a league had a strong and consistent presence in Pool C that always won a game or two.
Yeah, but that gets into the whole "who did they play?" thing. Losing on the road to a top-15 team you had to play because you were a Pool C doesn't mean you're also not a top-15 caliber program.
Quote from: Bombers798891 on October 15, 2015, 12:15:22 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 15, 2015, 11:54:51 AM
One proposal that I would be willing to entertain: Pool C bids can only come from leagues that have won playoff games "recently"
What happens if a team switches conferences the year after winning a playoff game? Which conference gets credit?
Tough one, and I don't have the answer for sure. But I think it's a possibility that could at least be discussed, right? I don't think it would be so bad if it stayed with the conference.
Quote from: Bombers798891 on October 15, 2015, 12:15:22 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 15, 2015, 11:19:45 AM
If the WIAC had 3 or more top-15 programs every year, wouldn't the WIAC runners-up who do get in through Pool C be distinguishing themselves a little more? I didn't have time to look through this for every league, but the early-2000's OAC is probably the only time a league had a strong and consistent presence in Pool C that always won a game or two.
Yeah, but that gets into the whole "who did they play?" thing. Losing on the road to a top-15 team you had to play because you were a Pool C doesn't mean you're also not a top-15 caliber program.
I agree, but that's not what actually happened with the WIAC teams I looked up.
2008 Stevens Point lost at home against an 8-2 Wartburg team (before Wartburg was the almost-slayed-UWW dragon that they're perceived to be now).
2013 Platteville crushed Wisconsin Lutheran in the first round, then lost by 28 at North Central. This is tough because NCC did make the semifinals that year.
My point was just that if the WIAC's 2nd and 3rd teams could just be penciled into the top 10...like this...
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 06, 2015, 04:52:30 PM
#1 UWW Until proven otherwise
#2 MUC Wish they would have tougher playoff games prior to the semi's or finals (excluding conference rematches where teams know each other)
#3/4/5/6 Linfield/UMHB/Wesley/MIAC winner/leader
#7 CCIW winner/leader which is Wheaton
#8 Wartburg
#9 WIAC #2 or MIAC #2
#10 WIAC #2 or MIAC #2
#11 WIAC # 3 or MIAC #3
#12 MIAC #3
...one would think that the "WIAC #2" would actually advance when it's in the playoffs. We have very little data to work with here, but the little data we do have doesn't show "WIAC #2" running roughshod over the rest of the nation.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 15, 2015, 11:54:51 AM
One proposal that I would be willing to entertain: Pool C bids can only come from leagues that have won playoff games "recently" (say, the last four years), while maintaining the full AQ structure of a Pool A bid for every qualifying league. That would ensure every team still has playoff access (and each league still has a chance to win / earn itself continued Pool C access if they win a game in a 4-year period), but it would generally steer the C bids to teams from (theoretically) tougher leagues. Then we would start to see the really good leagues usually getting their second team in while avoiding this ugly debate about whether the system is unfair to teams that play in good leagues.
This system still has problems but I actually think it would do a little better job of funneling the "good conference" teams into Pool C while still preserving access for all. And a league would always have the chance to win its Pool C access back by winning a playoff game, which is important. As long as your conference champ occasionally wins a playoff game, you can make the case that your league is capable of producing more than one playoff entrant. But if your conference champ never wins a playoff game, while I still think you deserve the Pool A bid so everyone has access, I'm fine with taking the league out of Pool C.
I haven't checked the Pool C records to be sure, but I think this is already
de facto the reality. For at least half the d3 conferences you just know that the runner-up has zero chance at a Pool C.
While things have improved in the past 4-5 years, the CCIW would have gotten a whole lot more teams to the semis if round two didn't mean UMU or (some years, when they still did geographical groupings and UMU was shipped East) UWW was the opponent. I believe we are talking teams that are legitimately tier two or three (and therefore to WWW, power conferences), not those imaginary teams that actually beat UMU or UWW! ;) (From 2001-2010, CCIW teams were 0-11 against UMU and UWW; 19-4 against everyone else, and two of those losses were against the Rocky Pentello Capital teams that just might have been the second best teams in d3 but couldn't get past conference-mate UMU.)
Not that it will change the argument much since it is UWW, but in 2008 Wartburg beat the AQ USP. UWW went in as a pool C & was beaten by Mt in the Stagg.
Whoops! Thanks for pointing that out wartknight...I was just on autopilot and assuming UWW was always the Pool A, just looking for "other" WIAC teams. Had forgotten that SP beat Whitewater that year and went in as Pool A.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 15, 2015, 07:24:27 AM
Finishing wally's and Ypsi's point above...let's go back a decade (2005-2014)
The CCIW has had playoff runs "past round 1 or 2" (which appears to be walla walla's threshold for counting as a really strong team, since Thomas More and Johns Hopkins haven't made it past round 1 or 2 enough for his taste) from:
2008 Wheaton
2008 North Central
2010 North Central
2013 North Central
(bet you're a little surprised by this one: the CCIW has only sent four total teams to the quarterfinals or beyond in the past decade. I was surprised, but Wheaton and NCC have both lost in the second round several times. Seems a little light for such a powerhouse league that you've decided merits an automatic spot in your top 10 rankings)
WIAC:
2005 UWW
2006 UWW
2007 UWW
2008 UWW
2009 UWW
2010 UWW
2011 UWW
2012 UWO
2013 UWW
2014 UWW
A worthwhile comment here: emma17 made an excellent point on the WIAC boards the other day that a key factor in getting people to believe the WIAC was more than a one-team league would be getting a second team into the playoffs, and having that team make a deep playoff run. Unfortunately, we haven't had many instances where the WIAC did get a second team into the field. Two things worth noting here: one is that the WIAC runner-up usually wasn't a viable candidate because they often ended up 7-3 overall; it's kinda their own fault if they drop a game to somebody from the lower half of the conference and that costs them a bid. The second, however, is that the WIAC hasn't done itself any favors when they did get a second team in. UWP lost to North Central by 28 points in the second round in 2013. UWSP lost in the first round to Wartburg in 2008. There's really not a long, illustrious history of WIAC second bananas making the playoffs and blowing through the field. I'd be more sympathetic to this entire argument if the WIAC runners-up that did make the playoffs actually won in the playoffs.
MIAC:
2006 St. John's
2007 Bethel
2010 Bethel
2010 St. Thomas
2011 St. Thomas
2012 St. Thomas
2013 Bethel
That's it. The MIAC is the only league that's sent more than two teams to the quarterfinals in the last decade, one of which has only one appearance that came 9 years ago. No conference is chock-full of a rotating cast of characters that run deep into the playoffs.
You're forgetting the OAC.
Mount Union (2005-2014)
Capital (2005, 2006)
John Carroll (2014)
Love the conversation!
Since this is the Top 25 I'd like to steer back to that. The Top 25 should be just that.. the top 25 teams in D3 football. In my opinion the strength of a particular team can be based upon this season's results, head to head match-ups and Strength of Schedule PLUS historical precedence for both that team and its success in the playoffs (or that of its conference members).
For example, this year's Linfield Wildcat's team is 4-0 with a single win over a team that was ranked (Chapman) at the time of the game. If we were to judge Linfield only by the criteria of teams that it has played it doesn't have an impressive resume. However, if we look at how the program has done in the playoffs over the past 5 years we see that it has lost 5 close games (2 in the 2nd round, 2 in the third round, and 1 in the semis). The teams to which they have lost have gone on to win it all twice and make the semis twice (I believe). Add that program history to the players returning I am comfortable that Linfield is a Top 5 team.
This same argument can be made for UWW, MUC, Wesley, MHB and I don't think there is much argument about what have been the Top 5 programs over the past 5 years.
Since UWO beat UWW I like placing them at #5. Until shown otherwise the WIAC winner is a tough out (UWO, the only other WIAC winner in the past 5 years, made it to the semis).
#7 Wheaton - Given the strength of the conference and its playoff results for the conference I am OK with this ranking.. we'll know much more about them in a few weeks
#8 Wartburg - they are undefeated, I don't know if they have played anyone good this year (although Central has been good).. but it seems that their honeymoon in ranking due to their 4 point loss to UWW has dwindled
#9 St Thomas - Beat a highly ranked St Johns teams that granted seems to have QB issues, have handled everyone relatively easily on their schedule, and are two season removed from a 5 year stretch where they won 2 playoff games each year
It is after this that things get fuzzy for me...
#10 Wabash - What do I know about Wabash... nothing except how they have done in the playoffs (and Wittenberg) over the past 5 years. And it isn't impressive at all... 1 good win... 1 good loss... and a lot of bad losses. However, people that are in the know seem to be very confident that this years Wabash team is very good and deserving of their ranking.
Probably more to the point, how would Wabash compete against other possible candidates for the #10 ranking? Probably well.
#11 - Johns Hopkins - Frankly I don't understand this unless this years team brought back a ton of talent from 2014. The 2014 team lost a close one to Hobart who got smacked by Wesley who ...well.. we know what happened to them... Now the 2013 version lost a close one to Wesley but the 2012 version got smacked by MUC in Round 2. I'd definitely put them behind UWP and St Johns and North Central at this point.
#12 - Thomas More - Again, I know nothing about Thomas More. The only thing that I can see is that the winner of their conference in 2014, W&J, had a playoff loss to MUC 67-0. (and Thomas More lost to W&J by 23 points..). And the PAC is 12-18 in the playoffs. I'd definitely place UWP, St Johns and North Central ahead of Thomas More. Frankly they seem to be at best a Top 15-25 team until they show it in the playoffs (or a team from their conference).
#13 UWP - Should be ranked a bit higher given that their only loss was by 10 to the then #1
#14 St Johns - Should be ranked higher but are probably fine here as long as they are having QB issues
#15 Hardin Simmons - They were down for a long time but really good for an even longer period. We'll know if they are for real after MHB
#16 W&J - not a chance that they are better than North Central. Granted they are only 2 points higher so that is almost reflected.
There have been a lot of "" or italics regarding "weak conferences" so I thought I'd repost some earlier calculating that I did. If you take the D3Football.com team rankings (which are done by the experts of D3) and find an average for each conference this is what you get (rankings from 2013-14-15):
WIAC 49 AQ Meaning that the 8 teams in the WIAC averaged out to 49 in rank
E8 69 AQ
MIAC 77 AQ
CCIW 81 AQ
OAC 87 AQ
NJAC 90 AQ
CC 97 AQ
IIAC 97 AQ
ODAC 99 AQ
MAC 105 AQ
NWC 105 AQ
LL 108 AQ
ASC 111 AQ
PAC 122 AQ
SAA 122 NA
SCAC 126 NA
USAC 126 AQ
MIAA 127 AQ
NCAC 131 AQ
SCIAC 133 AQ
NESCAC 137 NA
HCAC 154 AQ
MWC 156 AQ
NEFC 163 AQ
MASCAC 167 NA
NACC 167 AQ
ECFC 194 AQ
UMAC 212 AQ
When you put together the score for each conference it becomes readily apparent that there are a lot of AQ conferences that are bad/weak. I don't think we need to pretend that there are not conferences where the football is simply not good (and in my opinion undeserving of an AQ). Conferences with rankings greater than 150 should not receive AQs and definitely should not receive Pool C... Ever. Teams that made it thru their weak conference with a single league loss should stay home.
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 16, 2015, 05:46:52 PM
There are a lot of bad/weak conferences that get AQs based on rankings done by D3 experts. I don't think we need to pretend that there are not conferences where the football is simply not good (and in my opinion undeserving of an AQ).
This is the point to bear in mind. Why do you find it so surprising that some people disagree?
Quote from: HSCTiger74 on October 16, 2015, 06:39:07 PM
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 16, 2015, 05:46:52 PM
There are a lot of bad/weak conferences that get AQs based on rankings done by D3 experts. I don't think we need to pretend that there are not conferences where the football is simply not good (and in my opinion undeserving of an AQ).
This is the point to bear in mind. Why do you find it so surprising that some people disagree?
[/b
www,
boy do i have some az ocean front property for you to buy. :-* that kind of thinking got me in a world of hurt with plu too ? ::) (past history)
not current input only. :o ;D
The facts are that there are a lot of bad conferences with AQs. My opinion is that their champions are not automatically worthy of an AQ. There are some good teams in those conferences.
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 16, 2015, 08:07:08 PM
The facts are that there are a lot of bad conferences with AQs. My opinion is that their champions are not automatically worthy of an AQ. There are some good teams in those conferences.
I wasn't as clear as I should have been before, but I wasn't disputing your first point. Obviously some conferences have a greater pool of talent than others so the quality of football will be better in those conferences. And your
opinion about AQs is as worthy of consideration as anyone else's. But you have to be mindful that there are those who disagree with that opinion and as long as you keep bringing it up you're going to get pushback.
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 16, 2015, 05:46:52 PM
There have been a lot of "" or italics regarding "weak conferences" so I thought I'd repost some earlier calculating that I did. If you take the D3Football.com team rankings (which are done by the experts of D3) and find an average for each conference this is what you get (rankings from 2013-14-15):
The problems with this are:
1) these are preseason rankings, made before any team plays any games
2) the teams aren't in the right order. Really bad teams from "good" leagues get way overvalued in these rankings, bad teams from "bad" leagues get undervalued (classic confirmation bias, really) when the reality is that those bad teams are probably a lot closer to one another than the rankings suggest
3) you're assuming that the scale is perfectly graduated...that the difference between 1 and 2 is the same as the difference between 50 and 51 is the same as the difference between 200 and 201. It isn't, so it really isn't as simple as averaging numbers.
There's more nuance to this, I think. And the solution, unfortunately, is hard to attain because the size of the division is so massive and there are only so many hours in a day- we just can't know all there is to know about all of the teams.
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 16, 2015, 05:20:36 PM
#12 - Thomas More - Again, I know nothing about Thomas More. The only thing that I can see is that the winner of their conference in 2014, W&J, had a playoff loss to MUC 67-0. (and Thomas More lost to W&J by 23 points..). And the PAC is 12-18 in the playoffs. I'd definitely place UWP, St Johns and North Central ahead of Thomas More. Frankly they seem to be at best a Top 15-25 team until they show it in the playoffs (or a team from their conference).
The danger in ranking a team you don't know much about is frankly not knowing what you don't know. For instance a one possession game at W&J turned into a blowout after TMC lost their QB at the end of the third quarter in 2014 - how many teams in the top 25 could survive that, on the road in a game of that magnitude? I definitely feel Thomas More must prove themselves to be a contender in the tournament this year, though and having seen the top teams like MHB, UMU, Wheaton and Wesley in person, I definitely feel like the 2015 TMC team has reached the level where they CAN prove themselves. We'll have to wait and see.
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 16, 2015, 05:46:52 PM
There are a lot of bad/weak conferences that get AQs based on rankings done by D3 experts. I don't think we need to pretend that there are not conferences where the football is simply not good (and in my opinion undeserving of an AQ).
Say what?
Conferences get AQs based on rules set by the NCAA. Period.
Quote from: Ron Boerger on October 18, 2015, 11:26:36 PM
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 16, 2015, 05:46:52 PM
There are a lot of bad/weak conferences that get AQs based on rankings done by D3 experts. I don't think we need to pretend that there are not conferences where the football is simply not good (and in my opinion undeserving of an AQ).
Say what?
Conferences get AQs based on rules set by the NCAA. Period.
Giving benefit of doubt, I think he meant "based on rankings done by D3 experts." to modify the first clause, not to say the d3 experts allocate AQs.
Sorry about that guys.. In rereading what I wrote I can see the confusion. I've edited it... We all know that AQs are awarded for winning a league title. My point is that there are a lot of very weak conferences who receive AQs and sometimes Pool C bids.
With the size of D3 football I don't want to get to a place where we only have AQs or maybe 2-3 at large bids. There needs to be some way to keep the playoffs from becoming "everybody gets a ribbon" for winning a conference when the team would have struggled to be .500 in 50% of the leagues out there.
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 19, 2015, 12:55:11 AM
Sorry about that guys.. In rereading what I wrote I can see the confusion. I've edited it... We all know that AQs are awarded for winning a league title. My point is that there are a lot of very weak conferences who receive AQs and sometimes Pool C bids.
With the size of D3 football I don't want to get to a place where we only have AQs or maybe 2-3 at large bids. There needs to be some way to keep the playoffs from becoming "everybody gets a ribbon" for winning a conference when the team would have struggled to be .500 in 50% of the leagues out there.
This isn't a participation trophy thing. I think you're trying to mix issues that aren't miscible.
I think it's more apparent that "everyone gets a ribbon" when you take a team that choked away their conference and give them another shot at winning a championship. Second best, but we want them to get the ribbon so give them another go at it, right?
As long as there are 2 or 3 C slots I don't have a problem with the tournament. Strange things might happen to a team or two over the course of a season, but strange things don't happen to 3 or 4 national title contenders in the same season. Especially when only 2 teams have won the national title in the last 10 seasons. We don't really have 3 or 4 national title contenders so what are the odds they are choking away their opportunity?
Seriously, we have 2 teams that win, and maybe 3 more with a shot if the chips fall right. Do you really think more than half of those teams are going to blow it in conference season and not get a bid? No. So there are plenty of Cs to go around right now, and even with half as many there still would be enough to get everyone in the door with a legit shot who had a single bad game.
+1! Wally Wabash for the very proper use of a good D-3 word, miscible! ;)
Quote from: jknezek on October 19, 2015, 09:25:12 AM
I think it's more apparent that "everyone gets a ribbon" when you take a team that choked away their conference and give them another shot at winning a championship. Second best, but we want them to get the ribbon so give them another go at it, right?
Bingo. QED. End of discussion.
(or, it should be)
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 19, 2015, 11:15:09 AM
Quote from: jknezek on October 19, 2015, 09:25:12 AM
I think it's more apparent that "everyone gets a ribbon" when you take a team that choked away their conference and give them another shot at winning a championship. Second best, but we want them to get the ribbon so give them another go at it, right?
Bingo. QED. End of discussion.
(or, it should be)
XTP, if people still used dictionaries I think that your picture would be in there next to the word "optimist". :)
It is much easier to "choke" away your conference title if you are a good team in a good conference than if you are a good team in a weak conference. I don't know how any of you can argue against that.
Then add to that very few other programs are all that willing to play the perennial playoff power programs so that they end up playing each other for non-conference games and you easily have a recipe for 2 losses.
The rankings provided by the experts at D3football.com give us the best basis from which to make broad generalizations regarding conference strength and then playoff results either confirm or negate that analysis. As they are annual rankings and I've used a 3 year average it would seem that any improvement an individual program has made would have been accounted for.
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 19, 2015, 02:56:49 PM
It is much easier to "choke" away your conference title if you are a good team in a good conference than if you are a good team in a weak conference. I don't know how any of you can argue against that.
And you are still second best, so what's the big deal? Stop whining you want a ribbon when you can't win your conference
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 19, 2015, 02:56:49 PM
Then add to that very few other programs are all that willing to play the perennial playoff power programs so that they end up playing each other for non-conference games and you easily have a recipe for 2 losses.
None of which affects your access to the tournament since you can still win your conference, so stop whining you want a ribbon and win your conference
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 19, 2015, 02:56:49 PM
The rankings provided by the experts at D3football.com give us the best basis from which to make broad generalizations regarding conference strength and then playoff results either confirm or negate that analysis. As they are annual rankings and I've used a 3 year average it would seem that any improvement an individual program has made would have been accounted for.
Yeah, because polls are so good at predicting order of finish and have no flaws regarding anchoring, bias, or dozens of other things that are studied ad nauseum by social scientists. Wartburg certainly was as good a team last week as they are this week right? The poll last week wasn't wrong, and neither is the one this week! Wartburg just is and the games don't count. Just use the polls people!!!!!! We can crown the champion in the pre-season and if it's the same one as last year, that's ok. We averaged it!!!!
JKnezek,
While I am sympathetic to your point that you keep pounding home, you are oversimplifying the issue. Of course it's easy to say "just win your conference". That solution requires zero thought and may provide the best candidate for the title. But it may not. Let's use Major League Baseball as an example. There are flaws with this and it's obviously easier because the data set is so much larger with 182 games but the St Louis Cardinals, Pittsburgh Pirates and Chicago Cubs were the 3 best teams in the entire league by record. Using your approach we can tell them "just win your division" and you can get to the post season. Last season we saw the SF Giants win the title as a wild card, in the NFL we have seen the Steelers win the Super Bowl as a wild card.
I think we can all agree there are second place teams in some conferences that are better than first place teams in other conferences. We just can't decide on how to fairly determine that. So ignoring the issue by saying "just win your conference" is the easy way out. Emma, and others, are trying (flawed as the ideas may be) to see if there is a way out of this issue.
There are still wildcards in DIII! What is the problem here? We have 5 or 6 these days. There are barely 5 or 6 title contenders in all of DIII. It is almost impossible for a legitimate DIII contender to be left out. Win your conference and you're in. With the exception of UWW in '08 and Linfield in '03 (undefeated Pool B and a conference champion), every champion since '00 has come from Pool A. The most likely place to find a champion? Among the conference winners, by far.
If you can't win your conference, you most likely can't win the title. If you can still win the title, you most likely have 1 loss, came from a power conference, and are getting a Pool C. About the sole exception I can think of to this rule is last year UWO. And that's because they only lost 1 game if don't count 20% of their schedule. Everyone else had to play 10 games that counted. People here like to think they should have played 8 games that counted and 2 that only counted if they won.
Play 10 games, win your conference, lose only 1, and have some big time competition. That's how you get into the tournament and if you can't do these things, it's no great loss that you aren't there.
Pool C hardly matters except as a ribbon. I admit the current process isn't really good. I also think they rest of what you guys keep coming up with is solely designed to favor DIII's version of the Yankees (if you want to stick with baseball, here you go). Unless you are a Yankees fan, you don't want them having a step up on everyone else at the beginning of the year and you are really darn happy when the Royals and Astros go from the worst team over 20 year periods to playoff teams. That's hard to make happen if the Yankees only have to win 90% as many games to crowd them out every year.
The "C" bids (and the "B") make a great discussion for the coffee table, but frankly, most everyone in D-3 is playing for a playoff participation ribbon. That's great for a program, whether you are St. Scholastica or Wartburg. If you're not a Purple or Wesley, you're gonna need a lot of luck and help to make it to Salem.
I'm OK with that. Past the first round, you usually have no flakes or rummys, even though Purples have a tendency to make good teams look foolish at times.
If D-3 did without the auto qualifiers, I think a lot of what makes D-3 special goes away. Before the pool format, there was a guarantee that the committee would be called into question for backroom deals and back scratching in the smoke filled rooms. Win your league, make the playoffs. We should celebrate successes big or small.
Quote from: smedindy on October 13, 2015, 11:29:45 AM
Again, the ethos and mission of D3 is inclusion. The UMAC is an example of that and I embrace it. I'd rather see the UMAC in instead of a 3-loss third place team. The end result will be exactly the same.
I wonder if the bolded statement above isn't a sort of demarcation line for those that have opinions on the subject of Pool C.
From a Pool C standpoint only, I interpret the positions of some others as to agree entirely with the statement- that is, if you came in through Pool C, you don't have a chance to change the final (Stagg) outcome.
Last year St. Scholastica came in through AQ and played St. John's and was beat 35-7 (not a horrible mismatch though).
Is it that Smed and perhaps many others believe that had it been NCC or UWO coming in through Pool C and playing St. John's the end result would have been exactly the same?
If Smed is speaking bigger picture and referring to the Stagg Bowl as the end result, I still cannot hop on that train. How can people be certain that UWO or NCC doesn't beat St. John's, and then go on to beat Wartburg? What results occurred in 2014 or recent years suggest that neither UWO or NCC were capable of beating those teams?
My belief is that the more competitive the Pool C teams are, the greater the chance teams like UWW and Mt. Union will be pushed into the 4th quarter, and if that happens, the chance for upsets increases dramatically.
Quote from: jknezek on October 19, 2015, 04:11:42 PM
There are still wildcards in DIII! What is the problem here? We have 5 or 6 these days. There are barely 5 or 6 title contenders in all of DIII. It is almost impossible for a legitimate DIII contender to be left out. Win your conference and you're in. With the exception of UWW in '08 and Linfield in '03 (undefeated Pool B and a conference champion), every champion since '00 has come from Pool A. The most likely place to find a champion? Among the conference winners, by far.
If you can't win your conference, you most likely can't win the title. If you can still win the title, you most likely have 1 loss, came from a power conference, and are getting a Pool C. About the sole exception I can think of to this rule is last year UWO. And that's because they only lost 1 game if don't count 20% of their schedule. Everyone else had to play 10 games that counted. People here like to think they should have played 8 games that counted and 2 that only counted if they won.
Play 10 games, win your conference, lose only 1, and have some big time competition. That's how you get into the tournament and if you can't do these things, it's no great loss that you aren't there.
Pool C hardly matters except as a ribbon. I admit the current process isn't really good. I also think they rest of what you guys keep coming up with is solely designed to favor DIII's version of the Yankees (if you want to stick with baseball, here you go). Unless you are a Yankees fan, you don't want them having a step up on everyone else at the beginning of the year and you are really darn happy when the Royals and Astros go from the worst team over 20 year periods to playoff teams. That's hard to make happen if the Yankees only have to win 90% as many games to crowd them out every year.
No, you are wrong. People here like to think there could be the SF Giants or Pittsburgh Steelers, or how about Ohio State Buckeyes? Many thought they shouldn't have been in the NCAA playoffs last year. Just because it hasn't happened doesn't mean it won't, unless we all use your easy way out and say "just win your conference". I think Cubs fans are glad MLB doesn't think like you. If you use past history as your sole data to determine the future, history will surely repeat itself.
Quote from: USee on October 19, 2015, 05:25:56 PM
Quote from: jknezek on October 19, 2015, 04:11:42 PM
There are still wildcards in DIII! What is the problem here? We have 5 or 6 these days. There are barely 5 or 6 title contenders in all of DIII. It is almost impossible for a legitimate DIII contender to be left out. Win your conference and you're in. With the exception of UWW in '08 and Linfield in '03 (undefeated Pool B and a conference champion), every champion since '00 has come from Pool A. The most likely place to find a champion? Among the conference winners, by far.
If you can't win your conference, you most likely can't win the title. If you can still win the title, you most likely have 1 loss, came from a power conference, and are getting a Pool C. About the sole exception I can think of to this rule is last year UWO. And that's because they only lost 1 game if don't count 20% of their schedule. Everyone else had to play 10 games that counted. People here like to think they should have played 8 games that counted and 2 that only counted if they won.
Play 10 games, win your conference, lose only 1, and have some big time competition. That's how you get into the tournament and if you can't do these things, it's no great loss that you aren't there.
Pool C hardly matters except as a ribbon. I admit the current process isn't really good. I also think they rest of what you guys keep coming up with is solely designed to favor DIII's version of the Yankees (if you want to stick with baseball, here you go). Unless you are a Yankees fan, you don't want them having a step up on everyone else at the beginning of the year and you are really darn happy when the Royals and Astros go from the worst team over 20 year periods to playoff teams. That's hard to make happen if the Yankees only have to win 90% as many games to crowd them out every year.
No, you are wrong. People here like to think there could be the SF Giants or Pittsburgh Steelers, or how about Ohio State Buckeyes? Many thought they shouldn't have been in the NCAA playoffs last year. Just because it hasn't happened doesn't mean it won't, unless we all use your easy way out and say "just win your conference". I think Cubs fans are glad MLB doesn't think like you. If you use past history as your sole data to determine the future, history will surely repeat itself.
I'm so confused by this. We HAVE wildcards. Why is this something you won't accept? The Buckeyes were conference champions. In the D3 system they would have made the playoffs. What is this nonsense you spew? The Cubs? Great. They would have made a Pool C. They had the record. Honestly, your examples are useless. Wildcards exist in D3 and conference champions get AQs just like in MLB. IThere isn't a difference except people want to tilt the D3 wildcards to only a few conferences. That doesnt exist in MLB or you can be sure ESPN would make sure the Yankees and Redsox always made the playoffs. I can't make a link of sense off your last post.
Quote from: jknezek on October 19, 2015, 05:53:06 PM
Quote from: USee on October 19, 2015, 05:25:56 PM
Quote from: jknezek on October 19, 2015, 04:11:42 PM
There are still wildcards in DIII! What is the problem here? We have 5 or 6 these days. There are barely 5 or 6 title contenders in all of DIII. It is almost impossible for a legitimate DIII contender to be left out. Win your conference and you're in. With the exception of UWW in '08 and Linfield in '03 (undefeated Pool B and a conference champion), every champion since '00 has come from Pool A. The most likely place to find a champion? Among the conference winners, by far.
If you can't win your conference, you most likely can't win the title. If you can still win the title, you most likely have 1 loss, came from a power conference, and are getting a Pool C. About the sole exception I can think of to this rule is last year UWO. And that's because they only lost 1 game if don't count 20% of their schedule. Everyone else had to play 10 games that counted. People here like to think they should have played 8 games that counted and 2 that only counted if they won.
Play 10 games, win your conference, lose only 1, and have some big time competition. That's how you get into the tournament and if you can't do these things, it's no great loss that you aren't there.
Pool C hardly matters except as a ribbon. I admit the current process isn't really good. I also think they rest of what you guys keep coming up with is solely designed to favor DIII's version of the Yankees (if you want to stick with baseball, here you go). Unless you are a Yankees fan, you don't want them having a step up on everyone else at the beginning of the year and you are really darn happy when the Royals and Astros go from the worst team over 20 year periods to playoff teams. That's hard to make happen if the Yankees only have to win 90% as many games to crowd them out every year.
No, you are wrong. People here like to think there could be the SF Giants or Pittsburgh Steelers, or how about Ohio State Buckeyes? Many thought they shouldn't have been in the NCAA playoffs last year. Just because it hasn't happened doesn't mean it won't, unless we all use your easy way out and say "just win your conference". I think Cubs fans are glad MLB doesn't think like you. If you use past history as your sole data to determine the future, history will surely repeat itself.
I'm so confused by this. We HAVE wildcards. Why is this something you won't accept? The Buckeyes were conference champions. In the D3 system they would have made the playoffs. What is this nonsense you spew? The Cubs? Great. They would have made a Pool C. They had the record. Honestly, your examples are useless. Wildcards exist in D3 and conference champions get AQs just like in MLB. IThere isn't a difference except people want to tilt the D3 wildcards to only a few conferences. That doesnt exist in MLB or you can be sure ESPN would make sure the Yankees and Redsox always made the playoffs. I can't make a link of sense off your last post.
Honestly, if you don't understand the larger point, the only thing that is useless is you, since you seem to think that using those types of names are the cool thing. You don't get it. I see that. I am moving on.
Probably a good plan.
The consideration for me is whether a 9-1, 2nd place team that played a weaker schedule and has little to no history of being competitive with the stronger teams they will see in the playoffs is a better choice for Pool C than an 8-2 (or 6-1/6-4) 2nd or even 3rd place team that played a stronger schedule and has a history of being competitive with the stronger teams they will see in the playoffs.
They both "choked" (I don't agree with this term) their conference bids away. How should the 6 Pool C slots be filled?
History means nothing to this year, really. This year's team didn't achieve those results 3-5 years ago - good or bad.
I simply don't care that much about the history. A 9-1 team I'd put in on a "C" before a 7-3 or 6-4 team every time. Winning has to count for something. Otherwise just give all the bids to one conference and be done with it. No. You have to win or why play the season? Now it comes to 8-2/9-1, and here is where I simply lose a lot of interest.
To be honest if UWP and UWW win out, and UWO only loses to UWP, I have no problems at all with the WIAC having 3 teams in the playoffs. If the MIAC runner up is 9-1, I have no problems with the West having 3 or 4 of the 6 "C"s. I don't really see how it could happen, but I'd be fine with the West having all the "C"s if that's what it came down to. But it won't.
In the end, all I really care about is all the conferences have an AQ. No back room deals. At the beginning of the season every team has a shot. After that, they can play eenie-meenie-miney-moe among the 9-1/8-2 teams with at least 1 win versus an RRO for those 5 or 6 slots. It's all second chance and I'd just as soon have some limited qualification and have it be the "Loser Lottery" than build in an advantage to only a few year over year.
Quote from: jknezek on October 19, 2015, 07:34:20 PM
I simply don't care that much about the history. A 9-1 team I'd put in on a "C" before a 7-3 or 6-4 team every time. Winning has to count for something. Otherwise just give all the bids to one conference and be done with it. No. You have to win or why play the season? Now it comes to 8-2/9-1, and here is where I simply lose a lot of interest.
So if say Northwestern was a 9-1 team from the UMAC with a 40 point loss to St Scholastica and had a nonconference win against Maranatha Baptist... they would be ahead of say UW-Oshkosh at 7-3 with 4 point or OT losses on the road to undefeateds UW-Whitewater, Mount Union, and St Thomas?
Winning does count for something, but a team's record is not the only factor. Who you play also matters. Beating Finlandia or Earlham by 60 isn't anywhere as telling as going down to the wire with an elite team. If all that matters is winning then why not just say only unbeaten teams can participate in the playoffs?
And going back to the baseball analogy... until a few years ago when an extra wildcard was added, the Cubs with the 3rd best record in baseball would not have gotten a "pool C" and would have been watching from home.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 19, 2015, 08:53:31 PM
So if say Northwestern was a 9-1 team from the UMAC with a 40 point loss to St Scholastica and had a nonconference win against Maranatha Baptist... they would be ahead of say UW-Oshkosh at 7-3 with 4 point or OT losses on the road to undefeateds UW-Whitewater, Mount Union, and St Thomas?
I simply don't care. If you lost to UWW, UMU, and St. Thomas in one season already does it really matter if you are in the playoffs? Yes, if you play them tight you are a better team than St. Scholastica. Sure, it's fair to see them in the playoffs. But you've lost 3 times to D3 teams. Do you really factor into the playoffs at this point? Probably not.
Now can you make it more outlandish and start talking about OT, and blocked punts, and yada yada hypothetical... uggh. You lost. 3x. You had your shot and again and again and AGAIN you didn't win. So yes, it's ok for you stay home and someone else to go. Even if that team is also going to lose to those same programs, potentially even worse.
DIII isn't fair. It's not a flat playing surface. Teams everywhere have different advantages. A team with a 90% acceptance rate has a huge advantage over a team with a 15% acceptance rate. A team that can put 10K in the stands and create a big game atmosphere week in and out has a big advantage over a small liberal arts school in the middle of nowhere where game day is 800 people in the stands and 300 after the half. Having in-state tuition is an advantage. Having a huge endowment can be an advantage. Having good facilities is an advantage. Playing in a weak conference is an advantage if you are the top team. Deal with it. Nothing about DIII is fair or even handed, so I really don't care if the last couple spots of "second chance" playoff entrants is rigorously fair either.
What is fair is that at the beginning of every season, every team has an equal shot. The AQ provides that, the "C" teams just round out the brackets and it doesn't bother me who takes the spots so long as they have some logical reason for being there. Winning is an awfully good reason, winning against good competition is a better reason. Losing to good competition doesn't really do much except show you can't win...
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 19, 2015, 08:53:31 PM
So if say Northwestern was a 9-1 team from the UMAC with a 40 point loss to St Scholastica and had a nonconference win against Maranatha Baptist... they would be ahead of say UW-Oshkosh at 7-3 with 4 point or OT losses on the road to undefeateds UW-Whitewater, Mount Union, and St Thomas?
I think they'd be tied for irrelevant. I don't think either team would be regionally ranked, so neither team matters at that point. Maybe Oshkosh is ranked at the tail end of the rankings in your scenario, but they aren't getting in.
D3 football is for the players, much more than for the fans(think D1 and TV monies). As much as I would like to have seen how NCC would have done in the playoffs last year, they didn't earn it. I know that we could have beaten some teams in the playoffs and maybe even crushed some. But the AQs earned their way there winning their conference. I think they deserve the experience of being in a playoff game. I imagine that is important to them and they will remember it forever, even if it wasn't the ending they were hoping for. I know as a fan we might feel different and would like to see nothing but close playoff games and more competitive games. However, in D3, we are all about the players and the time and effort they put in to be real student-athletes. For all the student-athletes and all the work they put in, I wish all of them could experience at some time an NCAA playoff game. That won't happen, but at least one from every conference gets that chance.
Getting this thread back to the main topic...
2015 WEEK 7 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev
1) Linfield (4) 196 2
2) Mount Union (4) 195 1
3) Mary Hardin-Baylor 183 3
4) Wesley 174 4
5) Wheaton 158 T5
6) UW-Oshkosh 155 T5
7) Wabash 151 8
8) UW-Whitewater 150 7
9) St Thomas 148 9
10) Johns Hopkins 125 11
11) Thomas More 120 12
12) UW-Platteville 111 13
13) St John's 101 14
14) North Central 88 16
15) Hardin-Simmons 87 15
16) Wash & Jeff 73 17
17) Concordia-Moorhead 57 18
18) Illinois Wesleyan 45 19
19) Wartburg 40 10
20) Salisbury 38 20
21) Albright 35 21
22) Rowan 28 NR
T23) DePauw 27 25
T23) Texas Lutheran 27 22
25) Whitworth 26 23
Dropped Out: John Carroll
Also Receiving Votes: John Carroll (19), Washington & Lee (13), Wittenberg (7), Albion (5), Cortland St (5), Dubuque (4), Bethel (3), Western New England (3), Gustavus Adolphus (2), St Norbert (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, and thewaterboy
FCGG, you have Tex Lu at #25 with 22 points; you also have them in ARV with 5 points??
1) Linfield 196 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2)
2) Mount Union 195 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3) Mary Hardin-Baylor 183 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4)
4) Wesley 174 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5)
5) Wheaton 158 ( 3, 4, 5, 7, 7, 7, 8, 9)
6) UW-Oshkosh 155 ( 5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 8, 8, 9)
7) Wabash 151 ( 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8)
8) UW-Whitewater 150 ( 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 9, 11)
9) St Thomas 148 ( 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9)
10) Johns Hopkins 125 (10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 11, 12)
11) Thomas More 120 ( 9, 10, 11, 11, 11, 11, 12, 13)
12) UW-Platteville 111 (10, 11, 12, 12, 12, 12, 13, 15)
13) St John's 101 (11, 12, 13, 14, 14, 14, 14, 15)
14) North Central 88 (13, 13, 13, 14, 15, 15, 16, 21)
15) Hardin-Simmons 87 (12, 13, 14, 15, 15, 16, 17, 19)
16) Wash & Jeff 73 (13, 15, 15, 16, 17, 17, 20, 20)
17) Concordia-Moorhead 57 (16, 17, 17, 17, 18, 20, 21, 25)
18) Illinois Wesleyan 45 (18, 18, 18, 19, 20, 23, 23, 24)
19) Wartburg 40 (16, 17, 18, 21, 23, 23, 24, --)
20) Salisbury 38 (16, 19, 20, 20, 22, 22, 25, --)
21) Albright 35 (14, 16, 19, 21, 25, --, --, --)
22) Rowan 28 (18, 19, 21, 22, 24, 24, --, --)
T23) DePauw 27 (20, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, --)
T23) Texas Lutheran 27 (14, 18, 21, 24, --, --, --, --)
25) Whitworth 26 (16, 17, 19, --, --, --, --, --)
26) John Carroll 19 (18, 19, 22)
27) Wash & Lee 13 (19, 23, 23)
28) Wittenberg 7 (20, 25)
T29) Albion 5 (22, 25)
T29) Cortland St 5 (21)
31) Dubuque 4 (22)
T32) Bethel 3 (24, 25)
T32) W New England 3 (23)
34) Gustavus Adolphus 2 (24)
35) St Norbert 1 (25)
I am surprised to see Wartburg still ranked so generously. They were already looking kind of "meh" through the first few weeks, scraping their way past some teams who were otherwise blown out by comparably ranked teams (UST vs. Augsburg, UWO vs. UW-Stout). I'd have thought the blowout loss to Dubuque would actually have dropped them even further, to be honest...how does one reconcile keeping Wartburg on-ballot and ranked ahead of Dubuque? UD has only lost to teams ranked higher than Wartburg (albeit in blowout fashion) and just blew out Wartburg.
I don't think Dubuque has a particular strong case to be ranked ATM, but IMO if they're not ranked, Wartburg probably ought not to be ranked either. This seems like one of those anchor-and-adjust things where people feel weird dropping a previously highly-ranked team too far, even with a 32-point loss to a team that lost badly two other comparably ranked teams.
I know this is an impossible task, comparing teams across regions and trying to figure out where Salisbury and Albright rank in comparison to Wartburg, but still.
Hey, speaking of Salisbury and Albright, you guys know that Albright is undefeated with a h2h win against Salisbury, right? Even if it took a crazy 4th quarter comeback for Albright to win, ranking a 1-loss team ahead of the undefeated team who dealt them that loss seems a little wonky to me (worth noting that Albright has won handily in every game since; they're not exactly hanging on to that undefeated record by a thread each week). When there are multiple losses in play, I can see that h2h becomes a little harder to stick to, but I don't like this. There's no Salisbury-beat-X-who-beat-Albright that really justifies Salisbury > Albright.
Maybe you can follow this:
Salisbury 31, Rowan 28
Rowan 24, Widener 10
Albright 27, Widener 10
and try to justify the conclusion that Salisbury and Albright are about equal (they probably are) but I still don't understand giving the actual head-nod to a 1-loss team over the undefeated team responsible for that "1" in the L column.
I think I was the only one that ranked Dubuque ahead of Wartburg. I had them ranked the following based on their head to head games this season:
22: Dubuque
23: Wartburg
24: Bethel
Dubuque has two losses, but they were both against very good teams. Also Wartburg seems to be a far cry from last year's team, but still good. If the Wart/DQ game was remotely close I would probably ranked them differently.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 20, 2015, 09:36:07 AM
I think I was the only one that ranked Dubuque ahead of Wartburg. I had them ranked the following based on their head to head games this season:
22: Dubuque
23: Wartburg
24: Bethel
Dubuque has two losses, but they were both against very good teams. Also Wartburg seems to be a far cry from last year's team, but still good. If the Wart/DQ game was remotely close I would probably ranked them differently.
Yeah. What bothers me isn't really a strong feeling that Dubuque absolutely has to be ranked or that Wartburg absolutely sucks. It's that Dubuque just blew out Wartburg head to head, only has losses to teams who are justifiably both ranked higher than Wartburg, and when those two things are true I don't really see any reason for Wartburg still ranked over Dubuque except for "I had them 8th last week and didn't want to drop them more than X spots" or "they were supposed to be really good and I don't want to write them off after one loss."
Honestly, the Albright/Salisbury ranking is much stranger, though. Dubuque got blown out in their two losses and I don't think they really deserve an auto-ranking just for beating Wartburg. But there are at least two people ranking 4-1 Salisbury and not ranking Albright at 6-0
with-a-win-over-Salisbury.
Also, I still don't understand the pull towards Whitworth.....yet. I'm still waiting for that signature win, which I don't think they'll get based on the lack of competition (sans Linfield). Beating Pacific Lutheran (0-5) and Chapman (1-4) isn't quite the accomplishment as it used to be.
If they keep it close against Linfield (within two scores) I might consider them a top 25 team. However, I expect Linfield to win this one by 30-40 points.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 20, 2015, 10:01:10 AM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 20, 2015, 09:36:07 AM
I think I was the only one that ranked Dubuque ahead of Wartburg. I had them ranked the following based on their head to head games this season:
22: Dubuque
23: Wartburg
24: Bethel
Dubuque has two losses, but they were both against very good teams. Also Wartburg seems to be a far cry from last year's team, but still good. If the Wart/DQ game was remotely close I would probably ranked them differently.
Yeah. What bothers me isn't really a strong feeling that Dubuque absolutely has to be ranked or that Wartburg absolutely sucks. It's that Dubuque just blew out Wartburg head to head, only has losses to teams who are justifiably both ranked higher than Wartburg, and when those two things are true I don't really see any reason for Wartburg still ranked over Dubuque except for "I had them 8th last week and didn't want to drop them more than X spots" or "they were supposed to be really good and I don't want to write them off after one loss."
Honestly, the Albright/Salisbury ranking is much stranger, though. Dubuque got blown out in their two losses and I don't think they really deserve an auto-ranking just for beating Wartburg. But there are at least two people ranking 4-1 Salisbury and not ranking Albright at 6-0 with-a-win-over-Salisbury.
Ranking Salisbury over Alrbight is a
little more exucesable considering they only lost by one on the road, followed by a big win against a good Rowan team. Whereas DQ/Wartburg was a blowout.
Albright has a good test against Del Valley this week that will turn some more heads if they win.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 20, 2015, 10:01:10 AM
Honestly, the Albright/Salisbury ranking is much stranger, though. Dubuque got blown out in their two losses and I don't think they really deserve an auto-ranking just for beating Wartburg. But there are at least two people ranking 4-1 Salisbury and not ranking Albright at 6-0 with-a-win-over-Salisbury.
You know why. MAC << NJAC.
I'm curious if voters feel Wheaton could jump Wesley if both teams win this weekend.
Can't help you there, I already have them above Wesley. Hopefully Wheaton can win and make me look smart :)
Exciting weekend of games coming up as 8 of the top 10 play teams with only 11 losses combined. 3 of those 11 losses belong to UWSP, a team that has proven to be a tough out.
Quote from: emma17 on October 20, 2015, 04:27:22 PM
Exciting weekend of games coming up as 8 of the top 10 play teams with only 11 losses combined. 3 of those 11 losses belong to UWSP, a team that has proven to be a tough out.
I don't think we can say this inside of the same season that UW-SP had Albion hang a 60 burger on them. Albion is pretty good (probably), but still. 60, man. If Oshkosh loses to the Pointers, Oshkosh screwed up.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 20, 2015, 04:32:12 PM
Quote from: emma17 on October 20, 2015, 04:27:22 PM
Exciting weekend of games coming up as 8 of the top 10 play teams with only 11 losses combined. 3 of those 11 losses belong to UWSP, a team that has proven to be a tough out.
I don't think we can say this inside of the same season that UW-SP had Albion hang a 60 burger on them. Albion is pretty good (probably), but still. 60, man. If Oshkosh loses to the Pointers, Oshkosh screwed up.
Considering that Oshkosh already beat the Pointers last weekend, I would agree.
If they lose to the Pointers this weekend, they drove to the wrong field!
Giving a serious answer, though, I do think you can say UWSP is a tough out. They took Platteville to OT and led Oshkosh in the second half last week. UWW does have to take them seriously.
I'm actually looking at the Albion-UWSP result more as a sign that "maybe Albion is pretty good and the MIAA is tougher than we think" instead of a sign that UWSP isn't really that good.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 20, 2015, 04:32:12 PM
Quote from: emma17 on October 20, 2015, 04:27:22 PM
Exciting weekend of games coming up as 8 of the top 10 play teams with only 11 losses combined. 3 of those 11 losses belong to UWSP, a team that has proven to be a tough out.
I don't think we can say this inside of the same season that UW-SP had Albion hang a 60 burger on them. Albion is pretty good (probably), but still. 60, man. If Oshkosh loses to the Pointers, Oshkosh screwed up.
Oshkosh almost did lose to the Pointers...it was close until the 4th when UWO finally pulled away. I'm guessing the Albion game was a wake-up call for UWSP.
I have a fealing UWW will struggle against them on Saturday.
My bad. Edit to say:
If Whitewater loses to UW-SP this week, Whitewater screwed up. Or Whitewater perhaps isn't Whitewater, again.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 20, 2015, 04:51:25 PM
My bad. Edit to say:
If Whitewater loses to UW-SP this week, Whitewater screwed up. Or Whitewater perhaps isn't Whitewater, again.
Win or lose this weekend, I don't think Whitewater is Whitewater this year. There seems to be a bit of a learning curve between players and the new coaches. Also, injuries are the worse I've ever seen them in the 15+ years that I've been following them. RBs, Oline, Dline, WR, etc, etc.... We were down to our 5th RB on our depth chart last week. Unreal. They need to get healthy and get their confidence back.
Seasons like these makes you really appreciate what they've accomplished over the years.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 20, 2015, 04:57:18 PM
Seasons like these makes you really appreciate what they've accomplished over the years.
+K. If I could give you more than one I would. Because from an insider, it's been incredible and I think it takes a season like this for those who have "grown up" with it, to realize how ludicrous UWW has been.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 20, 2015, 04:51:25 PM
My bad. Edit to say:
If Whitewater loses to UW-SP this week, Whitewater screwed up. Or Whitewater perhaps isn't Whitewater, again.
But can we get you to agree- yes UWSP has proven to be a tough out?
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 20, 2015, 04:35:46 PM
Giving a serious answer, though, I do think you can say UWSP is a tough out. They took Platteville to OT and led Oshkosh in the second half last week. UWW does have to take them seriously.
I'm actually looking at the Albion-UWSP result more as a sign that "maybe Albion is pretty good and the MIAA is tougher than we think" instead of a sign that UWSP isn't really that good.
I think we have to give Albion the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise.
UWSP has played both UWP and UWO incredibly tough and as such we should all feel comfortable in saying they are a good team. Not only have they nearly beaten both teams, they've held both well under season averages.
As such, I think the thought process is to consider the Albion game as the oddity. Not that Albion won, but that the score was so high. UWSP gave up over 380 yards rushing and UWSP threw the ball 57 times. Neither of these numbers reflect the way or style UWSP is playing of late.
Maybe they started the season thinking they wanted to be one thing but ran into a team much more talented than expected that exposed all kinds of weaknesses, forcing them to reconsider.
Hopefully Albion will continue to roll and represent the conference well into the playoffs.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 20, 2015, 04:35:46 PM
Giving a serious answer, though, I do think you can say UWSP is a tough out. They took Platteville to OT and led Oshkosh in the second half last week. UWW does have to take them seriously.
I'm actually looking at the Albion-UWSP result more as a sign that "maybe Albion is pretty good and the MIAA is tougher than we think" instead of a sign that UWSP isn't really that good.
I plan on seeing the Albion - Olivet game in another week. That is the strength of the MIAA this year ... two "good" teams in a not so good conference. I don't see the MIAA champ advancing past round one unless they get a really lucky draw.
Quote from: DBQ1965 on October 20, 2015, 06:57:17 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 20, 2015, 04:35:46 PM
Giving a serious answer, though, I do think you can say UWSP is a tough out. They took Platteville to OT and led Oshkosh in the second half last week. UWW does have to take them seriously.
I'm actually looking at the Albion-UWSP result more as a sign that "maybe Albion is pretty good and the MIAA is tougher than we think" instead of a sign that UWSP isn't really that good.
I plan on seeing the Albion - Olivet game in another week. That is the strength of the MIAA this year ... two "good" teams in a not so good conference. I don't see the MIAA champ advancing past round one unless they get a really lucky draw.
I don't think it will even require a 'lucky' draw, just a fair one. The winner of Albion/Olivet should finish the season 10-0, and, despite the MIAA, probably deserves a 4 or 5 seed (though of course I'd have to see who they are up against in the 'regional' bracket), not the typical 7 or 8 seed of the MIAA AQ. Both are in my North region top ten, though neither has yet cracked my national top 25.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 20, 2015, 04:51:25 PM
My bad. Edit to say:
If Whitewater loses to UW-SP this week, Whitewater screwed up. Or Whitewater perhaps isn't Whitewater, again.
We do know that coaching at Buffalo isn't like coaching at Whitewater. (Nor is EMU like coaching at Wabash). I don't think Lance likes losing 51-14 to a directional Michigan.
Quote from: emma17 on October 20, 2015, 06:13:33 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 20, 2015, 04:51:25 PM
My bad. Edit to say:
If Whitewater loses to UW-SP this week, Whitewater screwed up. Or Whitewater perhaps isn't Whitewater, again.
But can we get you to agree- yes UWSP has proven to be a tough out?
Sure, when we can get you agree that good teams exist in leagues that you think stink otherwise. I see you kinda sorta gave Albion some credit. It's amazing what we can see when we analyze teams and not simply the league they come out of.
Quote from: smedindy on October 20, 2015, 07:52:41 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 20, 2015, 04:51:25 PM
My bad. Edit to say:
If Whitewater loses to UW-SP this week, Whitewater screwed up. Or Whitewater perhaps isn't Whitewater, again.
We do know that coaching at Buffalo isn't like coaching at Whitewater. (Nor is EMU like coaching at Wabash). I don't think Lance likes losing 51-14 to a directional Michigan.
And I doubt Chris Creighton likes being 1-6! :o
We'd just like to be mediocre for a change. We know that if we are really good, some big-name school will just 'steal' the coach anyway, but mediocre would be a nice change of pace! :P [EMU: where big-time hopes go to die.]
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 20, 2015, 10:45:35 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 20, 2015, 07:52:41 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 20, 2015, 04:51:25 PM
My bad. Edit to say:
If Whitewater loses to UW-SP this week, Whitewater screwed up. Or Whitewater perhaps isn't Whitewater, again.
We do know that coaching at Buffalo isn't like coaching at Whitewater. (Nor is EMU like coaching at Wabash). I don't think Lance likes losing 51-14 to a directional Michigan.
And I doubt Chris Creighton likes being 1-6! :o
We'd just like to be mediocre for a change. We know that if we are really good, some big-name school will just 'steal' the coach anyway, but mediocre would be a nice change of pace! :P [EMU: where big-time hopes go to die.]
As a former Ypsi resident, here's my edit. EMU: where big-time hopes don't go. :)
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 20, 2015, 09:18:52 PM
Quote from: emma17 on October 20, 2015, 06:13:33 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 20, 2015, 04:51:25 PM
My bad. Edit to say:
If Whitewater loses to UW-SP this week, Whitewater screwed up. Or Whitewater perhaps isn't Whitewater, again.
But can we get you to agree- yes UWSP has proven to be a tough out?
Sure, when we can get you agree that good teams exist in leagues that you think stink otherwise. I see you kinda sorta gave Albion some credit. It's amazing what we can see when we analyze teams and not simply the league they come out of.
So I understand. You'll agree to the truth when I agree to stop saying something I never said?
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 20, 2015, 10:47:14 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 20, 2015, 10:45:35 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 20, 2015, 07:52:41 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 20, 2015, 04:51:25 PM
My bad. Edit to say:
If Whitewater loses to UW-SP this week, Whitewater screwed up. Or Whitewater perhaps isn't Whitewater, again.
We do know that coaching at Buffalo isn't like coaching at Whitewater. (Nor is EMU like coaching at Wabash). I don't think Lance likes losing 51-14 to a directional Michigan.
And I doubt Chris Creighton likes being 1-6! :o
We'd just like to be mediocre for a change. We know that if we are really good, some big-name school will just 'steal' the coach anyway, but mediocre would be a nice change of pace! :P [EMU: where big-time hopes go to die.]
As a former Ypsi resident, here's my edit. EMU: where big-time hopes don't go. :)
MOSTLY true, but not 100%.
In the late 80s, EMU was top 25 in both football and basketball (in or around the year 1987) - Cal Berkeley hired away BOTH coaches! Since then, VERY little (when Charlie Batch lit up the opposition for a few years, it was apparently dismissed as a 'freak' QB and the coach stayed, but after Charlie graduated, the team died again :P). But, yeah, being <10 miles from the 'Big House', EMU has resigned itself to being forever overshadowed.
The same is
mostly (but not entirely) true of Ypsi vs. Ann Arbor and Detroit. Many automotive afficionados consider the Tucker to have been the most ahead-of-its-time car ever produced. Not having much capital backing, he was squashed like a bug by Detroit. And we've got a few tiny carry-out places I'll put up against anyone in the country: Gabriel's for cheese-steak hoagies, Bill's for hot dogs, and A Taste of Soul for BBQ and such. (And yes, I've eaten at many of the most famous places around the country that do those things - I'd put the Ypsi places
at least on a par.)
AND I have a neighbor girl I've known since birth who is a starlet in Hollywood! I alas fear she will not make it, but no one can say she isn't thinking (hoping) big! (On the other hand, she didn't go to EMU, which was the gist of your post. ;D)
Still wondering why Thomas More and Johns Hopkins are so highly rated....
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 23, 2015, 04:51:02 PM
Still wondering why Thomas More and Johns Hopkins are so highly rated....
Perhaps because Thomas More beat the 16th team on this poll by 18, with their backup QB.
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 23, 2015, 04:51:02 PM
Still wondering why Thomas More and Johns Hopkins are so highly rated....
Because you aren't the czar of polls, and other people have their own opinions.
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 23, 2015, 04:51:02 PM
Still wondering why Thomas More and Johns Hopkins are so highly rated....
11th and 10th respecgtively?
Because I think that those 2 teams have a very good chance of being in the Elite 8, unless they are the South #3 team and South #2 team and play in the second round.
I am definitely not the czar of the polls or the pick'ems!
It is interesting to note that MUC carries 19 of the #1 votes even though Linfield has been more competitive with UWW the past two seasons, returned its starting quarterback, and just beat the #25 team in Whitworth. I would have thought maybe a voter or two would have changed Linfield's way after this past weekend. But, like I've said before, UWW and MUC are #1 and #2 until beaten so with UWW losing MUC moves into the #1 spot.
I'm curious about Wesley. I'd definitely have UWO, UWW, and St Thomas ahead of them.
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 26, 2015, 04:42:47 PM
I am definitely not the czar of the polls or the pick'ems!
It is interesting to note that MUC carries 19 of the #1 votes even though Linfield has been more competitive with UWW the past two seasons, returned its starting quarterback, and just beat the #25 team in Whitworth. I would have thought maybe a voter or two would have changed Linfield's way after this past weekend. But, like I've said before, UWW and MUC are #1 and #2 until beaten so with UWW losing MUC moves into the #1 spot.
I'm curious about Wesley. I'd definitely have UWO, UWW, and St Thomas ahead of them.
Not sure what the buzz was about Whitworth. IMO it's kinda hard to judge that whole West Coast bubble until playoffs.
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 26, 2015, 04:42:47 PM
I am definitely not the czar of the polls or the pick'ems!
It is interesting to note that MUC carries 19 of the #1 votes even though Linfield has been more competitive with UWW the past two seasons, returned its starting quarterback, and just beat the #25 team in Whitworth. I would have thought maybe a voter or two would have changed Linfield's way after this past weekend. But, like I've said before, UWW and MUC are #1 and #2 until beaten so with UWW losing MUC moves into the #1 spot.
I'm curious about Wesley. I'd definitely have UWO, UWW, and St Thomas ahead of them.
I understand where you are coming from, but sometimes its all about matchups. Again, you do have a valid point about Linfield compared to Mount Union. What I would love to see this matchup, maybe by some chance you guys get to play them. As far as Wesley, I am skeptical, but they have won every game in convincing fashion except for this past weekend, UW-O and St. Thomas just recently separated themselves. As far as UW-W, they are who they are, however at this time they are not the UW-W that we see in the playoffs. All I know is the last time Wesley played Linfield, Wesley won, but that was years ago.
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 27, 2015, 08:06:45 AM
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 26, 2015, 04:42:47 PM
I am definitely not the czar of the polls or the pick'ems!
It is interesting to note that MUC carries 19 of the #1 votes even though Linfield has been more competitive with UWW the past two seasons, returned its starting quarterback, and just beat the #25 team in Whitworth. I would have thought maybe a voter or two would have changed Linfield's way after this past weekend. But, like I've said before, UWW and MUC are #1 and #2 until beaten so with UWW losing MUC moves into the #1 spot.
I'm curious about Wesley. I'd definitely have UWO, UWW, and St Thomas ahead of them.
I understand where you are coming from, but sometimes its all about matchups. Again, you do have a valid point about Linfield compared to Mount Union. What I would love to see this matchup, maybe by some chance you guys get to play them. As far as Wesley, I am skeptical, but they have won every game in convincing fashion except for this past weekend, UW-O and St. Thomas just recently separated themselves. As far as UW-W, they are who they are, however at this time they are not the UW-W that we see in the playoffs. All I know is the last time Wesley played Linfield, Wesley won, but that was years ago.
[/b]
Linfield won first half big BUT, Wesley WON the second half BIGGER and the ball game. :P still in :o
Just waiting on 1 ballot for this week. Technically the deadline isn't until tonight but everyone has been doing great on getting them in early this year ;D
Wesley also won a close game at North Central this year. I wouldn't compare that to the blow outs on their schedule.
I'd love to play Wesley at our place. I think that most Linfield fans have been waiting for a rematch. Wesley is a program that has earned my respect. Is there really all that much difference between #1-8?
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 27, 2015, 05:52:32 PM
I'd love to play Wesley at our place. I think that most Linfield fans have been waiting for a rematch. Wesley is a program that has earned my respect. Is there really all that much difference between #1-8?
Yes.
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on October 27, 2015, 05:52:32 PM
I'd love to play Wesley at our place. I think that most Linfield fans have been waiting for a rematch. Wesley is a program that has earned my respect. Is there really all that much difference between #1-8?
Considering 1 and 1a have been the same for a decade yes.
I meant this year it looks like there are eight legit teams... It is MUC and UWWs show till beaten in the playoffs. MHB is good-Wesley-st Thomas-UWW and Uwo and the winner from Wheatons conference has been a tough out...
2015 WEEK 8 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev
1) Linfield (3) 195 1
2) Mount Union (4) 194 2
3) Mary Hardin-Baylor 183 3
4) Wesley 171 4
5) UW-Oshkosh (1) 165 6
6) Wheaton 156 5
7) St Thomas 153 9
8) Wabash 150 7
9) UW-Whitewater 145 8
10) Johns Hopkins 126 10
11) Thomas More 121 11
12) St John's 112 13
13) Hardin-Simmons 105 15
14) Concordia-Moorhead 76 17
15) Illinois Wesleyan 74 18
16) UW-Platteville 63 12
17) Wartburg 59 19
18) Salisbury 56 20
19) North Central 48 14
20) John Carroll 38 NR
21) Washington & Lee 34 NR
22) Case Western Reserve 33 NR
23) Cortland St 28 NR
24) Delaware Valley 26 NR
25) Texas Lutheran 14 T23
Dropped Out: Washington & Jefferson, Albright, Rowan, DePauw, Whitworth
Also Receiving Votes: Albright (13), Wittenberg (10), Washington & Jefferson (9), Dubuque (7), Western New England (7), Framingham St (6), St Norbert (6), Rowan (5), Gustavus Adolphus (4), Olivet (3), Franklin (2), Amherst (1), St Lawrence (1), Whitworth (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, and thewaterboy
A few notes... I normally catch when someone forgets a team but I didn't this week with the Concordia-Moorhead vote. Based on past votes I believe the voter would have had them in the range everyone else did.
The most agreed upon team isn't at the top but is Hardin-Simmons at 13th with just one voter putting them 12th. Everyone agreed who the top 9 were even if they didn't agree on order. 10-13 were pretty similar on all ballots.
1) Linfield 195 ( 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
2) Mount Union 194 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3)
3) Mary Hardin-Baylor 183 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4)
4) Wesley 171 ( 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6)
5) UW-Oshkosh 165 ( 1, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 8)
6) Wheaton 156 ( 3, 4, 6, 7, 7, 7, 9, 9)
7) St Thomas 153 ( 4, 5, 5, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9)
8) Wabash 150 ( 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9)
9) UW-Whitewater 145 ( 6, 6, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9)
10) Johns Hopkins 126 (10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 11, 11)
11) Thomas More 121 (10, 10, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 12)
12) St John's 112 (11, 12, 12, 12, 12, 12, 12, 13)
13) Hardin-Simmons 105 (12, 13, 13, 13, 13, 13, 13, 13)
14) Concordia-Moorhead 76 (14, 14, 14, 14, 15, 17, 18, --)
15) Illinois Wesleyan 74 (15, 15, 16, 16, 17, 18, 18, 19)
16) UW-Platteville 63 (15, 15, 15, 15, 20, 21, 21, 23)
17) Wartburg 59 (14, 14, 16, 19, 19, 20, 21, --)
18) Salisbury 56 (14, 16, 16, 17, 18, 19, --, --)
19) North Central 48 (16, 17, 17, 20, 20, 22, 22, --)
20) John Carroll 38 (14, 15, 17, 20, --, --, --, --)
21) Wash & Lee 34 (17, 18, 21, 22, 23, 23, 24, --)
22) Case Western Reserve 33 (18, 19, 22, 22, 22, 23, 23, --)
23) Cortland St 28 (16, 16, 19, 25, --, --, --, --)
24) Delaware Valley 26 (17, 20, 22, 23, 24, 24, --, --)
25) Texas Lutheran 14 (21, 21, 24, 25, 25, --, --, --)
26) Albright 13 (18, 21)
27) Wittenberg 10 (18, 24)
28) Wash & Jeff 9 (23, 23, 24, 25)
T29) Dubuque 7 (19)
T29) W New England 7 (19)
T31) Framingham St 6 (20)
T31) St Norbert 6 (20)
33) Rowan 5 (21)
34) Gustavus Adolphus 4 (22)
35) Olivet 3 (24, 25)
36) Franklin 2 (24)
T37) Amherst 1 (25)
T37) St Lawrence 1 (25)
T37) Whitworth 1 (25)
2015 WEEK 9 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev
T1) Linfield (3) 195 1
T1) Mount Union (4) 195 2
3) UW-Oshkosh (1) 177 5
4) Wesley 175 4
5) St Thomas 160 7
6) Wheaton 157 6
7) UW-Whitewater 149 9
8) Hardin-Simmons 148 13
9) Wabash 147 8
10) Mary Hardin-Baylor 133 3
11) Johns Hopkins 119 10
12) Thomas More 116 11
13) St John's 105 12
14) UW-Platteville 81 16
T15) North Central 69 19
T15) Wartburg 69 17
17) Washington & Lee 61 21
18) Case Western Reserve 58 22
19) Delaware Valley 54 24
20) John Carroll 43 20
21) Texas Lutheran 30 25
22) Concordia-Moorhead 26 14
23) Illinois Wesleyan 25 15
24) Albright 21 NR
25) Dubuque 15 NR
Dropped Out: Salisbury and Cortland St
Also Receiving Votes: Washington & Jefferson (12), Wittenberg (12), Whitworth (11), St Norbert (10), Stevenson (9), St Lawrence (4), Western New England (4), Rowan (3), Salisbury (3), Framingham St (2), DePauw (1), Moravian (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, and thewaterboy
T1) Linfield 195 ( 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
T1) Mount Union 195 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3) UW-Oshkosh 177 ( 1, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6)
4) Wesley 175 ( 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 7)
5) St Thomas 160 ( 3, 3, 5, 5, 7, 7, 8, 10)
6) Wheaton 157 ( 3, 4, 5, 6, 6, 8, 9, 10)
7) UW-Whitewater 149 ( 5, 5, 7, 7, 7, 8, 10, 10)
8) Hardin-Simmons 148 ( 5, 6, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 10)
9) Wabash 147 ( 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 9, 9, 10)
10) Mary Hardin-Baylor 133 ( 6, 9, 9, 9, 10, 10, 11, 11)
11) Johns Hopkins 119 ( 9, 11, 11, 11, 11, 12, 12, 12)
12) Thomas More 116 ( 9, 11, 11, 12, 12, 12, 12, 13)
13) St John's 105 (12, 13, 13, 13, 13, 13, 13, 13)
14) UW-Platteville 81 (14, 14, 14, 14, 15, 17, 17, 22)
T15) North Central 69 (15, 15, 15, 16, 16, 18, 18, --)
T15) Wartburg 69 (14, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 23)
17) Washington & Lee 61 (14, 17, 17, 17, 18, 19, 19, --)
18) Case Western Reserve 58 (15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 20, 21, 21)
19) Delaware Valley 54 (16, 16, 18, 19, 20, 20, 21, 24)
20) John Carroll 43 (14, 15, 15, 17, --, --, --, --)
21) Texas Lutheran 30 (18, 20, 21, 21, 21, 25, --, --)
22) Concordia-Moorhead 26 (16, 20, 22, 22, 24, --, --, --)
23) Illinois Wesleyan 25 (19, 21, 22, 22, 24, 24, 25, --)
24) Albright 21 (17, 19, 21, --, --, --, --, --)
25) Dubuque 15 (18, 20, 25, --, --, --, --, --)
T26) Washington & Jefferson 12 (22, 22, 23, 25)
T26) Wittenberg 12 (16, 24)
28) Whitworth 11 (23, 23, 23, 24)
29) St Norbert 10 (17, 25)
30) Stevenson 9 (19, 24)
T31) St Lawrence 4 (23, 25)
T31) W New England 4 (22)
T33) Rowan 3 (23)
T33) Salisbury 3 (23)
35) Framingham St 2 (24)
T36) DePauw 1 (25)
T36) Moravian 1 (25)
Very intrigued that UWO has been getting a 1st place vote the past couple of weeks. As the lone WIAC rep on the panel, it wasn't me. ;D
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 03, 2015, 10:41:12 AM
Very intrigued that UWO has been getting a 1st place vote the past couple of weeks. As the lone WIAC rep on the panel, it wasn't me. ;D
Nor I, I went with MT. U until they get beat. IF & WHEN ;D
purple or PURPLE 8-)
Tough week filling out the poll. I dropped MHB even though they won. Since H-Simmons lost, I couldn't justify dropping them below MHB...so I dropped MHB down below H-S. I also added Salisbury to the top 25, but in doing so I also had to bring Albright into the top 25 picture b/c of their head-to-head.
It's tough keeping track of who beat who the past 10 weeks, and reflect it in the poll. :)
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 09, 2015, 09:47:40 AM
Tough week filling out the poll. I dropped MHB even though they won. Since H-Simmons lost, I couldn't justify dropping them below MHB...so I dropped MHB down below H-S. I also added Salisbury to the top 25, but in doing so I also had to bring Albright into the top 25 picture b/c of their head-to-head.
It's tough keeping track of who beat who the past 10 weeks, and reflect it in the poll. :)
[/b]
02,
that'a way you get the big bucks.. ;D
Mines somewhat mirrors that...
2015 WEEK 10 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev
T1) Linfield (3) 195 T1
T1) Mount Union (4) 195 T1
3) UW-Oshkosh (1) 182 3
4) St Thomas 173 5
5) Wheaton 165 6
6) UW-Whitewater 161 7
7) Wabash 159 9
8) Johns Hopkins 135 11
9) Thomas More 130 12
10) Mary Hardin-Baylor 129 10
11) Wesley 122 4
12) St John's 120 13
13) Hardin-Simmons 108 8
14) UW-Platteville 90 14
15) Washington & Lee 74 17
16) North Central 69 T15
17) John Carroll 51 20
18) Wartburg 48 T15
19) Albright 46 24
20) Salisbury 45 NR
21) Texas Lutheran 43 21
22) Dubuque 37 25
23) Case Western Reserve 25 18
24) Whitworth 18 NR
25) Illinois Wesleyan 13 23
Dropped Out: Delaware Valley and Concordia-Moorhead
Also Receiving Votes: Wittenberg (11), East Texas Baptist (10), St Norbert (10), Washington & Jefferson (9), Moravian (6), Western New England (6), Framingham St (5), Cortland St (4), Franklin (2), Huntingdon (2), Guilford (1), La Verne (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, and thewaterboy
T1) Linfield 195 ( 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
T1) Mount Union 195 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3) UW-Oshkosh 182 ( 1, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5)
4) St Thomas 173 ( 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 6, 7)
5) Wheaton 165 ( 3, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 8, 8)
6) UW-Whitewater 161 ( 4, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7)
7) Wabash 159 ( 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7)
8) Johns Hopkins 135 ( 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10, 11)
9) Thomas More 130 ( 7, 8, 9, 9, 10, 11, 11, 13)
10) Mary Hardin-Baylor 129 ( 7, 8, 8, 10, 10, 11, 12, 13)
11) Wesley 122 ( 9, 9, 10, 11, 11, 12, 12, 12)
12) St John's 120 ( 9, 9, 10, 11, 12, 12, 12, 13)
13) Hardin-Simmons 108 (10, 11, 12, 13, 13, 13, 14, 14)
14) UW-Platteville 90 (13, 14, 14, 14, 14, 15, 15, 19)
15) Washington & Lee 74 (14, 16, 16, 16, 17, 18, 18, 19)
16) North Central 69 (15, 15, 15, 16, 17, 17, 18, --)
17) John Carroll 51 (14, 15, 15, 16, 22, 23, --, --)
18) Wartburg 48 (16, 18, 18, 21, 21, 21, 21, 24)
19) Albright 46 (13, 15, 17, 21, 22, 24, 24, --)
20) Salisbury 45 (17, 17, 19, 20, 20, 22, 22, --)
21) Texas Lutheran 43 (17, 18, 18, 19, 20, 23, 24, --)
22) Dubuque 37 (17, 19, 19, 20, 23, 23, 24, --)
23) Case Western Reserve 25 (18, 29, 21, 23, 23, --, --, --)
24) Whitworth 18 (19, 22, 22, 23, --, --, --, --)
25) Illinois Wesleyan 13 (19, 20, --, --, --, --, --, --)
26) Wittenberg 11 (16, 25)
T27) E Texas Baptist 10 (22, 23, 24, 25)
T27) St Norbert 10 (16)
29) Wash & Jeff 9 (21, 24, 24)
T30) Moravian 6 (20)
T30) W New England 6 (20)
32) Framingham St 5 (21)
33) Cortland St 4 (22)
T34) Franklin 2 (25, 25)
T34) Huntingdon 2 (25, 25)
T36) Guilford 1 (25)
T36) La Verne 1 (25)
2015 WEEK 11 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev
T1) Linfield (3) 195 T1
T1) Mount Union (4) 195 T1
3) UW-Oshkosh (1) 182 3
4) St Thomas 174 4
5) UW-Whitewater 164 6
6) Wheaton 162 5
7) Wabash 157 7
8) Johns Hopkins 136 8
9) Thomas More 131 9
10) Mary Hardin-Baylor 128 10
11) Wesley 122 11
12) St John's 119 12
13) Hardin-Simmons 110 13
14) UW-Platteville 90 14
15) Washington & Lee 79 15
16) North Central 63 16
17) Albright 56 19
18) Dubuque 55 22
19) Texas Lutheran 52 21
20) Wartburg 51 18
21) Salisbury 44 20
22) Whitworth 31 24
23) Guilford 18 NR
24) Wittenberg 16 NR
25) St Norbert 12 NR
Dropped Out: John Carroll, Case Western Reserve, Illinois Wesleyan
Also Receiving Votes: John Carroll (11), Cortland St (9), Western New England (9), Washington & Jefferson (9), Framingham St (6), La Verne (4), Delaware Valley (3), Ohio Northern (3), Amherst (2), Franklin (1), Huntingdon (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, and thewaterboy
T1) Linfield 195 ( 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
T1) Mount Union 195 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3) UW-Oshkosh 182 ( 1, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5)
4) St Thomas 174 ( 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 6, 7)
5) UW-Whitewater 164 ( 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7)
6) Wheaton 162 ( 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 8, 8)
7) Wabash 157 ( 5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8)
8) Johns Hopkins 136 ( 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10, 11)
9) Thomas More 131 ( 7, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10, 11, 13)
10) Mary Hardin-Baylor 128 ( 7, 8, 8, 10, 10, 11, 13, 13)
11) Wesley 122 ( 9, 9, 10, 11, 11, 12, 12, 12)
12) St John's 119 ( 9, 9, 11, 11, 12, 12, 12, 13)
13) Hardin-Simmons 110 (10, 11, 12, 12, 13, 13, 13, 14)
14) UW-Platteville 90 (13, 14, 14, 14, 14, 14, 17, 18)
15) Washington & Lee 79 (14, 15, 15, 16, 16, 17, 17, 19)
16) North Central 63 (15, 15, 15, 15, 16, 17, --, --)
17) Albright 56 (14, 15, 16, 20, 21, 22, 22, 22)
18) Dubuque 55 (17, 18, 18, 18, 18, 20, 20, 24)
19) Texas Lutheran 52 (16, 17, 17, 19, 19, 20, 22, --)
20) Wartburg 51 (17, 18, 19, 19, 19, 20, 21, 24)
21) Salisbury 44 (16, 16, 18, 20, 21, 21, --, --)
22) Whitworth 31 (19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 23, 23, --)
23) Guilford 18 (22, 23, 23, 23, 23, 24, --, --)
24) Wittenberg 16 (15, 21, --, --, --, --, --, --)
25) St Norbert 12 (16, 25, 25, --, --, --, --, --)
26) John Carroll 11 (18, 23)
T27) Cortland St 9 (21, 24, 24)
T27) W New England 9 (19, 25, 25)
T27) Wash & Jeff 9 (21, 22)
30) Framingham St 6 (20)
31) La Verne 4 (22)
T32) Delaware Valley 3 (24, 25)
T32) Ohio Northern 3 (24, 25)
34) Amherst 2 (24)
T35) Franklin 1 (25)
T35) Huntingdon 1 (25)
Wheaton should be in the #1 spot.
This is the round that will help me determine if Wabash, JHU, and Thomas More are deserving of their rankings. I have doubted them all year. Wabash can prove it on the field. The other two have to hope that the team against whom they lost is competitive in the Quarters. Here's looking at you Wesley.
What more does Wabash have to prove, pray tell? They made it to the quarters. JHU and Thomas More also proved that they're almost ready for Top 8 consideration - certainly they're in the mix for the Top 10-12.
Wabash needs to beat someone that has had success on a regular basis in the playoffs. So far they haven't. Thomas More is from the PAC. Let's look at the PAC history:
2014 W&J won the conference and they lost to MUC 67-0
2013 W&J won the conference and lost to MUC 34-20 (the year MUC got pounded in the championship game by UWW)
2012 W&J won the conference and lost to JHU 42-10 who then lost to MUC 55-13
2011 Thomas More won the conference and lost 24-21 to Franklin who lost 41-14 to UWW
2010 Thomas More won the PAC and lost 69-7 to MHB
St Thomas comes from a power conference. If Wabash makes it a game then I'd agree that this season both Wabash and Thomas More are good teams - definitely in the mix for Top 12.
However, if Wabash gets blown out that is where final rankings get tricky. The same goes for Wesley and JHU. I'm expecting Wesley to get soundly beaten by MUC this Saturday.
The week 11 poll had Wabash at 7, JHU at 8, Thomas More at 9, St Johns at 10 and Wesley at 11 followed by Hardin Simmons, MHB, UWP and North Central.
We'll get to see how Wabash stacks up to St Johns via the game against the Tommies which will help determine final rankings from St Thomas, Wabash, St Johns and Thomas More.
I have to agree with W3 on this one. Wabash has a lot to prove still I think. Destroying teams in the NCAC and needing to come from behind to win their first two playoff games doesn't scream top 10 to me.
They can't wait till the second half to start playing against St. Thomas, like they did against Albion and TM.
If they lose 20-28 this Saturday, then yes....Wabash is legit (along with Thomas More). They don't need to win in my book to move up these polls. Just keep it close.
Making the Top 8 while being ranked in the Top 8? That's enough, man. Stop with the pedantic elitism. GOOD teams are one thing. This is a GREAT Wabash team. It may not be an ELITE team, that hasn't been proven yet.
Fair enough...they've made the quarter finals. That should be good enough to be a top 10 team....you're right.
I guess I'm more interested to see how this game turns out just to see how good Thomas More and St. John's really were.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on December 01, 2015, 04:29:53 PM
Fair enough...they've made the quarter finals. That should be good enough to be a top 10 team....you're right.
I guess I'm more interested to see how this game turns out just to see how good Thomas More and St. John's really were.
Watch them play, dude! Watch a damn game and decide if they're any good. Basing your opinion on who is good or not good using only the final scores of games that happen to briefly swoop into your own limited orbit once in a while is useless. If you want to know if Thomas More is good- watch them play.
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 01, 2015, 04:37:30 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on December 01, 2015, 04:29:53 PM
Fair enough...they've made the quarter finals. That should be good enough to be a top 10 team....you're right.
I guess I'm more interested to see how this game turns out just to see how good Thomas More and St. John's really were.
Watch them play, dude! Watch a damn game and decide if they're any good. Basing your opinion on who is good or not good using only the final scores of games that happen to briefly swoop into your own limited orbit once in a while is useless. If you want to know if Thomas More is good- watch them play.
If only the level of competition was the same for all teams. Then yes, that would be a good benchmark to judge teams by.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on December 01, 2015, 04:56:33 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 01, 2015, 04:37:30 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on December 01, 2015, 04:29:53 PM
Fair enough...they've made the quarter finals. That should be good enough to be a top 10 team....you're right.
I guess I'm more interested to see how this game turns out just to see how good Thomas More and St. John's really were.
Watch them play, dude! Watch a damn game and decide if they're any good. Basing your opinion on who is good or not good using only the final scores of games that happen to briefly swoop into your own limited orbit once in a while is useless. If you want to know if Thomas More is good- watch them play.
If only the level of competition was the same for all teams. Then yes, that would be a good benchmark to judge teams by.
You've been watching the best of the best for a number of years now. You should be able to watch good teams play and decide whether or not they are just sort of good or if they are really good. You of all people should have that baseline.
If you're not interested in teams outside of the WIAC, the MIAC, and Mount Union, that's cool. You don't have to be. But you should let the kind of permanent ink judgments you're about to lay down based on the result of the Wabash/UST game be handled by people who can be bothered to pay attention to something other than what's right in front of them.
Relax, guys -- you can't prove Wabash is good on a message board or on Twitter. They can do that on the field. (Sounds like something I've had to say on Twitter every November that there has been Twitter.)
Let's see. Using the result of the St Thomas/Wabash game, if St Thomas wins, to determine whether St John's is better, or not, than Wabash. Two teams from the MIAC who play one another all the time and who know one another. Two teams from the MIAC who played twice this year. Yes, let's use Saturday's result, points differential, to determine relative status. Why not just go to that crazy website that shows that some DIII team is better than, say, Ohio State, because you can find a string of games that leads to that conclusion.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on December 01, 2015, 04:56:33 PM
If only the level of competition was the same for all teams. Then yes, that would be a good benchmark to judge teams by.
The bottom of the MIAC's always been shaky for the most part. The bottom of the WIAC probably hit the nadir of their program's existence (Eau Claire) or just stumbled along into mediocrity (no matter what the conference - Stout, LAX, River Falls). I mean, we're not talking world beaters - and I acknowledge we're not talking about McMurray or Rockford, either. The OAC was down, too, which is why we're ALL shocked Ohio Northern got a "C". Some programs there - like Capital - have backslid.
But direct comparisons of Team A vs. Team B depend on so much - weather, injuries, matchups. This Wabash vs. St. Thomas game is all about control of the line of scrimmage.
Quote from: smedindy on December 01, 2015, 05:50:21 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on December 01, 2015, 04:56:33 PM
If only the level of competition was the same for all teams. Then yes, that would be a good benchmark to judge teams by.
The bottom of the MIAC's always been shaky for the most part. The bottom of the WIAC probably hit the nadir of their program's existence (Eau Claire) or just stumbled along into mediocrity (no matter what the conference - Stout, LAX, River Falls). I mean, we're not talking world beaters - and I acknowledge we're not talking about McMurray or Rockford, either. The OAC was down, too, which is why we're ALL shocked Ohio Northern got a "C". Some programs there - like Capital - have backslid.
But direct comparisons of Team A vs. Team B depend on so much - weather, injuries, matchups. This Wabash vs. St. Thomas game is all about control of the line of scrimmage.
Agreed. That is always the case when UWW and Mount plays. UWW usually controls both lines, and they win. The same happened with UWO and UWW, and UWO won. Plain and simple.
Beating the PAC champion isn't the same as beating the MIAC or WIAC champion or Linfield, Hardin Baylor, or Wesley. Wabash has proven that they are a good football team. They get the opportunity on Saturday to prove that they are a great team - win or lose.
I think you are too stingy with 'great' - that's why I use ELITE. And it really should only apply to THIS YEAR THIS TEAM.
Denison was a good football team this year. So was DePauw. North Central was only good this year, not great. Wheaton was great. Albion was on the cusp of good to great.
Sure I'm stingy with "good", "great", and "elite". Beating the PAC champion doesn't automatically make you a "great" team. However, beating St Thomas sure would (or even keeping it a 2 score game).
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on December 03, 2015, 05:16:07 PM
Sure I'm stingy with "good", "great", and "elite". Beating the PAC champion doesn't automatically make you a "great" team. However, beating St Thomas sure would (or even keeping it a 2 score game).
Designations aside, I'm curious: where, precisely, would you rank Thomas More, Wabash, and Johns Hopkins?
Someone has to be ranked in that 7-8-9 range beneath Mount, UWW, Linfield, UMHB, and the other acknowledged top dogs. If the criticism is that those three would not stay close with #1, 2, 3, and so on...well, nobody else does, either, outside of that top grouping. Mount Union's closest conference game was a 36-3 win over John Carroll. St. Thomas' closest games were 35-14 and 38-19 against St. John's (and a maybe-kinda-competitive 38-14 win over Concordia which was 28-14 at the start of the fourth quarter). UW-Oshkosh killed everybody except for Whitewater and Stevens Point. Linfield killed everyone they played, period. It's not like the OAC / MIAC / WIAC / NWC are teeming with squads that take their power champions to the limit. If Whitworth had lost by 3 to Linfield, or Bethel and Concordia-Moorhead were taking St. John's and St. Thomas to the wire (which
does happen in some years; the MIAC has definitely had seasons where it went four deep with really, really good teams) then I'd see the point that Wabash / TMC / JHU were (maybe) over-ranked and ought to be down lower behind those Billy Badass runners-up that just had the misfortune of being in (Power Team X's) conference.
Using the season-ending poll with Wabash, JHU, and Thomas More lined up at 7-8-9, who are you vaulting ahead of them with any certainty?
The next six teams are:
10. St. John's
11. Wesley
12. Hardin-Simmons
13. UMHB
14. UW-Platteville
15. North Central
I think you can make an argument that these teams
might be better than Wabash, Hopkins, Thomas More (and obviously now that Wesley and Hopkins met in the playoffs, Hopkins would be moved lower) but I don't think it's a total slam dunk, and once we get past 15 there's a pretty clear drop-off. So maybe a team like Johns Hopkins should be ranked, like, 13th instead of 8th in the final poll? The ranking was pretty defensible when the playoffs started. That's kinda
why we have the playoffs, to figure out where these teams belong.
If Wabash loses, say, 35-14 to St. Thomas...that's exactly what St. John's did the first time they played, and St. John's is the
next team down on the list. There's not exactly a lineup of teams sitting in that 10-15 spot who are going to be
clearly better / more competitive with the top 6.
My Poll would look something like this, with slight adjustments depending on the next two weeks outcomes.
1.) Mt Union
1A.) St Thomas
3.) Linfield
3A.) UWW
5.) UWO
6.) UMHB
7.) Wesley
8.) St John's
9.) Wabash
10.) Take your pick of JHU, Thomas More, Whitworth, HSU
Wheaton belongs in there somewhere.
You are correct sir. They slipped my mind. I revise and put them at #9, and drop Wabash to #10. That makes it a lot neater.
I was asked how I would rank the Top teams - specifically Wabash, JHU, and Thomas More. I'm going to stick to my earlier ranking process:
#1 UWW until proven otherwise
#2 MUC until proven otherwise
#3 Linfield
#4 St Thomas
#5 MHB
#6 UWO
#7 Wheaton
#8 Wesley
#9 St Johns
#10 UWP
#11 Hardin Simmons
#12 Wabash
#13 North Central
#14 JHU
#15 Thomas More
I'll adjust these after the semi's if need be.
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on December 08, 2015, 04:21:39 PM
I was asked how I would rank the Top teams - specifically Wabash, JHU, and Thomas More. I'm going to stick to my earlier ranking process:
#1 UWW until proven otherwise
#2 MUC until proven otherwise
#3 Linfield
#4 St Thomas
#5 MHB
#6 UWO
#7 Wheaton
#8 Wesley
#9 St Johns
#10 UWP
#11 Hardin Simmons
#12 Wabash
#13 North Central
#14 JHU
#15 Thomas More
I'll adjust these after the semi's if need be.
I guess it is time for you to adjust.
Quote from: PurpleTide on December 12, 2015, 07:45:55 PM
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on December 08, 2015, 04:21:39 PM
I was asked how I would rank the Top teams - specifically Wabash, JHU, and Thomas More. I'm going to stick to my earlier ranking process:
#1 UWW until proven otherwise
#2 MUC until proven otherwise
#3 Linfield
#4 St Thomas
#5 MHB
#6 UWO
#7 Wheaton
#8 Wesley
#9 St Johns
#10 UWP
#11 Hardin Simmons
#12 Wabash
#13 North Central
#14 JHU
#15 Thomas More
I'll adjust these after the semi's if need be.
I guess it is time for you to adjust.
Indeed.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on December 12, 2015, 08:08:11 PM
Quote from: PurpleTide on December 12, 2015, 07:45:55 PM
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on December 08, 2015, 04:21:39 PM
I was asked how I would rank the Top teams - specifically Wabash, JHU, and Thomas More. I'm going to stick to my earlier ranking process:
#1 UWW until proven otherwise
#2 MUC until proven otherwise
#3 Linfield
#4 St Thomas
#5 MHB
#6 UWO
#7 Wheaton
#8 Wesley
#9 St Johns
#10 UWP
#11 Hardin Simmons
#12 Wabash
#13 North Central
#14 JHU
#15 Thomas More
I'll adjust these after the semi's if need be.
I guess it is time for you to adjust.
Indeed.
In fairness, he DID say (for the first two) 'until proven otherwise'! I'd say today provided some pretty conclusive proof (same for 3 and 4). I'm not even going to begin ranking teams until after the Stagg because how that game goes affects practically everyone in the top 10-15 slots!
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 12, 2015, 10:15:13 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on December 12, 2015, 08:08:11 PM
Quote from: PurpleTide on December 12, 2015, 07:45:55 PM
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on December 08, 2015, 04:21:39 PM
I was asked how I would rank the Top teams - specifically Wabash, JHU, and Thomas More. I'm going to stick to my earlier ranking process:
#1 UWW until proven otherwise
#2 MUC until proven otherwise
#3 Linfield
#4 St Thomas
#5 MHB
#6 UWO
#7 Wheaton
#8 Wesley
#9 St Johns
#10 UWP
#11 Hardin Simmons
#12 Wabash
#13 North Central
#14 JHU
#15 Thomas More
I'll adjust these after the semi's if need be.
I guess it is time for you to adjust.
Indeed.
In fairness, he DID say (for the first two) 'until proven otherwise'! I'd say today provided some pretty conclusive proof (same for 3 and 4). I'm not even going to begin ranking teams until after the Stagg because how that game goes affects practically everyone in the top 10-15 slots!
Oh, it's not just about the first two.
walla walla has been ripping on Wabash, Thomas More, and Johns Hopkins as being pretenders all season. Today's results, if anything, should work to give each of those teams a little credit relative to their peers.
Presumably, walla walla's rationale for slipping Wabash down to #12 was the lopsided loss to St. Thomas. By proxy, Thomas More has been dropped to #14 in the walla walla rankings because they lost to Wabash. Except that now we've seen Linfield
also get crushed by St. Thomas, so maybe it's just that St. Thomas is a lot better than
everyone this year? St. Thomas hammering Linfield today definitely suggests that this transitive "St. Thomas blasted Wabash -> ergo Wabash and Thomas More can't be top 10 teams" train of thought is, at least, questionable. Unless we're also ready to toss Linfield from the pile.
Next, the case of Johns Hopkins. walla walla stated before the quarterfinals that how Wesley showed against Mount Union would influence his ranking of JHU, for JHU played Wesley quite competitively. Wesley then gave Mount a brief scare with a wild second-half stretch before falling; now that Mount dispatched Whitewater even more easily than Wesley (we can certainly argue degrees of defeat, but it's pretty hard to state that UWW was any better in Alliance than Wesley was) somehow I doubt any credit for this will trickle down to Johns Hopkins, although it probably should.
Since this last thought will no doubt be misunderstood - I don't think it's a slam dunk that any of the three are top-10 teams, but nor do I think we should be so dismissive of the possibility that Hopkins, Wabash, and Thomas More might actually be top-10 teams. They acquitted themselves just fine (or just as well as other teams that have the golden pass) in the playoffs.
I'm also curious to see what this means for Wesley's ranking relative to UWW, UWO, and Wheaton. All previously named ahead of Wesley in walla walla's ranking. Do they stay there, or does Wesley get past any of them after posting a somewhat more competitive loss vs. Mount than UWW did?
(I don't think there's really a clear answer here, I'm curious to see where those teams will end up in the final polls)
^^^Oh, I know of walla walla's past posts, and knew you were referring to more than JUST his latest. That's why I said I wouldn't even attempt to begin ranking teams 'til after the Stagg. If the game is a total walkover by either team, it affects all sorts of teams down below. If (as I expect) it is a well-contested game, the rankings will stay about where they currently are in my head. Today's games have already somewhat raised Wesley (and thus JHU) and SJU and Wabash (and thus TM) in my mind, and lowered UMHB, UWO and Wheaton; no DRASTIC changes (they'll all no doubt end up in my top 12-15), but perhaps a slot or two.
This would be so much easier if football teams played as many games as basketball teams! ;D (Or maybe it would be even harder as you get more cases of A beat B who beat C who beat A! ;))
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 12, 2015, 11:35:36 PM
This would be so much easier if football teams played as many games as basketball teams! ;D (Or maybe it would be even harder as you get more cases of A beat B who beat C who beat A! ;))
I say start the season at the normal time... then every team plays one game a day until they've played all 240ish teams. Should get done in time for the end of the school year ;D
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on December 13, 2015, 02:07:53 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 12, 2015, 11:35:36 PM
This would be so much easier if football teams played as many games as basketball teams! ;D (Or maybe it would be even harder as you get more cases of A beat B who beat C who beat A! ;))
I say start the season at the normal time... then every team plays one game a day until they've played all 240ish teams. Should get done in time for the end of the school year ;D
+1!
Or in the immortal words of Ernie Banks, Mr Cub, "Let's play two."
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on December 08, 2015, 04:21:39 PM
I was asked how I would rank the Top teams - specifically Wabash, JHU, and Thomas More. I'm going to stick to my earlier ranking process:
#1 UWW until proven otherwise
#2 MUC until proven otherwise
#3 Linfield
#4 St Thomas
#5 MHB
#6 UWO
#7 Wheaton
#8 Wesley
#9 St Johns
#10 UWP
#11 Hardin Simmons
#12 Wabash
#13 North Central
#14 JHU
#15 Thomas More
I'll adjust these after the semi's if need be.
Adjustments are in order!
#1 Mount Union - Until proven otherwise
#2 St Thomas - hate to see a healthy #23 behind that line!
#3 Linfield - Caveat is with a 100% healthy Sam Riddle... otherwise maybe #5
#4 UWW - Made it thru to the semis in a very tough bracket
#5 UWO - lost by 2 to a semifinalist
#6 MHB - Not much difference between them and Linfield
#7 Wabash - Impressive D to hold that Tommie running attack in check
#8 Wesley - Impressive O to score that many against MUC
#9 St Johns - Been the toughest out so far in 2015 for the Tommies - familiarity helps
#10 Thomas More
#11 Wheaton
#12 JHU - They were very competitive with Wesley and Wesley scored a bunch on MUC... Wesley's familiarity with MUC helps as I doubt that JHU does as well in Alliance
#13 UWP
#14 Hardin Simmons
#15 North Central
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on December 15, 2015, 01:13:28 PM
Quote from: Walla Walla Wildcat on December 08, 2015, 04:21:39 PM
I was asked how I would rank the Top teams - specifically Wabash, JHU, and Thomas More. I'm going to stick to my earlier ranking process:
#1 UWW until proven otherwise
#2 MUC until proven otherwise
#3 Linfield
#4 St Thomas
#5 MHB
#6 UWO
#7 Wheaton
#8 Wesley
#9 St Johns
#10 UWP
#11 Hardin Simmons
#12 Wabash
#13 North Central
#14 JHU
#15 Thomas More
I'll adjust these after the semi's if need be.
Adjustments are in order!
#1 Mount Union - Until proven otherwise
#2 St Thomas - hate to see a healthy #23 behind that line!
#3 Linfield - Caveat is with a 100% healthy Sam Riddle... otherwise maybe #5
#4 UWW - Made it thru to the semis in a very tough bracket
#5 UWO - lost by 2 to a semifinalist
#6 MHB - Not much difference between them and Linfield
#7 Wabash - Impressive D to hold that Tommie running attack in check
#8 Wesley - Impressive O to score that many against MUC
#9 St Johns - Been the toughest out so far in 2015 for the Tommies - familiarity helps
#10 Thomas More
#11 Wheaton
#12 JHU - They were very competitive with Wesley and Wesley scored a bunch on MUC... Wesley's familiarity with MUC helps as I doubt that JHU does as well in Alliance
#13 UWP
#14 Hardin Simmons
#15 North Central
Its tough to argue anything, but the results on the field. However, I think the Stagg game is in order, because North Central has a case with its result with Wesley, Wheaton, and UWP. I think it is all about matchups. Some teams have great offenses (i.e. Mount Union and Wesley) and some great defenses (Wabash, Mount Union, and UWW). However, if Mount destroys UST, then we were all wrong regarding strength of bracket. If UST wins by a couple scores and is never really tested, then our early predictions will be right regarding the bracketology.
And very few teams have actually played an ASC team in post season competition aside from Wesley Linfield UWW and UMU...I wish we had the chance to play the ODAC, or JHU or Thomas More more frequently.
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on December 15, 2015, 01:42:13 PM
Its tough to argue anything, but the results on the field. However, I think the Stagg game is in order, because North Central has a case with its result with Wesley, Wheaton, and UWP. I think it is all about matchups. Some teams have great offenses (i.e. Mount Union and Wesley) and some great defenses (Wabash, Mount Union, and UWW). However, if Mount destroys UST, then we were all wrong regarding strength of bracket. If UST wins by a couple scores and is never really tested, then our early predictions will be right regarding the bracketology.
North Central has a case for what? They lost three games. They're going to wind up ranked 14, 15, or 16. You can't possibly give any team more benefit of the doubt than that. Lose 30% of your games and still be ranked in the top 16 of Division III? That's the jackpot, frankly. You can't possibly be considering the idea that North Central should be ranked any higher than this.
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 15, 2015, 03:21:48 PM
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on December 15, 2015, 01:42:13 PM
Its tough to argue anything, but the results on the field. However, I think the Stagg game is in order, because North Central has a case with its result with Wesley, Wheaton, and UWP. I think it is all about matchups. Some teams have great offenses (i.e. Mount Union and Wesley) and some great defenses (Wabash, Mount Union, and UWW). However, if Mount destroys UST, then we were all wrong regarding strength of bracket. If UST wins by a couple scores and is never really tested, then our early predictions will be right regarding the bracketology.
North Central has a case for what? They lost three games. They're going to wind up ranked 14, 15, or 16. You can't possibly give any team more benefit of the doubt than that. Lose 30% of your games and still be ranked in the top 16 of Division III? That's the jackpot, frankly. You can't possibly be considering the idea that North Central should be ranked any higher than this.
Before someone else jumps in and points out that those three losses came against really good teams - we know. Using walla walla's most recent rankings for convenience, North Central lost to #7 by eight points, #8 by a point, and #10 by a touchdown. Does that mean they're competitive with the top 10 teams? Sure. Playing close games against three really good teams can get you ranked somewhere just below those teams - which is exactly where they are.
Next year North Central should go out and lose
four games, but make sure they're all against top-10 teams. We'll have someone making a case for them at #1.
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 15, 2015, 03:21:48 PM
North Central has a case for what? They lost three games. They're going to wind up ranked 14, 15, or 16. You can't possibly give any team more benefit of the doubt than that. Lose 30% of your games and still be ranked in the top 16 of Division III? That's the jackpot, frankly. You can't possibly be considering the idea that North Central should be ranked any higher than this.
Seriously. I'd love to see an argument for North Central based on games they actually, you know, won. At some point, doesn't that have to enter the equation?
Quote from: Bombers798891 on December 15, 2015, 05:15:51 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 15, 2015, 03:21:48 PM
North Central has a case for what? They lost three games. They're going to wind up ranked 14, 15, or 16. You can't possibly give any team more benefit of the doubt than that. Lose 30% of your games and still be ranked in the top 16 of Division III? That's the jackpot, frankly. You can't possibly be considering the idea that North Central should be ranked any higher than this.
Seriously. I'd love to see an argument for North Central based on games they actually, you know, won. At some point, doesn't that have to enter the equation?
I think it should be based on the games they actually, you know, played... all of them.
A 1 point loss to Wesley is certainly a better result than a 20-30 point win over a majority of D3 teams. The fact that they had not one, not two, but three close results against ranked opponents further solidifies my belief that they belong right up there top 15ish.
Where would a hypothetical Montana Baptist Wesleyan that goes 0-10 with all one score losses and 2 in OT to Mount Union, St Thomas, Linfield, MHB, Wesley, UWW, UWO, Wheaton, Wabash, and Johns Hopkins be ranked? I could see them being up there quite comfortably in the top 15
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on December 15, 2015, 06:04:07 PM
Where would a hypothetical Montana Baptist Wesleyan that goes 0-10 with all one score losses and 2 in OT to Mount Union, St Thomas, Linfield, MHB, Wesley, UWW, UWO, Wheaton, Wabash, and Johns Hopkins be ranked? I could see them being up there quite comfortably in the top 15
Unranked, like any 0-10 team should be. At some point, who you beat is more important than who you lost to. In this case, we'd have absolutely zero data to indicate this hypothetical team was capable of beating anyone else in the Top 25. It's a pretty strange argument that a team doesn't need to actually prove themselves by winning a game
Quote from: Bombers798891 on December 16, 2015, 10:56:11 AM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on December 15, 2015, 06:04:07 PM
Where would a hypothetical Montana Baptist Wesleyan that goes 0-10 with all one score losses and 2 in OT to Mount Union, St Thomas, Linfield, MHB, Wesley, UWW, UWO, Wheaton, Wabash, and Johns Hopkins be ranked? I could see them being up there quite comfortably in the top 15
Unranked, like any 0-10 team should be. At some point, who you beat is more important than who you lost to. In this case, we'd have absolutely zero data to indicate this hypothetical team was capable of beating anyone else in the Top 25. It's a pretty strange argument that a team doesn't need to actually prove themselves by winning a game
Montana Baptist probably doesn't have the cachet that North Central or St. John's has. So they would be unranked because in the hypothetical conversation about who Montana Baptist
could beat, they'd get zero benefit of doubt. Meanwhile, we have no problem whatsoever openly wondering (and sometimes flat out lobbying for) if North Central should be in the top ten or St. John's should be in the top five because, well, we don't know that they
wouldn't beat some of those teams that might also be ranked that high. It's crazy talk.
Wait, we have a D3 team in Montana now? Pat, can you send me there to cover a hoops game? :)
Quote from: gordonmann on December 16, 2015, 12:30:20 PM
Wait, we have a D3 team in Montana now? Pat, can you send me there to cover a hoops game? :)
You can cover both home games when Montana Baptist Wesleyan plays Palm Beach International Beach Bible College.
Quote from: pg04 on December 16, 2015, 12:36:54 PM
Quote from: gordonmann on December 16, 2015, 12:30:20 PM
Wait, we have a D3 team in Montana now? Pat, can you send me there to cover a hoops game? :)
You can cover both home games when Montana Baptist Wesleyan plays Palm Beach International Beach Bible College.
As if PBIBBC could ever give Montana Baptist Wesleyan a good game! Only their rival, Northwest Central Wyoming State ever comes close! ;D
Quote from: pg04 on December 16, 2015, 12:36:54 PM
Quote from: gordonmann on December 16, 2015, 12:30:20 PM
Wait, we have a D3 team in Montana now? Pat, can you send me there to cover a hoops game? :)
You can cover both home games when Montana Baptist Wesleyan plays Palm Beach International Beach Bible College.
I still think that the perfect road trip for D3football.com to take is the American Southwest Conference game when Belhaven College in Jackson MS goes to Sul Ross State in Alpine TX.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 16, 2015, 03:51:54 PM
Quote from: pg04 on December 16, 2015, 12:36:54 PM
Quote from: gordonmann on December 16, 2015, 12:30:20 PM
Wait, we have a D3 team in Montana now? Pat, can you send me there to cover a hoops game? :)
You can cover both home games when Montana Baptist Wesleyan plays Palm Beach International Beach Bible College.
I still think that the perfect road trip for D3football.com to take is the American Southwest Conference game when Belhaven College in Jackson MS goes to Sul Ross State in Alpine TX.
Yeah. I think that's the longest conference road trip that I found. Absolutely horrible. 900 miles. On a bus. That's got to be 14-16 hours each way counting food stops. That alone would have me hoping someone else was recruiting me...
Quote from: jknezek on December 16, 2015, 04:01:31 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 16, 2015, 03:51:54 PM
Quote from: pg04 on December 16, 2015, 12:36:54 PM
Quote from: gordonmann on December 16, 2015, 12:30:20 PM
Wait, we have a D3 team in Montana now? Pat, can you send me there to cover a hoops game? :)
You can cover both home games when Montana Baptist Wesleyan plays Palm Beach International Beach Bible College.
I still think that the perfect road trip for D3football.com to take is the American Southwest Conference game when Belhaven College in Jackson MS goes to Sul Ross State in Alpine TX.
Yeah. I think that's the longest conference road trip that I found. Absolutely horrible. 900 miles. On a bus. That's got to be 14-16 hours each way counting food stops. That alone would have me hoping someone else was recruiting me...
I'm guessing there were a lot of airline flights when the SCAC had Colorado College, Trinity TX, and DePauw --- or some
really long bus rides.
Quote from: jknezek on December 16, 2015, 04:01:31 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 16, 2015, 03:51:54 PM
Quote from: pg04 on December 16, 2015, 12:36:54 PM
Quote from: gordonmann on December 16, 2015, 12:30:20 PM
Wait, we have a D3 team in Montana now? Pat, can you send me there to cover a hoops game? :)
You can cover both home games when Montana Baptist Wesleyan plays Palm Beach International Beach Bible College.
I still think that the perfect road trip for D3football.com to take is the American Southwest Conference game when Belhaven College in Jackson MS goes to Sul Ross State in Alpine TX.
Yeah. I think that's the longest conference road trip that I found. Absolutely horrible. 900 miles. On a bus. That's got to be 14-16 hours each way counting food stops. That alone would have me hoping someone else was recruiting me...
Soooo I don't know much about the respective institutions and their available resources, but I sincerely hope that they are able to find a way to get those poor kids a flight for that game. 900 miles on a bus is ridiculous.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on December 16, 2015, 04:18:35 PM
Quote from: jknezek on December 16, 2015, 04:01:31 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 16, 2015, 03:51:54 PM
Quote from: pg04 on December 16, 2015, 12:36:54 PM
Quote from: gordonmann on December 16, 2015, 12:30:20 PM
Wait, we have a D3 team in Montana now? Pat, can you send me there to cover a hoops game? :)
You can cover both home games when Montana Baptist Wesleyan plays Palm Beach International Beach Bible College.
I still think that the perfect road trip for D3football.com to take is the American Southwest Conference game when Belhaven College in Jackson MS goes to Sul Ross State in Alpine TX.
Yeah. I think that's the longest conference road trip that I found. Absolutely horrible. 900 miles. On a bus. That's got to be 14-16 hours each way counting food stops. That alone would have me hoping someone else was recruiting me...
Soooo I don't know much about the respective institutions and their available resources, but I sincerely hope that they are able to find a way to get those poor kids a flight for that game. 900 miles on a bus is ridiculous.
Jackson MS to DFW or Love Field or Hobby Houston or IAH (Houston).
Connect to Midland
Midland to Alpine 162 miles or 2 hours 27 minutes.
Final Poll in...I have Mount Union #1 and St. Thomas #2...then a surprise team at #3 that some may disagree,
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on December 18, 2015, 11:03:22 PM
Final Poll in...I have Mount Union #1 and St. Thomas #2...then a surprise team at #3 that some may disagree,
I'm guessing you mean Wesley. I'm strongly considering them for #4, but they didn't beat anyone as tough as a couple of UWW's wins. (If I've mis-guessed on your #3, as Emily Litella would say: 'never mind'! ;D)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 18, 2015, 11:12:27 PM
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on December 18, 2015, 11:03:22 PM
Final Poll in...I have Mount Union #1 and St. Thomas #2...then a surprise team at #3 that some may disagree,
I'm guessing you mean Wesley. I'm strongly considering them for #4, but they didn't beat anyone as tough as a couple of UWW's wins. (If I've mis-guessed on your #3, as Emily Litella would say: 'never mind'! ;D)
Why not Wesley? Who else made Mount play late into the 4th?
Quote from: wesleydad on December 18, 2015, 11:29:28 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 18, 2015, 11:12:27 PM
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on December 18, 2015, 11:03:22 PM
Final Poll in...I have Mount Union #1 and St. Thomas #2...then a surprise team at #3 that some may disagree,
I'm guessing you mean Wesley. I'm strongly considering them for #4, but they didn't beat anyone as tough as a couple of UWW's wins. (If I've mis-guessed on your #3, as Emily Litella would say: 'never mind'! ;D)
Why not Wesley? Who else made Mount play late into the 4th?
Even if it IS the Stagg Bowl, never get overly fixated on a
single game. UST and UWW (and UWO, Linfield, Wheaton, etc. etc.) did not lose to Salisbury. AND most of them had
wins over better teams than any that Wesley beat.
For me, Wesley Salisbury is a rivalry game (that was played with the conference Pool A bid on the line). Those two have been in the playoffs plenty of times in the decade and a half.
The Salisbury loss was not a big one for me.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 20, 2015, 08:13:44 PM
For me, Wesley Salisbury is a rivalry game (that was played with the conference Pool A bid on the line). Those two have been in the playoffs plenty of times in the decade and a half.
The Salisbury loss was not a big one for me.
Agree 100%, some posters talk about quality wins, UWW and UWO split and UWW beat Wheaton (one Hail Mary away from NCC) and UWO is Ohio Northern (Comparable to Salisbury IMHO). Linfield has the best in my opinion against UMHB, because I think UMHB was better than Linfield. It appears everyone discounts Johns Hopkins because they lose to Wesley/Mount Union every year as for Wesley not having any quality wins.
...and yes, I voted Wesley #3, because of their offense and Wesley having the best player in DIII this year.
Quote from: Schwami on December 16, 2015, 04:15:31 PM
Quote from: jknezek on December 16, 2015, 04:01:31 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 16, 2015, 03:51:54 PM
Quote from: pg04 on December 16, 2015, 12:36:54 PM
Quote from: gordonmann on December 16, 2015, 12:30:20 PM
Wait, we have a D3 team in Montana now? Pat, can you send me there to cover a hoops game? :)
You can cover both home games when Montana Baptist Wesleyan plays Palm Beach International Beach Bible College.
I still think that the perfect road trip for D3football.com to take is the American Southwest Conference game when Belhaven College in Jackson MS goes to Sul Ross State in Alpine TX.
Yeah. I think that's the longest conference road trip that I found. Absolutely horrible. 900 miles. On a bus. That's got to be 14-16 hours each way counting food stops. That alone would have me hoping someone else was recruiting me...
I'm guessing there were a lot of airline flights when the SCAC had Colorado College, Trinity TX, and DePauw --- or some really long bus rides.
With Trinity/Austin rejoining the SAA (for football only) in 2017 some of those lengthy trips will return. Trinity - Berry clocks in at 958 road miles.
Quote from: Ron Boerger on December 21, 2015, 09:09:11 AM
Quote from: Schwami on December 16, 2015, 04:15:31 PM
Quote from: jknezek on December 16, 2015, 04:01:31 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 16, 2015, 03:51:54 PM
Quote from: pg04 on December 16, 2015, 12:36:54 PM
Quote from: gordonmann on December 16, 2015, 12:30:20 PM
Wait, we have a D3 team in Montana now? Pat, can you send me there to cover a hoops game? :)
You can cover both home games when Montana Baptist Wesleyan plays Palm Beach International Beach Bible College.
I still think that the perfect road trip for D3football.com to take is the American Southwest Conference game when Belhaven College in Jackson MS goes to Sul Ross State in Alpine TX.
Yeah. I think that's the longest conference road trip that I found. Absolutely horrible. 900 miles. On a bus. That's got to be 14-16 hours each way counting food stops. That alone would have me hoping someone else was recruiting me...
I'm guessing there were a lot of airline flights when the SCAC had Colorado College, Trinity TX, and DePauw --- or some really long bus rides.
With Trinity/Austin rejoining the SAA (for football only) in 2017 some of those lengthy trips will return. Trinity - Berry clocks in at 958 road miles.
I'm guessing those will mainly be flights. The SAA schools, from my understanding, are a little less budget constrained than the ASC schools. Plus Berry/Trinity as an example is an easy flight. There is no such thing to Alpine TX...
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on December 20, 2015, 09:07:54 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 20, 2015, 08:13:44 PM
For me, Wesley Salisbury is a rivalry game (that was played with the conference Pool A bid on the line). Those two have been in the playoffs plenty of times in the decade and a half.
The Salisbury loss was not a big one for me.
Agree 100%, some posters talk about quality wins, UWW and UWO split and UWW beat Wheaton (one Hail Mary away from NCC) and UWO is Ohio Northern (Comparable to Salisbury IMHO). Linfield has the best in my opinion against UMHB, because I think UMHB was better than Linfield. It appears everyone discounts Johns Hopkins because they lose to Wesley/Mount Union every year as for Wesley not having any quality wins.
...and yes, I voted Wesley #3, because of their offense and Wesley having the best player in DIII this year.
You voted Wesley #3 because of their offense? I think that's a dangerous premise. Their offense was clearly championship quality. I think it was Wesley's lack of defense that kept them from from advancing. You can't be #3 in the nation to me with a porous defense. And characterizing UWO as ONU and Wheaton as a Hail Mary away from NCC really diminishes any credibility your argument may have.
I currently have 6 ballots... still waiting on 2 others as well as hearing back about a team that was left off a ballot. Hopefully everything will be in and I can post it tomorrow night
Quote from: USee on December 21, 2015, 11:04:22 AM
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on December 20, 2015, 09:07:54 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 20, 2015, 08:13:44 PM
For me, Wesley Salisbury is a rivalry game (that was played with the conference Pool A bid on the line). Those two have been in the playoffs plenty of times in the decade and a half.
The Salisbury loss was not a big one for me.
Agree 100%, some posters talk about quality wins, UWW and UWO split and UWW beat Wheaton (one Hail Mary away from NCC) and UWO is Ohio Northern (Comparable to Salisbury IMHO). Linfield has the best in my opinion against UMHB, because I think UMHB was better than Linfield. It appears everyone discounts Johns Hopkins because they lose to Wesley/Mount Union every year as for Wesley not having any quality wins.
...and yes, I voted Wesley #3, because of their offense and Wesley having the best player in DIII this year.
You voted Wesley #3 because of their offense? I think that's a dangerous premise. Their offense was clearly championship quality. I think it was Wesley's lack of defense that kept them from from advancing. You can't be #3 in the nation to me with a porous defense. And characterizing UWO as ONU and Wheaton as a Hail Mary away from NCC really diminishes any credibility your argument may have.
No, since UWO and UWW was a wash, I indicated that their best win was Ohio Northern, which I would compare to Salisbury. As far as Wheaton and NCC, yes, from my perspective, that was a game changing play, which can take a lot of a team. Granted, I'm a big believer in Defense wins Championships, that's why Mount and UST are my clear #1 and #2, respectively. However, looking at the rest, I think that Wesley would outscore them.
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on December 22, 2015, 08:47:21 AM
Quote from: USee on December 21, 2015, 11:04:22 AM
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on December 20, 2015, 09:07:54 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 20, 2015, 08:13:44 PM
For me, Wesley Salisbury is a rivalry game (that was played with the conference Pool A bid on the line). Those two have been in the playoffs plenty of times in the decade and a half.
The Salisbury loss was not a big one for me.
Agree 100%, some posters talk about quality wins, UWW and UWO split and UWW beat Wheaton (one Hail Mary away from NCC) and UWO is Ohio Northern (Comparable to Salisbury IMHO). Linfield has the best in my opinion against UMHB, because I think UMHB was better than Linfield. It appears everyone discounts Johns Hopkins because they lose to Wesley/Mount Union every year as for Wesley not having any quality wins.
...and yes, I voted Wesley #3, because of their offense and Wesley having the best player in DIII this year.
You voted Wesley #3 because of their offense? I think that's a dangerous premise. Their offense was clearly championship quality. I think it was Wesley's lack of defense that kept them from from advancing. You can't be #3 in the nation to me with a porous defense. And characterizing UWO as ONU and Wheaton as a Hail Mary away from NCC really diminishes any credibility your argument may have.
No, since UWO and UWW was a wash, I indicated that their best win was Ohio Northern, which I would compare to Salisbury. As far as Wheaton and NCC, yes, from my perspective, that was a game changing play, which can take a lot of a team. Granted, I'm a big believer in Defense wins Championships, that's why Mount and UST are my clear #1 and #2, respectively. However, looking at the rest, I think that Wesley would outscore them.
There are multiple issues with your (lack of) logic. UWO actually beat UWW during the season. So their best win is NOT Ohio Northern. And you can't compare a WIN over ONU to a LOSS to Salisbury. That's just not credible analysis.
You can compare Wesley to Wheaton via common opponent. You can compare Wesley to UWW via common opponent. You can compare Wesley to St Thomas via common opponent.
I think where the D3football.com voters have them, at #6, is probably where I'd have them. Linfield, UWW, and UWO had the more impressive body of work, which has been described here numerous times.
Quote from: pg04 on December 22, 2015, 11:09:21 AM
I think where the D3football.com voters have them, at #6, is probably where I'd have them. Linfield, UWW, and UWO had the more impressive body of work, which has been described here numerous times.
I can't stand that body of work statement, hopefully yours doesn't involve game control and ESPN FPI metrics... ;D
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on December 22, 2015, 12:08:28 PM
Quote from: pg04 on December 22, 2015, 11:09:21 AM
I think where the D3football.com voters have them, at #6, is probably where I'd have them. Linfield, UWW, and UWO had the more impressive body of work, which has been described here numerous times.
I can't stand that body of work statement, hopefully yours doesn't involve game control and ESPN FPI metrics... ;D
I really shouldn't use the phrase "body of work" because of the negative connotations from the neverending analysis of the FBS playoffs.
Still one ballot waiting to be sent... if any of you see 02 around today be sure to nag to get that ballot in ;D I've sent multiple reminders over the past several days and I will be posting the final standings within 24 hours if I do not hear anything.
Some previews while you wait... top 2 are unanimous selections... 34 teams have been on a ballot and all have received at least 3 total points... 17 teams appear on all 7 ballots I've received... as of right now 4 teams have moved into the top 25
Nothing from 02 today so here is the final poll of the year
2015 FINAL TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev
1) Mount Union (7) 175 T1
2) St Thomas 168 4
3) Linfield 157 T1
4) UW-Whitewater 152 5
5) Wesley 141 11
6) Mary Hardin-Baylor 140 10
7) UW-Oshkosh 135 3
8) Wabash 127 7
9) Wheaton 117 6
10) Thomas More 115 9
11) St John's 104 12
12) Johns Hopkins 101 8
13) Hardin-Simmons 94 13
14) UW-Platteville 82 14
15) North Central 64 16
16) Cortland St 53 NR
17) Texas Lutheran 47 19
18) Washington & Lee 43 15
19) Albright 34 17
20) Wartburg 31 20
T21) Dubuque 28 18
T21) Huntingdon 28 NR
T23) John Carroll 26 NR
T23) Whitworth 26 22
25) Ohio Northern 20 NR
Dropped Out: Salisbury, Guilford, Wittenberg, and St Norbert
Also Receiving Votes: Framingham St (14), Washington & Jefferson (13), Wittenberg (13), Salisbury (6), St Lawrence (6), Guilford (5), Amherst (4), Albion (3), St Norbert (3)
Voters: D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, and thewaterboy
1) Mount Union 175 C ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2) St Thomas 168 F ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3) Linfield 157 SF ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5)
4) UW-Whitewater 152 SF ( 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 7)
5) Wesley 141 QF ( 3, 4, 5, 6, 6, 7, 10)
6) Mary Hardin-Baylor 140 QF ( 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 8)
7) UW-Oshkosh 135 QF ( 4, 5, 6, 6, 8, 9, 9)
8) Wabash 127 QF ( 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 10)
9) Wheaton 117 R2 ( 7, 7, 8, 8, 10, 11, 12)
10) Thomas More 115 R2 ( 8, 8, 9, 10, 10, 11, 11)
11) St John's 104 R2 ( 8, 10, 12, 12, 12, 12, 12)
12) Johns Hopkins 101 R2 (10, 11, 11, 11, 11, 13, 14)
13) Hardin-Simmons 94 R1 ( 9, 12, 13, 13, 13, 13, 15)
14) UW-Platteville 82 NP (13, 14, 14, 14, 14, 15, 16)
15) North Central 64 NP (13, 15, 15, 16, 16, 17, --)
16) Cortland St 53 R2 (15, 15, 15, 17, 21, 23, 23)
17) Texas Lutheran 47 NP (14, 17, 18, 19, 20, 23, 24)
18) Wash & Lee 43 R1 (17, 17, 18, 20, 21, 21, 25)
19) Albright 34 R2 (16, 16, 19, 21, 24, --, --)
20) Wartburg 31 NP (16, 18, 21, 21, 24, 25, --)
T21) Dubuque 28 R1 (19, 19, 20, 20, 24, --, --)
T21) Huntingdon 28 R2 (18, 19, 20, 22, 23, --, --)
T23) John Carroll 26 NP (16, 18, 22, 24, 25, 25, --)
T23) Whitworth 26 R1 (18, 18, 19, 23, --, --, --)
25) Ohio Northern 20 R2 (19, 20, 21, 24, --, --, --)
26) Framingham St 14 R1 (14, 24)
T27) Wash & Jeff 13 NP (17, 22)
T27) Wittenberg 13 NP (17, 22)
T29) Salisbury 6 R1 (22, 25, 25)
T29) St Lawrence 6 R1 (20)
31) Guilford 5 NP (22, 25)
32) Amherst 4 NP (22)
T33) Albion 3 R1 (23)
T33) St Norbert 3 R1 (23)
If you'll have me, I'll jump in next year again. My project at work has been delayed due to a vendor issue - but I think it SHOULD be wrapped up by July...
Quote from: smedindy on December 26, 2015, 04:23:49 PM
If you'll have me, I'll jump in next year again. My project at work has been delayed due to a vendor issue - but I think it SHOULD be wrapped up by July...
Hey, if they allow me to vote year after year, why wouldn't they take you?! ;D
Whats the rationale for putting Wesley at 10 on one voters poll? I had them at 4 on mine.
Quote from: thewaterboy on December 27, 2015, 02:49:50 AM
Whats the rationale for putting Wesley at 10 on one voters poll? I had them at 4 on mine.
10 makes a lot more sense than 4, IMO.
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 28, 2015, 11:17:15 AM
Quote from: thewaterboy on December 27, 2015, 02:49:50 AM
Whats the rationale for putting Wesley at 10 on one voters poll? I had them at 4 on mine.
10 makes a lot more sense than 4, IMO.
Then you stand alone among voters. Since every other voter put Wesley within 3 spots of #4, while only 1 voter put Wesley within 3 spots of #10. Personally I don't get the reasoning for 10 either, as you'd need Wabash, Wheaton and TMC to jump Wesley. I just don't see that given two of the three were easily handled by teams that UMU easily handled. There just isn't cause to jump them above Wesley.
Not that Wesley's game against UMU was great, but at least in the second half there was a point where it looked like it could go their way. You just can't say that about UWW or STU, and those two easily handled Wabash and Wheaton.
Wesley's other loss isn't great, but it was to a playoff team and one that is RV in the final poll. They also do have a win at #12 JHU and at #16 NCC, plus RV Framingham. Wabash's poll quality win is home against #10 TMC and RV Albion, so nothing more or less than comparable to what Wesley has. Wheaton's road win over NCC was one score, as was Wesley's.
Anyway, I think Wesley landed about where they should within a spot or two. I don't see anyone too out of place, though I think TLU is making a full calendar year living off their ridiculously disjointed playoff game against UMHB last year.
Quote from: jknezek on December 28, 2015, 11:44:41 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 28, 2015, 11:17:15 AM
Quote from: thewaterboy on December 27, 2015, 02:49:50 AM
Whats the rationale for putting Wesley at 10 on one voters poll? I had them at 4 on mine.
10 makes a lot more sense than 4, IMO.
Then you stand alone among voters. Since every other voter put Wesley within 3 spots of #4, while only 1 voter put Wesley within 3 spots of #10. Personally I don't get the reasoning for 10 either, as you'd need Wabash, Wheaton and TMC to jump Wesley. I just don't see that given two of the three were easily handled by teams that UMU easily handled. There just isn't cause to jump them above Wesley.
Definitely understand that I'm not in the majority Re: Wesley. But when we started this whole crazy thing called the playoffs, Wesley was ranked behind Wabash, Wheaton, and TMC, so it was Wesley who jumped, not the others. Why did Wesley jump? Because of 56-35 vs. Mount Union? I really can't believe the amount of
credit that Wesley is getting from that result. That's the part that doesn't make any sense to me. I don't understand how giving up 50+ and losing by 3 TDs is a positive and I really don't understand how it is such a net positive, that it outweighs a bad loss (by top 10 standards), a season's worth of pretty average defensive play, and a couple of other dicey results tossed into their 2015 schedule. I'm not saying I would have placed Wesley at #10, but I am saying that 10 is closer to what they earned than 4 and I don't think that's really a close call.
Quote from: jknezek on December 28, 2015, 11:44:41 AM
Not that Wesley's game against UMU was great, but at least in the second half there was a point where it looked like it could go their way. You just can't say that about UWW or STU, and those two easily handled Wabash and Wheaton.
Hmm. I think St. Thomas was much more in their game against Mount Union than Wesley ever was. St. Thomas did lead in the second half for a hot minute. Wesley spotted the Raiders 21 points (should have been 28) in the first quarter and were chasing the entire way. At best it's a push, but personally I think it's a stretch to say Wesley was just as in it as St. Thomas was. Either way, the ice starts to get really thin when you start talking about Team A was closer to Team B than Team C who really laid it on Team D so Team A > Team D. That's not a real strong connection. And amongst these teams, we have 10+ other games to look at and help guide us. It's a point I've made elsewhere before, but we put way too much emphasis on a single playoff result in the final rankings almost to the point of completely ignoring the other three months of the season.
Quote from: jknezek on December 28, 2015, 11:44:41 AM
Wesley's other loss isn't great, but it was to a playoff team and one that is RV in the final poll. They also do have a win at #12 JHU and at #16 NCC, plus RV Framingham. Wabash's poll quality win is home against #10 TMC and RV Albion, so nothing more or less than comparable to what Wesley has. Wheaton's road win over NCC was one score, as was Wesley's.
Salisbury...meh. They're ranked or receiving votes because they beat Wesley. Nothing else. So it's confirmation bias. How much better is Salisbury than say Wittenberg or DePauw? I'm not sure there's a huge difference. But Wittenberg and DePauw don't show up in the poll and Salisbury does because NJAC > NCAC and the poll loves its confirmation bias.
STU was in the game in the second half a bit. I will say watching that game after the first half I never thought STU would win. There was a brief moment in Wesley's second half where I thought they could. They didn't, obviously, and it got farther out of hand, but it was there in my mind.
Regardless, STU is ahead of Wesley, as they should be. The question is why should Wabash be in front of Wesley? Because they beat TMC at home? Or because they played excellent defense against mediocre teams and then got throttled by an excellent team? Wabash was never in the game versus STU. How far up the standings do you want to be when you are losing a game by 5 TDs until the dogs are called off?
I'm more than willing to concede that Wabash had an excellent defense. I don't think their offense was all that great, but the defense was excellent. I'm also not going out on a limb to say Wesley had an excellent offense. I don't think their defense was all that great, but the offense was excellent.
So given each had an excellent unit, Wesley lost to the champion by 21, and beat two top 20 opponents on the road, I like the way that stacks up against a team that got buried by a not quite touching distance runner up by 31 and beat one top 20 program at home, in overtime.
Another data point in this discussion is the Wesley/Wheaton common opponent. Wheaton beat NCC 18-9 @ NCC and Wesley beat NCC 50-49 on the same field. It's not hard to see Wesley is closer to Wheaton, Wabash, TMC than it is to UMU/St Thomas. They had a seriously deficient defense that kept them from the top 4. I agree with Wally that Wesley is closer to 10 than they are to 4.
Quote from: USee on December 28, 2015, 12:47:23 PM
Another data point in this discussion is the Wesley/Wheaton common opponent. Wheaton beat NCC 18-9 @ NCC and Wesley beat NCC 50-49 on the same field. It's not hard to see Wesley is closer to Wheaton, Wabash, TMC than it is to UMU/St Thomas. They had a seriously deficient defense that kept them from the top 4. I agree with Wally that Wesley is closer to 10 than they are to 4.
it was 17-9. So it was a 1 score game, as was Wesley's. It's just as easy to say Wheaton had a seriously deficient offense. To push Wesley down who do you want to move up? UWO or UMHB? I could see pushing UWO up, but UMHB also has that regular season loss and a loss to a team that couldn't stay within 2 TDs of the runner-up. I agree we are splitting hairs, but you've got to split them somewhere at this level.
I think Wesley had one of the best offenses in the country. NCC gave up 50 to Wesley, the next biggest was UWP at 35. Only Cortland put more points on Framingham St. They dropped 42 on JHU, no one else put more than 28. They put 35 on UMU. Only STU put up anything close to that.
I just have a hard time finding anyone else with a resume significantly better that falls behind Wesley.
Quote from: jknezek on December 28, 2015, 12:40:20 PM
So given each had an excellent unit, Wesley lost to the champion by 21, and beat two top 20 opponents on the road, I like the way that stacks up against a team that got buried by a not quite touching distance runner up by 31 and beat one top 20 program at home, in overtime.
There's that extra degree of separation again. That's just a really, really thin string of logic here that unfortunately gets way too much emphasis after the tournament. We could deep dive into how Wabash's game vs. UST wasn't as bad as it looked (and I can do it with quasi-common opponents!) and how Wesley's game vs. UMU wasn't as good as it looked (and I'm still in shock that so many people believe that was at all good), but we don't need to do that. There's an entire season's worth of games and data from which to draw conclusions about Wesley and Wabash and Thomas More and whoever else without having the whole thing hinge on the margin of victory in the Mount Union vs. St. Thomas game. I mean seriously- say it out loud. Wesley is better than Wabash because Mount Union beat St. Thomas by a lot. It doesn't make any sense. And I'm not here to shill for Wabash over Wesley (I believe they earned a higher ranking, but whatever). That's not what I was getting at. My point here was that Wesley didn't earn #4. You can only get to that number by blocking out a lot of things that happened to Wesley in 2015.
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 28, 2015, 01:20:31 PM
Quote from: jknezek on December 28, 2015, 12:40:20 PM
So given each had an excellent unit, Wesley lost to the champion by 21, and beat two top 20 opponents on the road, I like the way that stacks up against a team that got buried by a not quite touching distance runner up by 31 and beat one top 20 program at home, in overtime.
There's that extra degree of separation again. That's just a really, really thin string of logic here that unfortunately gets way too much emphasis after the tournament. We could deep dive into how Wabash's game vs. UST wasn't as bad as it looked (and I can do it with quasi-common opponents!) and how Wesley's game vs. UMU wasn't as good as it looked (and I'm still in shock that so many people believe that was at all good), but we don't need to do that. There's an entire season's worth of games and data from which to draw conclusions about Wesley and Wabash and Thomas More and whoever else without having the whole thing hinge on the margin of victory in the Mount Union vs. St. Thomas game. I mean seriously- say it out loud. Wesley is better than Wabash because Mount Union beat St. Thomas by a lot. It doesn't make any sense. And I'm not here to shill for Wabash over Wesley (I believe they earned a higher ranking, but whatever). That's not what I was getting at. My point here was that Wesley didn't earn #4. You can only get to that number by blocking out a lot of things that happened to Wesley in 2015.
Only a Wabash fan could say this. You had 73 yards of offense in the first half and 6 punts and were down 17-0. You averaged 12 yards per possession. Even still, I'll give you the defense held you in some hope despite giving up a 98 yard, 15 play drive, but any way you look at it, that first half was a dominating performance by STU. The second half started with a Wabash missed field goal, a fumble, then Wabash gave up onside kick recovery, and then two punts to close out the third quarter. So special teams failed twice, offense failed twice, and defense failed to stop STU (3 straight STU scoring drives). 38-0. Every facet of the game was beaten in those three quarters and the game was over before you got 130 yards of offense. It was every bit as bad as it looked.
As for the rest, yes and no. I like them better at 5 than at 4. I think UWO probably should move up a slot. But I can't really find a reason to push UMHB, Wabash, Wheaton or TMC ahead of Wesley. But it is all really thin comparisons at this point.
Quote from: jknezek on December 28, 2015, 01:40:59 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 28, 2015, 01:20:31 PM
Quote from: jknezek on December 28, 2015, 12:40:20 PM
So given each had an excellent unit, Wesley lost to the champion by 21, and beat two top 20 opponents on the road, I like the way that stacks up against a team that got buried by a not quite touching distance runner up by 31 and beat one top 20 program at home, in overtime.
There's that extra degree of separation again. That's just a really, really thin string of logic here that unfortunately gets way too much emphasis after the tournament. We could deep dive into how Wabash's game vs. UST wasn't as bad as it looked (and I can do it with quasi-common opponents!) and how Wesley's game vs. UMU wasn't as good as it looked (and I'm still in shock that so many people believe that was at all good), but we don't need to do that. There's an entire season's worth of games and data from which to draw conclusions about Wesley and Wabash and Thomas More and whoever else without having the whole thing hinge on the margin of victory in the Mount Union vs. St. Thomas game. I mean seriously- say it out loud. Wesley is better than Wabash because Mount Union beat St. Thomas by a lot. It doesn't make any sense. And I'm not here to shill for Wabash over Wesley (I believe they earned a higher ranking, but whatever). That's not what I was getting at. My point here was that Wesley didn't earn #4. You can only get to that number by blocking out a lot of things that happened to Wesley in 2015.
Only a Wabash fan could say this. You had 73 yards of offense in the first half and 6 punts and were down 17-0. You averaged 12 yards per possession. Even still, I'll give you the defense held you in some hope despite giving up a 98 yard, 15 play drive, but any way you look at it, that first half was a dominating performance by STU. The second half started with a Wabash missed field goal, a fumble, then Wabash gave up onside kick recovery, and then two punts to close out the third quarter. So special teams failed twice, offense failed twice, and defense failed to stop STU (3 straight STU scoring drives). 38-0. Every facet of the game was beaten in those three quarters and the game was over before you got 130 yards of offense. It was every bit as bad as it looked.
As for the rest, yes and no. I like them better at 5 than at 4. I think UWO probably should move up a slot. But I can't really find a reason to push UMHB, Wabash, Wheaton or TMC ahead of Wesley. But it is all really thin comparisons at this point.
This is when I hate that Wabash intersects with this area of the poll because any points I make about why Wabash should or shouldn't get ranked somewhere gets dismissed because of my screen name. Oh well.
So your version of events is one way to have seen Wabash vs. UST. Here's what I saw:
- LGs struggled to go on offense in the first half (as you noted). St. Thomas has an excellent defense, unless we're going to dismiss them also because they gave up a lot of points to Mount Union. Frauds? I don't think so, but I also don't judge teams based completely on their last game of the year, which is definitely happening in here.
- Opening drive of the second half Wabash scores a touchdown! Going to be 17-7 and we've got a ballgame...except holding. No score. Wabash's offense leaves the field to a field goal attempt- missed. Bummer.
- Wabash holds and forces a UST punt...but the punt is fumbled. UST ball in the red zone. Wabash holds UST to zero yards on three plays and forces a field goal...which Dowdle runs in on a fake. Touchdown UST. 24-0.
- Wabash gave away 15 yards after that fake field goal which put UST in prime position to onside kick, which they did and they recovered. Another short field and another score and the game gets to 31-0 just like that.
The game went from 17-7 to 31-0...in about 8 game minutes that included not one but two Wabash defensive stops and without Wabash's offense (who seemed to have figured something out there at halftime) ever touching the ball. The thing just imploded after that hold took the touchdown away and even at 17-0, there was optimism based on that opening third quarter drive, but 8 minutes later and down 31, it was done. But we shouldn't pretend that Wabash just got run over in that game. The score margin was large, yes. But Wabash didn't get run over. Linfield got run over. Mount Union even had more trouble with Roberts and Kaiser and that great OL than Wabash did.
What does it all mean? Nothing to most people. I just think it would be fair to take those same gymnastics that people are doing to not only convince themselves that Wesley didn't get blown out by Mount Union, but that they should actually get extra credit for losing 56-35, and apply them to games like Wabash vs. UST which might be more layered than the final score indicates.
In any case, I've accepted that this is where Wabash tops out until they get through to the semis. I just don't see where it's obvious that Wesley ought to be ranked higher than Wabash (or Thomas More or Wheaton). The only thing Wesley really did in 2015 that those teams didn't do is lose to a team they shouldn't have lost to- and that should count for a lot more than it is.
Part of why it gets disregarded is because anyone who watched that game without Wabash glasses on is going to laugh. You can't look at all those things you pointed out and say "well if we hadn't made 5 mistakes in a row, our special teams hadn't blown a field goal and a kickoff coverage, and if our defense hadn't given up scores, we would have been right there! Right there I tell you! We had it figured out on offense despite 6 punts in the first half and 3 plus a turnover on downs in the second!"
That's just Wabash tinted glasses. You got run over because you couldn't move the ball on offense, couldn't stop them on defense, couldn't stop making mistakes, and failed on special teams. What else is there to football? You had 1 drive, 1, against their first team defense and all of a sudden you've "figured it out"? The next time you got on the field on offense you went 11 yards in 5 plays and punted. Then 3 and out for 7 yards. Not exactly "figured it out territory."
There are three phases to football, and STU hammered Wabash in each one of them. That is the definition of getting run over. Final score was just confirmation of what happened.
STU was an excellent team. Second best in the country and while I really believe there is a lot of separation between 1 and 2 this year, it is nothing compared to the step down after STU. I think 3-8 are probably splitting hairs, though Linfield and UWW probably top it. I do get the argument after that, but I have no problem with the way it shook out. If Wabash can rest its laurels on an excellent defense, Wesley can rest theirs on an excellent offense. Both were rewarded in the polls.
The game went from 17-7 to 31-0...in about 8 game minutes that included not one but two Wabash defensive stops and without Wabash's offense (who seemed to have figured something out there at halftime) ever touching the ball. The thing just imploded after that hold took the touchdown away and even at 17-0, there was optimism based on that opening third quarter drive, but 8 minutes later and down 31, it was done. But we shouldn't pretend that Wabash just got run over in that game. The score margin was large, yes. But Wabash didn't get run over. Linfield got run over. Mount Union even had more trouble with Roberts and Kaiser and that great OL than Wabash did.
Wally, this looks a lot like the Wesley game with Mount. 28 - 14 with 6 mins to go in second quarter and then stuff happens and it is 49 - 14. The only difference is that Wesley got to within 49 - 35 with the ball inside the 15 with 8 mins to go in the game. They don't score and Nemeth goes 70+ yards for the last score and the 21 point difference. Yes, the game was much closer than the final score. The entire game as well as the entire season should be cosidered. Wesley has issues, should they be 4 or 10? I would go with closer to 4 than 10 and my opinion is always questioned based on my moniker. You have always been honest and I don't think anyone who has been on here for some time questions your logic because of the name you use. You are highly respected by those who have a clue. On another note, I am surprised by the love that Linfield is getting at 3.
Quote from: wesleydad on December 28, 2015, 03:46:12 PM
On another note, I am surprised by the love that Linfield is getting at 3.
Teams have to go somewhere. Someone has to be 3 through 10. Yes Linfield got a bit crunched by STU, but UWW got crunched by UMU and has an (avenged) loss, UWO got beat by a team that got crunched, Wesley got a bit crunched and has an ugly loss, UMHB got beat by a team that got a bit crunched and has a middling loss, Wabash got crunched, Wheaton got beat by a team that got crunched. At this point we are just out of options.
Someone has to be 3-10! You guys can wonder about the love for each team however you want, but you can't just leave a hole and skip it! Who else do you put 3, 4, 5?
Quote from: jknezek on December 28, 2015, 03:38:55 PM
Part of why it gets disregarded is because anyone who watched that game without Wabash glasses on is going to laugh. You can't look at all those things you pointed out and say "well if we hadn't made 5 mistakes in a row, our special teams hadn't blown a field goal and a kickoff coverage, and if our defense hadn't given up scores, we would have been right there! Right there I tell you! We had it figured out on offense despite 6 punts in the first half and 3 plus a turnover on downs in the second!"
That's just Wabash tinted glasses. You got run over because you couldn't move the ball on offense, couldn't stop them on defense, couldn't stop making mistakes, and failed on special teams. What else is there to football? You had 1 drive, 1, against their first team defense and all of a sudden you've "figured it out"? The next time you got on the field on offense you went 11 yards in 5 plays and punted. Then 3 and out for 7 yards. Not exactly "figured it out territory."
We shouldn't pretend that the game is the same after that sequence of events that took the story from Wabash losing a touchdown that gets the game down to 10 points with 25 minutes left to play to Wabash getting the ball back 8 minutes later down by 31 points. That's not realistic and you know that.
I'm definitely not hiding from the special teams apocalypse that befell the Little Giants on that afternoon. Give up punt return TDs, give up fake FGs, fumble punts, don't recover an onsides kick...that's a list of things that might happen to a team collectively once in an entire season. Wabash did it all in one game, most of it in the defining stretch of the game. Whether the offense was full go or not, you really can't overcome all of that and win against a great team. But that's how a game between physically competitive teams gets out of hand. The mismatch wasn't the way you're describing it. The game result was ugly, no doubt. Can't hide from that. But after watching UST vs. Linfield and UST vs. Mount Union and seeing the way UST ran through those two teams, my head is held way high. Would love to get some do overs on special teams, but in no way did I come away from that game with UST thinking Wabash wasn't playing the same game.
Quote from: jknezek on December 28, 2015, 03:38:55 PM
There are three phases to football, and STU hammered Wabash in each one of them. That is the definition of getting run over. Final score was just confirmation of what happened.
STU was an excellent team. Second best in the country and while I really believe there is a lot of separation between 1 and 2 this year, it is nothing compared to the step down after STU. I think 3-8 are probably splitting hairs, though Linfield and UWW probably top it. I do get the argument after that, but I have no problem with the way it shook out. If Wabash can rest its laurels on an excellent defense, Wesley can rest theirs on an excellent offense. Both were rewarded in the polls.
I knew I should have just left this one alone. I NEVER play the "if you don't count these three plays it was a close game" thing. I hate that. I engaged this one time in order to point out that you can run the same exercise for Wabash that you've run to find that Wesley was in a game with Mount Union. I'm a blind homer; Wesley is the fourth best team in D3. Shame on me for playing along. I knew better and I did it anyway.
But since I'm in this spot, I'll go ahead and hang on to my point here though that you're doing the exact same gymnastics I just did in trying to convince me or anybody else that Wesley was right there in a game where the score was 49 to whatever. Top 4 teams don't give up 49. And they definitely don't do it twice in the same season. And they don't lose to Salisbury. You want to stack everything up here in a way that says Wesley losing 56-35 is not just not a bad result, but is an honest-to-God-
achievement and makes them obviously better than Wabash or Thomas More or Wheaton or UMHB or even St. John's, then fine. Wesley has that kind of benefit of the doubt capital I guess.
Quote from: wesleydad on December 28, 2015, 03:46:12 PM
Wally, this looks a lot like the Wesley game with Mount. 28 - 14 with 6 mins to go in second quarter and then stuff happens and it is 49 - 14. The only difference is that Wesley got to within 49 - 35 with the ball inside the 15 with 8 mins to go in the game. They don't score and Nemeth goes 70+ yards for the last score and the 21 point difference. Yes, the game was much closer than the final score. The entire game as well as the entire season should be cosidered. Wesley has issues, should they be 4 or 10? I would go with closer to 4 than 10 and my opinion is always questioned based on my moniker. You have always been honest and I don't think anyone who has been on here for some time questions your logic because of the name you use. You are highly respected by those who have a clue. On another note, I am surprised by the love that Linfield is getting at 3.
Appreciate the sentiment, WD. I think we can both fairly look at our respective quarterfinal games and see positives and see the moments in the games where things turned irreversibly for the worse. It happens against the great teams. A couple of mistakes and a score gets away in a hurry.
Linfield also gets a little bit of a mulligan for the UST game because they were without their stud QB.
I have no dog in this fight, and maybe I'm tainted as a Mount guy looking at the D3 world as "win the Stagg or the season is a failure", but I find the heated arguments over the rankings to be a little odd. Especially when the rankings mean absolutely NOTHING when it comes to D3. It isn't like the BCS era in D1 where pre-season rankings were hugely important as they set you up for the year and how you finished last year had a huge impact on where you started the next season.
In my mind the top is pretty clear:
1. Mount
2. UST
3. Linfield (if healthy)
4. UWW
After that is gets questionable as all the teams have flaws. If I had to put the next bunch in order:
5. Oshkosh. UWO and UWW were essentially a toss-up. Twice. Which team is really better? UWW because of experience and winning when it mattered most. Therefore Oshkosh clearly gets slotted right behind the elite 4.
6. MHB. Had Linfield beat but once again couldn't close the deal. How many more times do we have to see this play out for MHB before the D3 nation see them as a supremely talented but terribly undisciplined bunch that finds ways to lose? MHB also had a better regular season loss than Welsey had too.
7. Wesley had a great QB but absolutely no defense. Yes, they made a nice comeback against Mount but they weren't ever a challenge for the Mount offense. If Wesley would have been more efficient early in the game all I see as different is Mount is pushed to score in the 60+ range. Either way, Mount was easily 21+ points better than Wesley regardless of how many times that games plays out in my head. I can't see them stopping the power run games of UST or UWW either. And that defense would have been lit up by a healthy Linfield.
8. Wheaton is a very solid team that gets tested in the CCIW much more than Wabash does in the NCAC and has been more consistent.
9. Wabash plays in a historically weak conference that slants their stats, but they had an excellent defense with a solid, but a limited offense when facing someone bigger/stronger. Not enough athletes to compensate for disparity up front against the elite. Probably very similar to many of the best East Region teams over the years like SJF. Very good team that is consistently improving, but not elite yet. Probably won't ever be truly elite though. I think they're close to peaking much like Wheaton has seemed to have done.
If we didn't talk about things that don't really matter in the grand scheme of things, what else would be left to talk about for, you know, the great majority of posters here? ;D
^ very true.
I guess what I meant was that the vigor by which the arguments were made was the biggest surprise to me. Though I guess I shouldn't have been. That could have been me in 1994 when Mount lost 34-33 at the eventual national champ's house in round 2. Guess 20+ years of Larry Kehres changes ones perspective.
Now back to your regularly scheduled discussion.....
Before the playoffs my top 10 was: Linfield, Mount Union, St Thomas, UW-Oshkosh, Wabash, UW-Whitewater, Thomas More, Wheaton, Wesley, Mary Hardin-Baylor
After the playoffs it was: Mount Union, St Thomas, Linfield, UW-Whitewater, UW-Oshkosh, Mary Hardin-Baylor, Wabash, Thomas More, Wheaton, Wesley.
Mount and St Thomas moved ahead of Linfield. UWW jumped up 2 knocking UWO down. UMHB jumped up 4 which pushed Wabash down 2 and Thomas More, Wheaton and Wesley all down 1.
I will point out that except for Wesley, I was not an outlier for anyone in the top 10. And there were 6 different teams that were ranked higher than Wesley on at least 2 ballots.
Don't forget Wesley had a loss not just to #1 but also a second loss to an unranked (on my ballot) Salisbury. Wabash's only loss was to #2, Thomas More's only loss was in OT to #7, Wheaton's only loss was to #4. Wesley's best wins were Johns Hopkins by 5 and North Central by 1. Is that enough to make up for the extra loss?
FWIW, my final ballot was: UMU, UST, UWW, UWO, Linfield, Wesley, Wheaton, UMHB, Wabash, TM. In retrospect, I would probably flip Wesley and Wheaton (Wheaton did not have a second loss, and beat NCC by a TD more than Wesley did).
From the year in review Ryan Tipps (Wabash Alum) posted his final poll for D3.com
Final poll
1. Mount Union
2. St. Thomas
3. Linfield
4. UW-Whitewater
5. UW-Oshkosh
6. Mary Hardin-Baylor
7. Wheaton
8. Wesley
9. Hardin-Simmons
10. Wabash
11. Thomas More
12. UW-Platteville
13. St. John's
14. Johns Hopkins
15. North Central
16. Cortland State
17. Albright
18. Whitworth
19. Salisbury
20. Texas Lutheran
21. Washington and Lee
22. Dubuque
23. Ohio Northern
24. St. Lawrence
25. Huntingdon
In general I have no big issues with Ryan's Top 25, and I know how the polling works and that it's really hard to get a read cross conferences, but John Carroll was a LOT better than the St Lawrence team that Mount played in the opening round. Not that it matters in the big scheme of D3 though.
Quote from: HScoach on December 30, 2015, 05:27:01 PM
In general I have no big issues with Ryan's Top 25, and I know how the polling works and that it's really hard to get a read cross conferences, but John Carroll was a LOT better than the St Lawrence team that Mount played in the opening round. Not that it matters in the big scheme of D3 though.
I couldn't agree more. I don't even see the logic honestly. St. Lawrence finished with the same amount of regular season losses, including one to 6-4 Morrisville State. JCU lost to the eventual champion in a game that was actually close at half, and in the last minutes to a second round playoff team. I think the problem is that ONU is too low in this poll, and because they beat JCU, he probably didn't want JCU too close to ONU. Either that or SLU gets an advantage for making the playoffs. But with that logic, maybe Norwich and LaVerne should be ranked........
Are you ready for some football?!
If you're interested in being part of the Fan Poll this year just send me a PM. Ballots are due by Tuesday during the season. If you need extra time or know you won't be able to get a ballot in that particular week please let me know as soon as you can. The earlier you submit a ballot the more time I'll have to check it and make sure you didn't make any errors or forget a team (and there's usually one every couple weeks that needs revised).
If you're in the south or east regions I strongly hope you'll join. There's usually a low turnout from those areas.
Preseason ballots are due one week from today on Monday August 29th which will give time for people to study Kickoff which comes out tomorrow.
There's still time to participate in this year's poll. 8-)
If you're interested in being a part of the most prestigious fan poll in all of D3 football, send me your ballot in the next 24 hours. A new poll every week until the start of the playoffs and one final poll after the Stagg Bowl.
Last chance to join if you're going to. I'm waiting on just one more ballot that I know of. Currently we're up to 9 voters this season :)
2016 PRESEASON TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank Team Points Prev Rank
1) Mount Union (7) 198 1
2) Linfield (1) 189 3
3) St Thomas 184 2
4) UW-Whitewater 175 4
5) Mary Hardin-Baylor 167 6
6) UW-Oshkosh 157 7
7) Wesley 150 5
8) St John's 140 11
9) Wheaton 135 9
10) UW-Platteville 117 14
11) North Central 106 15
12) Johns Hopkins 104 12
T13) Thomas More 101 10
T13) Wabash 101 8
15) Hardin-Simmons 99 13
16) John Carroll 75 T23
17) Cortland 62 16
18) Albright 44 19
T19) Washington & Lee 38 18
T19) Whitworth 38 T23
21) Texas Lutheran 36 17
22) Ohio Northern 30 25
23) Delaware Valley 15 NR
T24) Bethel 13 NR
T24) Salisbury 13 NR
Dropped Out: Wartburg, Dubuque, Huntingdon
Also Receiving Votes: UW-Stevens Point (12), DePauw (11), Washington & Jefferson (11), Wartburg (10), Illinois Wesleyan (9), Stevenson (8), Wittenberg (8), Augustana (6), Dubuque (6), St John Fisher (6), Huntingdon (5), Framingham St (4), Heidelberg (4), Case Western Reserve (3), Hobart (3), Widener (3), Claremont-Mudd-Scripps (2), Franklin (1), Monmouth (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HansenRatings, HSCTiger74, NCF and smedindy
Still waiting to hear from one person. Poll will be up in the next 24 hours. I'll include the individual positions this week as well.
2016 WEEK 1 TOP 25 FAN POLL
1) Mount Union (7) 222 1
2) Linfield (1) 211 2
3) UW-Whitewater (1) 204 4
4) St Thomas 202 3
5) Mary Hardin-Baylor 191 5
6) UW-Oshkosh 182 6
7) St John's 166 8
8) Wheaton 157 9
9) UW-Platteville 147 10
10) North Central 142 11
11) Johns Hopkins 134 12
12) Hardin-Simmons 123 15
13) Wabash 109 T13
14) Delaware Valley 93 23
15) Cortland 81 17
16) Wesley 80 7
17) Salisbury 64 T24
18) Franklin 62 NR
19) Ohio Northern 48 22
20) E Texas Baptist 42 NR
21) Thomas More 40 T13
T22) John Carroll 33 16
T22) St John Fisher 33 NR
24) Huntingdon 18 NR
T25) UW-Stevens Point 15 NR
T25) Wartburg 15 NR
Dropped Out: Albright, Washington & Lee, Whitworth, Texas Lutheran, Bethel
Also Receiving Votes: Washington & Jefferson (14), DePauw (13), Dubuque (12), Wittenberg (10), Monmouth (9), Central (8), Hobart (8), Illinois Wesleyan (8), Washington & Lee (7), Albion (5), Case Western Reserve (5), Stevenson (5), Augustana (3), Framingham St (3), Rowan (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HansenRatings, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF and smedindy
1) Mount Union 222 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 3)
2) Linfield 211 ( 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 4, 6)
3) UW-Whitewater 204 ( 1, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 6)
4) St Thomas 202 ( 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5)
5) Mary Hardin-Baylor 191 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 7)
6) UW-Oshkosh 182 ( 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 8)
7) St John's 166 ( 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 10)
8) Wheaton 157 ( 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 14)
9) UW-Platteville 147 ( 7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10, 11, 11, 13)
10) North Central 142 ( 7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 12, 12, 12, 14)
11) Johns Hopkins 134 (10, 10, 10, 10, 11, 11, 11, 12, 15)
12) Hardin-Simmons 123 ( 8, 10, 10, 11, 11, 12, 14, 15, 20)
13) Wabash 109 (12, 13, 13, 13, 13, 13, 14, 15, 19)
14) Delaware Valley 93 (11, 13, 14, 14, 15, 15, 16, 17, --)
15) Cortland 81 (12, 14, 15, 15, 17, 18, 18, 18, --)
16) Wesley 80 (12, 14, 16, 17, 17, 18, 18, 20, 22)
17) Salisbury 64 (13, 16, 16, 17, 17, 20, 22, 23, --)
18) Franklin 62 (12, 16, 16, 16, 19, 20, 23, 24, --)
19) Ohio Northern 48 (14, 15, 17, 20, 21, 22, 25, --, --)
20) E Texas Baptist 42 (13, 19, 19, 21, 21, 23, 24, --, --)
21) Thomas More 40 (16, 17, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, --, --)
T22) John Carroll 33 (10, 20, 20, 23, 24, --, --, --, --)
T22) St John Fisher 33 (16, 18, 19, 23, 24, 24, 25, --, --)
24) Huntingdon 18 (18, 20, 22, --, --, --, --, --, --)
T25) UW-Stevens Point 15 (11, --, --, --, --, --, --, --, --)
T25) Wartburg 15 (20, 21, 22, --, --, --, --, --, --)
27) Wash & Jeff 14 (19, 22, 24, 25)
28) DePauw 13 (15, 24)
29) Dubuque 12 (18, 23, 25)
30) Wittenberg 10 (17, 25)
31) Monmouth 9 (21, 22)
T32) Central 8 (21, 24, 25)
T32) Hobart 8 (19, 25)
T32) Illinois Wesleyan 8 (18)
35) Wash & Lee 7 (19)
T36) Albion 5 (21)
T36) Case Western 5 (22, 25)
T36) Stevenson 5 (21)
T39) Augustana 3 (23)
T39) Framingham St 3 (23)
41) Rowan 1 (25)
OOH - I'm curious as all get out to know who gave IWU all their points! (Despite being the 'Bleeds Green' Guy, it wasn't me. IF they beat NCC on the 17th, they'll be there, but not yet. ;))
Another striking anomaly was UWSP being named by only one voter, but as #ELEVEN! Since Saturday's opponent (Albion) gave Wabash a huge scare, they just might have a chance to justify the ranking this week.
Mr. Y,
NOT I " said the little red hen"... ;D UWSP was not even on my list. :'( Maybe it was the same voter who had Linfield at 6 , and UMHB at 7. :o UMHB 1st in D(0) , 2nd in 0 (56). :-*
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 07, 2016, 11:38:22 PM
OOH - I'm curious as all get out to know who gave IWU all their points! (Despite being the 'Bleeds Green' Guy, it wasn't me. IF they beat NCC on the 17th, they'll be there, but not yet. ;))
Another striking anomaly was UWSP being named by only one voter, but as #ELEVEN! Since Saturday's opponent (Albion) gave Wabash a huge scare, they just might have a chance to justify the ranking this week.
No secret I'm a big WIAC fan. However, that #11 UWSP vote didn't come from me. Even if they beat Albion on Saturday, UWSP still won't sniff my top 25. They will probably have to beat a UWW, UWO or UWP to crack the poll in my mind.
loganahansen21.wixsite.com/hansen-ratings (http://loganahansen21.wixsite.com/hansen-ratings)
:P
I had a long labor day weekend. Once I see some more game results I'll get more subjective.
2016 WEEK 2 TOP 25 FAN POLL
# School Pts Prev
1) Mount Union (7) 220 1
2) Linfield (2) 212 2
3) St Thomas 205 4
4) UW-Whitewater 204 3
5) Mary Hardin-Baylor 190 5
6) UW-Oshkosh 181 6
7) St John's 166 7
8) Wheaton 161 8
9) UW-Platteville 144 9
10) North Central 142 10
11) Johns Hopkins 138 11
12) Hardin-Simmons 124 12
13) Wabash 108 13
14) Delaware Valley 106 14
T15) Cortland 88 15
T15) Wesley 88 16
17) Salisbury 70 17
18) E Texas Baptist 54 20
T19) Franklin 47 18
T19) Thomas More 47 21
21) St John Fisher 38 T22
22) John Carroll 28 T22
T23) Huntingdon 25 24
T23) Washington & Jefferson 25 NR
T25) Central 20 NR
T25) Dubuque 20 NR
Dropped Out: Ohio Northern, UW-Stevens Point, Wartburg
Also Receiving Votes: DePauw (14), UW-Stevens Point (13), Monmouth (12), Hobart (10), Washington & Lee (8), Wittenberg (6), Stevenson (5), St Lawrence (3), Case Western Reserve (1), Coe (1), Whitworth (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HansenRatings, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF and smedindy
1) Mount Union 220 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 3, 4)
2) Linfield 212 ( 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 4, 4, 4)
3) St Thomas 205 ( 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5, 5)
4) UW-Whitewater 204 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5)
5) Mary Hardin-Baylor 190 ( 2, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7)
6) UW-Oshkosh 181 ( 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 8)
7) St John's 166 ( 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 10)
8) Wheaton 161 ( 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 10)
9) UW-Platteville 144 ( 7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10, 11, 12, 15)
10) North Central 142 ( 7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 12, 12, 12, 14)
11) Johns Hopkins 138 (10, 10, 10, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11)
12) Hardin-Simmons 124 ( 8, 10, 10, 11, 12, 12, 13, 17, 17)
13) Wabash 108 (12, 12, 13, 13, 13, 13, 15, 16, 19)
14) Delaware Valley 106 (11, 12, 13, 14, 14, 15, 15, 15, 19)
T15) Cortland 88 (10, 14, 14, 14, 17, 17, 17, 17, --)
T15) Wesley 88 (13, 14, 14, 16, 16, 16, 18, 19, 20)
17) Salisbury 70 (13, 16, 16, 16, 16, 19, 20, 22, --)
18) E Texas Baptist 54 (13, 18, 19, 20, 20, 21, 21, 22, --)
T19) Franklin 47 (15, 15, 18, 18, 22, 23, 24, --, --)
T19) Thomas More 47 (16, 17, 18, 20, 20, 21, 21, --, --)
21) St John Fisher 38 (18, 18, 19, 22, 22, 23, 23, 25, --)
22) John Carroll 28 (14, 20, 21, 22, 25, --, --, --, --)
T23) Huntingdon 25 (17, 20, 21, 23, 24, --, --, --, --)
T23) Wash & Jeff 25 (18, 19, 20, 23, 25, --, --, --, --)
T25) Central 20 (19, 21, 22, 24, 24, --, --, --, --)
T25) Dubuque 20 (17, 21, 23, 24, 25, --, --, --, --)
27) DePauw 14 (15, 23)
28) UW-Stevens Point 13 (15, 24)
29) Monmouth 12 (21, 22, 23)
30) Hobart 10 (19, 24, 25)
31) Wash & Lee 8 (18)
32) Wittenberg 6 (20)
33) Stevenson 5 (24, 24, 25)
34) St Lawrence 3 (23)
T35) Case Western 1 (25)
T35) Coe 1 (25)
T35) Whitworth 1 (25)
Who on the poll DID NOT include Cortland in the top 25? :o and WHY would be nice . ???
Quote from: desertcat1 on September 13, 2016, 12:27:22 PM
Who on the poll DID NOT include Cortland in the top 25? :o and WHY would be nice . ???
That would be me.
| Team |
| 1. | Mount Union |
| 2. | St. Thomas |
| 3. | UW-Whitewater |
| 4. | Linfield |
| 5. | UW-Oshkosh |
| 6. | Mary Hardin-Baylor |
| 7. | North Central |
| 8. | UW-Platteville |
| 9. | St. John's |
| 10. | Wheaton |
| 11. | Johns Hopkins |
| 12. | Wabash |
| 13. | Wesley |
| 14. | John Carroll |
| 15. | UW-Stevens Point |
| 16. | Thomas More |
| 17. | Hardin-Simmons |
| 18. | St. John Fisher |
| 19. | Delaware Valley |
| 20. | Wittenberg |
| 21. | Central |
| 22. | Monmouth |
| 23. | Dubuque |
| 24. | Franklin |
| 25. | Hobart |
Part of my reasoning is definitely a regional bias (as evidenced by my teams @ #'s 21-24), but it's not what I would consider a purely subjective bias. I actually elevated several Eastern schools from where my computer model thinks they should be. Part of it is also a difference in opinion between the way I think people should vote for a Top 25 compared to the standard convention (I mean, basically every Pick Em has UMHB favored over Linfield this year), but that's probably a topic for a different conversation.
I would probably put Cortland somewhere around 27 or 28 if the poll extended that far. That's right about where I would have put them in the preseason based on their number of returning starters and where I perceived them relative to the rest of the E8/East/nation a year ago (they were
maybe the best team in the conference by the end of the year, which
does not imply that I think they didn't deserve the conference championship). A 2 point victory over Heidelberg (3rd or 4th best OAC team) and a W (convincing, but not a :o type win) over Framingham doesn't lead me to believe they're any better than that. Their best unit according to my opponent-adjusted yards/play is their rush defense, and even that ranks outside of the Top 25 (#26). A win this weekend, by any margin, will probably see them switch places with Fisher for me.
Quote from: HansenRatings on September 13, 2016, 06:59:12 PM
Quote from: desertcat1 on September 13, 2016, 12:27:22 PM
Who on the poll DID NOT include Cortland in the top 25? :o and WHY would be nice . ???
That would be me.
| Team |
| 1. | Mount Union |
| 2. | St. Thomas |
| 3. | UW-Whitewater |
| 4. | Linfield |
| 5. | UW-Oshkosh |
| 6. | Mary Hardin-Baylor |
| 7. | North Central |
| 8. | UW-Platteville |
| 9. | St. John's |
| 10. | Wheaton |
| 11. | Johns Hopkins |
| 12. | Wabash |
| 13. | Wesley |
| 14. | John Carroll |
| 15. | UW-Stevens Point |
| 16. | Thomas More |
| 17. | Hardin-Simmons |
| 18. | St. John Fisher |
| 19. | Delaware Valley |
| 20. | Wittenberg |
| 21. | Central |
| 22. | Monmouth |
| 23. | Dubuque |
| 24. | Franklin |
| 25. | Hobart |
Part of my reasoning is definitely a regional bias (as evidenced by my teams @ #'s 21-24), but it's not what I would consider a purely subjective bias. I actually elevated several Eastern schools from where my computer model thinks they should be. Part of it is also a difference in opinion between the way I think people should vote for a Top 25 compared to the standard convention (I mean, basically every Pick Em has UMHB favored over Linfield this year), but that's probably a topic for a different conversation.
I would probably put Cortland somewhere around 27 or 28 if the poll extended that far. That's right about where I would have put them in the preseason based on their number of returning starters and where I perceived them relative to the rest of the E8/East/nation a year ago (they were maybe the best team in the conference by the end of the year, which does not imply that I think they didn't deserve the conference championship). A 2 point victory over Heidelberg (3rd or 4th best OAC team) and a W (convincing, but not a :o type win) over Framingham doesn't lead me to believe they're any better than that. Their best unit according to my opponent-adjusted yards/play is their rush defense, and even that ranks outside of the Top 25 (#26). A win this weekend, by any margin, will probably see them switch places with Fisher for me.
I'm glad to see you have UWSP in your rankings. I realize I expose myself to bias charges here as a WIAC guy, but I'm surprised at the little attention they've received. I realize it's early in the season and some may be waiting to see how they do against the big dogs, but that's a philosophy that should apply to all teams. Last year UWSP played 3 teams that finished in the top 15 in the country and lost by a combined total of 22 points. This year they beat the snot out of the team that beat them opening game last year (Albion), which happens to be the team that took this week's #13 team to overtime.
I'd enjoy reading your thoughts/model output on UWSP.
Quote from: emma17 on September 13, 2016, 08:10:25 PM
Quote from: HansenRatings on September 13, 2016, 06:59:12 PM
Quote from: desertcat1 on September 13, 2016, 12:27:22 PM
Who on the poll DID NOT include Cortland in the top 25? :o and WHY would be nice . ???
That would be me.
| Team |
| 1. | Mount Union |
| 2. | St. Thomas |
| 3. | UW-Whitewater |
| 4. | Linfield |
| 5. | UW-Oshkosh |
| 6. | Mary Hardin-Baylor |
| 7. | North Central |
| 8. | UW-Platteville |
| 9. | St. John's |
| 10. | Wheaton |
| 11. | Johns Hopkins |
| 12. | Wabash |
| 13. | Wesley |
| 14. | John Carroll |
| 15. | UW-Stevens Point |
| 16. | Thomas More |
| 17. | Hardin-Simmons |
| 18. | St. John Fisher |
| 19. | Delaware Valley |
| 20. | Wittenberg |
| 21. | Central |
| 22. | Monmouth |
| 23. | Dubuque |
| 24. | Franklin |
| 25. | Hobart |
Part of my reasoning is definitely a regional bias (as evidenced by my teams @ #'s 21-24), but it's not what I would consider a purely subjective bias. I actually elevated several Eastern schools from where my computer model thinks they should be. Part of it is also a difference in opinion between the way I think people should vote for a Top 25 compared to the standard convention (I mean, basically every Pick Em has UMHB favored over Linfield this year), but that's probably a topic for a different conversation.
I would probably put Cortland somewhere around 27 or 28 if the poll extended that far. That's right about where I would have put them in the preseason based on their number of returning starters and where I perceived them relative to the rest of the E8/East/nation a year ago (they were maybe the best team in the conference by the end of the year, which does not imply that I think they didn't deserve the conference championship). A 2 point victory over Heidelberg (3rd or 4th best OAC team) and a W (convincing, but not a :o type win) over Framingham doesn't lead me to believe they're any better than that. Their best unit according to my opponent-adjusted yards/play is their rush defense, and even that ranks outside of the Top 25 (#26). A win this weekend, by any margin, will probably see them switch places with Fisher for me.
I'm glad to see you have UWSP in ur rankings. I realize I expose myself to bias charges here as a WIAC guy, but I'm surprised at the little attention they've received. I realize it's early in the season and some may be waiting to see how they do against the big dogs, but that's a philosophy that should apply to all teams. Last year UWSP played 3 teams that finished in the top 15 in the country and lost by a combined total of 22 points. This year they beat the snot out of the team that beat them opening game last year (Albion), which happens to be the team that took this week's #13 team to overtime.
I'd enjoy reading your thoughts/model output on UWSP.
I typically rank my teams based upon many factors you aforementioned. However, I also watch a considerable amount of college football (majority DIII) during my Saturday (which my wife hates), which leads me to ask the question, "On a neutral field, would this team beat this team 6 out of 10 times?" I use this as my ranking, while obviously using head-to-head as my final deciding factor.
What will happen to the winner of the Linfield/MHB game as far as rankings go? What about the loser? #3 vs #5 is a compelling matchup that I'm not sure we've seen in recent years in D3 (if ever during the regular season).
Quote from: Andy Jamison - Walla Walla Wildcat on September 14, 2016, 04:19:47 PM
What will happen to the winner of the Linfield/MHB game as far as rankings go? What about the loser? #3 vs #5 is a compelling matchup that I'm not sure we've seen in recent years in D3 (if ever during the regular season).
My guess is basically nothing. A win for Linfield probably siphons off a few first place votes from Mount Union, but not enough to leapfrog all the way to #1. A win for UMHB probably gets them a couple of Linfield's first place votes, and they'd go up a spot, maybe two. For the loser, I don't think there's too far to fall. D3football.com top 25 voters aren't overly punitive when losing to a member of the division's upper crust. UMHB wouldn't fall any lower than 6th I think. Linfield probably wouldn't fall lower than 5th.
Unless the margin is really high. Then you might see a little more movement- like if UMHB loses by 40 on their own field, they might slip down behind UWO and Wheaton but probably not too much further, iyam.
Anyone remember how far Wesley fell after the beating on the Cruthedrals opening night? I don't remember it being very far... So that's a good indicator.
Quote from: jknezek on September 14, 2016, 04:54:59 PM
Anyone remember how far Wesley fell after the beating on the Cruthedrals opening night? I don't remember it being very far... So that's a good indicator.
That was 2013, right? They dropped from 5 to 11. That was d3football poll not the fan poll. The drop was 5 to 13 on the fan poll.
Quote from: Hawks88 on September 14, 2016, 08:08:57 PM
Quote from: jknezek on September 14, 2016, 04:54:59 PM
Anyone remember how far Wesley fell after the beating on the Cruthedrals opening night? I don't remember it being very far... So that's a good indicator.
That was 2013, right? They dropped from 5 to 11. That was d3football poll not the fan poll. The drop was 5 to 13 on the fan poll.
At least that was less than the plunge they took from losing to DelVal this season! ;) (I didn't drop them nearly as much as some: they're now 14 on my ballot.)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 14, 2016, 09:28:50 PM
Quote from: Hawks88 on September 14, 2016, 08:08:57 PM
Quote from: jknezek on September 14, 2016, 04:54:59 PM
Anyone remember how far Wesley fell after the beating on the Cruthedrals opening night? I don't remember it being very far... So that's a good indicator.
That was 2013, right? They dropped from 5 to 11. That was d3football poll not the fan poll. The drop was 5 to 13 on the fan poll.
At least that was less than the plunge they took from losing to DelVal this season! ;) (I didn't drop them nearly as much as some: they're now 14 on my ballot.)
That begs the question: Is DelVay 13 or higher in your rankings, then?
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 15, 2016, 03:58:41 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 14, 2016, 09:28:50 PM
Quote from: Hawks88 on September 14, 2016, 08:08:57 PM
Quote from: jknezek on September 14, 2016, 04:54:59 PM
Anyone remember how far Wesley fell after the beating on the Cruthedrals opening night? I don't remember it being very far... So that's a good indicator.
That was 2013, right? They dropped from 5 to 11. That was d3football poll not the fan poll. The drop was 5 to 13 on the fan poll.
At least that was less than the plunge they took from losing to DelVal this season! ;) (I didn't drop them nearly as much as some: they're now 14 on my ballot.)
That begs the question: Is DelVay 13 or higher in your rankings, then?
I have DelVal at #13. My hunch is that Wesley will finish the season ranked higher than DelVal, but doing so now would be rather presumptuous of me! ;)
Clearly, I am not a voter. Thought that Linfield's movement was a bit of an over reaction. I know they got crushed down in Belton, but I think LC is multiple scores better than (at least) the three teams above them. Shouldn't take too long for Linfield to get back to the top 5 though. In the next few weeks, there are three h2h games between six of the eight teams ahead of Linfield.
Mount Union's 6 non-first-place votes show some weakness and what I would guess include two seconds, three thirds and a fourth or one second and five thirds. I have a hard time imaging they received a 5th place vote or lower.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 19, 2016, 11:31:48 AM
Clearly, I am not a voter. Thought that Linfield's movement was a bit of an over reaction. I know they got crushed down in Belton, but I think LC is multiple scores better than (at least) the three teams above them. Shouldn't take too long for Linfield to get back to the top 5 though. In the next few weeks, there are three h2h games between six of the eight teams ahead of Linfield.
The Linfield result reminded me of the video game where one warrior strikes a major artery and the blood just starts spewing everywhere. Yes they lost, but it looks worse than it actually was. UMHB just got on a roll.
I have them under St. John's, for now. We will definitely see the relative strength of the Tommies and the Johnnies Saturday.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 15, 2016, 04:35:30 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 15, 2016, 03:58:41 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 14, 2016, 09:28:50 PM
Quote from: Hawks88 on September 14, 2016, 08:08:57 PM
Quote from: jknezek on September 14, 2016, 04:54:59 PM
Anyone remember how far Wesley fell after the beating on the Cruthedrals opening night? I don't remember it being very far... So that's a good indicator.
That was 2013, right? They dropped from 5 to 11. That was d3football poll not the fan poll. The drop was 5 to 13 on the fan poll.
At least that was less than the plunge they took from losing to DelVal this season! ;) (I didn't drop them nearly as much as some: they're now 14 on my ballot.)
That begs the question: Is DelVay 13 or higher in your rankings, then?
I have DelVal at #13. My hunch is that Wesley will finish the season ranked higher than DelVal, but doing so now would be rather presumptuous of me! ;)
OOPS! Wesley has now dropped totally out of my Top 25. ::) Though probably #26.
I moved UMHB to #2, and only dropped Linfield to #6.
We're one voter short this week due to family issues. We should be back up to 9 next week
2016 WEEK 3 TOP 25 FAN POLL
# School Pts Prev
1) Mount Union (4) 194 1
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor (3) 191 5
3) St Thomas (1) 186 3
4) UW-Whitewater 181 4
5) UW-Oshkosh 168 6
6) St John's 156 7
7) Linfield 145 2
8) Wheaton 135 8
T9) Hardin-Simmons 127 12
T9) UW-Platteville 127 9
11) North Central 120 10
12) Johns Hopkins 118 11
13) Wabash 107 13
14) Delaware Valley 101 14
T15) Salisbury 80 17
T15) St John Fisher 80 21
17) E Texas Baptist 60 18
18) Thomas More 50 T19
19) Franklin 47 T19
20) Huntingdon 37 T23
21) Christopher Newport 24 NR
22) Dubuque 23 T25
23) Hobart 21 NR
24) Central 18 T25
25) John Carroll 17 22
Dropped Out: Cortland, Wesley, Washington & Jefferson
Also Receiving Votes: Cortland (14), Monmouth (14), DePauw (12), St Lawrence (12), Stevenson (12), Wittenberg (7), UW-Stevens Point (4), Case Western Reserve (3), Coe (3), Whitworth (3), Washington & Jefferson (2), Alfred (1), Carthage (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF and smedindy
Two things that (mildly) surprised me:
Wesley dropping out was no surprise. Wesley not receiving a single vote DID surprise me.
St. Lawrence not making the top 25 surprised me (I had them #21). True, they haven't exactly faced "murderers' row", but going 118-ZERO against ANY three college teams is IMPRESSIVE.
There's a lot of sorting out to do, still - and a lot of teams are still in the mix.
Job well done voters.
Imo you did a great job with the top 25, especially the top 15.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 20, 2016, 06:42:17 PM
Two things that (mildly) surprised me:
Wesley dropping out was no surprise. Wesley not receiving a single vote DID surprise me.
St. Lawrence not making the top 25 surprised me (I had them #21). True, they haven't exactly faced "murderers' row", but going 118-ZERO against ANY three college teams is IMPRESSIVE.
Agree on both counts.
Re the Saints, having seen both them and Hobart's first 3 games, I'd say SLU is the better team overall, but Hobart has faced stiffer competition so that has to be factored in as well.
Needless to say, if the Hobart O and Saints D remain at this pace, the game on 11/5 is going to be epic.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 19, 2016, 12:37:36 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 19, 2016, 11:31:48 AM
Clearly, I am not a voter. Thought that Linfield's movement was a bit of an over reaction. I know they got crushed down in Belton, but I think LC is multiple scores better than (at least) the three teams above them. Shouldn't take too long for Linfield to get back to the top 5 though. In the next few weeks, there are three h2h games between six of the eight teams ahead of Linfield.
The Linfield result reminded me of the video game where one warrior strikes a major artery and the blood just starts spewing everywhere. Yes they lost, but it looks worse than it actually was. UMHB just got on a roll.
Ha--except that in this case, it was in large part, the CATS striking their own artery then slipping in the blood puddle, falling face down, and drowning. I was there (and am a HUGE Linfield fan) and it was painful to watch. I totally agree with what people are saying here--the score didn't reflect how even matched the two teams were. I think most of us sitting there at the game felt that losing the starting center (right before a bad snap fumble at the goaline) was the beginning of the end for the CATS in that game.....could have gone the other way prior to that injury....
No one can say I'm a homer now....
Everyone got their ballots in early so it's a Monday poll for you :)
2016 WEEK 4 TOP 25 FAN POLL
# School Pts Prev
1) Mount Union (4) 218 1
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor (4) 216 2
3) St Thomas (1) 209 3
4) UW-Whitewater 203 4
5) UW-Oshkosh 189 5
6) Linfield 167 7
7) St John's 161 6
8) UW-Platteville 159 T9
9) North Central 153 11
10) Hardin-Simmons 144 T9
11) Johns Hopkins 138 12
12) Wheaton 133 8
13) Salisbury 94 T15
14) St John Fisher 91 T15
15) Wittenberg 82 NR
16) Franklin 68 19
17) Thomas More 67 18
18) E Texas Baptist 62 17
19) Huntingdon 46 20
20) John Carroll 42 25
21) Wabash 38 13
22) Chris Newport 35 21
23) Hobart 28 23
24) Central 27 24
25) Dubuque 24 22
Dropped Out: Delaware Valley
Also Receiving Votes: Monmouth (21), Stevenson (20), UW-Stevens Point (19), DePauw (18), St Lawrence (16), Delaware Valley (15), Case Western Reserve (5), Coe (5), Utica (5), Alfred (3), Carthage (3), Western New England (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HansenRatings, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF and smedindy
1) Mount Union 218 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 216 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 4, 4)
3) St Thomas 209 ( 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4)
4) UW-Whitewater 203 ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4)
5) UW-Oshkosh 189 ( 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5)
6) Linfield 167 ( 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8, 9, 11)
7) St John's 161 ( 7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 10, 10)
8) UW-Platteville 159 ( 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 14)
9) North Central 153 ( 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 10, 11, 12, 12)
10) Hardin-Simmons 144 ( 6, 6, 8, 9, 11, 11, 12, 12, 15)
11) Johns Hopkins 138 ( 9, 10, 10, 10, 11, 11, 11, 12, 12)
12) Wheaton 133 ( 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 11, 12, 12, 18)
13) Salisbury 94 ( 8, 13, 14, 14, 15, 15, 17, 18, --)
14) St John Fisher 91 (12, 13, 14, 14, 14, 16, 17, 21, 22)
15) Wittenberg 82 (13, 13, 13, 15, 16, 19, 20, 21, 22)
16) Franklin 68 (13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 21, 23, --)
17) Thomas More 67 (14, 15, 15, 17, 18, 19, 19, 24, --)
18) E Texas Baptist 62 (13, 16, 16, 18, 18, 18, 23, 24, --)
19) Huntingdon 46 (13, 15, 17, 19, 20, --, --, --, --)
20) John Carroll 42 (11, 18, 19, 19, 21, --, --, --, --)
21) Wabash 38 (16, 16, 18, 22, 23, 24, 25, --, --)
22) Chris Newport 35 (17, 20, 20, 21, 22, 22, 25, --, --)
23) Hobart 28 (15, 20, 20, 21, --, --, --, --, --)
24) Central 27 (17, 20, 22, 23, 23, 24, --, --, --)
25) Dubuque 24 (13, 17, 24, --, --, --, --, --, --)
26) Monmouth 21 (16, 19, 22)
27) Stevenson 20 (16, 21, 21)
28) UW-Stevens Point 19 (14, 20, 25)
29) DePauw 18 (16, 20, 24)
30) St Lawrence 16 (19, 21, 23, 25)
31) Delaware Valley 15 (17, 22, 25, 25)
T32) Case Western Reserve 5 (22, 25)
T32) Coe 5 (23, 24)
T32) Utica 5 (24, 24, 25)
T35) Alfred 3 (23)
T35) Carthage 3 (23)
37) Western New England 1 (25)
Still waiting on 1 ballot... poll will be up this evening
2016 WEEK 5 TOP 25 FAN POLL
# School Pts Prev
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor (5) 216 2
2) Mount Union (3) 213 1
3) UW-Whitewater (1) 210 4
4) St Thomas 206 3
5) UW-Oshkosh 190 5
6) UW-Platteville 170 8
7) North Central 163 9
8) Linfield 161 6
9) St John's 152 7
10) Wheaton 146 12
11) Johns Hopkins 136 11
12) Hardin-Simmons 135 10
13) Salisbury 97 13
14) Wittenberg 86 15
15) St John Fisher 85 14
16) Franklin 72 16
17) Thomas More 71 17
18) E Texas Baptist 62 18
19) Dubuque 59 25
20) Wabash 48 21
21) St Lawrence 35 NR
22) Stevenson 30 NR
23) John Carroll 28 20
24) UW-Stevens Point 23 NR
25) Hobart 21 23
Dropped Out: Huntingdon, Christopher Newport, Central
Also Receiving Votes: Delaware Valley (20), Monmouth (20), DePauw (19), Alfred (12), Coe (8), Huntingdon (7), North Carolina Wesleyan (7), Case Western Reserve (5), Western New England (5), Carthage (4), Hendrix (2), Rowan (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HansenRatings, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF and smedindy
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 216 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 4)
2) Mount Union 213 ( 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4)
3) UW-Whitewater 210 ( 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4) St Thomas 206 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5)
5) UW-Oshkosh 190 ( 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5)
6) UW-Platteville 170 ( 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 9, 9)
7) North Central 163 ( 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 11, 12)
8) Linfield 161 ( 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 9, 9, 11, 12)
9) St John's 152 ( 8, 8, 8, 8, 9, 10, 10, 10, 11)
10) Wheaton 146 ( 7, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 10, 11, 12)
11) Johns Hopkins 136 ( 9, 10, 10, 11, 11, 11, 12, 12, 12)
12) Hardin-Simmons 135 ( 8, 8, 9, 11, 11, 12, 12, 13, 15)
13) Salisbury 97 ( 8, 13, 14, 14, 15, 15, 15, 17, --)
14) Wittenberg 86 (13, 13, 13, 15, 16, 16, 20, 20, 22)
15) St John Fisher 85 (14, 14, 14, 14, 15, 16, 18, 21, 23)
16) Franklin 72 (13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 18, 20, 20, --)
17) Thomas More 71 (14, 15, 15, 17, 18, 19, 19, 21, 25)
18) E Texas Baptist 62 (13, 16, 17, 18, 18, 18, 22, 24, --)
19) Dubuque 59 (13, 13, 17, 17, 20, 22, 24, 24, 25)
20) Wabash 48 (16, 17, 18, 18, 21, 22, 24, 24, --)
21) St Lawrence 35 (17, 21, 21, 21, 22, 23, 23, 25, --)
22) Stevenson 30 (16, 19, 20, 21, 24, --, --, --, --)
23) John Carroll 28 (12, 19, 19, --, --, --, --, --, --)
24) UW-Stevens Point 23 (14, 20, 22, 25, --, --, --, --, --)
25) Hobart 21 (17, 19, 22, 25, --, --, --, --, --)
T26) Delaware Valley 20 (15, 20, 23)
T26) Monmouth 20 (16, 19, 23)
28) DePauw 19 (16, 20, 23)
29) Alfred 12 (23, 23, 23, 24, 25)
30) Coe 8 (21, 24, 25)
T31) Huntingdon 7 (19)
T31) NC Wesleyan 7 (19)
T33) Case Western 5 (22, 25)
T33) W New England 5 (21)
35) Carthage 4 (22)
36) Hendrix 2 (24)
37) Rowan 1 (25)
Kind of glad Dubuque won, or else my Week 4 ranking of Dubuque (#13) would have made me look kind of silly. Considering 6 other voters didn't put them in their top 25 last week.
Now it's giving me the false hope that I know what I'm doing :P
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 06, 2016, 07:49:53 AM
Kind of glad Dubuque won, or else my Week 4 ranking of Dubuque (#13) would have made me look kind of silly. Considering 6 other voters didn't put them in their top 25 last week.
Now it's giving me the false hope that I know what I'm doing :P
I'm with you BOO BOO (02) ;D, i had them at #13 too. Or it could be great (mines)/(big hole).LOL :-*
Poll will be up tomorrow as one voter had something more important to do this weekend (I know... something could be more important than D3 football? :o)
I'm in now!
2016 WEEK 6 TOP 25 FAN POLL
# School Pts Prev
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor (4) 218 1
2) UW-Whitewater (3) 215 3
3) Mount Union (2) 210 2
4) St Thomas 200 4
5) UW-Oshkosh 191 5
6) UW-Platteville 171 6
7) North Central 164 7
8) Linfield 162 8
9) St John's 154 9
T10) Johns Hopkins 140 11
T10) Wheaton 140 10
12) Hardin-Simmons 135 12
13) Wittenberg 93 14
14) St John Fisher 89 15
15) Thomas More 88 17
16) E Texas Baptist 79 18
17) Franklin 78 16
18) Wabash 63 20
19) Dubuque 61 19
20) St Lawrence 57 21
21) Stevenson 40 22
22) John Carroll 35 23
23) Alfred 25 NR
24) Delaware Valley 24 NR
25) Coe 20 NR
Dropped Out: Salisbury, UW-Stevens Point, Hobart
Also Receiving Votes: Monmouth (19), Rowan (11), Case Western Reserve (8), Hendrix (7), UW-LaCrosse (7), DePauw (6), Salisbury (5), UW-Stevens Point (5), Western New England (3), Carthage (1), Claremont-Mudd-Scripps (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HansenRatings, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF and smedindy
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 11, 2016, 11:31:03 PM
2016 WEEK 6 TOP 25 FAN POLL
# School Pts Prev
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor (4) 218 1
2) UW-Whitewater (3) 215 3
3) Mount Union (2) 210 2
4) St Thomas 200 4
5) UW-Oshkosh 191 5
6) UW-Platteville 171 6
7) North Central 164 7
8) Linfield 162 8
9) St John's 154 9
T10) Johns Hopkins 140 11
T10) Wheaton 140 10
12) Hardin-Simmons 135 12
13) Wittenberg 93 14
14) St John Fisher 89 15
15) Thomas More 88 17
16) E Texas Baptist 79 18
17) Franklin 78 16
18) Wabash 63 20
19) Dubuque 61 19
20) St Lawrence 57 21
21) Stevenson 40 22
22) John Carroll 35 23
23) Alfred 25 NR
24) Delaware Valley 24 NR
25) Coe 20 NR
Dropped Out: Salisbury, Delaware Valley, Hobart
Also Receiving Votes: Monmouth (19), Rowan (11), Case Western Reserve (8), Hendrix (7), UW-LaCrosse (7), DePauw (6), Salisbury (5), UW-Stevens Point (5), Western New England (3), Carthage (1), Claremont-Mudd-Scripps (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HansenRatings, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF and smedindy
Is one of these supposed to have been someone else, or was this just the equivalent of a 'double vote' on a ballot?
That would be me typing a wrong team in. Should have been Stevens Point. Not sure how I got that mixed up.
I have to bug you voters all the time about listing a team twice or forgetting a team on your ballots... apparently even I'm not perfect :-[
Tough week. Less than chalk, really. That makes it intriguing.
I had no real problem listing 1-13 (though I adjusted the position of several of them just before sending in my ballot), then it got REALLY hard. In my view of teams 14-19, there just isn't anyone there! And then there are about 20 teams deserving of 20-25! ;)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 16, 2016, 11:34:49 PM
I had no real problem listing 1-13 (though I adjusted the position of several of them just before sending in my ballot), then it got REALLY hard. In my view of teams 14-19, there just isn't anyone there! And then there are about 20 teams deserving of 20-25! ;)
Definitely agree with this statement.
Yea, pretty much the same here. However, I did flip-flop my #1 and #2 teams from last week. But other than that, the top half remained the same, while the bottom half was challenging.
So how does Franklin, who beat Thomas More, go from ranked ahead of TMC to ranked behind them when they both won in most recent poll? Have you guys lost your minds or are you cut and pasting from the national poll? :o
Quote from: USee on October 17, 2016, 01:44:50 PM
So how does Franklin, who beat Thomas More, go from ranked ahead of TMC to ranked behind them when they both won in most recent poll? Have you guys lost your minds or are you cut and pasting from the national poll? :o
I think this has to do more with how Franklin performance against Butler, although they are a scholarship program. I think Thomas More result against a good W&J factored in more for the voters.
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 17, 2016, 02:34:11 PM
Quote from: USee on October 17, 2016, 01:44:50 PM
So how does Franklin, who beat Thomas More, go from ranked ahead of TMC to ranked behind them when they both won in most recent poll? Have you guys lost your minds or are you cut and pasting from the national poll? :o
I think this has to do more with how Franklin performance against Butler, although they are a scholarship program. I think Thomas More result against a good W&J factored in more for the voters.
That's a convenient out for people who are predisposed to discounting teams from the HCAC (or other similarly unglamorous leagues). There aren't a lot of teams in the division that would have done much better against Butler.
Wasn't me...I have Franklin ahead of Thomas More.
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 17, 2016, 02:34:11 PM
Quote from: USee on October 17, 2016, 01:44:50 PM
So how does Franklin, who beat Thomas More, go from ranked ahead of TMC to ranked behind them when they both won in most recent poll? Have you guys lost your minds or are you cut and pasting from the national poll? :o
I think this has to do more with how Franklin performance against Butler, although they are a scholarship program. I think Thomas More result against a good W&J factored in more for the voters.
Well the further mystery is then why was Franklin ranked ahead of Butler in the weeks 4 and 5 fan poll, which occurred after the Butler game (and after the TMC v WJ game), but then strangely ranked behind them in the week 6 poll? And when did results against non d3 opponents (or any opponents) trump a direct H2H result? The only time I can remember is when there are 3+ teams who all beat each other.
Quote from: USee on October 17, 2016, 04:42:33 PM
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 17, 2016, 02:34:11 PM
Quote from: USee on October 17, 2016, 01:44:50 PM
So how does Franklin, who beat Thomas More, go from ranked ahead of TMC to ranked behind them when they both won in most recent poll? Have you guys lost your minds or are you cut and pasting from the national poll? :o
I think this has to do more with how Franklin performance against Butler, although they are a scholarship program. I think Thomas More result against a good W&J factored in more for the voters.
Well the further mystery is then why was Franklin ranked ahead of Butler in the weeks 4 and 5 fan poll, which occurred after the Butler game (and after the TMC v WJ game), but then strangely ranked behind them in the week 6 poll? And when did results against non d3 opponents (or any opponents) trump a direct H2H result? The only time I can remember is when there are 3+ teams who all beat each other.
H2H is obviously important, but it is not the be-all, end-all determinant. Everyone will have his own ideas about what factors to consider and how to construct his list. Besides, as I once noted to Grizz when I turned in my poll, upsets happen. Whether or not the Franklin/TMC result (in the first game of the season) was an upset is for each voter to determine.
Quote from: HSCTiger74 on October 17, 2016, 04:58:47 PM
Quote from: USee on October 17, 2016, 04:42:33 PM
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 17, 2016, 02:34:11 PM
Quote from: USee on October 17, 2016, 01:44:50 PM
So how does Franklin, who beat Thomas More, go from ranked ahead of TMC to ranked behind them when they both won in most recent poll? Have you guys lost your minds or are you cut and pasting from the national poll? :o
I think this has to do more with how Franklin performance against Butler, although they are a scholarship program. I think Thomas More result against a good W&J factored in more for the voters.
Well the further mystery is then why was Franklin ranked ahead of Butler in the weeks 4 and 5 fan poll, which occurred after the Butler game (and after the TMC v WJ game), but then strangely ranked behind them in the week 6 poll? And when did results against non d3 opponents (or any opponents) trump a direct H2H result? The only time I can remember is when there are 3+ teams who all beat each other.
H2H is obviously important, but it is not the be-all, end-all determinant. Everyone will have his own ideas about what factors to consider and how to construct his list. Besides, as I once noted to Grizz when I turned in my poll, upsets happen. Whether or not the Franklin/TMC result (in the first game of the season) was an upset is for each voter to determine.
But it kind of
is the end-all. In the absence of other, disqualifying results (namely losses- probably multiple- by that team that won h2h). Maybe the combination of TMC's wins vs. WJ and Westminster plus the Butler loss is enough for some voters to place TMC ahead of Franklin. Maybe. I have a hard time believing that Franklin's conference doesn't influence that decision, which is the part that stinks the most IMO.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 17, 2016, 08:49:00 PM
Quote from: HSCTiger74 on October 17, 2016, 04:58:47 PM
Quote from: USee on October 17, 2016, 04:42:33 PM
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 17, 2016, 02:34:11 PM
Quote from: USee on October 17, 2016, 01:44:50 PM
So how does Franklin, who beat Thomas More, go from ranked ahead of TMC to ranked behind them when they both won in most recent poll? Have you guys lost your minds or are you cut and pasting from the national poll? :o
I think this has to do more with how Franklin performance against Butler, although they are a scholarship program. I think Thomas More result against a good W&J factored in more for the voters.
Well the further mystery is then why was Franklin ranked ahead of Butler in the weeks 4 and 5 fan poll, which occurred after the Butler game (and after the TMC v WJ game), but then strangely ranked behind them in the week 6 poll? And when did results against non d3 opponents (or any opponents) trump a direct H2H result? The only time I can remember is when there are 3+ teams who all beat each other.
H2H is obviously important, but it is not the be-all, end-all determinant. Everyone will have his own ideas about what factors to consider and how to construct his list. Besides, as I once noted to Grizz when I turned in my poll, upsets happen. Whether or not the Franklin/TMC result (in the first game of the season) was an upset is for each voter to determine.
But it kind of is the end-all. In the absence of other, disqualifying results (namely losses- probably multiple- by that team that won h2h). Maybe the combination of TMC's wins vs. WJ and Westminster plus the Butler loss is enough for some voters to place TMC ahead of Franklin. Maybe. I have a hard time believing that Franklin's conference doesn't influence that decision, which is the part that stinks the most IMO.
We all know that polls are just opinions, and that's why they should be taken with a grain of salt. My opinion tells me one thing and yours tells you another, so we probably each consider the other "wrong", but there's no animus involved. And the conference definitely plays a role. I think that the PAC > the HCAC, so in my
opinion TMC has been trending higher than Franklin. I'm sure you disagree and think it stinks, and that's OK. It would be a pretty boring world if we all agreed about everything.
It's not Franklin's conference, but the fact they squeaked past Bluffton (which at the time looked sketchy, but now looks pretty good and I've adjusted my ranking on Franklin to account for that) and giving up 27 to Manchester (albeit 14 in garbage time) that may be driving some rankings.
Meanwhile TMC didn't just beat W&J, they crushed 'em and then handed a good Westminster squad their only loss. Yes, Carnegie Mellon was close, but C-M is a good team that had a front loaded schedule (TMC, W&J and a good Wash U squad)
So putting all that data in the blender, and I can see TMC over Franklin in some people's minds. It's a long way from week 1.
Quote from: smedindy on October 18, 2016, 01:16:20 AM
It's not Franklin's conference, but the fact they squeaked past Bluffton (which at the time looked sketchy, but now looks pretty good and I've adjusted my ranking on Franklin to account for that) and giving up 27 to Manchester (albeit 14 in garbage time) that may be driving some rankings.
Meanwhile TMC didn't just beat W&J, they crushed 'em and then handed a good Westminster squad their only loss. Yes, Carnegie Mellon was close, but C-M is a good team that had a front loaded schedule (TMC, W&J and a good Wash U squad)
So putting all that data in the blender, and I can see TMC over Franklin in some people's minds. It's a long way from week 1.
Agree with all this. I DO have Franklin still above TM, but can understand the counter-arguments.
On a somewhat similar issue, Denison should have no problem with Allegheny this weekend, but then faces DePauw and Wabash. A part of me roots for the upstart; a part of me roots for DePauw and/or Wabash to squash them. I have Denison at #16 this week and that just FEELS way too high. ::) But what can I do - Denison beat Witt, who beat both Wabash and DePauw: Denison for now is clearly the top of the NCAC, yet I felt all three others should be Top 25.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 17, 2016, 04:39:42 PM
Wasn't me...I have Franklin ahead of Thomas More.
Again great mines think alike. ;D ( big hole ) :-*
I too had Franklin ahead of tom More. :-*
Quote from: smedindy on October 18, 2016, 01:16:20 AM
It's not Franklin's conference, but the fact they squeaked past Bluffton (which at the time looked sketchy, but now looks pretty good and I've adjusted my ranking on Franklin to account for that) and giving up 27 to Manchester (albeit 14 in garbage time) that may be driving some rankings.
Meanwhile TMC didn't just beat W&J, they crushed 'em and then handed a good Westminster squad their only loss. Yes, Carnegie Mellon was close, but C-M is a good team that had a front loaded schedule (TMC, W&J and a good Wash U squad)
So putting all that data in the blender, and I can see TMC over Franklin in some people's minds. It's a long way from week 1.
That may be true but it's really not a long way from week 5, where this poll had Franklin above TMC. The only thing that happened that week was Franklin beat winless Earlham 40-7 and TMC beat winless Grove City 70-20. Someone changed their ranking of these teams after week 5 based on something that has yet to be mentioned here it would appear.
Going with a larger font size on the poll this week. I think it looks better than it did.
2016 WEEK 7 TOP 25 FAN POLL
# School Pts Prev
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor (6) 222 1
2) UW-Whitewater (1) 212 2
3) Mount Union (2) 210 3
4) St Thomas 195 4
5) UW-Oshkosh 190 5
6) North Central 172 7
7) UW-Platteville 170 6
8) Linfield 164 8
9) St John's 157 9
10) Hardin-Simmons 143 12
11) Johns Hopkins 140 T10
12) Thomas More 113 15
13) Wheaton 109 T10
14) Franklin 106 17
15) Stevenson 77 21
16) St Lawrence 73 20
17) Wabash 60 18
18) Coe 59 25
19) Alfred 58 23
20) E Texas Baptist 39 16
21) John Carroll 34 22
22) Delaware Valley 31 24
23) Denison 30 NR
T24) Rowan 29 NR
T24) Wittenberg 29 13
Dropped Out: St John Fisher and Dubuque
Also Receiving Votes: Monmouth (23), Salisbury (18), UW-LaCrosse (13), Case Western Reserve (11), Dubuque (11), Utica (7), Western New England (5), Carthage (4), DePauw (3), Whitworth (3), Christopher Newport (2), St John Fisher (2), Berry (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HansenRatings, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF and smedindy
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 222 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2)
2) UW-Whitewater 212 ( 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4)
3) Mount Union 210 ( 1, 1, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4)
4) St Thomas 195 ( 2, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6)
5) UW-Oshkosh 190 ( 3, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6)
6) North Central 172 ( 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 8, 8, 9, 11)
7) UW-Platteville 170 ( 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 9)
8) Linfield 164 ( 4, 6, 7, 7, 7, 9, 9, 10, 11)
9) St John's 157 ( 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10)
10) Hardin-Simmons 143 ( 7, 8, 10, 10, 10, 10, 11, 12, 13)
11) Johns Hopkins 140 ( 9, 9, 10, 10, 11, 11, 11, 11, 12)
12) Thomas More 113 (12, 12, 12, 13, 14, 14, 14, 15, 15)
13) Wheaton 109 (10, 11, 12, 12, 13, 16, 17, 17, 17)
14) Franklin 106 (12, 13, 13, 13, 14, 14, 14, 16, 19)
15) Stevenson 77 (12, 13, 13, 16, 18, 18, 20, 23, 24)
16) St Lawrence 73 (14, 15, 15, 15, 17, 18, 19, 22, --)
17) Wabash 60 (15, 15, 16, 17, 18, 21, 21, 25, --)
18) Coe 59 (15, 16, 17, 18, 18, 19, 21, 25, --)
19) Alfred 58 (14, 16, 18, 18, 18, 19, 22, 25, --)
20) E Texas Baptist 39 (13, 16, 20, 20, 22, --, --, --, --)
21) John Carroll 34 (11, 19, 19, 21, --, --, --, --, --)
22) Delaware Valley 31 (17, 20, 20, 21, 22, 25, --, --, --)
23) Denison 30 (16, 19, 19, 23, 24, 25, --, --, --)
T24) Rowan 29 (20, 20, 21, 21, 23, 23, 25, --, --)
T24) Wittenberg 29 (17, 20, 20, 23, 24, 24, 25, --, --)
26) Monmouth 23 (14, 17, 24)
27) Salisbury 18 (21, 22, 22, 22, 25)
28) UW-LaCrosse 13 (16, 23)
T29) Case Western 11 (15)
T29) Dubuque 11 (22, 23, 24, 24)
31) Utica 7 (19)
32) W New England 5 (21)
33) Carthage 4 (22)
T34) DePauw 3 (23)
T34) Whitworth 3 (23)
T36) Christopher Newport 2 (24)
T36) St John Fisher 2 (24)
38) Berry 1 (25)
One interesting thing about the poll is the assumption that UWW is as good as they have been recently, and that UWP and UWO have risen in quality. What if UWW has come back to the pack, rather than UWO and UWP having risen to the elite status of UWW. Time will tell, I guess.
Gave retagent's question my best shot on the West Fan poll thread.
Sum it up...it's a little of both I think. Which seems like cop out answer but I think it applies.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 19, 2016, 10:49:27 AM
Gave retagent's question my best shot on the West Fan poll thread.
Sum it up...it's a little of both I think. Which seems like cop out answer but I think it applies.
Well, does that still make them a serious championship contender? UW-Whitewater and Mount Union over the last decade has been playing on such a high level above the others, if going down a notch, would that make them a Top 5-8 team (3rd round team)?
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 19, 2016, 12:05:49 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 19, 2016, 10:49:27 AM
Gave retagent's question my best shot on the West Fan poll thread.
Sum it up...it's a little of both I think. Which seems like cop out answer but I think it applies.
Well, does that still make them a serious championship contender? UW-Whitewater and Mount Union over the last decade has been playing on such a high level above the others, if going down a notch, would that make them a Top 5-8 team (3rd round team)?
I think their body of work this season so far suggests they are a contender.
I also think it's a little Column A, a little Column B in regards to UWW, UWO and UWP.
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/6e/2a/6d/6e2a6d5d199d0c50a213daf4ea77ef2e.jpg)
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 19, 2016, 12:05:49 PM
Well, does that still make them a serious championship contender? UW-Whitewater and Mount Union over the last decade has been playing on such a high level above the others, if going down a notch, would that make them a Top 5-8 team (3rd round team)?
I actually wrote a blog post (http://loganahansen21.wixsite.com/hansen-ratings/single-post/2016/09/14/The-Rich-Are-Getting-Richer) about this at the beginning of the season. What my model is suggesting is that Mount Union and UWW are still as good as they have been over the last decade
relative to the nation at large, but UMHB, Linfield, UST, SJU, UWO, UWP, and NCC are all now playing at that same level. Five years ago, UWW and UMU were the only teams to consistently achieve ratings over 0.995 (on a 0-1 scale, every National Champion since '99 had a rating >0.995). Now, pretty much all of the teams I mentioned have held steady above that threshold for the entire season.
Before you ask, yes, my model rates teams based on MoV, but I showed in my post that these teams' ratings aren't merely inflated because teams in 2016 are more likely to run up the score. On the contrary, teams now are no more likely to run up the score than they were in 1999.
Quote from: HansenRatings on October 19, 2016, 01:47:40 PM
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 19, 2016, 12:05:49 PM
Well, does that still make them a serious championship contender? UW-Whitewater and Mount Union over the last decade has been playing on such a high level above the others, if going down a notch, would that make them a Top 5-8 team (3rd round team)?
I actually wrote a blog post (http://loganahansen21.wixsite.com/hansen-ratings/single-post/2016/09/14/The-Rich-Are-Getting-Richer) about this at the beginning of the season. What my model is suggesting is that Mount Union and UWW are still as good as they have been over the last decade relative to the nation at large, but UMHB, Linfield, UST, SJU, UWO, UWP, and NCC are all now playing at that same level. Five years ago, UWW and UMU were the only teams to consistently achieve ratings over 0.995 (on a 0-1 scale, every National Champion since '99 had a rating >0.995). Now, pretty much all of the teams I mentioned have held steady above that threshold for the entire season.
Before you ask, yes, my model rates teams based on MoV, but I showed in my post that these teams' ratings aren't merely inflated because teams in 2016 are more likely to run up the score. On the contrary, teams now are no more likely to run up the score than they were in 1999.
Hansen, has your projection model been updated for this past weeks games?
It has. Surprisingly, my Top 25 features the same 25 teams as last week, just in a vastly different order from #'s 14 to 25.
Apparently Wittenberg's wins over quality opponents' outweighs a 3 point loss to Denison.
Wesley appears to "still" be the best team in the NJAC.
The Top 5 in the WIAC are good (see the west region fan poll for more on this)
No respect for Franklin.
Bethel's in the Top 25?
The E8 & MAC are MIA.
CWRU ain't played nobody.
http://loganahansen21.wixsite.com/hansen-ratings (http://loganahansen21.wixsite.com/hansen-ratings)
Quote from: HansenRatings on October 19, 2016, 03:09:33 PM
It has. Surprisingly, my Top 25 features the same 25 teams as last week, just in a vastly different order from #'s 14 to 25.
Apparently Wittenberg's wins over quality opponents' outweighs a 3 point loss to Denison.
Wesley appears to "still" be the best team in the NJAC.
The Top 5 in the WIAC are good (see the west region fan poll for more on this)
No respect for Franklin.
Bethel's in the Top 25?
The E8 & MAC are MIA.
CWRU ain't played nobody.
http://loganahansen21.wixsite.com/hansen-ratings (http://loganahansen21.wixsite.com/hansen-ratings)
I like the numbers about the NJAC. My eye test says the same thing. We shall see how it plays out in the next few weeks.
You know that piece of paper where you had your Top 25 written on?
You may have to burn it and start again - at least the lower part.
Quote from: smedindy on October 22, 2016, 04:55:51 PM
You know that piece of paper where you had your Top 25 written on?
You may have to burn it and start again - at least the lower part.
I understand the feeling, but that is overstating a bit. 6 teams on my previous ballot lost, but two of them lost on the road to teams ranked higher (and neither was blown out), so no penalty will be assessed. Franklin's gonna drop - have to think more to decide how far. And it's 'good-bye, it's been nice to know ya' to DelVal, DePauw, and Rowan. One of the replacements will be Wesley finally re-entering near the bottom of my ballot; the other two await further study.
2016 WEEK 8 TOP 25 FAN POLL
# School Pts Prev
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor (5) 221 1
2) UW-Whitewater (2) 213 2
3) Mount Union (2) 210 3
4) St Thomas 196 4
5) UW-Oshkosh 190 5
6) North Central 176 6
T7) Linfield 160 8
T7) St John's 160 9
9) UW-Platteville 151 7
10) Hardin-Simmons 150 10
11) Johns Hopkins 144 11
12) Wheaton 123 13
13) Thomas More 108 12
14) Stevenson 89 15
15) Alfred 83 19
16) Coe 76 18
17) St Lawrence 75 16
18) Wabash 62 17
19) E Texas Baptist 61 20
20) John Carroll 58 21
21) Denison 44 23
22) Wittenberg 38 T24
23) Salisbury 34 NR
24) Monmouth 32 NR
25) Wesley 21 NR
Dropped Out: Franklin, Delaware Valley, Rowan
Also Receiving Votes: Franklin (20), Dubuque (11), Case Western Reserve (7), Frostburg St (3), Muhlenberg (3), Berry (2), Huntingdon (2), Salve Regina (1), St John Fisher (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HansenRatings, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF and smedindy
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 221 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2)
2) UW-Whitewater 213 ( 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4)
3) Mount Union 210 ( 1, 1, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4)
4) St Thomas 196 ( 2, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6)
5) UW-Oshkosh 190 ( 3, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6)
6) North Central 176 ( 4, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 11)
T7) Linfield 160 ( 4, 6, 7, 7, 7, 9, 9, 10, 15)
T8) St John's 160 ( 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9)
9) UW-Platteville 151 ( 6, 7, 8, 8, 10, 10, 11, 11, 12)
10) Hardin-Simmons 150 ( 7, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 10, 11)
11) Johns Hopkins 144 ( 7, 8, 9, 10, 10, 11, 11, 12, 12)
12) Wheaton 123 (11, 11, 11, 12, 12, 13, 13, 14, 14)
13) Thomas More 108 (12, 12, 12, 13, 14, 14, 14, 15, 20)
14) Stevenson 89 ( 9, 13, 13, 13, 17, 18, 18, 22, 22)
15) Alfred 83 (12, 13, 16, 16, 17, 17, 17, 21, 22)
16) Coe 76 (14, 15, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 20, 21)
17) St Lawrence 75 (14, 15, 16, 16, 16, 17, 19, 20, --)
18) Wabash 62 (15, 15, 15, 16, 18, 19, 22, --, --)
19) E Texas Baptist 61 (14, 14, 18, 18, 19, 19, 20, 25, --)
20) John Carroll 58 (13, 17, 18, 18, 19, 20, 21, 24, --)
21) Denison 44 (15, 17, 19, 21, 22, 23, 23, 24, --)
22) Wittenberg 38 (16, 18, 21, 21, 22, 22, 24, --, --)
23) Salisbury 34 (17, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 24, --, --)
24) Monmouth 32 (13, 16, 19, 24, --, --, --, --, --)
25) Wesley 21 (21, 22, 23, 23, 23, 24, 25, --, --)
26) Franklin 20 (17, 20, 22, 25)
27) Dubuque 11 (20, 23, 25, 25)
28) Case Western 7 (21, 25, 25)
T29) Frostburg St 3 (23)
T29) Muhlenberg 3 (23)
T31) Berry 2 (24)
T31) Huntingdon 2 (24)
T33) Salve Regina 1 (25)
T33) St John Fisher 1 (25)
ok, who or whommmm ever has Linfield at # 15 ? :o Can you explain ? ::) I can see maybe 8 other teams in front of them ( I have them at #9) But, not 14 ? c'mon man. :P , The same thing for NCC at #11? :(
Quote from: desertcat1 on October 25, 2016, 11:48:56 AM
ok, who or whommmm ever has Linfield at # 15 ? :o Can you explain ? ::) I can see maybe 8 other teams in front of them ( I have them at #9) But, not 14 ? c'mon man. :P , The same thing for NCC at #11? :(
NCC @ #11 makes more sense to me than LF @ #15 (not that I agree with either). I see the order of the NCAC teams as a larger ? mark. I think this poll & the D3 top 25 pollsters are predicting the future (they may be correct) in ranking the NCAC teams.
Some of us were wait and see on Denison in the past. As a NRFP and a voter here, I didn't like Wabash's effort against Wooster, so I downgraded them.
The NCAC is backloaded this year (by chance, thanks to Denison) so it'll all be sorted out eventually. Wittenberg has the easiest schedule. Wabash, Denison and DPU all have tough matchups (Wabash plays a resurgent OWU, Denison and DPU; Denison and DPU play each other too). So basically voters may be forecasting the final standings.
The fact of the matter is that the difference between the teams is pretty slight IMHO.
Quote from: wartknight on October 25, 2016, 01:17:15 PM
Quote from: desertcat1 on October 25, 2016, 11:48:56 AM
ok, who or whommmm ever has Linfield at # 15 ? :o Can you explain ? ::) I can see maybe 8 other teams in front of them ( I have them at #9) But, not 14 ? c'mon man. :P , The same thing for NCC at #11? :(
NCC @ #11 makes more sense to me than LF @ #15 (not that I agree with either). I see the order of the NCAC teams as a larger ? mark. I think this poll & the D3 top 25 pollsters are predicting the future (they may be correct) in ranking the NCAC teams.
That would be me. As far as reasoning, I just felt that other teams have played more quality opponents and won or played fairly better and performed better against their schedule at the time and their conference opponents appear to be better. I have all the WIAC, MIAC, Texas, CCIW, and a couple other teams ahead at the moment. I am sure they will be back into my top 10 or 8 by the end of the regular season, if not higher.
As far as the way I'm seeing the NCAC, I had both Witt & Wabash in my ballot last week, and only Witt this week. I probably won't put Denison in my Top 25 unless they beat Wabash or DePauw. Witt is still the top team in the conference for me based on 2 wins vs. good opponents. Wabash really doesn't have any good wins right now (and hasn't looked great lately to imply the Witt loss was a fluke), and Denison has one good win.
After this weekend I moved Denison ahead of Witt and Wabash, and then put John Carroll in front of all of the NCAC.
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 25, 2016, 03:06:03 PM
Quote from: wartknight on October 25, 2016, 01:17:15 PM
Quote from: desertcat1 on October 25, 2016, 11:48:56 AM
ok, who or whommmm ever has Linfield at # 15 ? :o Can you explain ? ::) I can see maybe 8 other teams in front of them ( I have them at #9) But, not 14 ? c'mon man. :P , The same thing for NCC at #11? :(
NCC @ #11 makes more sense to me than LF @ #15 (not that I agree with either). I see the order of the NCAC teams as a larger ? mark. I think this poll & the D3 top 25 pollsters are predicting the future (they may be correct) in ranking the NCAC teams.
That would be me. As far as reasoning, I just felt that other teams have played more quality opponents and won or played fairly better and performed better against their schedule at the time and their conference opponents appear to be better. I have all the WIAC, MIAC, Texas, CCIW, and a couple other teams ahead at the moment. I am sure they will be back into my top 10 or 8 by the end of the regular season, if not higher.
d3mafan,
Still no answer to whom the "other (6) are ? ;D I agree with the first 9. ( wiac 3, miac 2, cciw 2, texas 2.) 8-) but after that was the question ? :'( Could it be east coast left coast ? :-*
Quote from: desertcat1 on October 26, 2016, 12:58:34 PM
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 25, 2016, 03:06:03 PM
Quote from: wartknight on October 25, 2016, 01:17:15 PM
Quote from: desertcat1 on October 25, 2016, 11:48:56 AM
ok, who or whommmm ever has Linfield at # 15 ? :o Can you explain ? ::) I can see maybe 8 other teams in front of them ( I have them at #9) But, not 14 ? c'mon man. :P , The same thing for NCC at #11? :(
NCC @ #11 makes more sense to me than LF @ #15 (not that I agree with either). I see the order of the NCAC teams as a larger ? mark. I think this poll & the D3 top 25 pollsters are predicting the future (they may be correct) in ranking the NCAC teams.
That would be me. As far as reasoning, I just felt that other teams have played more quality opponents and won or played fairly better and performed better against their schedule at the time and their conference opponents appear to be better. I have all the WIAC, MIAC, Texas, CCIW, and a couple other teams ahead at the moment. I am sure they will be back into my top 10 or 8 by the end of the regular season, if not higher.
d3mafan,
Still no answer to whom the "other (6) are ? ;D I agree with the first 9. ( wiac 3, miac 2, cciw 2, texas 2.) 8-) but after that was the question ? :'( Could it be east coast left coast ? :-*
There is no east coast/left coast thing going on. The highest east team is 9 and my top 4 has 3 west/left coast teams. Usually after playoffs, our top "East" Most team is usually ranked 8 or 9, so where I have them is consistent with most pollsters, except my opinion on where Linfield is ranked. History would tell you otherwise, but after taking a brutal loss to my #1 team, I don't think this is the same Linfield team of the past two years, they don't have the OOC schedule to prove otherwise other than losing poorly to the #1 team, it wouldn't be "fair" to other undefeated teams from stronger conferences who face tough challenges week in and week out (i.e. Alfred - there you go one "east" team that I have ranked higher. I also have East Texas as well. ) and no I am not sharing my full ballot with you.
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 26, 2016, 02:00:13 PM
Quote from: desertcat1 on October 26, 2016, 12:58:34 PM
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 25, 2016, 03:06:03 PM
Quote from: wartknight on October 25, 2016, 01:17:15 PM
Quote from: desertcat1 on October 25, 2016, 11:48:56 AM
ok, who or whommmm ever has Linfield at # 15 ? :o Can you explain ? ::) I can see maybe 8 other teams in front of them ( I have them at #9) But, not 14 ? c'mon man. :P , The same thing for NCC at #11? :(
NCC @ #11 makes more sense to me than LF @ #15 (not that I agree with either). I see the order of the NCAC teams as a larger ? mark. I think this poll & the D3 top 25 pollsters are predicting the future (they may be correct) in ranking the NCAC teams.
That would be me. As far as reasoning, I just felt that other teams have played more quality opponents and won or played fairly better and performed better against their schedule at the time and their conference opponents appear to be better. I have all the WIAC, MIAC, Texas, CCIW, and a couple other teams ahead at the moment. I am sure they will be back into my top 10 or 8 by the end of the regular season, if not higher.
d3mafan,
Still no answer to whom the "other (6) are ? ;D I agree with the first 9. ( wiac 3, miac 2, cciw 2, texas 2.) 8-) but after that was the question ? :'( Could it be east coast left coast ? :-*
There is no east coast/left coast thing going on. The highest east team is 9 and my top 4 has 3 west/left coast teams. Usually after playoffs, our top "East" Most team is usually ranked 8 or 9, so where I have them is consistent with most pollsters, except my opinion on where Linfield is ranked. History would tell you otherwise, but after taking a brutal loss to my #1 team, I don't think this is the same Linfield team of the past two years, they don't have the OOC schedule to prove otherwise other than losing poorly to the #1 team, it wouldn't be "fair" to other undefeated teams from stronger conferences who face tough challenges week in and week out (i.e. Alfred - there you go one "east" team that I have ranked higher. I also have East Texas as well . ) and no I am not sharing my full ballot with you.
So do you look at it as if Alfred played Linfield, on a neutral field right now, Alfred would win? As well as East Texas?
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 26, 2016, 03:14:51 PM
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 26, 2016, 02:00:13 PM
Quote from: desertcat1 on October 26, 2016, 12:58:34 PM
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 25, 2016, 03:06:03 PM
Quote from: wartknight on October 25, 2016, 01:17:15 PM
Quote from: desertcat1 on October 25, 2016, 11:48:56 AM
ok, who or whommmm ever has Linfield at # 15 ? :o Can you explain ? ::) I can see maybe 8 other teams in front of them ( I have them at #9) But, not 14 ? c'mon man. :P , The same thing for NCC at #11? :(
NCC @ #11 makes more sense to me than LF @ #15 (not that I agree with either). I see the order of the NCAC teams as a larger ? mark. I think this poll & the D3 top 25 pollsters are predicting the future (they may be correct) in ranking the NCAC teams.
That would be me. As far as reasoning, I just felt that other teams have played more quality opponents and won or played fairly better and performed better against their schedule at the time and their conference opponents appear to be better. I have all the WIAC, MIAC, Texas, CCIW, and a couple other teams ahead at the moment. I am sure they will be back into my top 10 or 8 by the end of the regular season, if not higher.
d3mafan,
Still no answer to whom the "other (6) are ? ;D I agree with the first 9. ( wiac 3, miac 2, cciw 2, texas 2.) 8-) but after that was the question ? :'( Could it be east coast left coast ? :-*
There is no east coast/left coast thing going on. The highest east team is 9 and my top 4 has 3 west/left coast teams. Usually after playoffs, our top "East" Most team is usually ranked 8 or 9, so where I have them is consistent with most pollsters, except my opinion on where Linfield is ranked. History would tell you otherwise, but after taking a brutal loss to my #1 team, I don't think this is the same Linfield team of the past two years, they don't have the OOC schedule to prove otherwise other than losing poorly to the #1 team, it wouldn't be "fair" to other undefeated teams from stronger conferences who face tough challenges week in and week out (i.e. Alfred - there you go one "east" team that I have ranked higher. I also have East Texas as well . ) and no I am not sharing my full ballot with you.
So do you look at it as if Alfred played Linfield, on a neutral field right now, Alfred would win? As well as East Texas?
I look at it as Alfred is undefeated from a strong conference and Linfield from a weaker conference with a bad loss. Regarding East Texas, both Linfield and East Texas got blitzed in the second half. Both Alfred and East Texas have a few key match ups coming up to prove me right, while Linfield has playoffs to prove me wrong. I did indicate that they would probably go back up once the other teams continue to play out their schedule.
d3mafan,
still YOU DID NOT ANSwer my question. :-[ All i wanted to know was who you put in from # 9 to # 14 that's all.
Sorry to disagree with you ;D but ALFRED(E-8) ::) :o is NOT at the same level as linfield. (imho) :-*
Hey man it's just a poll ? ??? it's not The Don VS Hillary.. show ;D
you should be proud of what you cast. :-*
Quote from: desertcat1 on October 27, 2016, 06:58:37 PM
d3mafan,
still YOU DID NOT ANSwer my question. :-[ All i wanted to know was who you put in from # 9 to # 14 that's all.
Sorry to disagree with you ;D but ALFRED(E-8) ::) :o is NOT at the same level as linfield. (imho) :-*
Hey man it's just a poll ? ??? it's not The Don VS Hillary.. show ;D
you should be proud of what you cast. :-*
Stevenson, Johns Hopkins and East Texas were the others. IMHO, at the time they had a better resume. I know in DIV III, history plays a big part in voting when there are less cross regional matchups, but like had stated in my earlier post, its at the time. However, IMHO, I think the best E 8 team would give Linfield a run for a money any year, that is one tough conference, its any given Saturday for them, NWC not so much (I basically penciled you guys into round 2 of the playoffs after week 6). I do respect your program, but its way tougher to go 9 straight weeks against teams that can beat you rather than only playing two big games a season and being well rested for playoffs.
I have never seen this board before how interesting 8-)
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 31, 2016, 01:06:08 PM
Quote from: desertcat1 on October 27, 2016, 06:58:37 PM
d3mafan,
still YOU DID NOT ANSwer my question. :-[ All i wanted to know was who you put in from # 9 to # 14 that's all.
Sorry to disagree with you ;D but ALFRED(E-8) ::) :o is NOT at the same level as linfield. (imho) :-*
Hey man it's just a poll ? ??? it's not The Don VS Hillary.. show ;D
you should be proud of what you cast. :-*
Stevenson, Johns Hopkins and East Texas were the others. IMHO, at the time they had a better resume. I know in DIV III, history plays a big part in voting when there are less cross regional matchups, but like had stated in my earlier post, its at the time. However, IMHO, I think the best E 8 team would give Linfield a run for a money any year, that is one tough conference, its any given Saturday for them, NWC not so much (I basically penciled you guys into round 2 of the playoffs after week 6). I do respect your program, but its way tougher to go 9 straight weeks against teams that can beat you rather than only playing two big games a season and being well rested for playoffs.
d ma,
How so you forget my friend :o ::)
Linfield BEAT the E8 winner last year and also beat the beast from the east Rowan a few years ago? Bad.. ( in sceond half) :-* wesley not so good.. :'(
Quote from: desertcat1 on October 31, 2016, 07:38:06 PM
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 31, 2016, 01:06:08 PM
Quote from: desertcat1 on October 27, 2016, 06:58:37 PM
d3mafan,
still YOU DID NOT ANSwer my question. :-[ All i wanted to know was who you put in from # 9 to # 14 that's all.
Sorry to disagree with you ;D but ALFRED(E-8) ::) :o is NOT at the same level as linfield. (imho) :-*
Hey man it's just a poll ? ??? it's not The Don VS Hillary.. show ;D
you should be proud of what you cast. :-*
Stevenson, Johns Hopkins and East Texas were the others. IMHO, at the time they had a better resume. I know in DIV III, history plays a big part in voting when there are less cross regional matchups, but like had stated in my earlier post, its at the time. However, IMHO, I think the best E 8 team would give Linfield a run for a money any year, that is one tough conference, its any given Saturday for them, NWC not so much (I basically penciled you guys into round 2 of the playoffs after week 6). I do respect your program, but its way tougher to go 9 straight weeks against teams that can beat you rather than only playing two big games a season and being well rested for playoffs.
d ma,
How so you forget my friend :o ::)
Linfield BEAT the E8 winner last year and also beat the beast from the east Rowan a few years ago? Bad.. ( in sceond half) :-* wesley not so good.. :'(
I did not forget last year's matchup, it was actually fun to watch, Cortland had already loss two games that season and showed that it was somewhat vulnerable late in the season. Also, "Run for its money" does not equate to winning, it means that I think they would be more than likely to upset Linfield than majority of some other teams from other conferences and your conference. Now going back to your ranking, all I am saying is that historically Linfield has not taken a beating as bad as it did earlier this season when playing some of the other tier 1A/2 teams, I can't excuse that, maybe it was early, maybe not. If you would have loss by 3-17, maybe you'll be in my Top 6-8, but for now "No."
2016 WEEK 9 TOP 25 FAN POLL
# School Pts Prev
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor (5) 221 1
2) UW-Whitewater (2) 213 2
3) Mount Union (2) 212 3
4) St Thomas 193 4
5) UW-Oshkosh 190 5
6) North Central 178 6
7) St John's 162 T7
8) Linfield 160 T7
9) Hardin-Simmons 151 10
10) UW-Platteville 147 9
11) Johns Hopkins 146 11
12) Wheaton 122 12
13) Thomas More 110 13
14) Stevenson 91 14
15) Alfred 90 15
16) Coe 86 16
17) St Lawrence 76 17
18) John Carroll 62 20
19) Wabash 55 18
20) Salisbury 49 23
21) E Texas Baptist 45 19
T22) Monmouth 35 24
T22) Wittenberg 35 22
24) Wesley 26 25
25) Case Western Reserve 22 NR
Dropped Out: Denison
Also Receiving Votes: Franklin (16), Muhlenberg (10), St John Fisher (9), Berry (3), Concordia-Moorhead (3), Frostburg St (3), Huntingdon (2), Maryville (1), Salve Regina (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HansenRatings, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF and smedindy
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 221 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2)
2) UW-Whitewater 213 ( 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4)
3) Mount Union 212 ( 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4) St Thomas 193 ( 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6)
5) UW-Oshkosh 190 ( 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6)
6) North Central 178 ( 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 8, 11)
7) St John's 162 ( 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9)
8) Linfield 160 ( 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 10, 13)
9) Hardin-Simmons 151 ( 7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 11)
10) UW-Platteville 147 ( 7, 8, 8, 10, 10, 10, 11, 11, 12)
11) Johns Hopkins 146 ( 7, 7, 8, 10, 10, 11, 11, 12, 12)
12) Wheaton 122 (11, 11, 11, 12, 12, 13, 14, 14, 14)
13) Thomas More 110 (12, 12, 12, 13, 13, 14, 14, 15, 19)
14) Stevenson 91 ( 9, 13, 13, 14, 17, 18, 18, 20, 21)
15) Alfred 90 (12, 13, 15, 16, 16, 16, 17, 17, 22)
16) Coe 86 (14, 15, 15, 16, 16, 17, 18, 18, 19)
17) St Lawrence 76 (14, 15, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 19, 25)
18) John Carroll 62 (13, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, --)
19) Wabash 55 (15, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, --, --, --)
20) Salisbury 49 (15, 18, 20, 21, 21, 21, 22, 23, 24)
21) E Texas Baptist 45 (14, 17, 19, 20, 20, 21, --, --, --)
T22) Monmouth 35 (13, 16, 19, 23, 25, 25, --, --, --)
T22) Wittenberg 35 (17, 19, 19, 21, 22, 23, --, --, --)
24) Wesley 26 (21, 22, 22, 22, 23, 23, 23, --, --)
25) Case Western 22 (20, 21, 23, 24, 24, 24, 25, 25, --)
26) Franklin 16 (18, 20, 24)
27) Muhlenberg 10 (20, 22)
28) St John Fisher 9 (22, 24, 24, 25)
T29) Berry 3 (23)
T29) Concordia-Moorhead 3 (23)
T29) Frostburg St 3 (24, 25)
32) Huntingdon 2 (24)
T33) Maryville 1 (25)
T33) Salve Regina 1 (25)
Wow, any love for Denison went through the door or out the window...
Quote from: smedindy on November 01, 2016, 04:27:01 PM
Wow, any love for Denison went through the door or out the window...
Bit too much out of the comfort zone for people, wasn't it?
I wonder what the response would be if Denison had lost to DePauw three weeks ago and then beat Wittenberg this past weekend? Still zero votes for Denison? I bet they would have more than zero.
Last week, UWO won AT UWRF, 41-7. This week it took UWW overtime to beat UWRF AT HOME. While I probably won't actually do it, I am SORELY tempted to move UWO ahead of UWW, despite the h-t-h result. After all, that game was IN Whitewater, and UWW won by only 3 - if home field means anything at all, that is essentially a tie! Thoughts?
They won by 7. I think it's meaningless. Matchups and circumstances were completely different. Patterson was down, lots of other nuances. For me I see a trap game after a brutal stretch where UWW could easily have lost and found a way to win. That trumps a team who couldn't find a way to win huh. It's a no brainer.
Quote from: USee on November 05, 2016, 07:51:30 PM
They won by 7. I think it's meaningless. Matchups and circumstances were completely different. Patterson was down, lots of other nuances. For me I see a trap game after a brutal stretch where UWW could easily have lost and found a way to win. That trumps a team who couldn't find a way to win huh. It's a no brainer.
The UWRF qb fumbled at the 5 in OT. The scoreboard officially read 7-point margin at the end, but that is to all intents-and-purposes a tie game AT HOME against a 3-5 opponent. Less than impressive.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 05, 2016, 08:16:35 PM
Quote from: USee on November 05, 2016, 07:51:30 PM
They won by 7. I think it's meaningless. Matchups and circumstances were completely different. Patterson was down, lots of other nuances. For me I see a trap game after a brutal stretch where UWW could easily have lost and found a way to win. That trumps a team who couldn't find a way to win huh. It's a no brainer.
The UWRF qb fumbled at the 5 in OT. The scoreboard officially read 7-point margin at the end, but that is to all intents-and-purposes a tie game AT HOME against a 3-5 opponent. Less than impressive.
Morningside. Oshkosh. Platteville. Nobody in the division has three results that good, let alone in consecutive weeks. I think you're really overthinking all of this. Even the best teams don't win by 50 every single week, nor should they have to.
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 05, 2016, 08:35:45 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 05, 2016, 08:16:35 PM
Quote from: USee on November 05, 2016, 07:51:30 PM
They won by 7. I think it's meaningless. Matchups and circumstances were completely different. Patterson was down, lots of other nuances. For me I see a trap game after a brutal stretch where UWW could easily have lost and found a way to win. That trumps a team who couldn't find a way to win huh. It's a no brainer.
The UWRF qb fumbled at the 5 in OT. The scoreboard officially read 7-point margin at the end, but that is to all intents-and-purposes a tie game AT HOME against a 3-5 opponent. Less than impressive.
Morningside. Oshkosh. Platteville. Nobody in the division has three results that good, let alone in consecutive weeks. I think you're really overthinking all of this. Even the best teams don't win by 50 every single week, nor should they have to.
Bingo. Couple years ago UWW squeaked by UWRF in less than impressive fashion and then monkey stomped everyone to the national title.
Sorry, you guys are too late! At the last minute I impulsively switched them. UWO 3, UWW 4.
UWO and UWW have only four common opponents. UWSP and UWLaX are a complete match: both went +22 at home, +10 on the road. UWW was +6 on the road against Platteville, UWO +9 at home - small advantage UWW. UWO +34 away, UWW +7 (OT game - I my mind essentially a tie) at home - HUGE advantage UWO. As to their big OOC wins, I just don't know whether UWW beating Morningside by 14 is better than Oshkosh beating John Carroll by 19. Do you? ;)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 05, 2016, 08:16:35 PM
Quote from: USee on November 05, 2016, 07:51:30 PM
They won by 7. I think it's meaningless. Matchups and circumstances were completely different. Patterson was down, lots of other nuances. For me I see a trap game after a brutal stretch where UWW could easily have lost and found a way to win. That trumps a team who couldn't find a way to win huh. It's a no brainer.
The UWRF qb fumbled at the 5 in OT. The scoreboard officially read 7-point margin at the end, but that is to all intents-and-purposes a tie game AT HOME against a 3-5 opponent. Less than impressive.
Until twenty years ago it WOULD have been a TIE! Although back then late game strategy might have been different with no overtime.
Had to laugh when the WW broadcaster referred to the "new ovetime" procedure and had no clue about the strategy of starting on defense in OT.
Official Top 25 for Week #10 is out.
The top 4 teams got 2347 out of a possible 2350 votes.
Sorry for the delay. Voters were a bit slower this week... maybe there was some vote that was more interesting or important happening yesterday :-\
2016 WEEK 10 TOP 25 FAN POLL
# School Pts Prev
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor (7) 223 1
2) Mount Union (2) 216 3
3) UW-Whitewater 202 2
4) St Thomas 195 4
5) UW-Oshkosh 192 5
6) North Central 174 6
7) Linfield 166 8
8) St John's 160 7
9) Hardin-Simmons 154 9
10) UW-Platteville 148 10
11) Johns Hopkins 146 11
12) Wheaton 124 12
13) Thomas More 114 13
14) Alfred 103 15
15) Coe 96 16
16) John Carroll 77 18
17) Wabash 68 19
18) Wesley 65 24
19) Monmouth 50 T22
T20) Case Western 49 25
T20) Wittenberg 49 T22
22) St John Fisher 29 NR
T23) Franklin 18 NR
T23) Hobart 18 NR
25) Muhlenberg 16 NR
Dropped Out: Stevenson, St Lawrence, Salisbury, E Texas Baptist
Also Receiving Votes: E Texas Baptist (13), Stevenson (12), St Lawrence (10), Salisbury (9), Frostburg St (8), Berry (5), Concordia-Moorhead (5), W New England (4), Huntingdon (3), Central (2), Husson (1), Trinity (CT) (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN-MG, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HansenRatings, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF and smedindy
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 09, 2016, 08:35:24 PM
Sorry for the delay. Voters were a bit slower this week... maybe there was some vote that was more interesting or important happening yesterday :-\
What vote could possibly be more important than timely participation in the Top 25 Fan Poll balloting?! :o
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 223 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2)
2) Mount Union 216 ( 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 4)
3) UW-Whitewater 202 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5)
4) St Thomas 195 ( 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6)
5) UW-Oshkosh 192 ( 3, 3, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6)
6) North Central 174 ( 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 9, 11)
7) Linfield 166 ( 3, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12)
8) St John's 160 ( 6, 7, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10)
9) Hardin-Simmons 154 ( 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 10, 11)
10) UW-Platteville 148 ( 7, 8, 8, 10, 10, 10, 10, 11, 12)
11) Johns Hopkins 146 ( 7, 7, 8, 10, 10, 11, 11, 12, 12)
12) Wheaton 124 (11, 11, 11, 12, 12, 13, 13, 13, 14)
13) Thomas More 114 (12, 12, 12, 13, 13, 13, 14, 15, 16)
14) Alfred 103 (11, 13, 14, 14, 14, 15, 16, 17, 17)
15) Coe 96 (14, 15, 15, 15, 15, 16, 16, 16, 16)
16) John Carroll 77 (13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 18, 20, 20, 23)
17) Wabash 68 (14, 14, 16, 17, 18, 18, 18, 25, --)
18) Wesley 65 (15, 15, 18, 19, 19, 19, 19, 20, 25)
19) Monmouth 50 (13, 16, 17, 20, 21, 21, 25, 25, --)
T20) Case Western 49 (17, 19, 20, 20, 21, 21, 22, 22, 23)
T20) Wittenberg 49 (17, 17, 17, 17, 19, 22, 24, --, --)
22) St John Fisher 29 (18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 25, --, --, --)
T23) Franklin 18 (19, 19, 22, --, --, --, --, --, --)
T23) Hobart 18 (20, 22, 23, 23, 24, --, --, --, --)
25) Muhlenberg 16 (18, 20, 24, --, --, --, --, --, --)
26) E Texas Baptist 13 (18, 22, 25)
27) Stevenson 12 (21, 22, 23)
28) St Lawrence 10 (23, 24, 24, 24, 25)
29) Salisbury 9 (21, 22)
30) Frostburg St 8 (21, 23)
T31) Berry 5 (21)
T31) Concordia-Moorhead 5 (21)
33) W New England 4 (24, 24)
34) Huntingdon 3 (23)
35) Central 2 (24)
T36) Husson 1 (25)
T36) Trinity (CT) 1 (25)
Gonna be an interesting week to vote - JCU 31, UMU 28. :o
The bottom 5 is almost all new, and Mt. Union dropped out of my Top 10 mainly because I couldn't justify moving anyone out when I moved JCU up.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 12, 2016, 04:22:02 PM
Gonna be an interesting week to vote - JCU 31, UMU 28. :o
At least you guys don't have to vote for the D1 schools this week----YIKES!
This is the final poll until after the Stagg Bowl. Good luck to the 32 teams still playing
2016 WEEK 11 TOP 25 FAN POLL
# School Pts Prev
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor (9) 225 1
2) UW-Whitewater 209 3
3) St Thomas 206 4
4) UW-Oshkosh 202 5
5) North Central 180 6
6) Linfield 166 7
7) St John's 159 8
8) Hardin-Simmons 153 9
9) John Carroll 151 16
10) Mount Union 147 2
11) UW-Platteville 145 10
12) Johns Hopkins 133 11
13) Wheaton 120 12
14) Alfred 112 14
15) Thomas More 106 13
16) Coe 95 15
17) Wesley 77 18
18) Monmouth 60 19
19) Wittenberg 54 T20
20) Hobart 50 T23
21) Stevenson 30 NR
22) Frostburg St 26 NR
23) Huntingdon 20 NR
24) Muhlenberg 19 25
25) Franklin 15 T23
Dropped Out: Wabash, Case Western Reserve, St John Fisher
Also Receiving Votes: St John Fisher (12), St Lawrence (11), DePauw (7), Berry (6), W New England (6), Central (5), Delaware Valley (5), Husson (3), Randolph-Macon (3), Wabash (3), Illinois Wesleyan (2), Redlands (1), Trinity (CT) (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HansenRatings, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF and smedindy
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 225 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2) UW-Whitewater 209 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4)
3) St Thomas 206 ( 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5)
4) UW-Oshkosh 202 ( 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5)
5) North Central 180 ( 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 11)
6) Linfield 166 ( 3, 5, 6, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 11)
7) St John's 159 ( 5, 7, 7, 7, 9, 9, 10, 10, 11)
8) Hardin-Simmon 153 ( 6, 6, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10, 11, 12)
9) John Carroll 151 ( 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 13, 16)
10) Mount Union 147 ( 5, 5, 8, 8, 9, 9, 12, 14, 17)
11) UW-Platteville 145 ( 6, 7, 9, 9, 10, 10, 11, 13, 14)
12) Johns Hopkins 133 ( 7, 8, 11, 11, 12, 13, 13, 13, 13)
13) Wheaton 120 (10, 12, 12, 12, 12, 13, 14, 14, 15)
14) Alfred 112 ( 6, 10, 14, 14, 15, 15, 15, 16, 17)
15) Thomas More 106 (12, 12, 13, 13, 14, 14, 15, 16, 19)
16) Coe 95 (11, 15, 15, 15, 16, 16, 17, 17, 17)
17) Wesley 77 (16, 16, 16, 17, 18, 18, 18, 19, 19)
18) Monmouth 60 (14, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 21, 21, 24)
19) Wittenberg 54 (15, 17, 17, 18, 18, 21, 22, --, --)
20) Hobart 50 (17, 19, 19, 19, 20, 20, 21, 23, --)
21) Stevenson 30 (18, 20, 20, 22, 23, 24, 25, --, --)
22) Frostburg St 26 (20, 21, 22, 23, 23, 23, 24, --, --)
23) Huntingdon 20 (20, 21, 23, 24, 24, 25, 25, --, --)
24) Muhlenberg 19 (18, 19, 22, --, --, --, --, --, --)
25) Franklin 15 (18, 19, --, --, --, --, --, --, --)
26) St John Fisher 12 (20, 21, 25)
27) St Lawrence 11 (22, 22, 23)
28) DePauw 7 (22, 23)
T29) Berry 6 (20)
T29) W New England 6 (22, 24)
T31) Central 5 (21)
T31) Delaware Valley 5 (22, 25)
T33) Husson 3 (23)
T33) Randolph-Macon 3 (24, 25)
T33) Wabash 3 (24, 25)
36) Illinois Wesleyan 2 (24)
T37) Redlands 1 (25)
T37) Trinity (CT) 1 (25)
Geez... Mount Union down to #10? I was one of the voters who kept them pretty high, #5, and I've had John Carroll in my Top 10-15 all season. Looking at overall body of work, I think Mount has an argument as the second-best 1-loss team in the country.
Quote from: HansenRatings on November 17, 2016, 10:56:33 AM
Geez... Mount Union down to #10? I was one of the voters who kept them pretty high, #5, and I've had John Carroll in my Top 10-15 all season. Looking at overall body of work, I think Mount has an argument as the second-best 1-loss team in the country.
Not saying you're wrong, but...I'm curious about this. Not that it really matters now, the playoff brackets are what they are and we'll see where everything shakes out, just curious how you're figuring Mount as the second-best 1-loss team in the country when there is a 1-loss team that has beaten them heads-up (JCU) and another 1-loss team who has beaten that one (UWO).
I can infer from your statement that you ranked Mount #5 (and that JCU's highest vote is 7) that you kept Mount ahead of JCU (so presumably UWO is the "best 1-loss team" with Mount, JCU, Linfield, Hardin-Simmons, and St. John's somewhere just behind them in the hierarchy of one-loss teams).
I assume your rationale for Mount/JCU is because Mount spent the entire season blitzing through OAC teams while JCU had a few closer calls, hence the justification that Mount's body of work is better? Since they played all of the same teams...I guess you're saying that JCU struggled to beat BW and ONU while Mount beat both more easily?
We're about to see things like this unfold in FBS as well, where the CFP committee is likely going to have to decide between Clemson/Louisville (both 1-loss teams, Clemson owning h2h win, but it was a close game at Clemson and otherwise Lousville has spent the season crushing some teams that Clemson has squeaked by) and maybe even will have to decide between a 1-loss Ohio State and a 2-loss B1G champion Penn State or Wisconsin...
Somebody thinks there are 16 teams better than Mount Union? That's wild. I mean, UMU rarely gives voters a chance to play around with their ranking so, hey, get weird with it. Might be 12 more years before you can do it again. :)
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on November 17, 2016, 11:25:46 AM
Quote from: HansenRatings on November 17, 2016, 10:56:33 AM
Geez... Mount Union down to #10? I was one of the voters who kept them pretty high, #5, and I've had John Carroll in my Top 10-15 all season. Looking at overall body of work, I think Mount has an argument as the second-best 1-loss team in the country.
Not saying you're wrong, but...I'm curious about this. Not that it really matters now, the playoff brackets are what they are and we'll see where everything shakes out, just curious how you're figuring Mount as the second-best 1-loss team in the country when there is a 1-loss team that has beaten them heads-up (JCU) and another 1-loss team who has beaten that one (UWO).
I can infer from your statement that you ranked Mount #5 (and that JCU's highest vote is 7) that you kept Mount ahead of JCU (so presumably UWO is the "best 1-loss team" with Mount, JCU, Linfield, Hardin-Simmons, and St. John's somewhere just behind them in the hierarchy of one-loss teams).
I assume your rationale for Mount/JCU is because Mount spent the entire season blitzing through OAC teams while JCU had a few closer calls, hence the justification that Mount's body of work is better? Since they played all of the same teams...I guess you're saying that JCU struggled to beat BW and ONU while Mount beat both more easily?
We're about to see things like this unfold in FBS as well, where the CFP committee is likely going to have to decide between Clemson/Louisville (both 1-loss teams, Clemson owning h2h win, but it was a close game at Clemson and otherwise Lousville has spent the season crushing some teams that Clemson has squeaked by) and maybe even will have to decide between a 1-loss Ohio State and a 2-loss B1G champion Penn State or Wisconsin...
You hit it pretty much on the head there. UMU outscored their mutual opponents with JCU by an average of 12.75 points. So for 9 games, UMU was on average 2 touchdowns better than JCU, and about equal in the last week. If I'm voting based on who I think the best teams are, Mount comes out on top in that matchup. Like I said, I kept JCU pretty high up my ballot all year, right in the mix with Linfield/HSU, so I didn't view them winning as a HUGE surprise (I thought the Raiders would win, obviously, but it would be close).
I have 8 out of 9 ballots so hopefully the final poll will be up soon.
Apparently the playoffs didn't clear things up as there are already 40 teams with a vote while before the playoffs there were just 38.
As usual we seem to have lost a voter during the playoffs so there were only 8 ballots rather than 9.
2016 FINAL TOP 25 FAN POLL
# School Pts Prev
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor (8) 200 1
2) UW-Oshkosh 192 4
3) John Carroll 181 9
4) Mount Union 174 10
5) St Thomas 167 3
6) UW-Whitewater 158 2
7) Wheaton 142 13
T8) Linfield 127 6
T8) St John's 127 7
10) Johns Hopkins 124 12
11) North Central 122 5
12) UW-Platteville 108 11
13) Wesley 106 17
14) Hardin-Simmons 101 8
15) Alfred 100 14
16) Wittenberg 74 19
T17) Coe 65 16
T17) Thomas More 65 15
19) Hobart 50 20
20) W New England 39 NR
21) Monmouth 38 18
22) Stevenson 31 21
23) Frostburg St 25 22
24) Huntingdon 18 23
25) St Lawrence 10 NR
Dropped Out: Muhlenberg and Franklin
Also Receiving Votes: Muhlenberg (9), Franklin (8), Central (6), Bridgewater St (5), Delaware Valley (5), Redlands (5), Berry (4), DePauw (4), Illinois Wesleyan (3), Wash & Jeff (2), Salisbury (1), St John Fisher (1), Trinity (CT) (1), Wabash (1), Whitworth (1)
Voters: D3MAFAN, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HansenRatings, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF and smedindy
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 200 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2) UW-Oshkosh 192 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3) John Carroll 181 ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4)
4) Mount Union 174 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5)
5) St Thomas 167 ( 3, 3, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 9)
6) UW-Whitewater 158 ( 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 10)
7) Wheaton 142 ( 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 10, 10)
T8) Linfield 127 ( 5, 9, 9, 10, 11, 11, 12, 14)
T8) St John's 127 ( 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 12, 12)
10) Johns Hopkins 124 ( 6, 8, 10, 11, 11, 12, 13, 13)
11) North Central 122 ( 8, 9, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14)
12) UW-Platteville 108 ( 7, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 15, 17)
13) Wesley 106 ( 7, 7, 10, 14, 14, 15, 17, 18)
14) Hardin-Simmons 101 ( 8, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18)
15) Alfred 100 ( 7, 8, 8, 13, 15, 15, 17, 25)
16) Wittenberg 74 (13, 13, 16, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21)
T17) Coe 65 (15, 16, 17, 18, 18, 18, 19, 22)
T17) Thomas More 65 (14, 14, 15, 17, 17, 19, 21, --)
19) Hobart 50 (13, 16, 19, 20, 20, 21, 23, --)
20) W New England 39 (18, 18, 19, 19, 21, 22, --, --)
21) Monmouth 38 (16, 20, 21, 21, 21, 23, 23, 25)
22) Stevenson 31 (16, 19, 20, 22, 22, --, --, --)
23) Frostburg St 25 (16, 19, 23, 23, 24, --, --, --)
24) Huntingdon 18 (19, 20, 23, 24, --, --, --, --)
25) St Lawrence 10 (22, 22, 24, --, --, --, --, --)
26) Muhlenberg 9 (17)
27) Franklin 8 (20, 24)
28) Central 6 (20)
T29) Bridgewater St 5 (21)
T29) Delaware Valley 5 (23, 24)
T29) Redlands 5 (24, 24, 25)
T32) Berry 4 (22)
T32) DePauw 4 (22)
34) Illinois Wesleyan 3 (23)
35) Wash & Jeff 2 (24)
T36) Salisbury 1 (25)
T36) St John Fisher 1 (25)
T36) Trinity (CT) 1 (25)
T36) Wabash 1 (25)
T36) Whitworth 1 (25)
Are you ready for some football?!
If you're interested in being part of the Fan Poll this year just send me a PM. Ballots are due by Tuesday during the season. If you need extra time or know you won't be able to get a ballot in that particular week please let me know as soon as you can. The earlier you submit a ballot the more time I'll have to check it and make sure you didn't make any errors or forget a team (and there's usually one every couple weeks that needs revised).
If you're in the south or east regions I strongly hope you'll join. There's usually a low turnout from those areas.
I'd like to have the preseason poll up by Sunday 27th. This will give time for people to study Kickoff which comes out the 22nd.
I'm in!
Everyone from last year is returning and we've picked up an additional voter from the South which gets us to double digits this year. :)
So far 4 ballots are in... hopefully all will be in by Sunday. I know one voter has said they won't get their ballot in this week but will be good after that.
It's finally here... the Top 25 Fan Poll. Everyone from last year has returned (with one not submitting this week) and we've added a 10th voter.
2017 PRESEASON TOP 25 FAN POLL
# School Pts Prev
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor (8) 223 1
2) Mount Union 213 4
3) UW-Whitewater 202 6
4) UW-Oshkosh 195 2
5) St Thomas (1) 194 5
6) Wheaton 170 7
7) North Central 167 11
8) Linfield 154 T8
9) John Carroll 153 3
10) Wesley 150 13
11) St John's 135 T8
12) Hardin-Simmons 121 14
13) Johns Hopkins 103 10
14) UW-Platteville 101 12
15) Hobart 85 19
16) Frostburg St 75 23
17) Wittenberg 68 16
18) Stevenson 63 22
19) Delaware Valley 61 NR
20) Thomas More 59 T17
21) Case Western Reserve 47 NR
22) Alfred 35 15
T23) St John Fisher 18 NR
T23) Wash & Jeff 18 NR
25) Muhlenberg 15 NR
Dropped Out: Coe, W New England, Monmouth, Huntingdon, St Lawrence
Also Receiving Votes: Denison (12), UW-La Crosse (11), Whitworth (11), Redlands (10), W New England (10), Heidelberg (8), Salisbury (8), Concordia-Moorhead (7), Brockport (5), Illinois Wesleyan (5), Dubuque (4), Wabash (3), Wartburg (3), Monmouth (2), Franklin (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HansenRatings, HSCTiger74, NCF, smedindy, and newcomer Scots13
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 223 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 3)
2) Mount Union 213 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4)
3) UW-Whitewater 202 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5)
4) UW-Oshkosh 195 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 7, 8)
5) St Thomas 194 ( 1, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 7)
6) Wheaton 170 ( 5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 9, 11)
7) North Central 167 ( 5, 5, 6, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 10)
8) Linfield 154 ( 6, 7, 8, 8, 8, 10, 10, 10, 13)
9) John Carroll 153 ( 6, 7, 7, 8, 9, 9, 10, 12, 13)
10) Wesley 150 ( 6, 6, 9, 9, 9, 10, 11, 12, 12)
11) St John's 135 ( 8, 9, 10, 11, 11, 11, 12, 12, 15)
12) Hardin-Simmons 121 (10, 11, 11, 11, 12, 12, 15, 15, 16)
13) Johns Hopkins 103 (12, 13, 13, 13, 14, 14, 15, 17, 20)
14) UW-Platteville 101 ( 6, 12, 13, 14, 15, 15, 15, 21, 22)
15) Hobart 85 ( 7, 13, 14, 14, 16, 18, 20, 21, --)
16) Frostburg St 75 (10, 13, 17, 17, 17, 18, 19, 22, --)
17) Wittenberg 68 (14, 15, 16, 16, 17, 18, 18, --, --)
18) Stevenson 63 (14, 16, 17, 18, 18, 19, 20, 23, --)
19) Delaware Valley 61 (16, 16, 17, 17, 20, 20, 20, 23, 24)
20) Thomas More 59 (13, 14, 16, 18, 19, 19, 25, 25, --)
21) Case Western Reserve 47 (11, 16, 20, 22, 22, 22, 24, 24, --)
22) Alfred 35 (17, 18, 20, 21, 21, 24, --, --, --)
T23) St John Fisher 18 (19, 22, 23, 23, 25, --, --, --, --)
T23) Wash & Jeff 18 (19, 21, 21, 25, --, --, --, --, --)
25) Muhlenberg 15 (19, 23, 24, 24, 25, --, --, --, --)
26) Denison 12 (14)
T27) UW-La Crosse 11 (15)
T27) Whitworth 11 (22, 22, 23)
29) Redlands 10 (21, 23, 25, 25)
30) W New England 10 (19, 24, 25)
T31) Heidelberg 8 (18)
T31) Salisbury 8 (20, 24)
33) Concordia-Moorhead 7 (19)
T34) Brockport 5 (21)
T34) Illinois Wesleyan 5 (21)
36) Dubuque 4 (22)
T37) Wabash 3 (23)
T37) Wartburg 3 (23)
39) Monmouth 2 (24)
40) Franklin 1 (25)
that all looks about right for preseason, although the receiving votes section is a little surprising. I thought Franklin might have gotten a few more...
I am very much an outlier for most of teams, including being the only person not voting UMHB as #1 (very surprising to me, honestly), and being the only vote for about 4 of the teams receiving votes.
I was a bit surprised by the overwhelming support for UMHB as #1 also. I can see the justification for keeping the defending champ at #1, but I would not expect that line of thinking to be nearly unanimous among voters (both here and the main d3football.com poll)
Quote from: HansenRatings on August 28, 2017, 12:35:45 PM
I am very much an outlier for most of teams, including being the only person not voting UMHB as #1 (very surprising to me, honestly), and being the only vote for about 4 of the teams receiving votes.
I didn't see any overwhelming reason NOT to have them #1. Ties go to the champ.
Quote from: HansenRatings on August 28, 2017, 12:35:45 PM
I am very much an outlier for most of teams, including being the only person not voting UMHB as #1 (very surprising to me, honestly), and being the only vote for about 4 of the teams receiving votes.
Do you vote strictly on your algorithm? Just curious. I've played around with one when I had more free time (a/k/a a boring job in the past) but never voted based on it.
Quote from: smedindy on August 28, 2017, 07:24:27 PM
Quote from: HansenRatings on August 28, 2017, 12:35:45 PM
I am very much an outlier for most of teams, including being the only person not voting UMHB as #1 (very surprising to me, honestly), and being the only vote for about 4 of the teams receiving votes.
Do you vote strictly on your algorithm? Just curious. I've played around with one when I had more free time (a/k/a a boring job in the past) but never voted based on it.
It definitely influences my thinking, but I vote based on my own opinions (but I'm pretty unlikely to vote a team into my Top 25 if the algorithm has them around 50 or 75, like Western New England right now)
Not a voter in this poll, but I was also surprised at the near-unanimous support of UMHB at #1. I mean, they lost the best defensive player in the country and the one guy Fredenburg trusted with the football when all the chips went into the middle last December. I know they've got plenty of dudes down there in Belton, but they lost two huge pieces. St. Thomas is loaded. Mount Union has a ton back from a team that scrapped their way to the semis. I thought there were three or four viable options for #1 preseason, which is why it's surprising that everyone went with UMHB.
I guess time will tell, as the cliche goes, but again, I didn't see a reason not to have them #1.
September will be a reckoning, with UMHB - Linfield, Oshkosh - John Carroll, St. Thomas - St. Johns, and Whitewater with three good teams on the road (IWU and C-M, and then Oshkosh on the 30th).
If UW-W gets to October 4-0 with three good wins on the road, well, that may change the calculus.
I also think we won't really know much about Mt. Union until their last game unless they unexpectedly struggle against ONU. The OAC seems to be backsliding except for UMU and JCU.
So much for UWW being in the mix for #1! :P THREE times in the game they were first-and-goal from the IWU 1, and never scored a TD! The Titan defense got two TOs and held them to a FG the third (actually, first) time.
Despite being a die-hard Titan fan, I thought the voter who had them 21st was somewhat crazy. Well, yeah - they had them too low! :o When I rejoin the voting this week, I'll have them higher than that - though way too early to know how high (NOT top ten; probably somewhere in the mid-teens).
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 02, 2017, 05:34:31 PM
So much for UWW being in the mix for #1! :P THREE times in the game they were first-and-goal from the IWU 1, and never scored a TD! The Titan defense got two TOs and held them to a FG the third (actually, first) time.
Despite being a die-hard Titan fan, I thought the voter who had them 21st was somewhat crazy. Well, yeah - they had them too low! :o When I rejoin the voting this week, I'll have them higher than that - though way too early to know how high (NOT top ten; probably somewhere in the mid-teens).
me thinks yesterday's result tell us more about Whitewater's trajectory (especially since Bullis took over) than it does IWU. They have appeared on my ballot, but I feel the way you do with the team in the mid-teens.
Still waiting on 1 ballot to come in.
I'm surprised at how in agreement everyone is on who should be ranked... of course they don't agree on where they should be ranked though
2017 Week 1 TOP 25 FAN POLL
# School Pts Prev
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor (8) 247 1
2) Mount Union (1) 241 2
3) UW-Oshkosh 226 4
4) St Thomas (1) 223 5
5) Wheaton 207 6
6) North Central 196 7
7) Linfield 187 8
8) St John's 181 11
9) Hardin-Simmons 151 12
10) John Carroll 148 9
11) Delaware Valley 133 19
12) Illinois Wesleyan 128 NR
13) UW-Whitewater 122 3
14) Frostburg St 120 16
15) Johns Hopkins 103 13
16) UW-Platteville 102 14
17) Wittenberg 86 17
18) Thomas More 78 20
19) Wesley 64 10
20) Case Western Reserve 59 21
21) Washington & Jefferson 47 T23
22) Whitworth 41 NR
23) Alfred 35 22
24) Redlands 31 NR
25) Brockport 25 NR
Dropped Out: Hobart, Stevenson, St John Fisher, Muhlenberg
Also Receiving Votes: Muhlenberg (23), Denison (13), Dubuque (8), Heidelberg (8), Concordia-Moorhead (6), Hobart (3), Wabash (3), Albright (2), Monmouth (2), Franklin (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HansenRatings, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, Scots13, and smedindy
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 247 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 3)
2) Mount Union 241 ( 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3) UW-Oshkosh 226 ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5)
4) St Thomas 223 ( 1, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 6)
5) Wheaton 207 ( 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7)
6) North Central 196 ( 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8)
7) Linfield 187 ( 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 9, 11)
8) St John's 181 ( 5, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9)
9) Hardin-Simmons 151 ( 8, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 10, 13, 15, 15)
10) John Carroll 148 ( 6, 8, 9, 9, 10, 11, 14, 14, 15, 16)
11) Delaware Valley 133 (11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 12, 14, 17, 18)
12) Illinois Wesleyan 128 ( 6, 12, 12, 13, 13, 14, 15, 15, 16, 16)
13) UW-Whitewater 122 ( 9, 10, 10, 10, 14, 14, 16, 17, 18, 20)
14) Frostburg St 120 ( 8, 10, 11, 12, 12, 13, 16, 17, 19, 22)
15) Johns Hopkins 103 (12, 13, 13, 13, 16, 16, 17, 17, 18, 22)
16) UW-Platteville 102 ( 8, 11, 12, 12, 15, 17, 17, 19, 21, --)
17) Wittenberg 86 (13, 14, 14, 14, 15, 17, 18, 21, 22, --)
18) Thomas More 78 (12, 12, 15, 16, 16, 18, 19, 23, 25, --)
19) Wesley 64 (13, 15, 18, 18, 21, 21, 21, 22, 22, 25)
20) Case Western Reserve 59 (10, 17, 18, 19, 19, 23, 23, 23, 23, --)
21) Wash & Jeff 47 (14, 17, 19, 19, 20, 22, 24, --, --, --)
22) Whitworth 41 (15, 19, 19, 22, 23, 23, 23, 24, 25, --)
23) Alfred 35 (20, 20, 20, 20, 21, 22, 24, --, --, --)
24) Redlands 31 (18, 20, 21, 21, 21, 25, 25, --, --, --)
25) Brockport 25 (19, 21, 22, 24, 24, 24, 25, 25, 25, --)
26) Muhlenberg 23 (16, 20, 22, 24, 25)
27) Denison 13 (13)
T28) Dubuque 8 (20, 24)
T28) Heidelberg 8 (18)
30) Concordia Moorhead 6 (20)
T31) Hobart 3 (23)
T31) Wabash 3 (23)
T33) Albright 2 (24)
T33) Monmouth 2 (24)
35) Franklin 1 (25)
I went from the only voter ranking IWU to one of the voters giving them their worst ranking. Interesting...
Quote from: HansenRatings on September 07, 2017, 05:57:28 PM
I went from the only voter ranking IWU to one of the voters giving them their worst ranking. Interesting...
You might want to check your ballot again
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 07, 2017, 07:13:45 PM
Quote from: HansenRatings on September 07, 2017, 05:57:28 PM
I went from the only voter ranking IWU to one of the voters giving them their worst ranking. Interesting...
You might want to check your ballot again
I know my model had them in the Top 25 preseason, must have decided to take them off so I could sneak Wartburg in.
Quote from: HansenRatings on August 28, 2017, 07:45:16 PM
Quote from: smedindy on August 28, 2017, 07:24:27 PM
Quote from: HansenRatings on August 28, 2017, 12:35:45 PM
I am very much an outlier for most of teams, including being the only person not voting UMHB as #1 (very surprising to me, honestly), and being the only vote for about 4 of the teams receiving votes.
Do you vote strictly on your algorithm? Just curious. I've played around with one when I had more free time (a/k/a a boring job in the past) but never voted based on it.
It definitely influences my thinking, but I vote based on my own opinions (but I'm pretty unlikely to vote a team into my Top 25 if the algorithm has them around 50 or 75, like Western New England right now)
Hansen Ratings,
(Just getting caught up on some of the other boards...)
As for your being an outlier on 4 single vote teams, I can imagine that the confidence interval or standard deviation of your system will permit some of those outliers.
Having a #24 or even a #22 as single outlier may not be that unusual that far down the ballot.
My question to you about the rankings relates to your algorithm that may overvalue a team to receive a #14, #15, #18 or #19 vote.
I can imagine UW-Lacrosse being buoyed by its presence in the WIAC, but might one of your votes be Denison?
Just waiting on one more ballot. If it's in (which I think it will be) I'll try to get the poll up late tonight
One ballot missing this week... hopefully they'll be back next week as I already know one person will be gone
2017 Week 2 TOP 25 FAN POLL
# School Pts Prev
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor (8) 224 1
2) Mount Union (1) 216 2
3) UW-Oshkosh 207 3
4) Wheaton 196 5
5) North Central 185 6
6) St John's 173 8
7) Linfield 171 7
8) Hardin-Simmons 156 9
9) John Carroll 154 10
T10) Delaware Valley 123 11
T10) Frostburg St 123 14
12) Illinois Wesleyan 112 12
13) UW-Platteville 108 16
14) St Thomas 104 4
15) Johns Hopkins 94 15
16) Wittenberg 85 17
17) Case Western Reserve 67 20
18) Brockport 59 25
T19) Concordia-Moorhead 55 NR
T19) Wesley 55 19
T19) Whitworth 55 22
22) Alfred 52 23
23) Wash & Jeff 47 21
24) UW-Stout 33 NR
25) Redlands 26 24
Dropped Out: UW-Whitewater and Thomas More
Also Receiving Votes: Denison (13), Albright (12), Muhlenberg (8), Hobart (3), Wabash (3), Dubuque (2), Framingham St (2), Thomas More (1), UW-Whitewater (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, Scots13, and smedindy
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 224 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2)
2) Mount Union 216 ( 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3) UW-Oshkosh 207 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4) Wheaton 196 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6)
5) North Central 185 ( 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7)
6) St John's 173 ( 4, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8)
7) Linfield 171 ( 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8, 11)
8) Hardin-Simmons 156 ( 7, 7, 7, 9, 9, 9, 9, 10, 11)
9) John Carroll 154 ( 5, 7, 8, 8, 8, 9, 10, 10, 15)
T10) Delaware Valley 123 ( 9, 10, 11, 11, 12, 12, 13, 16, 17)
T10) Frostburg St 123 ( 7, 9, 10, 11, 11, 12, 15, 16, 20)
12) Illinois Wesleyan 112 ( 5, 11, 12, 14, 14, 15, 15, 16, 20)
13) UW-Platteville 108 ( 9, 10, 12, 13, 13, 13, 16, 18, 22)
14) St Thomas 104 (10, 10, 11, 14, 14, 14, 16, 17, 24)
15) Johns Hopkins 94 (11, 12, 13, 13, 15, 17, 17, 19, 23)
16) Wittenberg 85 (12, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 22, --)
17) Case Western Reserve 67 ( 9, 16, 17, 19, 19, 19, 20, 22, --)
18) Brockport 59 (14, 14, 15, 18, 21, 22, 22, 24, 25)
T19) Concordia-Moorhead 55 (16, 17, 17, 18, 19, 21, 23, 23, 25)
T19) Wesley 55 (12, 14, 15, 20, 20, 22, 25, 25, --)
T19) Whitworth 55 (10, 16, 19, 21, 21, 22, 23, 23, 24)
22) Alfred 52 (15, 18, 18, 19, 20, 20, 20, --, --)
23) Wash & Jeff 47 (13, 17, 18, 20, 21, 21, 25, --, --)
24) UW-Stout 33 (16, 18, 21, 23, 24, 24, 24, 25, --)
25) Redlands 26 (19, 19, 21, 22, 23, --, --, --, --)
26) Denison 13 (13)
27) Albright 12 (18, 22)
28) Muhlenberg 8 (21, 24, 25)
T29) Hobart 3 (23)
T29) Wabash 3 (23)
T31) Dubuque 2 (24)
T31) Framingham St 2 (24)
T33) Thomas More 1 (25)
T33) UW-Whitewater 1 (25)
I'm interested to hear why there's such a gap between Illinois Wesleyan and Concordia-Moorhead. They've played the same 2 teams and won by almost identical amounts. IWU was a bit better against Nebraska Wesleyan before late scores evened those results up while the Whitewater games were pretty similar. I had IWU 16 and Moorhead 17 on my ballot
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 13, 2017, 08:46:38 PM
I'm interested to hear why there's such a gap between Illinois Wesleyan and Concordia-Moorhead. They've played the same 2 teams and won by almost identical amounts. IWU was a bit better against Nebraska Wesleyan before late scores evened those results up while the Whitewater games were pretty similar. I had IWU 16 and Moorhead 17 on my ballot
Good question. ;) In my case it was largely an omission that I was too tired to go back and correct. Neither Moorhead or Stout had even been on my radar before Saturday. I knew they needed to go in, but never found a spot for them until the very end (hence, 24 and 25). I lowered IWU one slot (13 to 14), but agree with you that there really is no justification for that large a gap.
Aside from adding Stout and Moorhead, my only major changes in what was a fairly quiet week was dropping both UWW and Thomas More, and sharply raising Brockport and Whitworth (who in retrospect I think I greatly undervalued last week).
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 13, 2017, 10:26:29 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 13, 2017, 08:46:38 PM
I'm interested to hear why there's such a gap between Illinois Wesleyan and Concordia-Moorhead. They've played the same 2 teams and won by almost identical amounts. IWU was a bit better against Nebraska Wesleyan before late scores evened those results up while the Whitewater games were pretty similar. I had IWU 16 and Moorhead 17 on my ballot
Good question. ;) In my case it was largely an omission that I was too tired to go back and correct. Neither Moorhead or Stout had even been on my radar before Saturday. I knew they needed to go in, but never found a spot for them until the very end (hence, 24 and 25). I lowered IWU one slot (13 to 14), but agree with you that there really is no justification for that large a gap.
Aside from adding Stout and Moorhead, my only major changes in what was a fairly quiet week was dropping both UWW and Thomas More, and sharply raising Brockport and Whitworth (who in retrospect I think I greatly undervalued last week).
Well someone ranked IWU 5 while either not ranking or putting UWW 25. There is not that big a spread between those two teams. It was a 1 score game that went down to the last minute.
Quote from: USee on September 14, 2017, 12:37:35 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 13, 2017, 10:26:29 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 13, 2017, 08:46:38 PM
I'm interested to hear why there's such a gap between Illinois Wesleyan and Concordia-Moorhead. They've played the same 2 teams and won by almost identical amounts. IWU was a bit better against Nebraska Wesleyan before late scores evened those results up while the Whitewater games were pretty similar. I had IWU 16 and Moorhead 17 on my ballot
Good question. ;) In my case it was largely an omission that I was too tired to go back and correct. Neither Moorhead or Stout had even been on my radar before Saturday. I knew they needed to go in, but never found a spot for them until the very end (hence, 24 and 25). I lowered IWU one slot (13 to 14), but agree with you that there really is no justification for that large a gap.
Aside from adding Stout and Moorhead, my only major changes in what was a fairly quiet week was dropping both UWW and Thomas More, and sharply raising Brockport and Whitworth (who in retrospect I think I greatly undervalued last week).
Well someone ranked IWU 5 while either not ranking or putting UWW 25. There is not that big a spread between those two teams. It was a 1 score game that went down to the last minute.
But there is now more info than JUST the h-t-h - IWU is 2-0; UWW is 0-2. I certainly would not place IWU at #5. (Now, IF they knock off NCC this Saturday, I may have to reconsider! ;D)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 14, 2017, 12:46:57 AM
Quote from: USee on September 14, 2017, 12:37:35 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 13, 2017, 10:26:29 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 13, 2017, 08:46:38 PM
I'm interested to hear why there's such a gap between Illinois Wesleyan and Concordia-Moorhead. They've played the same 2 teams and won by almost identical amounts. IWU was a bit better against Nebraska Wesleyan before late scores evened those results up while the Whitewater games were pretty similar. I had IWU 16 and Moorhead 17 on my ballot
Good question. ;) In my case it was largely an omission that I was too tired to go back and correct. Neither Moorhead or Stout had even been on my radar before Saturday. I knew they needed to go in, but never found a spot for them until the very end (hence, 24 and 25). I lowered IWU one slot (13 to 14), but agree with you that there really is no justification for that large a gap.
Aside from adding Stout and Moorhead, my only major changes in what was a fairly quiet week was dropping both UWW and Thomas More, and sharply raising Brockport and Whitworth (who in retrospect I think I greatly undervalued last week).
Well someone ranked IWU 5 while either not ranking or putting UWW 25. There is not that big a spread between those two teams. It was a 1 score game that went down to the last minute.
But there is now more info than JUST the h-t-h - IWU is 2-0; UWW is 0-2. I certainly would not place IWU at #5. (Now, IF they knock off NCC this Saturday, I may have to reconsider! ;D)
I agree, if they knock off NCC, they will definitely crack the Top 10 if not the Top 5.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 14, 2017, 12:46:57 AM
Quote from: USee on September 14, 2017, 12:37:35 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 13, 2017, 10:26:29 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 13, 2017, 08:46:38 PM
I'm interested to hear why there's such a gap between Illinois Wesleyan and Concordia-Moorhead. They've played the same 2 teams and won by almost identical amounts. IWU was a bit better against Nebraska Wesleyan before late scores evened those results up while the Whitewater games were pretty similar. I had IWU 16 and Moorhead 17 on my ballot
Good question. ;) In my case it was largely an omission that I was too tired to go back and correct. Neither Moorhead or Stout had even been on my radar before Saturday. I knew they needed to go in, but never found a spot for them until the very end (hence, 24 and 25). I lowered IWU one slot (13 to 14), but agree with you that there really is no justification for that large a gap.
Aside from adding Stout and Moorhead, my only major changes in what was a fairly quiet week was dropping both UWW and Thomas More, and sharply raising Brockport and Whitworth (who in retrospect I think I greatly undervalued last week).
Well someone ranked IWU 5 while either not ranking or putting UWW 25. There is not that big a spread between those two teams. It was a 1 score game that went down to the last minute.
But there is now more info than JUST the h-t-h - IWU is 2-0; UWW is 0-2. I certainly would not place IWU at #5. (Now, IF they knock off NCC this Saturday, I may have to reconsider! ;D)
Of course that's true and presumably their records are reflected in their rankings, certainly that's the case for UWW. Right now we don't know if IWU is much better than we thought and/or UWW is much worse, likely somewhere in between. IWU played Nebraska Wesleyan at home, which tells us nothing really. Having UWW unranked or ranked very low (23-25) makes sense. IWU, based on what we know, ranked in mid to low teens, seems right. #5? I don't see it. Another way to look at, based on current info, IWU won at home against two unranked teams and UWW lost by less than 1 score on the road to two ranked teams.
Wheaton (19 starters and 70 players on the roster from last year) and NCC (18 starters return) return mostly the same team that won @IWU last year. While I think IWU is definitely better than I thought this year, there is no evidence that tells me they are going to win on the road against those two teams when they didn't beat them at home last year. Now, that doesn't mean it won't happen, but it isn't rational to me to rank IWU ahead of either of those two (or in the top 5) because they beat a now unranked UWW team.
Yeah, I have IWU #5. I have them at #2 in the North. Maybe I over-reacted to the UWW game, but I will reassess after this week of course. There was no reason for a downgrade.
But, like the Yachtski scale, it all washes out to where it should be despite the individual ratings.
UWW is not ranked because of their second loss. Had they beaten C-M they probably would have maintained or raised their ranking a bit. But to be honest, the difference between #5 and #25 on the field may not be that big, especially this year.
Quote from: smedindy on September 14, 2017, 11:06:19 AM
the difference between #5 and #25 on the field may not be that big, especially this year.
Welcome to 2017, everybody.
(I agree.)
One voter is on vacation. Should be back up to 10 voters next week.
2017 Week 3 TOP 25 FAN POLL
# School Pts Prev
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor (8) 224 1
2) Mount Union (1) 216 2
3) UW-Oshkosh 203 3
4) Wheaton 200 4
5) North Central 189 5
6) St John's 179 6
7) Hardin-Simmons 168 8
8) John Carroll 141 9
9) Delaware Valley 134 T10
10) Frostburg St 125 T10
11) Linfield 121 7
12) St Thomas 120 14
13) Johns Hopkins 107 15
14) UW-Platteville 101 13
15) Wittenberg 92 16
16) Washington & Jefferson 80 23
17) Illinois Wesleyan 79 12
18) Brockport 71 18
T19) Concordia-Moorhead 69 T19
T19) Whitworth 69 T19
21) Case Western Reserve 65 17
22) Wesley 56 T19
23) UW-Stout 36 24
24) Alfred 34 22
25) Denison 14 NR
Dropped Out: Redlands
Also Receiving Votes: UW-Whitewater (7), Wartburg (5), Heidelberg (4), Hobart (4), Albright (2), Framingham St (2), George Fox (2), Wabash (2), Berry (1), Coe (1), Dubuque (1), Springfield (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HansenRatings, HSCTiger74, NCF, Scots13, and smedindy
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 224 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2)
2) Mount Union 216 ( 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3) UW-Oshkosh 203 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5)
4) Wheaton 200 ( 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5)
5) North Central 189 ( 3, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6)
6) St John's 179 ( 4, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8)
7) Hardin-Simmons 168 ( 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9)
8) John Carroll 141 ( 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9, 13, 14, 18)
9) Delaware Valley 134 ( 7, 8, 10, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15)
10) Frostburg St 125 ( 7, 9, 9, 11, 11, 12, 14, 16, 20)
11) Linfield 121 ( 7, 8, 9, 12, 12, 13, 16, 18, 18)
12) St Thomas 120 ( 7, 10, 10, 10, 12, 13, 14, 16, 22)
13) Johns Hopkins 107 ( 9, 11, 11, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18, 22)
14) UW-Platteville 101 ( 9, 10, 10, 11, 13, 14, 20, 23, 23)
15) Wittenberg 92 (10, 11, 12, 12, 15, 15, 19, 23, 25)
16) Wash & Jeff 80 (13, 15, 15, 16, 16, 17, 19, 19, 24)
17) Illinois Wesleyan 79 (13, 16, 16, 17, 17, 18, 19, 19, 20)
18) Brockport 71 (11, 11, 13, 18, 21, 21, 22, 22, 24)
T19) Concordia-Moorhead 69 (14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23)
T19) Whitworth 69 (10, 14, 17, 19, 20, 20, 20, 22, 23)
21) Case Western Reserve 65 ( 9, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, --)
22) Wesley 56 (14, 15, 15, 20, 20, 21, 24, 24, 25)
23) UW-Stout 36 (15, 19, 21, 22, 22, 23, 24, --, --)
24) Alfred 34 (17, 17, 18, 21, 23, --, --, --, --)
25) Denison 14 (12, --, --, --, --, --, --, --, --)
26) UW-Whitewater 7 (21, 24)
27) Wartburg 5 (21)
T28) Heidelberg 4 (22)
T28) Hobart 4 (23, 25)
T30) Albright 2 (24)
T30) Framingham St 2 (24)
T30) George Fox 2 (25, 25)
T30) Wabash 2 (24)
T34) Berry 1 (25)
T34) Coe 1 (25)
T34) Dubuque 1 (25)
T34) Springfield 1 (25)
I love that Denison is in the top 25 on the back of one voter. Stay strong, independent voter! Your faith in the Big Red will be rewarded next week. :)
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 20, 2017, 10:38:32 AM
I love that Denison is in the top 25 on the back of one voter. Stay strong, independent voter! Your faith in the Big Red will be rewarded next week. :)
I know Denison played really well last year and has played very well to start the season, I just don't see the data to say that they are 14. I guess that's why we have multiple voters. Wally, you are right, that one voter at the end of the season, may be saying "I told you so" ;D
Quote from: D3MAFAN on September 20, 2017, 11:37:44 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 20, 2017, 10:38:32 AM
I love that Denison is in the top 25 on the back of one voter. Stay strong, independent voter! Your faith in the Big Red will be rewarded next week. :)
I know Denison played really well last year and has played very well to start the season, I just don't see the data to say that they are 14. I guess that's why we have multiple voters. Wally, you are right, that one voter at the end of the season, may be saying "I told you so" ;D
9.85 yards per play do anything for you? I know they weren't playing UMHB/Oshkosh level defenses through their first two games, but that's a wild number no matter who you play. The Big Red are the real deal. Going to be fun watching them run the @Witt, @Wabash, vs. DePauw gauntlet starting next weekend.
Man I was so close to putting Denison on there. I chose Berry. I may be wrong...
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 20, 2017, 11:52:57 AM
Quote from: D3MAFAN on September 20, 2017, 11:37:44 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 20, 2017, 10:38:32 AM
I love that Denison is in the top 25 on the back of one voter. Stay strong, independent voter! Your faith in the Big Red will be rewarded next week. :)
I know Denison played really well last year and has played very well to start the season, I just don't see the data to say that they are 14. I guess that's why we have multiple voters. Wally, you are right, that one voter at the end of the season, may be saying "I told you so" ;D
Hosting Southwestern, Denison trailed 24-21 in the 3Q. In their next 4 drives, they took over on the Southwestern 34 after a failed 4th and 5. They scored on a 34 yard drive. Two series later, they reovered a fumble on the Southwestern 17 for a quick score.
That seems to be as much of a Southwestern melt-down as anything.
ETBU beat Southwestern 28-10 last weekend, the same margin. As much as I assess the quality of the top tier of ASC football, ETBU is borderline South Region Top 10, much less solid Top 25.
9.85 yards per play do anything for you? I know they weren't playing UMHB/Oshkosh level defenses through their first two games, but that's a wild number no matter who you play. The Big Red are the real deal. Going to be fun watching them run the @Witt, @Wabash, vs. DePauw gauntlet starting next weekend.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 20, 2017, 11:52:57 AM
Quote from: D3MAFAN on September 20, 2017, 11:37:44 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 20, 2017, 10:38:32 AM
I love that Denison is in the top 25 on the back of one voter. Stay strong, independent voter! Your faith in the Big Red will be rewarded next week. :)
I know Denison played really well last year and has played very well to start the season, I just don't see the data to say that they are 14. I guess that's why we have multiple voters. Wally, you are right, that one voter at the end of the season, may be saying "I told you so" ;D
9.85 yards per play do anything for you? I know they weren't playing UMHB/Oshkosh level defenses through their first two games, but that's a wild number no matter who you play. The Big Red are the real deal. Going to be fun watching them run the @Witt, @Wabash, vs. DePauw gauntlet starting next weekend.
Hosting Southwestern, Denison trailed 24-21 in the 3Q. In their next 4 drives, they took over on the Southwestern 34 after a failed 4th and 5. They scored on a 34 yard drive. Two series later, they recovered a fumble on the Southwestern 17 for a quick score.
That seems to be as much of a Southwestern melt-down as anything.
ETBU beat Southwestern 28-10 last weekend, the same margin. As much as I assess the quality of the top tier of ASC football, ETBU is borderline South Region Top 10, much less solid Top 25.
Back to a full 10 voters this week.
2017 Week 4 TOP 25 FAN POLL
# School Pts Prev
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor (8) 248 1
2) Mount Union (2) 241 2
T3) UW-Oshkosh 221 3
T3) Wheaton 221 4
5) North Central 214 5
6) Hardin-Simmons 200 7
7) St Thomas 175 12
8) Delaware Valley 159 9
9) St John's 157 6
10) Linfield 155 11
11) Frostburg St 147 10
12) Johns Hopkins 118 13
13) UW-Platteville 115 14
14) Wittenberg 100 15
15) Washington & Jefferson 93 16
16) Concordia-Moorhead 89 T19
17) Whitworth 88 T19
18) Brockport 82 18
T19) Case Western Reserve 81 21
T19) Illinois Wesleyan 81 17
21) Wesley 77 22
22) Alfred 53 24
23) UW-Stout 40 23
24) Heidelberg 35 NR
25) Denison 16 25
Dropped Out: John Carroll
Also Receiving Votes: UW-Whitewater (9), Albright (6), Framingham St (6), Wartburg (5), Berry (4), George Fox (4), Hobart (3), John Carroll (3), Carthage (2), Springfield (2)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HansenRatings, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, Scots13, and smedindy
Lots of agreement on who should be ranked... not so much agreement on where they should be ranked.
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 248 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2)
2) Mount Union 241 ( 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
T3) UW-Oshkosh 221 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 6, 6)
T3) Wheaton 221 ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5)
5) North Central 214 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6)
6) Hardin-Simmons 200 ( 4, 4, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8)
7) St Thomas 175 ( 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14)
8) Delaware Valley 159 ( 6, 7, 7, 8, 10, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15)
9) St John's 157 ( 7, 8, 9, 10, 10, 10, 11, 11, 12, 15)
10) Linfield 155 ( 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 13, 17)
11) Frostburg St 147 ( 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 11, 12, 14, 16, 19)
12) Johns Hopkins 118 ( 9, 11, 11, 12, 14, 14, 15, 17, 18, 21)
13) UW-Platteville 115 ( 8, 10, 11, 12, 12, 12, 13, 19, 22, --)
14) Wittenberg 100 ( 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 14, 16, 22, 23, --)
15) Wash & Jeff 93 (12, 13, 15, 15, 16, 17, 18, 18, 18, 25)
16) Concordia-Moorhead 89 (10, 13, 15, 16, 17, 17, 18, 21, 22, 22)
17) Whitworth 88 (10, 13, 14, 16, 18, 19, 19, 20, 21, 22)
18) Brockport 82 (10, 13, 15, 17, 17, 20, 20, 21, 21, 24)
T19) Case Western Reserve 81 ( 9, 14, 15, 17, 18, 18, 20, 20, 22, --)
T19) Illinois Wesleyan 81 (15, 16, 16, 16, 17, 19, 19, 19, 21, 21)
21) Wesley 77 ( 9, 13, 14, 18, 18, 20, 21, 23, 23, 24)
22) Alfred 53 (16, 16, 17, 19, 19, 20, 22, --, --, --)
23) UW-Stout 40 (15, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 23, 25, --, --)
24) Heidelberg 35 ( 9, 22, 22, 23, 24, 24, 25, 25, 25, --)
25) Denison 16 (12, 25, 25, --, --, --, --, --, --, --)
26) UW-Whitewater 9 (20, 23)
T27) Albright 6 (23, 23)
T27) Framingham St 6 (20)
29) Wartburg 5 (21)
T30) Berry 4 (24, 25, 25)
T30) George Fox 4 (24, 24)
T32) Hobart 3 (24, 25)
T32) John Carroll 3 (23)
T34) Carthage 2 (24)
T34) Springfield 2 (24)
Happy to see that Wheaton has now tied Oshkosh for third. With two weeks off, UWO's ONLY real credentials were last season and beating (now exposed) JCU. This Saturday will be interesting as UWO hosts UWW while Wheaton hosts IWU (who defeated UWW on opening day). [BTW, somewhat mystified why IWU fell from 17 to t19 - they pitched a shutout against (admittedly not good) NPU. ??? None of the teams that jumped them had a clearly better result.]
One voter can make a difference.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 27, 2017, 12:24:15 AM
Happy to see that Wheaton has now tied Oshkosh for third. With two weeks off, UWO's ONLY real credentials were last season and beating (now exposed) JCU. This Saturday will be interesting as UWO hosts UWW while Wheaton hosts IWU (who defeated UWW on opening day). [BTW, somewhat mystified why IWU fell from 17 to t19 - they pitched a shutout against (admittedly not good) NPU. ??? None of the teams that jumped them had a clearly better result.]
You can make the argument that IWU's ONLY real credential is beating a (now exposed) UWW. That win looked really good up until UWW lost again - the very next week - to (once again) an unranked team. I'm guessing the Hawks won't get their second win of the season until Week 6 against Stout. However, Stout took down St. Thomas...so I easily be wrong.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 27, 2017, 12:17:03 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 27, 2017, 12:24:15 AM
Happy to see that Wheaton has now tied Oshkosh for third. With two weeks off, UWO's ONLY real credentials were last season and beating (now exposed) JCU. This Saturday will be interesting as UWO hosts UWW while Wheaton hosts IWU (who defeated UWW on opening day). [BTW, somewhat mystified why IWU fell from 17 to t19 - they pitched a shutout against (admittedly not good) NPU. ??? None of the teams that jumped them had a clearly better result.]
You can make the argument that IWU's ONLY real credential is beating a (now exposed) UWW. That win looked really good up until they lost again - the very next week - to (once again) an unranked team.
True, but that doesn't explain why they dropped THIS past week.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 27, 2017, 12:25:20 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 27, 2017, 12:17:03 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 27, 2017, 12:24:15 AM
Happy to see that Wheaton has now tied Oshkosh for third. With two weeks off, UWO's ONLY real credentials were last season and beating (now exposed) JCU. This Saturday will be interesting as UWO hosts UWW while Wheaton hosts IWU (who defeated UWW on opening day). [BTW, somewhat mystified why IWU fell from 17 to t19 - they pitched a shutout against (admittedly not good) NPU. ??? None of the teams that jumped them had a clearly better result.]
You can make the argument that IWU's ONLY real credential is beating a (now exposed) UWW. That win looked really good up until they lost again - the very next week - to (once again) an unranked team.
True, but that doesn't explain why they dropped THIS past week.
True as well. I actually moved them up in my poll. From 17th to 16th, because of JCU dropping down.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 27, 2017, 12:30:04 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 27, 2017, 12:25:20 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 27, 2017, 12:17:03 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 27, 2017, 12:24:15 AM
Happy to see that Wheaton has now tied Oshkosh for third. With two weeks off, UWO's ONLY real credentials were last season and beating (now exposed) JCU. This Saturday will be interesting as UWO hosts UWW while Wheaton hosts IWU (who defeated UWW on opening day). [BTW, somewhat mystified why IWU fell from 17 to t19 - they pitched a shutout against (admittedly not good) NPU. ??? None of the teams that jumped them had a clearly better result.]
You can make the argument that IWU's ONLY real credential is beating a (now exposed) UWW. That win looked really good up until they lost again - the very next week - to (once again) an unranked team.
True, but that doesn't explain why they dropped THIS past week.
True as well. I actually moved them up in my poll. From 17th to 16th, because of JCU dropping down.
Until about Week 5 or so, I generally completely scrap my previous week's rankings so that I'm not too biased based on early expectations. Could be just a handful of voters doing the same thing, and they moved down just a little bit on multiple ballots.
13, 16, 16, 17, 17, 18, 19, 19, 20
vs.
15, 16, 16, 16, 17, 19, 19, 19, 21, 21
I had them at #19 both times.
Just slight shifts downward or the same. I think the offensive struggles despite the dominant defense (2 missed XPs, three turnovers, 18 points despite 400+ yards) may have given some voters pause.
The teams that jumped them - C-M, Brockport and Whitworth, are gaining steam as "hey they could be really really good and win their conference."
For the first time since week 1 there wasn't a tie for 19th
2017 Week 5 TOP 25 FAN POLL
# School Pts Prev
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor (8) 248 1
2) Mount Union (2) 241 2
3) UW-Oshkosh 228 T3
4) North Central 219 5
5) Hardin-Simmons 208 6
6) St Thomas 187 7
7) Linfield 170 10
8) Delaware Valley 167 8
9) St John's 159 9
10) Frostburg St 152 11
11) Illinois Wesleyan 148 T19
12) Wheaton 138 T3
13) UW-Platteville 127 13
14) Wittenberg 107 14
15) Brockport 99 18
16) Washington & Jefferson 98 15
17) Wesley 95 21
18) Concordia-Moorhead 92 16
19) Case Western Reserve 81 T19
20) Alfred 64 22
21) Heidelberg 53 24
22) UW-Stout 34 23
23) Whitworth 24 17
24) Berry 21 NR
25) Johns Hopkins 17 12
Dropped Out: Denison
Also Receiving Votes: John Carroll (11), Ursinus (11), Wartburg (10), Framingham St (7), Chris Newport (6), Denison (5), Albright (4), Franklin & Marshall (4), George Fox (4), Springfield (4), UW-La Crosse (3), Carnegie Mellon (2), Wabash (2)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HansenRatings, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, Scots13, and smedindy
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 248 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2)
2) Mount Union 241 ( 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3) UW-Oshkosh 228 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5)
4) North Central 219 ( 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5)
5) Hardin-Simmons 208 ( 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 8)
6) St Thomas 187 ( 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 9, 10, 13)
7) Linfield 170 ( 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 9, 10, 10, 12, 17)
8) Delaware Valley 167 ( 6, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 10, 11, 13, 13)
9) St John's 159 ( 7, 8, 8, 10, 10, 10, 11, 11, 12, 14)
10) Frostburg St 152 ( 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 10, 11, 11, 18, 19)
11) Illinois Wesleyan 148 ( 5, 7, 8, 11, 12, 12, 13, 13, 14, 17)
12) Wheaton 138 ( 8, 9, 9, 9, 13, 14, 14, 14, 14, 18)
13) UW-Platteville 127 ( 7, 9, 9, 11, 12, 12, 13, 16, 18, --)
14) Wittenberg 107 ( 8, 8, 12, 12, 13, 14, 17, 21, 22, --)
15) Brockport 99 ( 9, 11, 15, 16, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 20)
16) Wash & Jeff 98 (11, 13, 15, 15, 15, 16, 16, 17, 19, 25)
17) Wesley 95 (12, 12, 14, 14, 16, 17, 18, 20, 20, 22)
18) Concordia-Moorhead 92 (11, 15, 15, 15, 17, 17, 18, 18, 19, 23)
19) Case Western Reserve 81 (10, 14, 15, 16, 16, 17, 19, 21, 25, --)
20) Alfred 64 (15, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 23, --, --)
21) Heidelberg 53 (13, 19, 19, 20, 22, 22, 22, 22, 23, 25)
22) UW-Stout 34 (16, 20, 21, 23, 23, 23, 24, 24, --, --)
23) Whitworth 24 (19, 20, 21, 24, 24, 25, 25, --, --, --)
24) Berry 21 (21, 21, 23, 23, 24, 24, 25, --, --, --)
25) Johns Hopkins 17 (18, 21, 22, --, --, --, --, --, --, --)
T26) John Carroll 11 (18, 23)
T26) Ursinus 11 (20, 21)
28) Wartburg 10 (20, 22)
29) Framingham St 7 (19)
30) Chris Newport 6 (20)
31) Denison 5 (21)
T32) Albright 4 (23, 25)
T32) Franklin & Marshall 4 (24, 24)
T32) George Fox 4 (22)
T32) Springfield 4 (22)
36) UW-La Crosse 3 (24, 25)
T37) Carnegie Mellon 2 (25, 25)
T37) Wabash 2 (24)
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 03, 2017, 02:03:08 PM
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 248 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2)
2) Mount Union 241 ( 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3) UW-Oshkosh 228 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5)
4) North Central 219 ( 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5)
5) Hardin-Simmons 208 ( 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 8)
6) St Thomas 187 ( 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 9, 10, 13)
7) Linfield 170 ( 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 9, 10, 10, 12, 17)
8) Delaware Valley 167 ( 6, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 10, 11, 13, 13)
9) St John's 159 ( 7, 8, 8, 10, 10, 10, 11, 11, 12, 14)
10) Frostburg St 152 ( 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 10, 11, 11, 18, 19)
11) Illinois Wesleyan 148 ( 5, 7, 8, 11, 12, 12, 13, 13, 14, 17)
12) Wheaton 138 ( 8, 9, 9, 9, 13, 14, 14, 14, 14, 18)
13) UW-Platteville 127 ( 7, 9, 9, 11, 12, 12, 13, 16, 18, --)
14) Wittenberg 107 ( 8, 8, 12, 12, 13, 14, 17, 21, 22, --)
15) Brockport 99 ( 9, 11, 15, 16, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 20)
16) Wash & Jeff 98 (11, 13, 15, 15, 15, 16, 16, 17, 19, 25)
17) Wesley 95 (12, 12, 14, 14, 16, 17, 18, 20, 20, 22)
18) Concordia-Moorhead 92 (11, 15, 15, 15, 17, 17, 18, 18, 19, 23)
19) Case Western Reserve 81 (10, 14, 15, 16, 16, 17, 19, 21, 25, --)
20) Alfred 64 (15, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 23, --, --)
21) Heidelberg 53 (13, 19, 19, 20, 22, 22, 22, 22, 23, 25)
22) UW-Stout 34 (16, 20, 21, 23, 23, 23, 24, 24, --, --)
23) Whitworth 24 (19, 20, 21, 24, 24, 25, 25, --, --, --)
24) Berry 21 (21, 21, 23, 23, 24, 24, 25, --, --, --)
25) Johns Hopkins 17 (18, 21, 22, --, --, --, --, --, --, --)
T26) John Carroll 11 (18, 23)
T26) Ursinus 11 (20, 21)
28) Wartburg 10 (20, 22)
29) Framingham St 7 (19)
30) Chris Newport 6 (20)
31) Denison 5 (21)
T32) Albright 4 (23, 25)
T32) Franklin & Marshall 4 (24, 24)
T32) George Fox 4 (22)
T32) Springfield 4 (22)
36) UW-La Crosse 3 (24, 25)
T37) Carnegie Mellon 2 (25, 25)
T37) Wabash 2 (24)
I know this is late in the week, but Frostburg at 19? I think if they lose to Wesley and play competitively, that's where they should be.
2017 Week 6 TOP 25 FAN POLL
# School Pts Prev
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor (8) 248 1
2) Mount Union (2) 241 2
3) UW-Oshkosh 229 3
4) North Central 220 4
5) Hardin-Simmons 193 5
6) St Thomas 191 6
7) Linfield 178 7
8) Delaware Valley 174 8
9) St John's 171 9
10) Illinois Wesleyan 149 11
11) UW-Platteville 144 13
12) Wesley 135 17
13) Wittenberg 134 14
14) Brockport 115 15
15) Washington & Jefferson 113 16
16) Case Western Reserve 102 19
17) Frostburg St 96 10
18) Alfred 82 20
19) George Fox 49 NR
20) Wartburg 44 NR
21) Berry 43 24
22) Concordia-Moorhead 36 18
T23) Johns Hopkins 35 25
T23) Wabash 35 NR
T25) Framingham St 13 NR
T25) Wheaton 13 12
Dropped Out: Heidelberg, UW-Stout, Whitworth
Also Receiving Votes: UW-La Crosse (10), Salisbury (9), John Carroll (8), Millikin (8), Springfield (8), UW-Whitewater (8), Heidelberg (7), Carthage (5), Trine (2), Westminster (PA) (2)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HansenRatings, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, Scots13, and smedindy
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 248 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2)
2) Mount Union 241 ( 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3) UW-Oshkosh 229 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4)
4) North Central 220 ( 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5)
5) Hardin-Simmons 193 ( 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 9, 10, 10)
6) St Thomas 191 ( 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 8, 9, 13)
7) Linfield 178 ( 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 11, 11, 15)
8) Delaware Valley 174 ( 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 12)
9) St John's 171 ( 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10, 14)
10) Illinois Wesleyan 149 ( 8, 8, 9, 10, 11, 11, 12, 13, 13, 16)
11) UW-Platteville 144 ( 6, 8, 8, 9, 11, 11, 11, 15, 16, 21)
12) Wesley 135 ( 8, 10, 12, 12, 12, 13, 13, 14, 14, 17)
13) Wittenberg 134 ( 6, 6, 10, 11, 12, 12, 13, 15, 18, 23)
14) Brockport 115 ( 7, 11, 13, 14, 15, 15, 16, 17, 17, 20)
15) Wash & Jeff 113 (11, 12, 12, 12, 13, 15, 15, 16, 20, 21)
16) Case Western Reserve 102 ( 9, 13, 14, 14, 14, 14, 16, 17, 21, --)
17) Frostburg St 96 ( 9, 14, 15, 17, 17, 17, 18, 18, 19, 20)
18) Alfred 82 (13, 14, 15, 16, 16, 17, 18, 19, 24, --)
19) George Fox 49 (19, 20, 20, 20, 20, 21, 21, 22, 23, 25)
20) Wartburg 44 (15, 18, 19, 20, 20, 23, 23, --, --, --)
21) Berry 43 (18, 19, 19, 19, 19, 22, 23, --, --, --)
22) Concordia-Moorhead 36 (16, 17, 21, 22, 22, 23, 25, --, --, --)
T23) Johns Hopkins 35 (16, 18, 18, 22, 24, 24, 25, --, --, --)
T23) Wabash 35 (17, 20, 21, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, --, --)
T25) Framingham St 13 (16, 23, --, --, --, --, --, --, --, --)
T25) Wheaton 13 (19, 22, 25, 25, --, --, --, --, --, --)
27) UW-La Crosse 10 (21, 22, 25)
28) Salisbury 9 (18, 25)
T29) John Carroll 8 (21, 23)
T29) Millikin 8 (24, 24, 24, 24)
T29) Springfield 8 (22, 23, 25)
T29) UW-Whitewater 8 (18)
33) Heidelberg 7 (19)
34) Carthage 5 (22, 25)
T35) Trine 2 (24)
T35) Westminster (PA) 2 (24)
Kinda surprised (though not shocked) that I was the ONLY voter for UWW. Three losses is hard to overcome, but folks: the Whitewater 'Reign of Terror' is over, but they are still a very dangrous team. Barring some very improbable results, they won't make the playoffs, but I guarantee no one would look forward to playing them if they did.
A number of teams are ranked fairly consistently, but some are viewed with wildly different eyes. Witt with 2 sixes and a 23?! Case with a nine and a not even in the poll? It is truly (as usual ;)) a weird year in D3.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 10, 2017, 12:14:21 AMCase with a nine and a not even in the poll?
The D3football.com Top 25 is pretty similar. Case's SOS is pretty abysmal, to be honest.
It's certainly an open year. Normally it seems like around the top 14-16 are pretty much agreed upon with some variance at the bottom.
I've always been a bit of an outlier. :-\ I have DelVal 5, Witt 6, Brockport 7, Wesley 8, Frostburg 9 but Hardin-Simmons 10, St Thomas 13, St Johns 14. This was the first week all season I've had CWRU on my ballot.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 10, 2017, 01:30:46 AM
It's certainly an open year. Normally it seems like around the top 14-16 are pretty much agreed upon with some variance at the bottom.
I've always been a bit of an outlier. :-\ I have DelVal 5, Witt 6, Brockport 7, Wesley 8, Frostburg 9 but Hardin-Simmons 10, St Thomas 13, St Johns 14. This was the first week all season I've had CWRU on my ballot.
When I think its an open year, the playoff bracket that gets presented usually doesn't allow it be proven. With the lack of significant OOC games, you can never really play this team beat this team or play the common opponent game, such as i.e UW-Platteville >HSC and George Fox, thus saying that CNU is comparable to UW-Platteville. I know funding is a big part. However, we rarely see that cross-up match in playoffs.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 10, 2017, 12:14:21 AM
Kinda surprised (though not shocked) that I was the ONLY voter for UWW. Three losses is hard to overcome, but folks: the Whitewater 'Reign of Terror' is over, but they are still a very dangrous team. Barring some very improbable results, they won't make the playoffs, but I guarantee no one would look forward to playing them if they did.
This comment on UWW and the ranking of St Thomas really demonstrate the differences in poll perspective. Do I think UW-W would be likely to beat a lot of these top 25 teams? Sure. Does their track record support it? Nah.
I am somewhat sympathetic to the arguments that St Thomas shouldn't be ranked so highly (I'm not going to complain that they are though). They are the only team in the top 25 with a loss to a now-unranked team. The transitive property only takes us so far and I would feel pretty good about UST facing any team outside of the top 3 here.
I have no problem with ranking St. Thomas this high. Yes, they lost to a team 'outside the Top 25', but Stout's still a good team that caught St. Thomas at the right time. It's not like St. Thomas lost to Simpson or Buena Vista.
Case will either justify their ranking, or their non-ranking, with their games against Westminster and C-M.
As far as UW-W, I don't think they're Top 25 caliber. They beat Stout at home, sure. But Wash U. is 1-5 and they needed a 4th quarter rally. Hard to believe they were losing after 3 to the Bears.
I dropped both Whitewater and Stout from my West Region poll (Whitewater for two weeks) and have LAX as my third WIAC member.
My question is Linfield. I'm low on them. I have them as fifth...in the WEST (behind Oshkosh, St. Thomas, St. John's, and Platteville). Their whippin' of Whitworth lost its sheen with George Fox did the same, and on the road.
Quote from: jamtoTommie on October 10, 2017, 11:15:16 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 10, 2017, 12:14:21 AM
Kinda surprised (though not shocked) that I was the ONLY voter for UWW. Three losses is hard to overcome, but folks: the Whitewater 'Reign of Terror' is over, but they are still a very dangrous team. Barring some very improbable results, they won't make the playoffs, but I guarantee no one would look forward to playing them if they did.
This comment on UWW and the ranking of St Thomas really demonstrate the differences in poll perspective. Do I think UW-W would be likely to beat a lot of these top 25 teams? Sure. Does their track record support it? Nah.
I am somewhat sympathetic to the arguments that St Thomas shouldn't be ranked so highly (I'm not going to complain that they are though). They are the only team in the top 25 with a loss to a now-unranked team. The transitive property only takes us so far and I would feel pretty good about UST facing any team outside of the top 3 here.
Smed beat me to the punch while I was typing, but I thought I'd go ahead and post this anyway.
Something else that I believe needs to be kept in mind is that upsets happen. On September 9 Stout played better and won the game, but whether or not they are actually a better team than St. Thomas is open to debate.
And as is generally true in college polls, an early loss is better than a later loss. Just 4 weeks later and UST is already back up to 6th, when had they not lost to Stout, they would have been 4th.
Quote from: HSCTiger74 on October 10, 2017, 12:23:48 PM
Quote from: jamtoTommie on October 10, 2017, 11:15:16 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 10, 2017, 12:14:21 AM
Kinda surprised (though not shocked) that I was the ONLY voter for UWW. Three losses is hard to overcome, but folks: the Whitewater 'Reign of Terror' is over, but they are still a very dangrous team. Barring some very improbable results, they won't make the playoffs, but I guarantee no one would look forward to playing them if they did.
This comment on UWW and the ranking of St Thomas really demonstrate the differences in poll perspective. Do I think UW-W would be likely to beat a lot of these top 25 teams? Sure. Does their track record support it? Nah.
I am somewhat sympathetic to the arguments that St Thomas shouldn't be ranked so highly (I'm not going to complain that they are though). They are the only team in the top 25 with a loss to a now-unranked team. The transitive property only takes us so far and I would feel pretty good about UST facing any team outside of the top 3 here.
Smed beat me to the punch while I was typing, but I thought I'd go ahead and post this anyway.
Something else that I believe needs to be kept in mind is that upsets happen. On September 9 Stout played better and won the game, but whether or not they are actually a better team than St. Thomas is open to debate.
Not really. (Spoiler Alert!) They're not. That was definitely an upset, if the term has any meaning at all.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 11, 2017, 09:31:33 PM
Quote from: HSCTiger74 on October 10, 2017, 12:23:48 PM
Quote from: jamtoTommie on October 10, 2017, 11:15:16 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 10, 2017, 12:14:21 AM
Kinda surprised (though not shocked) that I was the ONLY voter for UWW. Three losses is hard to overcome, but folks: the Whitewater 'Reign of Terror' is over, but they are still a very dangrous team. Barring some very improbable results, they won't make the playoffs, but I guarantee no one would look forward to playing them if they did.
This comment on UWW and the ranking of St Thomas really demonstrate the differences in poll perspective. Do I think UW-W would be likely to beat a lot of these top 25 teams? Sure. Does their track record support it? Nah.
I am somewhat sympathetic to the arguments that St Thomas shouldn't be ranked so highly (I'm not going to complain that they are though). They are the only team in the top 25 with a loss to a now-unranked team. The transitive property only takes us so far and I would feel pretty good about UST facing any team outside of the top 3 here.
Smed beat me to the punch while I was typing, but I thought I'd go ahead and post this anyway.
Something else that I believe needs to be kept in mind is that upsets happen. On September 9 Stout played better and won the game, but whether or not they are actually a better team than St. Thomas is open to debate.
Not really. (Spoiler Alert!) They're not. That was definitely an upset, if the term has any meaning at all.
No kidding. That's why UST is in my poll and Stout isn't, but I was trying to be semi-polite about it. ;)
Man, the chaos in the North has cascaded through my ballot. It's...ugly.
The tie for 19th place has returned after a two week hiatus.
2017 Week 7 TOP 25 FAN POLL
# School Pts Prev
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor (8) 248 1
2) Mount Union (2) 241 2
3) UW-Oshkosh 231 3
4) Hardin-Simmons 205 5
5) St Thomas 198 6
6) Linfield 190 7
7) Delaware Valley 186 8
8) St John's 180 9
9) Illinois Wesleyan 151 10
10) Wittenberg 141 13
11) Wesley 140 12
12) North Central 130 4
13) Brockport 122 14
T14) UW-Platteville 116 11
T14) Washington & Jefferson 116 15
16) Wheaton 102 T25
17) Frostburg St 101 17
18) Case Western Reserve 100 16
T19) George Fox 59 19
T19) Wartburg 59 20
21) Johns Hopkins 49 T23
T22) Berry 46 21
T22) Concordia-Moorhead 46 22
24) Springfield 16 NR
T25) Millikin 13 NR
T25) UW-Whitewater 13 NR
Dropped Out: Alfred, Wabash, Framingham St
Also Receiving Votes: Alfred (9), Heidelberg (8), Carthage (7), Monmouth (6), Trine (6), DePauw (5), Salisbury (5), Westminster (PA) (3), UW-La Crosse (2)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HansenRatings, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, Scots13, and smedindy
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 248 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2)
2) Mount Union 241 ( 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3) UW-Oshkosh 231 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4) Hardin-Simmons 205 ( 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9)
5) St Thomas 198 ( 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 8, 13)
6) Linfield 190 ( 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12)
7) Delaware Valley 186 ( 4, 5, 5, 6, 7, 8, 8, 8, 11, 12)
8) St John's 180 ( 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 9, 9, 14)
9) Illinois Wesleyan 151 ( 6, 9, 9, 10, 10, 12, 12, 13, 13, 15)
10) Wittenberg 141 ( 5, 5, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16, 17, 22)
11) Wesley 140 ( 7, 9, 11, 11, 12, 13, 13, 13, 14, 17)
12) North Central 130 ( 9, 10, 10, 11, 11, 12, 12, 14, 18, 23)
13) Brockport 122 ( 6, 10, 13, 13, 14, 14, 15, 17, 17, 19)
T14) UW-Platteville 116 ( 7, 7, 9, 10, 14, 15, 17, 18, 22, 25)
T14) Wash & Jeff 116 ( 9, 11, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 16, 20, 21)
16) Wheaton 102 ( 8, 10, 10, 11, 15, 16, 18, 18, --, --)
17) Frostburg St 101 ( 8, 14, 14, 16, 16, 17, 17, 18, 19, 20)
18) Case Western Reserve 100 (11, 12, 14, 14, 15, 15, 15, 17, 21, --)
T19) George Fox 59 (16, 18, 19, 19, 20, 20, 20, 22, 22, 25)
T19) Wartburg 59 (15, 15, 17, 17, 20, 22, 22, 23, 24, --)
21) Johns Hopkins 49 (16, 18, 19, 19, 20, 21, 23, 23, --, --)
T22) Berry 46 (16, 18, 19, 19, 21, 21, 22, --, --, --)
T22) Concordia-Moorhead 46 (16, 18, 21, 21, 21, 21, 23, 24, 24, 25)
24) Springfield 16 (20, 22, 23, 24, 25, --, --, --, --, --)
T25) Millikin 13 (20, 22, 23, --, --, --, --, --, --, --)
T25) UW-Whitewater 13 (18, 21, --, --, --, --, --, --, --, --)
27) Alfred 9 (19, 24)
28) Heidelberg 8 (19, 25)
29) Carthage 7 (20, 25)
T30) Monmouth 6 (23, 23)
T30) Trine 6 (22, 24)
T32) DePauw 5 (24, 25, 25, 25)
T32) Salisbury 5 (24, 24, 25)
34) Westminster (PA) 3 (23)
35) UW-La Crosse 2 (24)
I'm high or low on several - I will say that I made a slight error and flipped two teams here from where I had them on the North poll but that wouldn't affect the overall rankings.
There are probably 35 teams to consider, and in my eyes there are 25 teams fighting for 11 - down.
Quote from: smedindy on October 18, 2017, 11:27:26 AM
I'm high or low on several - I will say that I made a slight error and flipped two teams here from where I had them on the North poll but that wouldn't affect the overall rankings.
There are probably 35 teams to consider, and in my eyes there are 25 teams fighting for 11 - down.
What order do you have the CCIW teams in?
I went NCC (10), IWU (12), Wheaton (18), Carthage (25)
10. IWU
20. Carthage
22. Millikin
23. North Central
I spent a long time moving teams up and down and landed on that. But...ask me again today and it may be different.
Quote from: smedindy on October 20, 2017, 01:22:16 PM
10. IWU
20. Carthage
22. Millikin
23. North Central
I spent a long time moving teams up and down and landed on that. But...ask me again today and it may be different.
That's how our ERFP rankings are.
2017 Week 8 TOP 25 FAN POLL
# School Pts Prev
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor (8) 248 1
2) Mount Union (2) 241 2
3) UW-Oshkosh 231 3
4) St Thomas 201 5
5) Hardin-Simmons 200 4
6) Linfield 192 6
7) Delaware Valley 184 7
8) St John's 181 8
9) Wittenberg 156 10
10) Illinois Wesleyan 148 9
11) Wesley 140 11
12) North Central 129 12
13) UW-Platteville 127 T14
14) Brockport 122 13
15) Wheaton 108 16
16) Washington & Jefferson 103 T14
17) Frostburg St 101 17
18) Case Western Reserve 96 18
19) Wartburg 57 T19
20) Berry 56 T22
21) George Fox 53 T19
22) Concordia-Moorhead 50 T22
23) Johns Hopkins 49 21
24) Springfield 26 24
25) UW-Whitewater 15 T25
Dropped Out: Millikin
Also Receiving Votes: Millikin (14), Salisbury (9), Trine (7), Monmouth (3), Westminster (PA) (2), Trinity (CT) (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HansenRatings, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, Scots13, and smedindy
Only 31 teams this week is the lowest number of the season
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 248 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2)
2) Mount Union 241 ( 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3) UW-Oshkosh 231 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4) St Thomas 201 ( 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 13)
5) Hardin-Simmons 200 ( 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8, 9)
6) Linfield 192 ( 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 10)
7) Delaware Valley 184 ( 5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 8, 8, 8, 12, 12)
8) St John's 181 ( 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 9, 9, 14)
9) Wittenberg 156 ( 4, 5, 8, 8, 10, 11, 11, 13, 15, 19)
10) Illinois Wesleyan 148 ( 6, 9, 9, 10, 12, 12, 12, 13, 14, 15)
11) Wesley 140 ( 7, 9, 9, 11, 12, 13, 13, 14, 14, 18)
12) North Central 129 ( 9, 10, 10, 11, 12, 12, 14, 15, 19, 19)
13) UW-Platteville 127 ( 6, 7, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15, 17, 20, 22)
14) Brockport 122 ( 6, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 18)
15) Wheaton 108 (10, 10, 11, 11, 16, 16, 17, 18, 18, 25)
16) Wash & Jeff 103 (11, 11, 13, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 21, 22)
17) Frostburg St 101 ( 8, 12, 14, 16, 17, 17, 18, 18, 19, 20)
18) Case Western Reserve 96 (11, 12, 14, 14, 15, 16, 17, 20, 20, 25)
19) Wartburg 57 (15, 15, 17, 19, 19, 22, 22, 23, 25, --)
20) Berry 56 (16, 17, 18, 19, 19, 20, 22, 22, 25, --)
21) George Fox 53 (13, 15, 16, 20, 20, 22, 23, --, --, --)
22) Concordia-Moorhead 50 (16, 19, 21, 21, 21, 21, 21, 23, 23, 24)
23) Johns Hopkins 49 (16, 17, 19, 20, 20, 22, 22, 23, --, --)
24) Springfield 26 (20, 21, 21, 23, 23, 24, 25, 25, --, --)
25) UW-Whitewater 15 (18, 21, 24, --, --, --, --, --, --, --)
26) Millikin 14 (21, 22, 23, 25, 25)
27) Salisbury 9 (24, 24, 24, 24, 25)
28) Trine 7 (23, 24, 24)
29) Monmouth 3 (23)
30) Westminster (PA) 2 (24)
31) Trinity (CT) 1 (25)
2017 Week 9 TOP 25 FAN POLL
# School Pts Prev
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor (8) 248 1
2) Mount Union (2) 241 2
3) UW-Oshkosh 230 3
4) St Thomas 204 4
5) Hardin-Simmons 200 5
6) Delaware Valley 189 7
7) St John's 186 8
8) Linfield 175 6
9) Illinois Wesleyan 155 10
10) Wittenberg 152 9
11) North Central 144 12
12) Wesley 143 11
13) Brockport 134 14
14) Frostburg St 108 17
15) Wash & Jeff 105 16
16) Case Western Reserve 103 18
17) Wheaton 98 15
18) Wartburg 80 19
19) Concordia-Moorhead 59 22
20) Berry 58 20
T21) Johns Hopkins 49 23
T21) UW-Platteville 49 13
23) George Fox 34 21
24) Springfield 28 24
25) UW-Whitewater 21 25
Dropped Out: None
Also Receiving Votes: Salisbury (14), Trine (12), Carthage (9), UW-La Crosse (6), Monmouth (5), Westminster (PA) (5), Framingham St (2), Husson (2), Trinity (CT) (1), Union (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HansenRatings, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, Scots13, and smedindy
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 248 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2)
2) Mount Union 241 ( 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3) UW-Oshkosh 230 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4) St Thomas 204 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 12)
5) Hardin-Simmons 200 ( 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 8, 8, 8)
6) Delaware Valley 189 ( 4, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 11, 11)
7) St John's 186 ( 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 13)
8) Linfield 175 ( 4, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 12, 16)
9) Illinois Wesleyan 155 ( 6, 9, 9, 10, 11, 11, 11, 11, 13, 14)
10) Wittenberg 152 ( 5, 6, 8, 10, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 19)
11) North Central 144 ( 8, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10, 11, 13, 19, 19)
12) Wesley 143 ( 7, 9, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 13, 14, 19)
13) Brockport 134 ( 5, 6, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18)
14) Frostburg St 108 ( 9, 14, 14, 14, 15, 16, 16, 17, 18, 19)
15) Wash & Jeff 105 (10, 10, 13, 13, 15, 15, 16, 16, 21, --)
16) Case Western Reserve 103 (11, 12, 14, 14, 15, 15, 15, 16, 20, 25)
17) Wheaton 98 ( 9, 9, 12, 13, 16, 16, 18, 18, 25, --)
18) Wartburg 80 (12, 15, 17, 17, 17, 18, 18, 22, 22, 22)
19) Concordia-Moorhead 59 (15, 17, 17, 17, 20, 21, 21, 22, 25, --)
20) Berry 58 (15, 18, 19, 19, 19, 20, 20, 22, 24, --)
T21) Johns Hopkins 49 (17, 18, 20, 20, 21, 22, 22, 23, 23, 25)
T21) UW-Platteville 49 (14, 18, 18, 20, 21, 21, 23, 24, --, --)
23) George Fox 34 (12, 19, 20, 21, 24, --, --, --, --, --)
24) Springfield 28 (19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 24, 24, 25, --, --)
25) UW-Whitewater 21 (16, 17, 25, 25, --, --, --, --, --, --)
26) Salisbury 14 (22, 23, 23, 24, 24)
27) Trine 12 (23, 23, 23, 23)
28) Carthage 9 (22, 22, 25)
29) UW-La Crosse 6 (20)
T30) Monmouth 5 (21)
T30) Westminster (PA) 5 (21)
T32) Framingham St 2 (24)
T32) Husson 2 (24)
T34) Trinity (CT) 1 (25)
T34) Union 1 (25)
2017 Week 10 TOP 25 FAN POLL
# School Pts Prev
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor (8) 248 1
2) Mount Union (2) 241 2
3) UW-Oshkosh 231 3
4) St Thomas 203 4
5) Hardin-Simmons 201 5
6) Delaware Valley 189 6
7) St John's 187 7
8) Linfield 172 8
9) Illinois Wesleyan 154 9
10) North Central 152 11
11) Wittenberg 151 10
12) Wesley 145 12
13) Brockport 133 13
14) Washington & Jefferson 113 15
15) Case Western Reserve 109 16
16) Wheaton 102 17
17) Frostburg St 97 14
18) Wartburg 92 18
19) Concordia-Moorhead 64 19
T20) Berry 57 20
T20) Johns Hopkins 57 T21
22) Springfield 40 24
23) UW-Whitewater 33 25
24) Trine 20 NR
25) UW-La Crosse 17 NR
Dropped Out: UW-Platteville and George Fox
Also Receiving Votes: Salisbury (8), Monmouth (7), UW-Platteville (6), George Fox (5), Framingham St (4), Centre (3), Huntingdon (3), Plymouth St (3), Millikin (2), Chapman (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HansenRatings, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, Scots13, and smedindy
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 248 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2)
2) Mount Union 241 ( 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3) UW-Oshkosh 231 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4) St Thomas 203 ( 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 12)
5) Hardin-Simmons 201 ( 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8)
6) Delaware Valley 189 ( 4, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 11, 11)
7) St John's 187 ( 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8, 8, 13)
8) Linfield 172 ( 4, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 11, 11, 12, 18)
9) Illinois Wesleyan 154 ( 6, 9, 9, 10, 10, 11, 11, 13, 13, 14)
10) North Central 152 ( 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10, 11, 16, 19)
11) Wittenberg 151 ( 5, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12, 12, 13, 13, 19)
12) Wesley 145 ( 7, 9, 9, 9, 11, 12, 12, 13, 14, 19)
13) Brockport 133 ( 5, 10, 10, 12, 13, 13, 14, 16, 16, 18)
14) Wash & Jeff 113 (10, 10, 13, 14, 15, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19)
15) Case Western Reserve 109 (11, 12, 14, 14, 14, 14, 15, 15, 17, 25)
16) Wheaton 102 ( 9, 9, 12, 13, 15, 15, 18, 19, 22, --)
17) Frostburg St 97 ( 9, 14, 15, 16, 16, 16, 16, 17, 22, 22)
18) Wartburg 92 (12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 17, 18, 19, 20, 20)
19) Concordia-Moorhead 64 (15, 17, 17, 18, 19, 19, 20, 22, 24, 25)
T20) Berry 57 (15, 17, 18, 18, 19, 21, 21, 22, --, --)
T20) Johns Hopkins 57 (17, 18, 19, 20, 20, 21, 21, 22, 22, 23)
22) Springfield 40 (18, 20, 20, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, --, --)
23) UW-Whitewater 33 (16, 17, 20, 21, 23, --, --, --, --, --)
24) Trine 20 (21, 22, 23, 23, 23, 24, --, --, --, --)
25) UW-La Crosse 17 (20, 23, 23, 24, 24, 25, --, --, --, --)
26) Salisbury 8 (22, 24, 25, 25)
27) Monmouth 7 (21, 24)
28) UW-Platteville 6 (21, 25)
29) George Fox 5 (21)
30) Framingham St 4 (24, 24)
T31) Centre 3 (23)
T31) Huntingdon 3 (25, 25, 25)
T31) Plymouth St 3 (23)
34) Millikin 2 (24)
35) Chapman 1 (25)
So much for any reputation I had as a maverick - for the first time, all 25 teams on my ballot finished in the top 25! (Though some of them are fairly far from where I had them, and I'm still one of the two first place votes for UMU.)
Hasn't been much action here for a few weeks so I'll post my ballot.
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 248 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2)
2) Mount Union 241 ( 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3) UW-Oshkosh 231 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4) St Thomas 203 ( 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 12)
5) Hardin-Simmons 201 ( 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8)
6) Delaware Valley 189 ( 4, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 11, 11)
7) St John's 187 ( 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8, 8, 13)
8) Linfield 172 ( 4, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 11, 11, 12, 18)
9) Illinois Wesleyan 154 ( 6, 9, 9, 10, 10, 11, 11, 13, 13, 14)
10) North Central 152 ( 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10, 11, 16, 19)
11) Wittenberg 151 ( 5, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12, 12, 13, 13, 19)
12) Wesley 145 ( 7, 9, 9, 9, 11, 12, 12, 13, 14, 19)
13) Brockport 133 ( 5, 10, 10, 12, 13, 13, 14, 16, 16, 18)
14) Wash & Jeff 113 (10, 10, 13, 14, 15, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19)
15) Case Western Reserve 109 (11, 12, 14, 14, 14, 14, 15, 15, 17, 25)
16) Wheaton 102 ( 9, 9, 12, 13, 15, 15, 18, 19, 22, --)
17) Frostburg St 97 ( 9, 14, 15, 16, 16, 16, 16, 17, 22, 22)
18) Wartburg 92 (12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 17, 18, 19, 20, 20)
19) Concordia-Moorhead 64 (15, 17, 17, 18, 19, 19, 20, 22, 24, 25)
T20) Berry 57 (15, 17, 18, 18, 19, 21, 21, 22, --, --)
T20) Johns Hopkins 57 (17, 18, 19, 20, 20, 21, 21, 22, 22, 23)
22) Springfield 40 (18, 20, 20, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, --, --)
23) UW-Whitewater 33 (16, 17, 20, 21, 23, --, --, --, --, --)
24) Trine 20 (21, 22, 23, 23, 23, 24, --, --, --, --)
25) UW-La Crosse 17 (20, 23, 23, 24, 24, 25, --, --, --, --)
26) Salisbury 8 (22, 24, 25, 25)
27) Monmouth 7 (21, 24)
28) UW-Platteville 6 (21, 25)
29) George Fox 5 (21)
30) Framingham St 4 (24, 24)
T31) Centre 3 (23)
T31) Huntingdon 3 (25, 25, 25)
T31) Plymouth St 3 (23)
34) Millikin 2 (24)
35) Chapman 1 (25)
Lots of extremes on my ballot...
I'm the solo highest voter for Delaware Valley, Wesley, Brockport, Frostburg St, Berry and Centre plus joint lowest on Wash & Jeff and Framingham St
I'm the solo lowest voter for St Thomas, St John's, Linfield, Illinois Wesleyan, and Concordia-Moorhead and joint lowest on Hardin-Simmons
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 08, 2017, 07:00:26 PM
Lots of extremes on my ballot...
I'm the solo highest voter for Delaware Valley, Wesley, Brockport, Frostburg St, Berry and Centre plus joint lowest on Wash & Jeff and Framingham St
I'm the solo lowest voter for St Thomas, St John's, Linfield, Illinois Wesleyan, and Concordia-Moorhead and joint lowest on Hardin-Simmons
#EastCoastBias
What's your justification for so many east teams so high?
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 08, 2017, 07:00:26 PM
Hasn't been much action here for a few weeks so I'll post my ballot.
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 248 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2)
2) Mount Union 241 ( 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3) UW-Oshkosh 231 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4) St Thomas 203 ( 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 12)
5) Hardin-Simmons 201 ( 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8)
6) Delaware Valley 189 ( 4, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 11, 11)
7) St John's 187 ( 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8, 8, 13)
8) Linfield 172 ( 4, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 11, 11, 12, 18)
9) Illinois Wesleyan 154 ( 6, 9, 9, 10, 10, 11, 11, 13, 13, 14)
10) North Central 152 ( 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10, 11, 16, 19)
11) Wittenberg 151 ( 5, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12, 12, 13, 13, 19)
12) Wesley 145 ( 7, 9, 9, 9, 11, 12, 12, 13, 14, 19)
13) Brockport 133 ( 5, 10, 10, 12, 13, 13, 14, 16, 16, 18)
14) Wash & Jeff 113 (10, 10, 13, 14, 15, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19)
15) Case Western Reserve 109 (11, 12, 14, 14, 14, 14, 15, 15, 17, 25)
16) Wheaton 102 ( 9, 9, 12, 13, 15, 15, 18, 19, 22, --)
17) Frostburg St 97 ( 9, 14, 15, 16, 16, 16, 16, 17, 22, 22)
18) Wartburg 92 (12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 17, 18, 19, 20, 20)
19) Concordia-Moorhead 64 (15, 17, 17, 18, 19, 19, 20, 22, 24, 25)
T20) Berry 57 (15, 17, 18, 18, 19, 21, 21, 22, --, --)
T20) Johns Hopkins 57 (17, 18, 19, 20, 20, 21, 21, 22, 22, 23)
22) Springfield 40 (18, 20, 20, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, --, --)
23) UW-Whitewater 33 (16, 17, 20, 21, 23, --, --, --, --, --)
24) Trine 20 (21, 22, 23, 23, 23, 24, --, --, --, --)
25) UW-La Crosse 17 (20, 23, 23, 24, 24, 25, --, --, --, --)
26) Salisbury 8 (22, 24, 25, 25)
27) Monmouth 7 (21, 24)
28) UW-Platteville 6 (21, 25)
29) George Fox 5 (21)
30) Framingham St 4 (24, 24)
T31) Centre 3 (23)
T31) Huntingdon 3 (25, 25, 25)
T31) Plymouth St 3 (23)
34) Millikin 2 (24)
35) Chapman 1 (25)
Lots of extremes on my ballot...
I'm the solo highest voter for Delaware Valley, Wesley, Brockport, Frostburg St, Berry and Centre plus joint lowest on Wash & Jeff and Framingham St
I'm the solo lowest voter for St Thomas, St John's, Linfield, Illinois Wesleyan, and Concordia-Moorhead and joint lowest on Hardin-Simmons
Eternal shame upon you, sir. May you have 60 straight gutter balls next Tuesday! ;D
Del Val: beat Wesley, hasn't had any struggles and haven't given up more than 19 points (against Wesley) all year.
Brockport: while not having that signature win that DelVal has, does have a nice overall resume with wins over a quartet of good 6-3 teams
Wesley: besides the 5 point loss to a Del Val team I have top 5, have beaten both Frostburg and Salisbury (who are solid teams) while holding everyone else to single digit points.
Frostburg: I could see as being a few spots high. They just drifted up the first half of the year as teams lost. Even though they've dropped a couple spots from their highwater mark on my ballot I think I'll have to correct it next week as their season doesn't look quite as good as I once thought.
After that the only other east teams I have are unbeaten Springfield at 20 and Framingham St at 24
St Thomas's loss to Stout is one of the worst losses (by team not score) by anyone on my ballot (the only other one might be Framingham St losing to Plymouth St). They've played just 3 teams with a winning record this season one of them being the loss to Stout. St John's is pretty similar and have no results that make me want to put them ahead of St Thomas. They've been handcuffed right behind them since they played week 4.
I'm intrigued, Grizz.
Hypothetical for you: Del Val vs. UST on a neutral field, how would you set the spread? #4 vs. #12, essentially a national tournament semifinalist vs. a team losing in the second round, would be at least a 10-point spread for me on a neutral field, probably 12.5 or so.
That's the bummer about D3, next to nothing in terms of intersectional match ups. Candidly, I don't know jack about teams out East because I've never been able to see any of them in person. Wish there were more options to do so. The same goes for those out East, they have no way to judge the size, speed or depth of midestern teams. The good news is that all sorts itself out in the playoffs, it's a shame we have to wait that long.
I will say, after watching tons of midwest games up close, the one thing that really stands out for me is you can tell a WIAC team when the come out of the tunnel. The are bigger across the board than any other type of team I've seen.
Quote from: HansenRatings on November 08, 2017, 10:27:41 PM
I'm intrigued, Grizz.
Hypothetical for you: Del Val vs. UST on a neutral field, how would you set the spread? #4 vs. #12, essentially a national tournament semifinalist vs. a team losing in the second round, would be at least a 10-point spread for me on a neutral field, probably 12.5 or so.
If I was setting the spread for others to pick I'd probably have St Thomas favored by about a TD. As for me personally I'd take DelVal if they were giving a FG. But really that's the case for pretty much any two teams from that mix. Any of the teams I have from 4 down to at least 14 (15-19 aren't that far behind either) I think would win at least 3 or 4 if they played 10 times against any of the others.
Griz, I admire your transparency.
I get the feeling you don't allow any part of prior year performances to enter into your ranking- is that an accurate statement? I'm not debating your choice to do so.
Is it your view that there are 17 teams that would beat Linfield 6 out of 10 Times?
Similarly, UWW wouldn't beat any of your top 25 teams 6 out of 10 Times?
Quote from: jamtoTommie on November 08, 2017, 07:33:06 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 08, 2017, 07:00:26 PM
Lots of extremes on my ballot...
I'm the solo highest voter for Delaware Valley, Wesley, Brockport, Frostburg St, Berry and Centre plus joint lowest on Wash & Jeff and Framingham St
I'm the solo lowest voter for St Thomas, St John's, Linfield, Illinois Wesleyan, and Concordia-Moorhead and joint lowest on Hardin-Simmons
#EastCoastBias
What's your justification for so many east teams so high?
No one is ever bias. Not on the D3 Fan Poll Committee. Ha, I pretty sure you guys votes even's it out.
Quote from: MANDGSU on November 10, 2017, 11:43:46 AM
Quote from: jamtoTommie on November 08, 2017, 07:33:06 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 08, 2017, 07:00:26 PM
Lots of extremes on my ballot...
I'm the solo highest voter for Delaware Valley, Wesley, Brockport, Frostburg St, Berry and Centre plus joint lowest on Wash & Jeff and Framingham St
I'm the solo lowest voter for St Thomas, St John's, Linfield, Illinois Wesleyan, and Concordia-Moorhead and joint lowest on Hardin-Simmons
#EastCoastBias
What's your justification for so many east teams so high?
No one is ever bias. Not on the D3 Fan Poll Committee. Ha, I pretty sure you guys votes even's it out.
I just hope that the D3 Fan Poll Committee can recognize their biases and overcome or counteract them when it comes to casting their votes :-) The question of where the top east teams fall in the national picture will get settled on the field in the playoffs. I just hope that it's at the hands of somebody other than Mount Union, who has been known to crush everyone's hopes and dreams most years.
Quote from: emma17 on November 10, 2017, 10:59:55 AM
Griz, I admire your transparency.
I get the feeling you don't allow any part of prior year performances to enter into your ranking- is that an accurate statement? I'm not debating your choice to do so.
Is it your view that there are 17 teams that would beat Linfield 6 out of 10 Times?
Similarly, UWW wouldn't beat any of your top 25 teams 6 out of 10 Times?
Early in the season perhaps past years might factor in a bit but at this point there's plenty of data about the current year that you don't really need to look back.
With the way Linfield has played the past few weeks probably more than 17 could beat them.
I have Concordia-Moorhead at 25 and they did beat UWW ;) They're certainly the best 3 loss team and not too far off my ballot
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 10, 2017, 03:13:29 PM
Quote from: emma17 on November 10, 2017, 10:59:55 AM
Griz, I admire your transparency.
I get the feeling you don't allow any part of prior year performances to enter into your ranking- is that an accurate statement? I'm not debating your choice to do so.
Is it your view that there are 17 teams that would beat Linfield 6 out of 10 Times?
Similarly, UWW wouldn't beat any of your top 25 teams 6 out of 10 Times?
Early in the season perhaps past years might factor in a bit but at this point there's plenty of data about the current year that you don't really need to look back.
With the way Linfield has played the past few weeks probably more than 17 could beat them.
I have Concordia-Moorhead at 25 and they did beat UWW ;) They're certainly the best 3 loss team and not too far off my ballot
Well, "could" beat them isn't really the point. Would they "likely" beat them? W&J, Case, Frostburg and Berry would all likely beat Linfield?
Quote from: emma17 on November 10, 2017, 07:14:30 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 10, 2017, 03:13:29 PM
Quote from: emma17 on November 10, 2017, 10:59:55 AM
Griz, I admire your transparency.
I get the feeling you don't allow any part of prior year performances to enter into your ranking- is that an accurate statement? I'm not debating your choice to do so.
Is it your view that there are 17 teams that would beat Linfield 6 out of 10 Times?
Similarly, UWW wouldn't beat any of your top 25 teams 6 out of 10 Times?
Early in the season perhaps past years might factor in a bit but at this point there's plenty of data about the current year that you don't really need to look back.
With the way Linfield has played the past few weeks probably more than 17 could beat them.
I have Concordia-Moorhead at 25 and they did beat UWW ;) They're certainly the best 3 loss team and not too far off my ballot
Well, "could" beat them isn't really the point. Would they "likely" beat them? W&J, Case, Frostburg and Berry would all likely beat Linfield?
I don't know that I'd necessarily say "likely" but yeah I'd take those teams to win 5 or 6 out of 10. Definitely wouldn't have said that a month ago though.
Of course now that I've said that, Linfield will get their mojo back and make a run in the playoffs just to prove me wrong ::)
Has DIII outlawed upsets? Except for minor tinkering, my ballot this week will be the same as last week, which was remarkably similar to my ballot of the previous week!
I was thinking the same thing. There has been a remarkable lack of top-25 upsets the last few weeks of the season.
2017 Week 11 TOP 25 FAN POLL
# School Pts Prev
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor (8) 248 1
2) Mount Union (2) 241 2
3) UW-Oshkosh 231 3
4) Hardin-Simmons 205 5
5) St Thomas 200 4
6) Delaware Valley 192 6
7) St John's 185 7
8) Linfield 172 8
9) Illinois Wesleyan 156 9
10) North Central 150 10
11) Wesley 149 12
12) Wittenberg 147 11
13) Brockport 141 13
14) Washington & Jefferson 111 14
15) Wartburg 98 18
16) Wheaton 97 16
17) Frostburg St 88 17
18) Case Western Reserve 79 15
19) Concordia-Moorhead 67 19
20) Berry 54 T20
T21) Johns Hopkins 52 T20
T21) Springfield 52 22
23) UW-Whitewater 46 23
24) Trine 24 24
25) UW-La Crosse 17 25
Dropped Out: none
Also Receiving Votes: Salisbury (12), UW-Platteville (8), Monmouth (7), RPI (6), George Fox (5), Centre (3), Framingham St (2), Plymouth St (2), Franklin & Marshall (1), Huntingdon (1), W New England (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HansenRatings, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, Scots13, and smedindy
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 248 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2)
2) Mount Union 241 ( 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3) UW-Oshkosh 231 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4) Hardin-Simmons 205 ( 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 7, 8, 8)
5) St Thomas 200 ( 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 7, 7, 7, 7, 11)
6) Delaware Valley 192 ( 4, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 9, 11)
7) St John's 185 ( 5, 6, 6, 6, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 12)
8) Linfield 172 ( 4, 5, 5, 6, 7, 10, 11, 11, 12, 17)
9) Illinois Wesleyan 156 ( 6, 9, 9, 10, 11, 11, 11, 12, 12, 13)
10) North Central 150 ( 8, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 12, 16, 18)
11) Wesley 149 ( 7, 9, 9, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 17)
12) Wittenberg 147 ( 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 12, 13, 13, 15, 19)
13) Brockport 141 ( 5, 5, 10, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18)
14) Wash & Jeff 111 ( 9, 10, 13, 14, 14, 16, 18, 18, 18, 19)
15) Wartburg 98 (12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 16, 18, 19, 19, 20)
16) Wheaton 97 ( 9, 11, 13, 15, 15, 16, 18, 19, 21, --)
17) Frostburg St 88 (14, 14, 16, 16, 16, 16, 17, 19, 22, 22)
18) Case Western Reserve 79 (11, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 21, 21, 25, --)
19) Concordia-Moorhead 67 (14, 15, 15, 17, 18, 19, 22, 23, 24, --)
20) Berry 54 (15, 17, 17, 20, 20, 20, 22, 23, --, --)
T21) Johns Hopkins 52 (17, 18, 19, 21, 21, 21, 22, 23, 23, 23)
T21) Springfield 52 (13, 19, 19, 20, 20, 20, 22, 24, 25, --)
23) UW-Whitewater 46 (14, 15, 17, 21, 22, 22, 25, --, --, --)
24) Trine 24 (20, 22, 22, 23, 23, 24, 25, 25, --, --)
25) UW-La Crosse 17 (20, 23, 23, 24, 24, 25, --, --, --, --)
26) Salisbury 12 (16, 24)
27) UW-Platteville 8 (21, 24, 25)
28) Monmouth 7 (21, 24)
29) RPI 6 (20)
30) George Fox 5 (21)
31) Centre 3 (23)
T32) Framingham St 2 (24)
T32) Plymouth St 2 (24)
T34) Franklin & Marshall 1 (25)
T34) Huntingdon 1 (25)
T34) W New England 1 (25)
There will be a final poll coming... I have 6 ballots in so far. Hopefully the last few haven't already begun hibernating until next season :D
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on December 19, 2017, 04:35:39 AM
There will be a final poll coming... I have 6 ballots in so far. Hopefully the last few haven't already begun hibernating until next season :D
Looking forward to how the fan vote differs from that of DIII, I would presume, it would be very similar except more teams from West higher.
I haven't been able to get any word from one person so we finish with just 9 voters.
2017 FINAL TOP 25 FAN POLL
# School Pts Prev
1) Mount Union (8) 224 2
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor (1) 215 1
3) UW-Oshkosh 208 3
4) St Thomas 192 5
5) Brockport 186 13
6) Linfield 171 8
7) Delaware Valley 166 6
8) Wartburg 162 15
9) North Central 156 10
10) Frostburg St 141 17
11) Hardin-Simmons 138 4
12) Wesley 121 11
13) St John's 115 7
14) Case Western Reserve 111 18
15) Wash & Jeff 85 14
T16) Berry 84 20
T16) Illinois Wesleyan 84 9
18) Wheaton 65 16
19) Wittenberg 57 12
20) Trine 52 24
21) Concordia-Moorhead 48 19
22) Johns Hopkins 42 T21
23) UW-Whitewater 29 23
T24) Husson 24 NR
T24) UW-La Crosse 24 25
Dropped Out: Springfield
Also Receiving Votes: Franklin (6), Springfield (6), Centre (3), Framingham St (3), Ithaca (2), Monmouth (2), Franklin & Marshall (1), RPI (1), UW-Platteville (1)
Voters: 02 Warhawk, D3MAFAN, desertcat1, FCGrizzliesGrad, HSCTiger74, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, Scots13, and smedindy
1) Mount Union 224 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 215 ( 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3)
3) UW-Oshkosh 208 ( 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4) St Thomas 192 ( 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6, 7)
5) Brockport 186 ( 3, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 7, 9)
6) Linfield 171 ( 4, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 8, 10, 11)
7) Delaware Valley 166 ( 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 9, 10, 11)
8) Wartburg 162 ( 5, 6, 7, 8, 8, 8, 9, 10, 11)
9) North Central 156 ( 5, 7, 8, 8, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12)
10) Frostburg St 141 ( 8, 9, 9, 10, 10, 11, 11, 12, 13)
11) Hardin-Simmons 138 ( 7, 8, 9, 10, 10, 10, 13, 14, 15)
12) Wesley 121 ( 7, 11, 12, 12, 13, 13, 14, 15, 16)
13) St John's 115 ( 9, 11, 12, 13, 13, 13, 15, 16, 17)
14) Case Western Reserve 111 (12, 12, 12, 14, 14, 14, 14, 15, 16)
15) Wash & Jeff 85 ( 9, 15, 16, 16, 17, 18, 19, 19, 20)
T16) Berry 84 (12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 19, 22)
T16) Illinois Wesleyan 84 (14, 15, 15, 16, 17, 17, 18, 18, 20)
18) Wheaton 65 (11, 16, 17, 17, 18, 19, 21, 23, 24)
19) Wittenberg 57 (13, 15, 18, 18, 19, 21, 21, --, --)
20) Trine 52 (14, 19, 19, 20, 21, 21, 22, 22, 24)
21) Concordia-Moorhead 48 (15, 17, 18, 20, 20, 22, 24, 24, --)
22) Johns Hopkins 42 (19, 20, 20, 21, 21, 22, 22, 23, 24)
23) UW-Whitewater 29 (16, 18, 21, 23, 23, --, --, --, --)
T24) Husson 24 (20, 20, 21, 22, 25, 25, 25, --, --)
T24) UW-La Crosse 24 (17, 22, 23, 23, 23, 24, --, --, --)
T26) Franklin 6 (21, 25)
T26) Springfield 6 (22, 25, 25)
T28) Centre 3 (23)
T28) Framingham St 3 (23)
T30) Ithaca 2 (24)
T30) Monmouth 2 (24)
T32) Franklin & Marshall 1 (25)
T32) RPI 1 (25)
T32) UW-Platteville 1 (25)
Comparing the top 27 teams in the fan poll and the D3Football poll doesn't show much difference. The only team more than 2 places different was Wheaton who was 4 spots higher in the fan poll.
.
| . | . | F | an
| D | 3F
|
Team | Playoffs | . | Rank | Points | Rank | Points |
Mount Union | C | . | 1 | 224 | 1 | 625 |
Mary Hardin-Baylor | F | . | 2 | 215 | 2 | 597 |
UW-Oshkosh | SF | . | 3 | 208 | 3 | 577 |
St Thomas | QF | . | 4 | 192 | 4 | 537 |
Brockport | SF | . | 5 | 186 | 5 | 513 |
Linfield | R2 | . | 6 | 171 | 6 | 469 |
Delaware Valley | QF | . | 7 | 166 | 7 | 454 |
Wartburg | QF | . | 8 | 162 | 10 | 404 |
North Central | R2 | . | 9 | 156 | 8
| 409
|
Frostburg St | QF | . | 10 | 141 | 9 | 405
|
Hardin-Simmons | R1 | . | 11 | 138 | 11 | 388 |
Wesley | R2 | . | 12 | 121 | 12 | 351 |
St John's | R1 | . | 13 | 115 | 14 | 295 |
Case Western Reserve | R2 | . | 14 | 111 | 13 | 312 |
Wash & Jeff | R2 | . | 15 | 85 | 16 | 264 |
Berry | R2 | . | T16 | 84 | 15 | 275 |
Illinois Wesleyan | R1 | . | T16 | 84 | 17 | 208 |
Wheaton | NP | . | 18 | 65 | 22 | 87 |
Wittenberg | R1 | . | 19 | 57 | 18 | 165 |
Trine | R2 | . | 20 | 52 | 19 | 129
|
Concordia-Moorhead | NP | . | 21 | 48 | 21 | 94 |
Johns Hopkins | R1 | . | 22 | 42 | 20 | 120 |
UW-Whitewater | NP | . | 23 | 29 | 23 | 85 |
Husson | R2 | . | T24 | 24 | T25 | 66 |
UW-La Crosse | NP | . | T24 | 24 | 24 | 84 |
Franklin | R1 | . | T26 | 6 | T25 | 66 |
Springfield | R1 | . | T26 | 6 | 27 | 54 |
Interesting. Like to hear the logic behind MHB at #1 .
Quote from: HScoach on December 25, 2017, 09:38:02 PM
Interesting. Like to hear the logic behind MHB at #1 .
Likewise. I feel retroactively vindicated for voting UMU #1 all season long. ;)
I'm also curious about the two extreme votes on Brockport. I (like most here and on the 'official' poll) had them 5th. 4th and 7th can justifiably be argued. 3rd and 9th seem a bit off-the-wall.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 25, 2017, 11:02:18 PM
Quote from: HScoach on December 25, 2017, 09:38:02 PM
Interesting. Like to hear the logic behind MHB at #1 .
Likewise. I feel retroactively vindicated for voting UMU #1 all season long. ;)
I'm also curious about the two extreme votes on Brockport. I (like most here and on the 'official' poll) had them 5th. 4th and 7th can justifiably be argued. 3rd and 9th seem a bit off-the-wall.
Agreed and concur on all points.
Hi,
The rationale was that I screwed up and didn't flip my top 2. So really, Mt. Union should have 225 and UMHB 214. Alas.
Well, then, we're all pretty glad you're not the swing vote on the Supreme Court. ;D
Now that everyone has had a few days to study Kickoff, are we doing a preseason poll again this year?
And is FCGG still our pollster?
Yeah, I'll run it again this season. I'll get the official post up sometime in the next few days.
For some reason my football motor is having a hard time starting this year. Once we get going it'll be fine.
If you're interested in being part of the Fan Poll this year just send me a PM. Ballots are due by Monday night (moving it up to Monday because it's a bit easier for me to get it up Monday night rather than Tuesday night and if the basketball fan poll can have Sunday games and be up on Tuesday then football with its much fewer games and teams can go up Monday) during the season. If you need extra time or know you won't be able to get a ballot in that particular week please let me know as soon as you can. The earlier you submit a ballot the more time I'll have to check it and make sure you didn't make any errors or forget a team (and there's usually one every couple weeks that needs revised).
If you're in the south or east regions I strongly hope you'll join. There's usually a low turnout from those areas.
I'd like to have the preseason poll up by Sunday the 26th.
I've already received 4 ballots, I've just sent a message to the other voters from last year, and we've picked up a new voter. Still more than a week to join in if you're interested.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on August 18, 2018, 05:20:31 AM
I've already received 4 ballots, I've just sent a message to the other voters from last year, and we've picked up a new voter. Still more than a week to join in if you're interested.
Anyone can vote? I might be interested! :)
Quote from: bluestreak66 on August 20, 2018, 11:57:10 AM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on August 18, 2018, 05:20:31 AM
I've already received 4 ballots, I've just sent a message to the other voters from last year, and we've picked up a new voter. Still more than a week to join in if you're interested.
Anyone can vote? I might be interested! :)
Anyone who can put together a reasonable ballot, and commit to doing it every week
There's still time to join. I've received 9 ballots so far including a few rookies. I was targeting tonight to get the preseason poll up but if someone still needs an extra day let me know ASAP.
2018 PRESEASON TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | Points | Prev
|
1) | Mount Union (10)
| 250 | 1 |
2) | Mary Hardin-Baylor | 238 | 2 |
3) | UW-Oshkosh | 229 | 3 |
4) | St Thomas | 216 | 4 |
5) | Linfield | 197 | 6 |
6) | Brockport | 194 | 5 |
7) | North Central | 187 | 9 |
8) | Wesley | 171 | 12 |
9) | Frostburg St | 170 | 10 |
10) | St John's | 165 | 13 |
11) | Hardin-Simmons | 155 | 11 |
12) | UW-Whitewater | 148 | 23 |
13) | Wartburg | 134 | 8 |
14) | Wittenberg | 108 | 19 |
15) | Washington & Jefferson | 95 | 15 |
16) | Wheaton | 90 | 18 |
17) | UW-Platteville | 83 | NR |
18) | Johns Hopkins | 71 | 22 |
19) | Delaware Valley | 61 | 7 |
20) | Illinois Wesleyan | 38 | T16 |
21) | Franklin & Marshall | 37 | NR |
22) | John Carroll | 36 | NR |
23) | Berry | 35 | T16 |
24) | Trine | 26 | 20 |
25) | Concordia-Moorhead | 24 | 21 |
Dropped Out: Case Western Reserve, Husson, and UW-La Crosse
Also Receiving Votes: Case Western Reserve 22, Ithaca 18, Widener 13, Washington & Lee 7, Whitworth 6, Millikin 5, Wabash 5, Framingham St 4, RPI 3, Springfield 3, Thomas More 3, Alfred 2, Salisbury 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, desertcat1, FCGG, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, and rookies bluestreak66, bman, MANDGSU, Oline79
Nice, thanks for posting. Two NJAC schools in the top 10! Rowan is improved heading into this season, but these two games will be tough!
Frostburg is planning to move up to D2 next season, are any other schools planning similar jumps?
Quote from: RowanPhan on August 27, 2018, 02:09:44 PM
Nice, thanks for posting. Two NJAC schools in the top 10! Rowan is improved heading into this season, but these two games will be tough!
Frostburg is planning to move up to D2 next season, are any other schools planning similar jumps?
Benedictine and UT-Tyler (but they don't do football)
There's discussion on the General Board about all of the moves when they come up.
I had Ithaca, Wabash, Thomas More, Whitworth and Widener on my ballot.
I did not have C-M. Trine, Berry, Illinois Wesleyan, or Delaware Valley.
I didn't have Illinois Wesleyan in my North Top 10 poll, either. Kickoff spooked me.
I may have been low on Linfield and highest on F&M
I was an Ithaca voter, not an F&M. Despite a great record for F&M last year, it is hard to put two teams from the Centennial in the preseason top 25, and no team from the Liberty League.
1) Mount Union 250 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 238 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3)
3) UW-Oshkosh 229 ( 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4)
4) St Thomas 216 ( 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 9)
5) Linfield 197 ( 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11)
6) Brockport 194 ( 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9)
7) North Central 187 ( 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8, 9, 12)
8) Wesley 171 ( 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 11, 11, 11, 12)
9) Frostburg St 170 ( 6, 7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 12)
10) St John's 165 ( 6, 7, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 11, 11, 12)
11) Hardin-Simmons 155 ( 5, 7, 9, 10, 10, 11, 12, 12, 14, 15)
12) UW-Whitewater 148 ( 7, 8, 10, 11, 11, 11, 13, 13, 13, 15)
13) Wartburg 134 ( 5, 12, 12, 12, 13, 13, 13, 13, 14, 19)
14) Wittenberg 108 (13, 13, 14, 14, 15, 15, 15, 15, 18, 20)
15) Wash & Jeff 95 (13, 14, 15, 16, 16, 17, 17, 17, 19, 21)
16) Wheaton 90 (12, 14, 14, 15, 16, 16, 17, 17, 23, --)
17) UW-Platteville 83 (10, 14, 15, 16, 16, 17, 18, 20, 25, --)
18) Johns Hopkins 71 (16, 17, 17, 18, 18, 18, 19, 20, 20, --)
19) Delaware Valley 61 (17, 18, 18, 18, 18, 19, 19, 20, --, --)
20) Illinois Wesleyan 38 (14, 16, 20, 22, 22, 24, --, --, --, --)
21) Franklin & Marshall 37 (16, 19, 20, 21, 23, 23, 24, 25, --, --)
22) John Carroll 36 (16, 18, 21, 21, 22, 23, 25, --, --, --)
23) Berry 35 (15, 21, 21, 21, 22, 22, 25, --, --, --)
24) Trine 26 (19, 20, 21, 22, 22, --, --, --, --, --)
25) Concordia-Moorhead 24 (17, 19, 21, 23, --, --, --, --, --, --)
26) Case Western Reserve 22 (20, 20, 22, 23, 24, 25)
27) Ithaca 18 (14, 23, 24, 25)
28) Widener 13 (19, 21, 25)
29) Wash & Lee 7 (19)
30) Whitworth 6 (22, 24)
T31) Millikin 5 (23, 24)
T31) Wabash 5 (23, 24)
33) Framingham St 4 (22)
T34) RPI 3 (24, 25)
T34) Springfield 3 (24, 25)
T34) Thomas More 3 (23)
37) Alfred 2 (24)
38) Salisbury 1 (25)
Quote from: Oline79 on August 27, 2018, 02:50:35 PM
I was an Ithaca voter, not an F&M. Despite a great record for F&M last year, it is hard to put two teams from the Centennial in the preseason top 25, and no team from the Liberty League.
(The Centennial practically has twice as many football programs as the LL.)
Quote from: Pat Coleman on August 27, 2018, 05:38:23 PM
Quote from: Oline79 on August 27, 2018, 02:50:35 PM
I was an Ithaca voter, not an F&M. Despite a great record for F&M last year, it is hard to put two teams from the Centennial in the preseason top 25, and no team from the Liberty League.
(The Centennial practically has twice as many football programs as the LL.)
Does twice the number of teams increase the talent pool or dilute it? Still feel strongly that the best team in the LL is usually at least as good as the best team in the Centennial, and certainly as good as the second best team. Preseason polls are just that, can't wait for the start of football 2018. One of the best parts of D3 Football is how much change can occur year to year (Mt Union, UMHB aside...)
Quote from: Oline79 on August 28, 2018, 08:58:02 AM
Does twice the number of teams increase the talent pool or dilute it?
Neither -- we're not talking about a closed system here.
Quote from: Oline79 on August 28, 2018, 08:58:02 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on August 27, 2018, 05:38:23 PM
Quote from: Oline79 on August 27, 2018, 02:50:35 PM
I was an Ithaca voter, not an F&M. Despite a great record for F&M last year, it is hard to put two teams from the Centennial in the preseason top 25, and no team from the Liberty League.
(The Centennial practically has twice as many football programs as the LL.)
Does twice the number of teams increase the talent pool or dilute it? Still feel strongly that the best team in the LL is usually at least as good as the best team in the Centennial, and certainly as good as the second best team. Preseason polls are just that, can't wait for the start of football 2018. One of the best parts of D3 Football is how much change can occur year to year (Mt Union, UMHB aside...)
The historical Kickoff Conference ratings often flip flop on the CC and LL Conference ratings. Personally, I think a round robin of the top 4 teams from each league this year would show parity. The last 2 teams in the LL and the last 6 teams in the CC , no so much. So the top four LL teams(IC,RPI,Hobart, Union) only have have 2 likely league wins and the CC top four(Hopkins, F&M,Muhlenberg,Ursinus??) have 6 likely league wins. The CC isolated schedule can inflate or deflate the league strength depending on a handful of out of conference games and 1 or 2 playoff games. The LL has to play more out of conference games giving you a better sense of league strength.
As far as the poll, I appreciate every contributor's efforts and especially GrizzliesGrad for coordinating....the first few weeks involves some serious guesstimating.
Like Smedindy I also did not have Del Val in the top 25. According to our Del Val poster who is usually spot on and has good access, Del Val has been decimated by both graduation and key players from last year leaving. The acid test will be week 1 vs Wesley...then we will know if they belong or not...
Still waiting on 2 ballots. I'll chalk it up to being a holiday weekend. Hopefully they'll be in and I'll have the poll up sometime today.
2018 WEEK 1 TOP 25 FAN POLL Rank | Team | Points | Prev |
1) | Mount Union (10)
| 250 | 1 |
2) | Mary Hardin-Baylor | 239 | 2 |
3) | St Thomas | 225 | 4 |
4) | UW-Oshkosh | 212 | 3 |
5) | Brockport | 206 | 6 |
6) | Linfield | 195 | 5 |
7) | North Central | 194 | 7 |
8) | Wesley | 171 | 8 |
9) | Frostburg St | 169 | 9 |
10) | St John's | 162 | 10 |
11) | Hardin-Simmons | 149 | 11 |
12) | UW-Whitewater | 145 | 12 |
13) | Wartburg | 139 | 13 |
14) | Wittenberg | 111 | 14 |
15) | Washington & Jefferson | 106 | 15 |
16) | Wheaton | 102 | 16 |
17) | UW-Platteville | 82 | 17 |
18) | Johns Hopkins | 78 | 18 |
19) | John Carroll | 43 | 22 |
20) | Trine | 40 | 24 |
21) | Berry | 37 | 23 |
22) | Illinois Wesleyan | 34 | 20 |
23) | Case Western Reserve | 32 | NR |
24) | Franklin & Marshall | 24 | 21 |
25) | Delaware Valley | 19 | 19 |
Dropped Out: Concordia-Moorhead
Also Receiving Votes: Ithaca 18, Concordia-Moorhead 16, RPI 11, Wabash 8, Washington & Lee 8, Whitworth 5, Millikin 4, Rowan 3, Springfield 3, Baldwin Wallace 2, Carthage 2, Redlands 2, Salisbury 2, Alfred 1, Framingham St 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bluestreak66, bman, desertcat1, FCGG, MANDGSU, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, Oline79, and smedindy
1) Mount Union 250 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 239 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3) St Thomas 225 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 7)
4) UW-Oshkosh 212 ( 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6)
5) Brockport 206 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 7, 8, 8)
6) Linfield 195 ( 3, 4, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8, 9, 12)
7) North Central 194 ( 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8, 9)
8) Wesley 171 ( 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 10, 10, 11, 12)
9) Frostburg St 169 ( 6, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 10, 11, 12)
10) St John's 162 ( 7, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 10, 11, 11, 11)
11) Hardin-Simmons 149 ( 6, 8, 10, 10, 11, 12, 12, 13, 14, 15)
12) UW-Whitewater 145 ( 7, 9, 10, 11, 11, 12, 13, 13, 14, 15)
13) Wartburg 139 ( 4, 11, 12, 12, 12, 12, 13, 13, 13, 19)
14) Wittenberg 111 (13, 13, 13, 14, 14, 15, 15, 16, 17, 19)
15) Wash & Jeff 106 (11, 14, 14, 15, 15, 16, 16, 17, 18, 18)
16) Wheaton 102 (13, 14, 14, 15, 15, 15, 16, 17, 17, 22)
17) UW-Platteville 82 (14, 15, 16, 16, 17, 18, 18, 20, 20, 24)
18) Johns Hopkins 78 (16, 17, 17, 17, 17, 18, 18, 18, 19, 25)
19) John Carroll 43 (16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, --, --, --)
20) Trine 40 (19, 19, 20, 20, 21, 22, 22, 25, --, --)
21) Berry 37 (19, 19, 20, 21, 21, 21, 24, --, --, --)
22) Illinois Wesleyan 34 (16, 20, 21, 21, 21, 23, --, --, --, --)
23) Case Western Reserve 32 (19, 20, 22, 22, 22, 23, 24, 25, 25, --)
24) Franklin & Marshall 24 (16, 20, 23, 23, 24, --, --, --, --, --)
25) Delaware Valley 19 (18, 20, 23, 24, --, --, --, --, --, --)
26) Ithaca 18 (14, 23, 23)
27) Concordia-Moorhead 16 (17, 19)
28) RPI 11 (21, 23, 24, 25)
T29) Wabash 8 (22, 22)
T29) Wash & Lee 8 (18)
31) Whitworth 5 (21)
32) Millikin 4 (22)
T33) Rowan 3 (24, 25)
T33) Springfield 3 (23)
T35) Baldwin Wallace 2 (24)
T35) Carthage 2 (25, 25)
T35) Redlands 2 (24)
T35) Salisbury 2 (24)
T39) Alfred 1 (25)
T39) Framingham St 1 (25)
Someone's got Ithaca at 14? Whoo boy, that's a bit much for me
This was an *interesting* week, thanks to Oshkosh and Linfield, and Wartburg laying a giant mettwurst and Johns Hopkins dissolving before our eyes.
Quote from: smedindy on September 10, 2018, 11:43:46 AM
This was an *interesting* week, thanks to Oshkosh and Linfield, and Wartburg laying a giant mettwurst and Johns Hopkins dissolving before our eyes.
It's almost exactly the same "dissolve" that JHU had last year. It didn't last then, I'm skeptical it will last now. Last year Ursinus. This year Susquehanna. Decent teams, not great. The only difference is last year it was an obvious trap game with Ursinus followed by F&M. This year it isn't a trap game. I think JHU will recover, though F&M and Muhlenberg are going to be stiff tests.
Quote from: jknezek on September 10, 2018, 11:50:48 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 10, 2018, 11:43:46 AM
This was an *interesting* week, thanks to Oshkosh and Linfield, and Wartburg laying a giant mettwurst and Johns Hopkins dissolving before our eyes.
It's almost exactly the same "dissolve" that JHU had last year. It didn't last then, I'm skeptical it will last now. Last year Ursinus. This year Susquehanna. Decent teams, not great. The only difference is last year it was an obvious trap game with Ursinus followed by F&M. This year it isn't a trap game. I think JHU will recover, though F&M and Muhlenberg are going to be stiff tests.
I don't think decent teams fear them any more.
Quote from: smedindy on September 10, 2018, 12:37:01 PM
Quote from: jknezek on September 10, 2018, 11:50:48 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 10, 2018, 11:43:46 AM
This was an *interesting* week, thanks to Oshkosh and Linfield, and Wartburg laying a giant mettwurst and Johns Hopkins dissolving before our eyes.
It's almost exactly the same "dissolve" that JHU had last year. It didn't last then, I'm skeptical it will last now. Last year Ursinus. This year Susquehanna. Decent teams, not great. The only difference is last year it was an obvious trap game with Ursinus followed by F&M. This year it isn't a trap game. I think JHU will recover, though F&M and Muhlenberg are going to be stiff tests.
I don't think decent teams fear them any more.
I don't think many conference teams really fear each other. Familiarity kind of kills that concept. It's possible that the air of invincibility is diminished. But any team that has lost 6 conference games in 9 seasons is going to get every team's best shot.
One of these weeks we'll get this up[ on a Monday night. This week one voter was away all weekend and the other hasn't been on the forum in several days. Hopefully both ballots come in today and I can get it up tonight.
One voter is MIA so we're going with 9 voters this week.
2018 WEEK 2 TOP 25 FAN POLL Rank | Team | Points | Prev |
1) | Mount Union (9)
| 225 | 1 |
2) | Mary Hardin-Baylor | 216 | 2 |
3) | St Thomas | 204 | 3 |
4) | Brockport | 195 | 5 |
5) | North Central | 190 | 7 |
6) | Frostburg St | 171 | 9 |
7) | Wesley | 167 | 8 |
8) | St John's | 161 | 10 |
9) | UW-Whitewater | 157 | 12 |
10) | Hardin-Simmons | 151 | 11 |
T11) | Wash & Jeff | 116 | 15 |
T11) | Wheaton | 116 | 16 |
13) | Linfield | 114 | 6 |
14) | Wittenberg | 110 | 14 |
15) | UW-Oshkosh | 89 | 4 |
16) | UW-Platteville | 88 | 17 |
17) | John Carroll | 65 | 19 |
18) | Trine | 58 | 20 |
19) | Berry | 55 | 21 |
T20) | Case Western Reserve | 46 | 23 |
T20) | Franklin & Marshall | 46 | 24 |
22) | UW-La Crosse | 37 | NR |
23) | RPI | 30 | NR |
24) | Delaware Valley | 27 | 25 |
T25) | Springfield | 13 | NR |
T25) | Wash & Lee | 13 | NR |
Dropped Out: Wartburg, Johns Hopkins, Illinois Wesleyan
Also Receiving Votes: Susquehanna 11, Monmouth 6, Wartburg 6, Whitworth 6, Illinois Wesleyan 5, Wabash 5, Carthage 4, Cortland 4, Millikin 4, Baldwin Wallace 3, Salisbury 3, Alfred 2, Redlands 2, Albion 1, Concordia-Moorhead 1, Rowan 1, Trinity (TX) 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bluestreak66, bman, desertcat1, FCGG, MANDGSU, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, Oline79, and smedindy
1) Mount Union 225 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 216 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3) St Thomas 204 ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5)
4) Brockport 195 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 6, 6)
5) North Central 190 ( 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 7)
6) Frostburg St 171 ( 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 9, 9)
7) Wesley 167 ( 5, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8, 8, 9, 10)
8) St John's 161 ( 5, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 11)
9) UW-Whitewater 157 ( 5, 7, 7, 9, 9, 9, 10, 10, 11)
10) Hardin-Simmons 151 ( 6, 7, 7, 9, 10, 10, 11, 11, 12)
T11) Wash & Jeff 116 (11, 12, 12, 12, 14, 14, 14, 14, 15)
T11) Wheaton 116 (10, 10, 12, 12, 13, 13, 15, 16, 17)
13) Linfield 114 ( 8, 10, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 19, 20)
14) Wittenberg 110 (11, 11, 12, 12, 13, 13, 15, 17, 20)
15) UW-Oshkosh 89 (11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 16, 17, 19, --)
16) UW-Platteville 88 (13, 13, 14, 15, 15, 15, 17, 18, --)
17) John Carroll 65 (14, 16, 16, 17, 17, 19, 22, 22, --)
18) Trine 58 (14, 16, 17, 17, 19, 19, 22, --, --)
19) Berry 55 (14, 15, 17, 18, 18, 19, --, --, --)
T20) Case Western Reserve 46 (18, 19, 19, 20, 20, 23, 23, 23, 23)
T20) Franklin & Marshall 46 (16, 18, 20, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 24)
22) UW-La Crosse 37 (16, 18, 18, 20, 23, 24, --, --, --)
23) RPI 30 (18, 21, 21, 21, 21, 24, --, --, --)
24) Delaware Valley 27 (16, 19, 21, 23, 25, 25, --, --, --)
T25) Springfield 13 (18, 22, 25, --, --, --, --, --, --)
T25) Wash & Lee 13 (13, --, --, --, --, --, --, --, --)
27) Susquehanna 11 (21, 22, 24)
T28) Monmouth 6 (20)
T28) Wartburg 6 (21, 25)
T28) Whitworth 6 (20)
T31) Illinois Wesleyan 5 (22, 25)
T31) Wabash 5 (21)
T33) Carthage 4 (22)
T33) Cortland 4 (24, 24)
T33) Millikin 4 (22)
T36) Baldwin Wallace 3 (23)
T36) Salisbury 3 (23)
T38) Alfred 2 (24)
T38) Redlands 2 (24)
T40) Albion 1 (25)
T40) Concordia-Moorhead 1 (25)
T40) Rowan 1 (25)
T40) Trinity (TX) 1 (25)
To not rank UW-O ???
Curious who in the received other category this person had ranked higher than UWO?
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 12, 2018, 03:52:33 PM
To not rank UW-O ???
Curious who in the received other category this person had ranked higher than UWO?
I was thinking the same thing! Personally, I'm not ready to give JCU a #14 quite yet either, but I do appreciate the vote whomever they are! ;D
I had three lone votes this week.
Didn't have Berry, Del Val, Springfield, or W&L
It's getting to be a fools errand to play transitive scores with Platteville losing to Thomas More, and the chain extends all the way to Brockport.
Again we have a voter missing so it's 9 for the 2nd week in a row
2018 WEEK 3 TOP 25 FAN POLL Rank | Team | Points | Prev
|
1) | Mount Union (9)
| 225 | 1 |
2) | Mary Hardin-Baylor | 216 | 2 |
3) | St Thomas | 204 | 3 |
4) | Brockport | 195 | 4 |
5) | North Central | 190 | 5 |
6) | Frostburg St | 170 | 6 |
7) | Wesley | 168 | 7 |
8) | St John's | 161 | 8 |
9) | Hardin-Simmons | 158 | 10 |
10) | UW-Whitewater | 154 | 9 |
11) | Wash & Jeff | 123 | T11 |
12) | Linfield | 121 | 13 |
13) | UW-Oshkosh | 118 | 15 |
14) | Wittenberg | 116 | 14 |
15) | John Carroll | 95 | 17 |
16) | Trine | 60 | 18 |
17) | Case Western Reserve | 59 | T20 |
18) | Illinois Wesleyan | 57 | NR |
19) | Berry | 55 | 19 |
20) | UW-La Crosse | 50 | 22 |
21) | Franklin & Marshall | 47 | T20 |
22) | Wheaton | 43 | T11 |
23) | Delaware Valley | 29 | 24 |
24) | RPI | 25 | 23 |
25) | Union | 15 | NR |
Dropped Out: UW-Platteville, Springfield, Washington & Lee
Also Receiving Votes: Ithaca 14, Millikin 9, Whitworth 8, Concordia-Moorhead 6, Wabash 5, Wartburg 5, Cortland 4, Muhlenberg 4, Salisbury 4, Washington & Lee 4, Monmouth 3, Albion 2, Centre 1, Rowan 1, Thomas More 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bluestreak66, bman, desertcat1, FCGG, MANDGSU, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, Oline79, and smedindy
1) Mount Union 225 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 216 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3) St Thomas 204 ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5)
4) Brockport 195 ( 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6, 6)
5) North Central 190 ( 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 8)
6) Frostburg St 170 ( 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 9, 9)
7) Wesley 168 ( 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8, 8, 11)
8) St John's 161 ( 5, 7, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10)
9) Hardin-Simmons 158 ( 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 10, 10, 10, 11)
10) UW-Whitewater 154 ( 5, 7, 9, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 11)
11) Wash & Jeff 123 (11, 11, 11, 11, 12, 13, 13, 14, 15)
12) Linfield 121 ( 9, 10, 12, 12, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16)
13) UW-Oshkosh 118 (11, 12, 12, 12, 12, 13, 13, 14, 17)
14) Wittenberg 116 (10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 14, 14, 15, 15)
15) John Carroll 95 (13, 13, 13, 14, 15, 15, 15, 15, --)
16) Trine 60 (16, 17, 17, 17, 17, 20, 22, 22, --)
17) Case Western Reserve 59 (18, 18, 18, 19, 19, 19, 20, 21, 23)
18) Illinois Wesleyan 57 (16, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 24, --)
19) Berry 55 (16, 16, 16, 17, 18, 18, --, --, --)
20) UW-La Crosse 50 (14, 15, 17, 19, 21, 22, 24, --, --)
21) Franklin & Marshall 47 (16, 17, 19, 20, 22, 23, 23, 23, 24)
22) Wheaton 43 (18, 18, 19, 21, 21, 21, 22, 25, --)
23) Delaware Valley 29 (14, 19, 21, 22, 25, --, --, --, --)
24) RPI 25 (16, 20, 22, 23, 24, --, --, --, --)
25) Union 15 (20, 20, 23, --, --, --, --, --, --)
26) Ithaca 14 (19, 21, 24)
27) Millikin 9 (18, 25)
28) Whitworth 8 (20, 24)
29) Concordia-Moorhead 6 (20)
T30) Wabash 5 (21)
T30) Wartburg 5 (24, 24, 25)
T32) Cortland 4 (23, 25)
T32) Muhlenberg 4 (23, 25)
T32) Salisbury 4 (22)
T32) Washington & Lee 4 (22)
36) Monmouth 3 (23)
37) Albion 2 (24)
T38) Centre 1 (25)
T38) Rowan 1 (25)
T38) Thomas More 1 (25)
Interesting quirk, CWRU is 17th despite not being higher than 18th on any ballot.
High on LaCrosse. Low on Linfield.
I'm the Wabash voter (but it's not a homer vote - it's how it shakes out aligning with my North Region and West Region polls). I also threw bones to Whitworth and Rowan, and didn't vote for Union, Del Val, or Berry.
Quote from: ADL70 on September 19, 2018, 10:08:08 AM
Interesting quirk, CWRU is 17th despite not being higher than 18th on any ballot.
That's like when you have a voter place a team in the top 10 while no one else votes for them or have them very low and they make it into the Top 20. However, that's an interesting quirk with not having that one vote at 17 or higher.
No love for BWU after the loss to MTU. If they can get on a run, they'll be playing JCU week 11, possibly for 2nd place in the OAC and possible playoff birth.
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on September 19, 2018, 11:51:54 AM
No love for BWU after the loss to MTU. If they can get on a run, they'll be playing JCU week 11, possibly for 2nd place in the OAC and possible playoff birth.
Let's not just assume the game will be for 2nd Place! We could enter the game at 9-0! ;)
Quote from: JCUStreaks70 on September 19, 2018, 12:25:18 PM
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on September 19, 2018, 11:51:54 AM
No love for BWU after the loss to MTU. If they can get on a run, they'll be playing JCU week 11, possibly for 2nd place in the OAC and possible playoff birth.
Let's not just assume the game will be for 2nd Place! We could enter the game at 9-0! ;)
It's happened before. Once in the past 18 years or so. But Mount Union only loses home games when I am in attendance, and I will be nowhere near Alliance this weekend.
I moved to FL in 2003, but I was in attendance at each of these games:11/12/16 Loss to JCU 31-28 at HOME
10/22/05 Loss to ONU 21-14 at HOME
12/11/04 Loss to MHBU 38-35 at HOME
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on September 19, 2018, 01:19:27 PM
Quote from: JCUStreaks70 on September 19, 2018, 12:25:18 PM
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on September 19, 2018, 11:51:54 AM
No love for BWU after the loss to MTU. If they can get on a run, they'll be playing JCU week 11, possibly for 2nd place in the OAC and possible playoff birth.
Let's not just assume the game will be for 2nd Place! We could enter the game at 9-0! ;)
It's happened before. Once in the past 18 years or so. But Mount Union only loses home games when I am in attendance, and I will be nowhere near Alliance this weekend.
I moved to FL in 2003, but I was in attendance at each of these games:
11/12/16 Loss to JCU 31-28 at HOME
10/22/05 Loss to ONU 21-14 at HOME
12/11/04 Loss to MHBU 38-35 at HOME
With a record like that, I'm surprised the UMU athletic department hasn't placed a restraining order on you! ;D
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 19, 2018, 02:00:35 PM
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on September 19, 2018, 01:19:27 PM
Quote from: JCUStreaks70 on September 19, 2018, 12:25:18 PM
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on September 19, 2018, 11:51:54 AM
No love for BWU after the loss to MTU. If they can get on a run, they'll be playing JCU week 11, possibly for 2nd place in the OAC and possible playoff birth.
Let's not just assume the game will be for 2nd Place! We could enter the game at 9-0! ;)
It's happened before. Once in the past 18 years or so. But Mount Union only loses home games when I am in attendance, and I will be nowhere near Alliance this weekend.
I moved to FL in 2003, but I was in attendance at each of these games:
11/12/16 Loss to JCU 31-28 at HOME
10/22/05 Loss to ONU 21-14 at HOME
12/11/04 Loss to MHBU 38-35 at HOME
With a record like that, I'm surprised the UMU athletic department hasn't placed a restraining order on you! ;D
How much to convince you to go on Saturday? :)
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on September 19, 2018, 11:51:54 AM
No love for BWU after the loss to MTU. If they can get on a run, they'll be playing JCU week 11, possibly for 2nd place in the OAC and possible playoff birth.
The same could be said for most of D-3 right now..
"If they could get on a run...." ;D
Quote from: JCUStreaks70 on September 19, 2018, 03:12:18 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 19, 2018, 02:00:35 PM
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on September 19, 2018, 01:19:27 PM
Quote from: JCUStreaks70 on September 19, 2018, 12:25:18 PM
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on September 19, 2018, 11:51:54 AM
No love for BWU after the loss to MTU. If they can get on a run, they'll be playing JCU week 11, possibly for 2nd place in the OAC and possible playoff birth.
Let's not just assume the game will be for 2nd Place! We could enter the game at 9-0! ;)
It's happened before. Once in the past 18 years or so. But Mount Union only loses home games when I am in attendance, and I will be nowhere near Alliance this weekend.
I moved to FL in 2003, but I was in attendance at each of these games:
11/12/16 Loss to JCU 31-28 at HOME
10/22/05 Loss to ONU 21-14 at HOME
12/11/04 Loss to MHBU 38-35 at HOME
With a record like that, I'm surprised the UMU athletic department hasn't placed a restraining order on you! ;D
How much to convince you to go on Saturday? :)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic1.1.sqspcdn.com%2Fstatic%2Ff%2F1956449%2F23837843%2F1383676046223%2F1%2Bmillion%2Bliaiblity%2Binsurance.jpg%3Ftoken%3DiconDDuu3bhEwCeOHNoSMw69bkU%253D&hash=a8c88eb99141fdb0e12b36859e6494462ab8563a)
Quote from: smedindy on September 19, 2018, 03:59:33 PM
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on September 19, 2018, 11:51:54 AM
No love for BWU after the loss to MTU. If they can get on a run, they'll be playing JCU week 11, possibly for 2nd place in the OAC and possible playoff birth.
The same could be said for most of D-3 right now..
"If they could get on a run...." ;D
Just saying a 9-1 runner up in the OAC has a pretty good chance of making the playoffs.
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on September 19, 2018, 07:28:10 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 19, 2018, 03:59:33 PM
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on September 19, 2018, 11:51:54 AM
No love for BWU after the loss to MTU. If they can get on a run, they'll be playing JCU week 11, possibly for 2nd place in the OAC and possible playoff birth.
The same could be said for most of D-3 right now..
"If they could get on a run...." ;D
Just saying a 9-1 runner up in the OAC has a pretty good chance of making the playoffs.
Of course, but even MWC schools think now "If we could get on a run, we could go to the playoffs!" Even Knox. :D
Quote from: smedindy on September 19, 2018, 08:00:14 PM
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on September 19, 2018, 07:28:10 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 19, 2018, 03:59:33 PM
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on September 19, 2018, 11:51:54 AM
No love for BWU after the loss to MTU. If they can get on a run, they'll be playing JCU week 11, possibly for 2nd place in the OAC and possible playoff birth.
The same could be said for most of D-3 right now..
"If they could get on a run...." ;D
Just saying a 9-1 runner up in the OAC has a pretty good chance of making the playoffs.
Of course, but even MWC schools think now "If we could get on a run, we could go to the playoffs!" Even Knox. :D
I'll predict that a NESCAC team will go to the playoffs before Knox does! Since they participate in the playoffs in every(?) other sport, NESCAC might rescind their ban after just a light frost in Hell; Knox (and Earlham, Finlandia, etc.) won't go 'til Hell solidly freezes over. ;)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 19, 2018, 09:46:34 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 19, 2018, 08:00:14 PM
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on September 19, 2018, 07:28:10 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 19, 2018, 03:59:33 PM
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on September 19, 2018, 11:51:54 AM
No love for BWU after the loss to MTU. If they can get on a run, they'll be playing JCU week 11, possibly for 2nd place in the OAC and possible playoff birth.
The same could be said for most of D-3 right now..
"If they could get on a run...." ;D
Just saying a 9-1 runner up in the OAC has a pretty good chance of making the playoffs.
Of course, but even MWC schools think now "If we could get on a run, we could go to the playoffs!" Even Knox. :D
I'll predict that a NESCAC team will go to the playoffs before Knox does! Since they participate in the playoffs in every(?) other sport, NESCAC might rescind their ban after just a light frost in Hell; Knox (and Earlham, Finlandia, etc.) won't go 'til Hell solidly freezes over. ;)
NESCAC might go to the playoffs before Earlham even wins again. We'll have the heat death of the universe before the Quakers make the playoffs. Their best chance this year is likely Anderson in week 7. If they lose that the streak will be at 50 and tie the record. There's Defiance a couple games later who they could also have a chance at.
2018 WEEK 4 TOP 25 FAN POLL Rank | Team | Points | Prev |
1) | Mount Union (9)
| 225 | 1 |
2) | Mary Hardin-Baylor | 216 | 2 |
3) | St Thomas | 204 | 3 |
4) | Brockport | 195 | 4 |
5) | North Central | 190 | 5 |
6) | Frostburg St | 170 | 6 |
7) | Wesley | 168 | 7 |
8) | St John's | 161 | 8 |
9) | Hardin-Simmons | 159 | 9 |
10) | UW-Whitewater | 153 | 10 |
11) | Wash & Jeff | 120 | 11 |
12) | Linfield | 119 | 12 |
13) | UW-Oshkosh | 117 | 13 |
14) | Wittenberg | 110 | 14 |
15) | John Carroll | 101 | 15 |
16) | Trine | 63 | 16 |
17) | Case Western Reserve | 62 | 17 |
18) | Illinois Wesleyan | 60 | 18 |
19) | Berry | 59 | 19 |
20) | UW-La Crosse | 52 | 20 |
21) | Wheaton | 46 | 22 |
22) | Franklin & Marshall | 40 | 21 |
23) | RPI | 33 | 24 |
24) | Delaware Valley | 32 | 23 |
25) | Union | 11 | 25
|
Dropped Out: none
Also Receiving Votes: Ithaca 9, Whitworth 8, Wartburg 7, Concordia-Moorhead 6, Muhlenberg 6, Salisbury 5, Wabash 5, Wash & Lee 5, Monmouth 3, Albion 2, Johns Hopkins 1, Ohio Northern 1, Thomas More 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bluestreak66, desertcat1, FCGG, MANDGSU, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, Oline79, and smedindy
Full vote breakdown will come later today.
Dutch Boy...formerly dlip, is ****ing ecstatic to see the Dutch get some top 25 love here. He doesn't quite think they are there yet. A win over Hobart in two weeks, (not a ****ing easy task even against a down Hobart team) may convince dlip his beloved Dutch are top 25 worthy.
****, from the Dutchman's atrocious and painful fall from D3 respectability that ended with a never forget 0-10 campaign, Dutch Boy is just so ****ing ecstatic that his Behrman led Dutch are a part of the conversation.
By the way...RPI way ****ing overrated...Dutch Boy would put them around #238 or so.
It took a loss for JCU for me to put them in my top 25
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 26, 2018, 05:40:06 PM
It took a loss for JCU for me to put them in my top 25
Ah, another poster publicly noting that the concept of "a good loss" is very real! ;) I first gave close attention to Carthage when they damn near beat UW-Oshkosh, and I'm convinced that Ithaca's votes are more due to the close loss to Brockport than to their rather unimpressive wins.
1) Mount Union 225 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 216 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3) St Thomas 204 ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5)
4) Brockport 195 ( 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6, 6)
5) North Central 190 ( 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 8)
6) Frostburg St 170 ( 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 9, 9)
7) Wesley 168 ( 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8, 8, 11)
8) St John's 161 ( 5, 7, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10)
9) Hardin-Simmons 159 ( 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 9, 10, 10, 11)
10) UW-Whitewater 153 ( 5, 7, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 10, 11)
11) Wash & Jeff 120 (11, 11, 11, 12, 13, 13, 14, 14, 15)
12) Linfield 119 ( 9, 10, 12, 13, 13, 13, 14, 15, 16)
13) UW-Oshkosh 117 (11, 11, 12, 12, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17)
14) Wittenberg 110 (10, 12, 13, 14, 14, 14, 14, 15, 18)
15) John Carroll 101 (11, 12, 12, 12, 13, 13, 15, 19, --)
16) Trine 63 (16, 16, 16, 16, 17, 20, 22, 22, --)
17) Case Western Reserve 62 (17, 18, 18, 18, 19, 19, 19, 21, 23)
18) Illinois Wesleyan 60 (16, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 21, --)
19) Berry 59 (15, 16, 16, 17, 17, 18, 25, 25, --)
20) UW-La Crosse 52 (15, 15, 17, 19, 20, 22, 24, 24, --)
21) Wheaton 46 (18, 18, 19, 21, 21, 21, 22, 22, --)
22) Franklin & Marshall 40 (17, 17, 18, 20, 23, 23, 25, 25, --)
23) RPI 33 (15, 19, 20, 22, 23, 24, --, --, --)
24) Delaware Valley 32 (14, 19, 20, 22, 24, 25, --, --, --)
25) Union 11 (20, 22, 25, --, --, --, --, --, --)
26) Ithaca 9 (22, 23, 24)
27) Whitworth 8 (20, 24)
28) Wartburg 7 (23, 24, 24)
T29) Concordia-Moorhead 6 (20)
T29) Muhlenberg 6 (23, 23)
T31) Salisbury 5 (21)
T31) Wabash 5 (21)
T31) Wash & Lee 5 (21)
34) Monmouth 3 (23)
35) Albion 2 (24)
T36) Johns Hopkins 1 (25)
T36) Ohio Northern 1 (25)
T36) Thomas More 1 (25)
I submitted my ballot a couple hours ago. Pretty sure it is my first ballot ever on which the name Linfield does not appear anywhere! We'll know hell has frozen over when I can say that about UMU, UMHB, and UWW! ;D
There are a bunch to teams clamoring for the bottom 3 spots...
Quote from: smedindy on October 01, 2018, 01:32:43 PM
There are a bunch to teams clamoring for the bottom 3 spots...
2 of my bottom 3 didn't receive any votes last week. This is kind of a crazy year so far
Certainly a lot of new faces appearing on this week's poll. I especially want to see if Linfield still makes the Fan Poll top 25. I am mystified that they are on the national board. If Mt Union was 1-2, it would be hard to justify a top 25 spot.
Quote from: Oline89 on October 01, 2018, 02:19:18 PM
Certainly a lot of new faces appearing on this week's poll. I especially want to see if Linfield still makes the Fan Poll top 25. I am mystified that they are on the national board. If Mt Union was 1-2, it would be hard to justify a top 25 spot.
Usually it depends on who you lose to and how close. However, they do have a quality win against a good Redlands team, which will most likely compete for their conference championship. It's hard to compare the far west conferences outside of playoffs sometimes...
Linfield is still a top 25 team, just as long as Whitworth is ranked ahead of them.
But yeah, this was as very hard week to rank teams. I had a difficult time on where to put Wheaton, NCC, and IL-Wesleyan. Considering head to head ILW>Wheaton>NCC. However, UWL>ILW, but no way can I rank UWL (now with 2 losses) over ILW. So many things to factor in....not easy.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 02, 2018, 09:43:02 AM
Linfield is still a top 25 team, just as long as Whitworth is ranked ahead of them.
But yeah, this was as very hard week to rank teams. I had a difficult time on where to put Wheaton, NCC, and IL-Wesleyan. Considering head to head ILW>Wheaton>NCC. However, UWL>ILW, but no way can I rank UWL (now with 2 losses) over ILW. So many things to factor in....not easy.
02- Are you saying there's no way you can rank UWL over IWU because of the two losses or because the UWW score, of some other reason? Does the loss to a non D3 school weigh in your decision?
FYI UWL has more offensive yards and held IWU to 2.9 yds per rush, while averaging 5 yards per rush. The game was played at IWU. I have no idea who would win in a rematch. We likely didn't see UWL at their best given the OC leaving mid-week. It seems UWL did everything they had to do to earn a ranking ahead of IWU.
Quote from: emma17 on October 02, 2018, 02:05:41 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 02, 2018, 09:43:02 AM
Linfield is still a top 25 team, just as long as Whitworth is ranked ahead of them.
But yeah, this was as very hard week to rank teams. I had a difficult time on where to put Wheaton, NCC, and IL-Wesleyan. Considering head to head ILW>Wheaton>NCC. However, UWL>ILW, but no way can I rank UWL (now with 2 losses) over ILW. So many things to factor in....not easy.
02- Are you saying there's no way you can rank UWL over IWU because of the two losses or because the UWW score, of some other reason? Does the loss to a non D3 school weigh in your decision?
FYI UWL has more offensive yards and held IWU to 2.9 yds per rush, while averaging 5 yards per rush. The game was played at IWU. I have no idea who would win in a rematch. We likely didn't see UWL at their best given the OC leaving mid-week. It seems UWL did everything they had to do to earn a ranking ahead of IWU.
Having two losses is part of it. Also, as we discussed in the WIAC thread, i believe UWL just isn't that good this year. However, the fact that they beat ILW who beat Wheaton who beat NCC throws me for a loop. >:( If UWL's game against UWW would have been a little closer, I might have put UWL in mix with Wheaton and ILW.
Considering I haven't ranked UWL at all this year, I have a hard time putting them in the Top 25 for the first time after
losing by 3+ touchdowns at home to a team that didn't make the playoffs last year ;)
2018 WEEK 5 TOP 25 FAN POLL Rank | Team | Points | Prev
|
1) | Mount Union (8)
| 224 | 1 |
2) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (1)
| 217 | 2 |
3) | St Thomas | 205 | 3 |
4) | Brockport | 198 | 4 |
5) | Frostburg St | 176 | 6 |
6) | Wesley | 175 | 7 |
7) | St John's | 172 | 8 |
T8) | Hardin-Simmons | 167 | 9 |
T8) | UW-Whitewater | 167 | 10 |
10) | UW-Oshkosh | 131 | 13 |
11) | Wash & Jeff | 130 | 11 |
12) | John Carroll | 128 | 15 |
13) | Wheaton | 102 | 21 |
14) | Wittenberg | 98 | 14 |
15) | Illinois Wesleyan | 94 | 18 |
T16) | Berry | 73 | 19 |
T16) | Case Western Reserve | 73 | 17 |
T16) | North Central | 73 | 5 |
19) | Trine | 68 | 16 |
20) | Whitworth | 44 | NR |
T21) | Delaware Valley | 37 | 24 |
T21) | RPI | 37 | 23 |
23) | Muhlenberg | 35 | NR |
24) | Ithaca | 17 | NR |
25) | Wabash | 16 | NR |
Dropped Out: #12 Linfield, #20 UW-La Crosse, #22 Franklin & Marshall, #25 Union
Also Receiving Votes: Union 15, Central 10, Salisbury 9, UW-Platteville 8, Linfield 7, Johns Hopkins 6, UW-La Crosse 5, Monmouth 3, Montclair St 2, Albion 1, Baldwin Wallace 1, Marietta 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bluestreak66, desertcat1, FCGG, MANDGSU, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, Oline79, and smedindy
1) Mount Union 224 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 217 ( 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3) St Thomas 205 ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4)
4) Brockport 198 ( 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5)
5) Frostburg St 176 ( 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8)
6) Wesley 175 ( 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 9, 9)
7) St John's 172 ( 4, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8)
T8) Hardin-Simmons 167 ( 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 9, 9, 9)
T8) UW-Whitewater 167 ( 4, 5, 6, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9)
10) UW-Oshkosh 131 (10, 10, 10, 11, 11, 12, 12, 13, 14)
11) Wash & Jeff 130 (10, 11, 11, 11, 11, 12, 12, 12, 14)
12) John Carroll 128 (10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 11, 13, 13, 19)
13) Wheaton 102 (11, 13, 13, 14, 14, 15, 15, 15, 22)
14) Wittenberg 98 (11, 12, 12, 12, 13, 14, 16, 20, --)
15) Illinois Wesleyan 94 (12, 13, 14, 14, 15, 16, 18, 18, 20)
T16) Berry 73 (13, 13, 16, 16, 16, 17, 22, 24, 24)
T16) Case Western Reserve 73 (15, 17, 17, 17, 17, 18, 19, 19, 22)
T16) North Central 73 (15, 15, 16, 16, 17, 18, 19, 19, --)
19) Trine 68 (15, 15, 16, 17, 17, 18, 21, 21, --)
20) Whitworth 44 (16, 17, 20, 21, 21, 21, 22, --, --)
T21) Delaware Valley 37 (14, 18, 19, 22, 22, 24, --, --, --)
T21) RPI 37 (14, 18, 20, 21, 23, 23, --, --, --)
23) Muhlenberg 35 (20, 20, 20, 20, 22, 23, 23, 25, --)
24) Ithaca 17 (19, 22, 24, 24, 24, --, --, --, --)
25) Wabash 16 (19, 20, 24, 25, --, --, --, --, --)
26) Union 15 (21, 22, 23, 24, 25)
27) Central 10 (19, 23)
28) Salisbury 9 (18, 25)
29) UW-Platteville 8 (18)
30) Linfield 7 (21, 25, 25)
31) Johns Hopkins 6 (23, 23)
32) UW-La Crosse 5 (21)
33) Monmouth 3 (23)
34) Montclair St 2 (24)
T35) Albion 1 (25)
T35) Baldwin Wallace 1 (25)
T35) Marietta 1 (25)
There actually aren't as many teams in the ORV category as I thought there would be!
Voting looked pretty much as expected this week. The only anomalies I noted were the complete absence of Witt, NCC, and Trine from one ballot each. On the other hand, I had two choices that others may question: leaving Whitworth off my ballot (beating LaVerne is certainly no credit, and not sure how much credit goes to beating Chapman by 3 at home and beating an obviously down Linfield - I strongly considered them near the bottom of the ballot, but didn't pull the trigger) and giving UW-LaX their only 5 points (the 'beat-down' by UWW was actually a 'wear-down' - close into the 4th, and UWW may be back close to their Stagg years, plus UWL beat my Titans to open our season! ;))
Overall, I think we voters 'done good'. :)
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 02, 2018, 02:38:40 PM
Quote from: emma17 on October 02, 2018, 02:05:41 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 02, 2018, 09:43:02 AM
Linfield is still a top 25 team, just as long as Whitworth is ranked ahead of them.
But yeah, this was as very hard week to rank teams. I had a difficult time on where to put Wheaton, NCC, and IL-Wesleyan. Considering head to head ILW>Wheaton>NCC. However, UWL>ILW, but no way can I rank UWL (now with 2 losses) over ILW. So many things to factor in....not easy.
02- Are you saying there's no way you can rank UWL over IWU because of the two losses or because the UWW score, of some other reason? Does the loss to a non D3 school weigh in your decision?
FYI UWL has more offensive yards and held IWU to 2.9 yds per rush, while averaging 5 yards per rush. The game was played at IWU. I have no idea who would win in a rematch. We likely didn't see UWL at their best given the OC leaving mid-week. It seems UWL did everything they had to do to earn a ranking ahead of IWU.
Having two losses is part of it. Also, as we discussed in the WIAC thread, i believe UWL just isn't that good this year. However, the fact that they beat ILW who beat Wheaton who beat NCC throws me for a loop. >:( If UWL's game against UWW would have been a little closer, I might have put UWL in mix with Wheaton and ILW.
Considering I haven't ranked UWL at all this year, I have a hard time putting them in the Top 25 for the first time after losing by 3+ touchdowns at home to a team that didn't make the playoffs last year ;)
You mean the one ranked 8th in your national poll?
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 02, 2018, 11:38:27 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 02, 2018, 02:38:40 PM
Quote from: emma17 on October 02, 2018, 02:05:41 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 02, 2018, 09:43:02 AM
Linfield is still a top 25 team, just as long as Whitworth is ranked ahead of them.
But yeah, this was as very hard week to rank teams. I had a difficult time on where to put Wheaton, NCC, and IL-Wesleyan. Considering head to head ILW>Wheaton>NCC. However, UWL>ILW, but no way can I rank UWL (now with 2 losses) over ILW. So many things to factor in....not easy.
02- Are you saying there's no way you can rank UWL over IWU because of the two losses or because the UWW score, of some other reason? Does the loss to a non D3 school weigh in your decision?
FYI UWL has more offensive yards and held IWU to 2.9 yds per rush, while averaging 5 yards per rush. The game was played at IWU. I have no idea who would win in a rematch. We likely didn't see UWL at their best given the OC leaving mid-week. It seems UWL did everything they had to do to earn a ranking ahead of IWU.
Having two losses is part of it. Also, as we discussed in the WIAC thread, i believe UWL just isn't that good this year. However, the fact that they beat ILW who beat Wheaton who beat NCC throws me for a loop. >:( If UWL's game against UWW would have been a little closer, I might have put UWL in mix with Wheaton and ILW.
Considering I haven't ranked UWL at all this year, I have a hard time putting them in the Top 25 for the first time after losing by 3+ touchdowns at home to a team that didn't make the playoffs last year ;)
You mean the one ranked 8th in your national poll?
That's the one!
(It was my tongue and cheek attempt to down play UWW to help build my argument)
High on Whitworth
Low on CWRU and Berry
Voted for Central
Sole vote for Platteville
Didn't have Del Val or Ithaca
May have to reconsider Thomas More.
Quote from: smedindy on October 03, 2018, 12:30:38 PM
High on Whitworth
Low on CWRU and Berry
Voted for Central
Sole vote for Platteville
Didn't have Del Val or Ithaca
May have to reconsider Thomas More.
I had the other Central vote. I was also the sole vote for Marietta
Quote from: bluestreak66 on October 03, 2018, 12:43:16 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 03, 2018, 12:30:38 PM
High on Whitworth
Low on CWRU and Berry
Voted for Central
Sole vote for Platteville
Didn't have Del Val or Ithaca
May have to reconsider Thomas More.
I had the other Central vote. I was also the sole vote for Marietta
I actually like Berry they have been playing some good football. I think Johns Hopkins bounces back and are still a top 25 team. Delaware Valley is right where I expect them to be at seasons in. I do think some teams will find their way back in towards season end.
For whatever reason, I am finding myself more and more interested in the dynamics of polls and what influences voters to vote the way they do. Since I have more access to ya'll than I do to most of the D3football.com voters, you get my questions!
From the outside looking in (in terms of really spending time considering where teams should be ranked), one team's position baffles me. Frostburg State ranked #5. Who in the world have they beaten to deserve a top 5 ranking? They lost by 33 in the quarters to Mount Union last year, giving up 70 points. They also lost to Wesley last year. In 2016, they lost to Wesley by 36. In 2015, they lost their last 3 games of the season and earlier had lost to Wesley by 41. I guess I'm asking what victories they have had to convince you guys that they are a top 5 team? Top 5 is a pretty elite perch. It seems to me they ought to go at least one season without losing to someone by 30 before being put up there. Just my opinion and would like to hear your input/reasoning.
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 03, 2018, 07:00:18 PM
For whatever reason, I am finding myself more and more interested in the dynamics of polls and what influences voters to vote the way they do. Since I have more access to ya'll than I do to most of the D3football.com voters, you get my questions!
From the outside looking in (in terms of really spending time considering where teams should be ranked), one team's position baffles me. Frostburg State ranked #5. Who in the world have they beaten to deserve a top 5 ranking? They lost by 33 in the quarters to Mount Union last year, giving up 70 points. They also lost to Wesley last year. In 2016, they lost to Wesley by 36. In 2015, they lost their last 3 games of the season and earlier had lost to Wesley by 41. I guess I'm asking what victories they have had to convince you guys that they are a top 5 team? Top 5 is a pretty elite perch. It seems to me they ought to go at least one season without losing to someone by 30 before being put up there. Just my opinion and would like to hear your input/reasoning.
So I have Frosty ranked 7, behind Wesley and St Johns. Why are they even 7? Well they are undefeated, have outscored opponents 115-21, and as you mentioned won two rounds in NCAA's last year before running into Mount. Obviously, after this weekend, there will be major shifts in the top 10. The fates of Wesley, Frosty, Hardin Simmons, UMHB, UWO and UWW will be determined on the field!
,
Bleed,
Part of the issue is you have to put someone at 5. Who is below them that you would put there? That's and issue for the fan poll as well as the d3.com voters I suspect. Remember this is a poll for this year and while it's a reasonable argument to look at history, this isn't a fan poll for the top 5 programs or a top 25 for playoff success, its a top 25 for teams on the field this year. It's one reason I don't stray into the top 25 poll, I don't feel I can do enough work to get a good feel for all those teams.
Quote from: USee on October 03, 2018, 08:18:07 PM
Bleed,
Part of the issue is you have to put someone at 5. Who is below them that you would put there? That's and issue for the fan poll as well as the d3.com voters I suspect. Remember this is a poll for this year and while it's a reasonable argument to look at history, this isn't a fan poll for the top 5 programs or a top 25 for playoff success, its a top 25 for teams on the field this year. It's one reason I don't stray into the top 25 poll, I don't feel I can do enough work to get a good feel for all those teams.
I think the issues you raise are what have really caught my interest in how polls shake out. Poll dynamics are intriguing. For example, even though the poll has Frostburg at 5, only 2 of 9 voters had them that high and no one had them any higher.
Very true that this is a poll of this year...sort of. While it isn't (and shouldn't be) a poll of "programs", "this year" doesn't seem to be a complete vacuum, either. If it were, I doubt victories over Stevenson, TCNJ, and Rowan would propel anyone to the Top 5. With a lack of data and a desire not to drag too much of previous years' results into the equation, if I were a voter, I think I would revert to the simple subjective test: who I think would win if two teams played. I think Wesley, Hardin Simmons, Whitewater, and St. John's would all beat Frosty. I think Oshkosh, John Carroll, and Wheaton would all beat Frosty as well, but they all have a loss, so that has to limit their ceiling. So I think I would slot Frostburg at 9th and try to decide between this poll's current 6-9 as the 5-8 teams.
I'm not at all complaining about the Frostburg at 5. It was just odd to me, seeing that ranking in two different polls and not really seeing the resume' to back it up (in my opinion) and exacerbated by blowouts in each of the last three years.
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 03, 2018, 10:03:07 PM
Quote from: USee on October 03, 2018, 08:18:07 PM
Bleed,
Part of the issue is you have to put someone at 5. Who is below them that you would put there? That's and issue for the fan poll as well as the d3.com voters I suspect. Remember this is a poll for this year and while it's a reasonable argument to look at history, this isn't a fan poll for the top 5 programs or a top 25 for playoff success, its a top 25 for teams on the field this year. It's one reason I don't stray into the top 25 poll, I don't feel I can do enough work to get a good feel for all those teams.
I think the issues you raise are what have really caught my interest in how polls shake out. Poll dynamics are intriguing. For example, even though the poll has Frostburg at 5, only 2 of 9 voters had them that high and no one had them any higher.
Very true that this is a poll of this year...sort of. While it isn't (and shouldn't be) a poll of "programs", "this year" doesn't seem to be a complete vacuum, either. If it were, I doubt victories over Stevenson, TCNJ, and Rowan would propel anyone to the Top 5. With a lack of data and a desire not to drag too much of previous years' results into the equation, if I were a voter, I think I would revert to the simple subjective test: who I think would win if two teams played. I think Wesley, Hardin Simmons, Whitewater, and St. John's would all beat Frosty. I think Oshkosh, John Carroll, and Wheaton would all beat Frosty as well, but they all have a loss, so that has to limit their ceiling. So I think I would slot Frostburg at 9th and try to decide between this poll's current 6-9 as the 5-8 teams.
I'm not at all complaining about the Frostburg at 5. It was just odd to me, seeing that ranking in two different polls and not really seeing the resume' to back it up (in my opinion) and exacerbated by blowouts in each of the last three years.
If getting blown out by Mount Union was a disqualifier for the No. 5 spot, we'd have a hard time filling that position.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 03, 2018, 10:25:46 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 03, 2018, 10:03:07 PM
Quote from: USee on October 03, 2018, 08:18:07 PM
Bleed,
Part of the issue is you have to put someone at 5. Who is below them that you would put there? That's and issue for the fan poll as well as the d3.com voters I suspect. Remember this is a poll for this year and while it's a reasonable argument to look at history, this isn't a fan poll for the top 5 programs or a top 25 for playoff success, its a top 25 for teams on the field this year. It's one reason I don't stray into the top 25 poll, I don't feel I can do enough work to get a good feel for all those teams.
I think the issues you raise are what have really caught my interest in how polls shake out. Poll dynamics are intriguing. For example, even though the poll has Frostburg at 5, only 2 of 9 voters had them that high and no one had them any higher.
Very true that this is a poll of this year...sort of. While it isn't (and shouldn't be) a poll of "programs", "this year" doesn't seem to be a complete vacuum, either. If it were, I doubt victories over Stevenson, TCNJ, and Rowan would propel anyone to the Top 5. With a lack of data and a desire not to drag too much of previous years' results into the equation, if I were a voter, I think I would revert to the simple subjective test: who I think would win if two teams played. I think Wesley, Hardin Simmons, Whitewater, and St. John's would all beat Frosty. I think Oshkosh, John Carroll, and Wheaton would all beat Frosty as well, but they all have a loss, so that has to limit their ceiling. So I think I would slot Frostburg at 9th and try to decide between this poll's current 6-9 as the 5-8 teams.
I'm not at all complaining about the Frostburg at 5. It was just odd to me, seeing that ranking in two different polls and not really seeing the resume' to back it up (in my opinion) and exacerbated by blowouts in each of the last three years.
If getting blown out by Mount Union was a disqualifier for the No. 5 spot, we'd have a hard time filling that position.
True enough, but getting blown out by 30 plus by someone three years in a row, two of them by a decidedly non-Mount team, might be. Or alternatively, if 30 point plus losses to Wesley are "forgivable" maybe the Wolverines deserve to be there. Either way, I'm not complaining. I'm more interested in discussing to further see the different ways teams are viewed and ranked. The data I am using are from past seasons, so I know there are probably issues with that as well. With Frostburg, I'm trying to see what transpired to launch them from 10ish to 5. They lost two games last year, including yielding the 70 to Mount. They lost to Wesley by 36 in 2016 and didn't even make the playoffs. And now they are 5th. They did rock Wittenberg and W&J in the playoffs last year. They also beat a 7-4 Salisbury team by a TD last year. Maybe the state of D-III football right now is that is enough to be #5 in this moment of time. I know it's all moot because everything gets sorted out on the field. Just interesting conversation.
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 04, 2018, 12:18:17 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 03, 2018, 10:25:46 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 03, 2018, 10:03:07 PM
Quote from: USee on October 03, 2018, 08:18:07 PM
Bleed,
Part of the issue is you have to put someone at 5. Who is below them that you would put there? That's and issue for the fan poll as well as the d3.com voters I suspect. Remember this is a poll for this year and while it's a reasonable argument to look at history, this isn't a fan poll for the top 5 programs or a top 25 for playoff success, its a top 25 for teams on the field this year. It's one reason I don't stray into the top 25 poll, I don't feel I can do enough work to get a good feel for all those teams.
I think the issues you raise are what have really caught my interest in how polls shake out. Poll dynamics are intriguing. For example, even though the poll has Frostburg at 5, only 2 of 9 voters had them that high and no one had them any higher.
Very true that this is a poll of this year...sort of. While it isn't (and shouldn't be) a poll of "programs", "this year" doesn't seem to be a complete vacuum, either. If it were, I doubt victories over Stevenson, TCNJ, and Rowan would propel anyone to the Top 5. With a lack of data and a desire not to drag too much of previous years' results into the equation, if I were a voter, I think I would revert to the simple subjective test: who I think would win if two teams played. I think Wesley, Hardin Simmons, Whitewater, and St. John's would all beat Frosty. I think Oshkosh, John Carroll, and Wheaton would all beat Frosty as well, but they all have a loss, so that has to limit their ceiling. So I think I would slot Frostburg at 9th and try to decide between this poll's current 6-9 as the 5-8 teams.
I'm not at all complaining about the Frostburg at 5. It was just odd to me, seeing that ranking in two different polls and not really seeing the resume' to back it up (in my opinion) and exacerbated by blowouts in each of the last three years.
If getting blown out by Mount Union was a disqualifier for the No. 5 spot, we'd have a hard time filling that position.
True enough, but getting blown out by 30 plus by someone three years in a row, two of them by a decidedly non-Mount team, might be. Or alternatively, if 30 point plus losses to Wesley are "forgivable" maybe the Wolverines deserve to be there. Either way, I'm not complaining. I'm more interested in discussing to further see the different ways teams are viewed and ranked. The data I am using are from past seasons, so I know there are probably issues with that as well. With Frostburg, I'm trying to see what transpired to launch them from 10ish to 5. They lost two games last year, including yielding the 70 to Mount. They lost to Wesley by 36 in 2016 and didn't even make the playoffs. And now they are 5th. They did rock Wittenberg and W&J in the playoffs last year. They also beat a 7-4 Salisbury team by a TD last year. Maybe the state of D-III football right now is that is enough to be #5 in this moment of time. I know it's all moot because everything gets sorted out on the field. Just interesting conversation.
I think you are looking to far in the past, I have seen the worst of Frostburg State and now the good. In year's past, this would have been Salisbury Poll position after coming off a tremendous playoff run, except Frostburg hasn't loss that early season game. I do believe some programs have higher ceilings than others, however current data and last year's most recent data, I believe this Frostburg team is really good, we will have more clarity after this weekend, but a poll position of 5 is not really that much to argue about these days. I do believe the NJAC top can compete in any conference, not saying they would all go undefeated, but they would be respectable. However, saying that this Frostburg team loss to Wesley by such and such amount two year's ago, I knew with the new coaching staff and the young guys that were being recruited a few year's back, they were going to surpass us in a year, which they did. Not saying they are on the Mount Union and/or championship Whitewater team Salisbury faced in the past, but they earned there respect the last few year's and are currently trending up. I think these are the up year's for them. We won't know if it is sustainable due their departure to D2.
Them at 5 is more about North Central losing and Linfield losing earlier. Frostburg started the season at 8 -- high, for sure, but not unreasonable considering last season's finish.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 04, 2018, 01:20:39 PM
Them at 5 is more about North Central losing and Linfield losing earlier. Frostburg started the season at 8 -- high, for sure, but not unreasonable considering last season's finish.
That's a great point. It is hard to argue about an opening 8 seed for someone who made it to the quarters the previous year. And with the North Central, Linfield, (and probably UW-0) losses, it makes sense. And no one could expect them to do more than what they've done against their opponents this year. You can only beat the team that lines up across from you. And they have done that convincingly.
This week's going to be revelatory...I hope!
Well, hard to argue with being 5 now, when you just beat number 6! I guess I just had to wait until Saturday to find out why Frostburg was 5th! If nothing else, it's a lot easier to feel better about them at 5 with a "signature" type win.
I kept Frostburg at 6th, dropping Wesley from 5th to 7th. UWW jumped from 9th to 5th on my ballot. To shut out UWO is eerily reminiscent of the Stagg Bowl Warhawks of old! I also moved UMHB ahead of UMU for the first time this season; I'm not certain even the Raiders could have shut-out HSU!
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 07, 2018, 07:12:49 PM
I kept Frostburg at 6th, dropping Wesley from 5th to 7th. UWW jumped from 9th to 5th on my ballot. To shut out UWO is eerily reminiscent of the Stagg Bowl Warhawks of old! I also moved UMHB ahead of UMU for the first time this season; I'm not certain even the Raiders could have shut-out HSU!
I moved UWW from 9 to 7, mostly because Wesley and Hardin-Simmons lost in front of them in my poll. UWW does have a Stagg Bowl quality defense, but their offense isn't quite at the same level which is why they aren't in my top 5. I have St. John's #4, right behind UST #3. I guess I'll see this weekend if St. John's can keep up with UST, making my #4 ranking of them seem ahead of the curve. :-\
I tossed around the idea last week of putting Wabash in at #25, but I thought to myself I'll wait and see how they do against a pretty good Denison team. I think I made the right choice leaving them off.
I think I'm the only one on the Monmouth bandwagon, having them at #23. Their only loss was to Wheaton, which isn't too bad considering NCC was also blown out by Wheaton. That was followed up by a (semi-)solid win vs. Wartburg. After that Monmouth has gone of win their next three games by a combined total of 141-0. They haven't given up a point in over a month now.
I'd be happy to join the Monmouth bandwagon, but the three teams they beat 141-0 are teams any good team should shutout. And they won't face any decent competition until the MWC title game. They should get to 8-1 and probably still won't be on my ballot.
And I have a bias towards Monmouth. I have a niece who is both physically and mentally challenged. She is in an assisted living apartment in Monmouth, and her caretakers are mostly Monmouth students and/or Monmouth affiliated. The only season since the 2000s started that IWU beat both Wheaton and NCC in the same year, the Alex Tanney-led Scots beat us in the first round of the playoffs. So I would love to vote for them, but they've got to beat someone!
Everyone actually submitted their ballots in a timely manner. Good work everyone :)
2018 WEEK 6 TOP 25 FAN POLL Rank | Team | Points | Prev |
1) | Mount Union (6)
| 222 | 1 |
2) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (3)
| 219 | 2 |
3) | St Thomas | 204 | 3 |
4) | Brockport | 198 | 4 |
5) | Frostburg St | 182 | 5 |
6) | St John's | 179 | 7 |
7) | UW-Whitewater | 178 | T8 |
8) | Wesley | 154 | 6 |
9) | John Carroll | 145 | 12 |
10) | Wash & Jeff | 137 | 11 |
11) | Hardin-Simmons | 128 | T8 |
12) | Wheaton | 106 | 13 |
13) | Wittenberg | 101 | 14 |
T14) | Illinois Wesleyan | 91 | 15 |
T14) | UW-Oshkosh | 91 | 10 |
16) | Berry | 83 | T16 |
17) | North Central | 82 | T16 |
18) | Whitworth | 80 | 20 |
19) | Trine | 74 | 19 |
20) | RPI | 50 | T21 |
T21) | Case Western Reserve | 43 | T16 |
T21) | Muhlenberg | 43 | 23 |
23) | Delaware Valley | 37 | T21 |
24) | Central | 19 | NR |
25) | Salisbury | 18 | NR |
Dropped Out: #24 Ithaca, #25 Wabash
Also Receiving Votes: Linfield 13, UW-Platteville 12, Johns Hopkins 9, Montclair St 6, Thomas More 6, Marietta 4, UW-La Crosse 4, Monmouth 3, Randolph-Macon 3, Millikin 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bluestreak66, desertcat1, FCGG, MANDGSU, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, Oline89, and smedindy
1) Mount Union 222 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 219 ( 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3) St Thomas 204 ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5)
4) Brockport 198 ( 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5)
5) Frostburg St 182 ( 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7)
6) St John's 179 ( 4, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8)
7) UW-Whitewater 178 ( 4, 4, 5, 5, 7, 7, 7, 8, 9)
8) Wesley 154 ( 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 9, 10, 10, 13)
9) John Carroll 145 ( 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10, 11, 18)
10) Wash & Jeff 137 ( 8, 9, 10, 10, 11, 11, 12, 13, 13)
11) Hardin-Simmons 128 ( 8, 9, 9, 10, 10, 11, 12, 16, 21)
12) Wheaton 106 (11, 12, 12, 12, 14, 14, 14, 15, 24)
13) Wittenberg 101 (10, 11, 12, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, --)
T14) Illinois Wesleyan 91 ( 9, 13, 13, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20, 20)
T14) UW-Oshkosh 91 (11, 11, 12, 13, 16, 16, 18, 20, --)
16) Berry 83 (11, 13, 15, 15, 16, 18, 18, 21, 24)
17) North Central 82 (14, 14, 15, 15, 15, 16, 18, 19, --)
18) Whitworth 80 (10, 13, 16, 17, 17, 18, 20, 21, 22)
19) Trine 74 (14, 15, 16, 17, 17, 18, 20, 20, 23)
20) RPI 50 (14, 17, 20, 20, 21, 21, 22, 24, 25)
T21) Case Western Reserve 43 (12, 17, 19, 19, 21, 25, --, --, --)
T21) Muhlenberg 43 (16, 17, 19, 22, 22, 23, 23, 24, 25)
23) Delaware Valley 37 (13, 18, 19, 22, 22, 25, --, --, --)
24) Central 19 (19, 19, 21, --, --, --, --, --, --)
25) Salisbury 18 (19, 21, 23, 23, --, --, --, --, --)
26) Linfield 13 (21, 23, 23, 24)
27) UW-Platteville 12 (15, 25)
28) Johns Hopkins 9 (22, 22, 25)
T29) Montclair St 6 (20)
T29) Thomas More 6 (24, 24, 25, 25)
T31) Marietta 4 (22)
T31) UW-La Crosse 4 (24, 24)
T33) Monmouth 3 (23)
T33) Randolph-Macon 3 (23)
35) Millikin 1 (25)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 08, 2018, 10:25:32 PM
I'd be happy to join the Monmouth bandwagon, but the three teams they beat 141-0 are teams any good team should shutout. And they won't face any decent competition until the MWC title game. They should get to 8-1 and probably still won't be on my ballot.
And I have a bias towards Monmouth. I have a niece who is both physically and mentally challenged. She is in an assisted living apartment in Monmouth, and her caretakers are mostly Monmouth students and/or Monmouth affiliated. The only season since the 2000s started that IWU beat both Wheaton and NCC in the same year, the Alex Tanney-led Scots beat us in the first round of the playoffs. So I would love to vote for them, but they've got to beat someone!
Same could be said about Oshkosh and NCC. ;)
I get what you're saying though, no worries.
Once upon a time, Wartburg was someone.
I have Platteville and Thomas More in, and Del Val and Salisbury out.
I may be a bit optimistic on Platteville, but that's where they slotted in based on my West Region ballot as well.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 09, 2018, 08:24:23 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 08, 2018, 10:25:32 PM
I'd be happy to join the Monmouth bandwagon, but the three teams they beat 141-0 are teams any good team should shutout. And they won't face any decent competition until the MWC title game. They should get to 8-1 and probably still won't be on my ballot.
And I have a bias towards Monmouth. I have a niece who is both physically and mentally challenged. She is in an assisted living apartment in Monmouth, and her caretakers are mostly Monmouth students and/or Monmouth affiliated. The only season since the 2000s started that IWU beat both Wheaton and NCC in the same year, the Alex Tanney-led Scots beat us in the first round of the playoffs. So I would love to vote for them, but they've got to beat someone!
Same could be said about Oshkosh and NCC. ;)
I get what you're saying though, no worries.
And John Carroll
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 09, 2018, 01:16:21 PM
Once upon a time, Wartburg was someone.
True, then they met Simpson. I was very tempted to vote Monmouth when they beat Wartburg, but their domination by Wheaton was too fresh in my mind. And now Wartburg faces Coe and Central back-to-back. They may beat one, I doubt they'll beat both.
I reshuffled a bit thanks to results by Wash U., Trine, and Central, along with the Platteville - Oshkosh game and the Johnnie - Tommie Clash.
Quote from: smedindy on October 14, 2018, 09:50:34 PM
I reshuffled a bit thanks to results by Wash U., Trine, and Central, along with the Platteville - Oshkosh game and the Johnnie - Tommie Clash.
Yeah, my shuffling was fairly modest, but I do now have the highest ranking I've ever given to an East region team: Brockport is DESTROYING opponents (some of them pretty darn good); they're now #3 on my ballot.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 14, 2018, 10:12:46 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 14, 2018, 09:50:34 PM
I reshuffled a bit thanks to results by Wash U., Trine, and Central, along with the Platteville - Oshkosh game and the Johnnie - Tommie Clash.
Yeah, my shuffling was fairly modest, but I do now have the highest ranking I've ever given to an East region team: Brockport is DESTROYING opponents (some of them pretty darn good); they're now #3 on my ballot.
I agree, even as an ERF pollster. They remind be of the old Wesley teams statistically that could dominate you on all facets of football. They can run when they need to or pass when the have to, then the defense has been lights out. Even when the offense doesn't score (i.e. Ithaca game), the defense steps up. I think late in the playoffs they are going to have to be able to be well balance and be able to punch in some short yardage plays to get over that hump.
Quote from: MANDGSU on October 15, 2018, 11:20:47 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 14, 2018, 10:12:46 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 14, 2018, 09:50:34 PM
I reshuffled a bit thanks to results by Wash U., Trine, and Central, along with the Platteville - Oshkosh game and the Johnnie - Tommie Clash.
Yeah, my shuffling was fairly modest, but I do now have the highest ranking I've ever given to an East region team: Brockport is DESTROYING opponents (some of them pretty darn good); they're now #3 on my ballot.
I agree, even as an ERF pollster. They remind be of the old Wesley teams statistically that could dominate you on all facets of football. They can run when they need to or pass when the have to, then the defense has been lights out. Even when the offense doesn't score (i.e. Ithaca game), the defense steps up. I think late in the playoffs they are going to have to be able to be well balance and be able to punch in some short yardage plays to get over that hump.
Will 2018 Brockport be the first East Region team to win the Stagg Bowl since Bush 41?
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 15, 2018, 02:21:49 PM
Quote from: MANDGSU on October 15, 2018, 11:20:47 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 14, 2018, 10:12:46 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 14, 2018, 09:50:34 PM
I reshuffled a bit thanks to results by Wash U., Trine, and Central, along with the Platteville - Oshkosh game and the Johnnie - Tommie Clash.
Yeah, my shuffling was fairly modest, but I do now have the highest ranking I've ever given to an East region team: Brockport is DESTROYING opponents (some of them pretty darn good); they're now #3 on my ballot.
I agree, even as an ERF pollster. They remind be of the old Wesley teams statistically that could dominate you on all facets of football. They can run when they need to or pass when the have to, then the defense has been lights out. Even when the offense doesn't score (i.e. Ithaca game), the defense steps up. I think late in the playoffs they are going to have to be able to be well balance and be able to punch in some short yardage plays to get over that hump.
Will 2018 Brockport be the first East Region team to win the Stagg Bowl since Bush 41?
I am thinking....YES. This is a team that starts with NASTY shutdown defense(they live for TFLs against some decent teams) and will score like lightning with the same QB and wide receivers as last year, just one year better, and their "holes" on the Oline have been filled very nicely . They are well coached and should not panic after their visit to the semis last year. Having watched them beat and then crush two decent Hobart teams the last two years, this is the most complete D3 team I have ever watched in person(includes a few Mount Union and Wesley teams and one St. Thomas team). I wonder if 41 could parachute down one last more time to start the Stagg Bowl?
2018 WEEK 7 TOP 25 FAN POLL Rank | Team | Points | Prev |
1) | Mount Union (6)
| 222 | 1 |
2) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (3)
| 219 | 2 |
3) | Brockport | 205 | 4 |
4) | St John's | 197 | 6 |
5) | Frostburg St | 186 | 5 |
6) | UW-Whitewater | 183 | 7 |
7) | Wesley | 163 | 8 |
8) | St Thomas | 159 | 3 |
9) | John Carroll | 150 | 9 |
10) | Hardin-Simmons | 144 | 11 |
11) | Wash & Jeff | 129 | 10 |
12) | Wittenberg | 103 | 13 |
13) | UW-Oshkosh | 97 | T14 |
14) | North Central | 96 | 17 |
15) | Berry | 93 | 16 |
16) | Illinois Wesleyan | 86 | T14 |
17) | Whitworth | 83 | 18 |
18) | Trine | 72 | 19 |
19) | Muhlenberg | 58 | T21 |
20) | RPI | 52 | 20 |
21) | Case Western Reserve | 46 | T21 |
22) | Delaware Valley | 42 | 23 |
23) | Washington U | 34 | NR |
24) | Linfield | 21 | NR |
25) | Salisbury | 19 | 25 |
Dropped Out: #12 Wheaton, #24 Central
Also Receiving Votes: Wheaton 16, Central 13, Johns Hopkins 12, Ithaca 6, Marietta 6, Centre 4, Randolph-Macon 4, UW-La Crosse 2, Bethel 1, Monmouth 1, Montclair St 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bluestreak66, desertcat1, FCGG, MANDGSU, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, Oline89, and smedindy
1) Mount Union 222 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 219 ( 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3) Brockport 205 ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4)
4) St John's 197 ( 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5)
5) Frostburg St 186 ( 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7)
6) UW-Whitewater 183 ( 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7)
7) Wesley 163 ( 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 11)
8) St Thomas 159 ( 6, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9, 13)
9) John Carroll 150 ( 7, 7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 10, 16)
10) Hardin-Simmons 144 ( 7, 8, 9, 10, 10, 10, 10, 12, 14)
11) Wash & Jeff 129 ( 9, 10, 10, 11, 12, 12, 12, 13, 16)
12) Wittenberg 103 (11, 11, 12, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, --)
13) UW-Oshkosh 97 (10, 11, 11, 11, 14, 15, 16, 23, --)
14) North Central 96 (12, 13, 13, 14, 14, 15, 18, 18, 21)
15) Berry 93 (11, 12, 14, 14, 15, 17, 17, 19, 22)
16) Illinois Wesleyan 86 (11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 16, 18, 19, --)
17) Whitworth 83 (10, 13, 15, 16, 16, 19, 19, 21, 22)
18) Trine 72 (13, 13, 17, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23)
19) Muhlenberg 58 (15, 15, 17, 18, 21, 22, 22, 23, 23)
20) RPI 52 (14, 17, 19, 20, 20, 21, 21, 24, --)
21) Case Western Reserve 46 (15, 16, 18, 20, 20, 23, 24, --, --)
22) Delaware Valley 42 (12, 17, 19, 20, 21, 25, --, --, --)
23) Washington U 34 (16, 17, 19, 22, 23, 25, --, --, --)
24) Linfield 21 (18, 20, 23, 24, 24, --, --, --, --)
25) Salisbury 19 (18, 20, 21, --, --, --, --, --, --)
26) Wheaton 16 (18, 22, 24, 24)
27) Central 13 (19, 22, 24)
28) Johns Hopkins 12 (21, 21, 25, 25)
T29) Ithaca 6 (23, 23)
T29) Marietta 6 (20)
T31) Centre 4 (24, 24)
T31) Randolph-Macon 4 (22)
33) UW-La Crosse 2 (25, 25)
T34) Bethel 1 (25)
T34) Monmouth 1 (25)
T34) Montclair St 1 (25)
UWO not getting a vote from someone, interesting.
They lose by four to a 6-1 D2 team, and lose to a very good UWW team. Both games were on the road too.
Any "quality" wins?
Quote from: retagent on October 19, 2018, 05:19:09 PM
Any "quality" wins?
Same could be asked about NCC, JCU and a host of other teams in this list.
Quote from: retagent on October 19, 2018, 05:19:09 PM
Any "quality" wins?
With such a short schedule, backloaded schedules, and many conferences only having one non-conference game, the idea of 'quality' wins as the be-all for rankings isn't the way to go.
Many times, a schedule looks to have a quality team only to have them circling the drain by the time you play them.
Beating Platteville on the road, though, is quality.
Quote from: smedindy on October 19, 2018, 07:55:55 PM
Quote from: retagent on October 19, 2018, 05:19:09 PM
Any "quality" wins?
With such a short schedule, backloaded schedules, and many conferences only having one non-conference game, the idea of 'quality' wins as the be-all for rankings isn't the way to go.
Many times, a schedule looks to have a quality team only to have them circling the drain by the time you play them.
Beating Platteville on the road, though, is quality.
The UW-0/UW-P game was in Oshkosh. But I do think on the whole that is still a quality win.
Derp.
This is probably only tangentially germane to this board, but I just did some "for the heck of it" research for the Top 5 ranked teams by d3football.com. I looked at each team's schedule and replaced the name of their opponent with their Kickoff Ranking. Obviously, that was before the season and things have changed. But I thought it would be interesting to see the relative strength of schedules just based on those rankings. (Sorry for the word processing column snafus)
Mount Union
79
37
26
77
184
194
49
36
152
115
UMHB
93
179
48
41
10
172
198
159
190
54
Brockport State
43
28
148
110
149
34
85
75
46
133
St. Johns
80
130
230
163
64
3
122
30
186
31
UWW
53
30
27
4
74
55
80
81
16
Highest Two Ranked Opponents:
Mt. Union: 26, 36
UMHB: 10, 41
Brockport 28, 34
St. Johns 3, 30
UWW 4, 16
Lowest Two Ranked Opponents:
Mt. Union: 194, 184
UMHB: 198, 190
Brockport: 149, 148
St. Johns 230, 186
UWW 81, 80
Number of Opponents Ranked worse than #100:
Mount Union: 4
UMHB: 5
Brockport: 4
St. johns 5
UWW 0
Another grouping from the above list. After isolating the two highest ranked and two lowest ranked opponents for each team, what about the rest. I guess that could be the meat of the schedule. So, throwing out the two highest and lowest ranked opponent, here is how the rest of the opponents rank for the Top 5 teams.
Mount Union
37
49
77
79
115
152
UMHB
48
54
93
159
172
179
BROCKPORT STATE
43
46
75
85
110
133
ST. JOHNS
31
64
80
122
130
163
UW-W
27
30
53
55
74
This all illustrates that Kickoff thinks the WIAC is the deepest conference in the division. Which we already knew.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 22, 2018, 03:13:36 PM
This all illustrates that Kickoff thinks the WIAC is the deepest conference in the division. Which we already knew.
Very true. When I started this little venture, I wasn't sure what it would look like. I was surprised by how well Brockport and Mount's schedule stacked up with UMHB.
How does one really rank and tell apart a team rated like 50-150 in D3. There is such little coverage and so many unknowns that it is nearly impossible to know how one average team is better than another average team in D3
Quote from: Greggers on October 23, 2018, 09:18:15 AM
How does one really rank and tell apart a team rated like 50-150 in D3. There is such little coverage and so many unknowns that it is nearly impossible to know how one average team is better than another average team in D3
There is enough data out there with OOC (and over the course of a few years) and playoffs that we can get a pretty decent handle on who is the #50 team vs #150. Also helps that there is a very very wide gap between the haves and have nots in D3. Now, if you are asking how to tell apart the #50 and #51 team? That's a bit more tricky and subject to speculation.
Agreed. There is definitely a point in the middle where you have a hard time telling the quality of the teams apart, but it's not nearly as wide as 50-150. It is probably more like 80-140.
Still that's subjective. Where do you put a team that's got a bad record in a top conference (say Elmhurst) versus a team with a great record in a weak conference (Eureka).
The exact middle of the Massey Ratings (removing the NESCAC) is Puget Sound and Austin on either side.
2018 WEEK 8 TOP 25 FAN POLL Rank | Team | Points | Prev |
1) | Mount Union (6)
| 222 | 1 |
2) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (3)
| 219 | 2 |
3) | Brockport | 204 | 3 |
4) | St John's | 195 | 4 |
5) | UW-Whitewater | 190 | 6 |
6) | Frostburg St | 184 | 5 |
7) | St Thomas | 166 | 8 |
8) | John Carroll | 154 | 9 |
9) | Hardin-Simmons | 150 | 10 |
10) | Wittenberg | 135 | 12 |
11) | UW-Oshkosh | 119 | 13 |
12) | Illinois Wesleyan | 106 | 16 |
T13) | Berry | 100 | 15 |
T13) | North Central | 100 | 14 |
15) | Whitworth | 99 | 17 |
16) | Trine | 89 | 18 |
17) | Muhlenberg | 73 | 19 |
18) | RPI | 72 | 20 |
19) | Wesley | 58 | 7 |
T20) | Case Western Reserve | 46 | 21 |
T20) | Delaware Valley | 46 | 22 |
22) | Salisbury | 44 | 25 |
23) | Wash & Jeff | 32 | 11 |
T24) | Johns Hopkins | 24 | NR |
T24) | Linfield | 24 | 24 |
Dropped Out: #23 Washington U
Also Receiving Votes: Wheaton 23, Washington U 14, Centre 11, Ithaca 9, Bethel 4, Marietta 3, Baldwin Wallace 2, Cortland 2, Randolph-Macon 2, UW-La Crosse 2, Monmouth 1, Rowan 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bluestreak66, desertcat1, FCGG, MANDGSU, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, Oline89, and smedindy
1) Mount Union 222 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 219 ( 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3) Brockport 204 ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5)
4) St John's 195 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5)
5) UW-Whitewater 190 ( 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6)
6) Frostburg St 184 ( 4, 4, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7)
7) St Thomas 166 ( 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 10)
8) John Carroll 154 ( 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 11, 13)
9) Hardin-Simmons 150 ( 7, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 12, 14)
10) Wittenberg 135 ( 9, 9, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 15)
11) UW-Oshkosh 119 (10, 10, 10, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 21)
12) Illinois Wesleyan 106 ( 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16, 16, 19, 22)
T13) Berry 100 ( 9, 12, 14, 14, 14, 16, 16, 17, 22)
T13) North Central 100 (10, 10, 12, 12, 12, 15, 17, 20, --)
15) Whitworth 99 ( 7, 11, 13, 14, 16, 16, 16, 20, 22)
16) Trine 89 (10, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 18, 20, 20)
17) Muhlenberg 73 (12, 13, 15, 15, 18, 21, 22, 22, 23)
18) RPI 72 (13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 19, 21, --)
19) Wesley 58 (13, 15, 18, 18, 19, 20, 22, 25, --)
T20) Case Western Reserve 46 (15, 18, 18, 19, 20, 22, 24, --, --)
T20) Delaware Valley 46 (13, 14, 16, 19, 23, 25, --, --, --)
22) Salisbury 44 (12, 17, 17, 20, 23, 24, 25, --, --)
23) Wash & Jeff 32 (17, 19, 20, 21, 23, 25, 25, --, --)
T24) Johns Hopkins 24 (18, 21, 21, 23, 23, --, --, --, --)
T24) Linfield 24 (17, 20, 21, 24, 25, --, --, --, --)
26) Wheaton 23 (17, 19, 21, 24)
27) Washington U 14 (16, 23, 25)
28) Centre 11 (19, 22)
29) Ithaca 9 (21, 23, 25)
30) Bethel 4 (22)
31) Marietta 3 (23)
T32) Baldwin Wallace 2 (24)
T32) Cortland 2 (24)
T32) Randolph-Macon 2 (24)
T32) UW-La Crosse 2 (24)
T36) Monmouth 1 (25)
T36) Rowan 1 (25)
I was the one who picked Rowan, who i think deserve it after beating Wesley even after the loss to Newport. I didn't have Johns Hopkins in my 25.
I'm one of two on #10 on North Central, and #9 on Witt, and #4 on Frostburg.
Quote from: smedindy on October 24, 2018, 01:51:12 PM
I was the one who picked Rowan, who i think deserve it after beating Wesley even after the loss to Newport. I didn't have Johns Hopkins in my 25.
I'm one of two on #10 on North Central, and #9 on Witt, and #4 on Frostburg.
So Frostburg, Wesley, Salisbury and Rowan all in the top 25? Kind of NJAC heavy?
Quote from: smedindy on October 24, 2018, 01:51:12 PM
I was the one who picked Rowan, who i think deserve it after beating Wesley even after the loss to Newport. I didn't have Johns Hopkins in my 25.
I'm one of two on #10 on North Central, and #9 on Witt, and #4 on Frostburg.
I considered Rowan, but that blowout home loss to Newport weighed too much on them for my top 25. That wasn't exactly a good loss either, considering Newport is a cancelled* game away from being 4-3.
*Frostburg would have destroyed them
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 24, 2018, 03:05:29 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 24, 2018, 01:51:12 PM
I was the one who picked Rowan, who i think deserve it after beating Wesley even after the loss to Newport. I didn't have Johns Hopkins in my 25.
I'm one of two on #10 on North Central, and #9 on Witt, and #4 on Frostburg.
I considered Rowan, but that blowout home loss to Newport weighed too much on them for my top 25. That wasn't exactly a good loss either, considering Newport is a cancelled* game away from being 4-3.
*Frostburg would have destroyed them
Not sure about that, the games have been very close over the past few years. Frostburg scored late last year to win. CNU has a great program and can win a big game at anytime, but recently lose games they should have won. Both their losses have been by 3 points to a 7-0 Salisbury and a 5-2 Montclair that loss both their games by a combined 10 points to both undefeated Frostburg and Salisbury.
Quote from: Oline89 on October 24, 2018, 02:26:52 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 24, 2018, 01:51:12 PM
I was the one who picked Rowan, who i think deserve it after beating Wesley even after the loss to Newport. I didn't have Johns Hopkins in my 25.
I'm one of two on #10 on North Central, and #9 on Witt, and #4 on Frostburg.
So Frostburg, Wesley, Salisbury and Rowan all in the top 25? Kind of NJAC heavy?
I didn't mean it to work out that way...I still am not used to Wesley, Salisbury, and Frostburg IN that league.
Frostburg is 12th in Massey (non-NESCAC) and Newport is 53rd. Frostburg would be favored, but it wouldn't be a stomping.
In Hansen they're 14th and 69th.
I'd put a 7 1/2 point line on it.
2018 WEEK 9 TOP 25 FAN POLL Rank | Team | Points | Prev |
1) | Mount Union (6)
| 222 | 1 |
2) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (3)
| 219 | 2 |
3) | Brockport | 205 | 3 |
4) | St John's | 196 | 4 |
5) | UW-Whitewater | 187 | 5 |
6) | Frostburg St | 185 | 6 |
7) | St Thomas | 167 | 7 |
8) | John Carroll | 157 | 8 |
9) | Hardin-Simmons | 150 | 9 |
T10) | Berry | 119 | T13 |
T10) | North Central | 119 | T13 |
T10) | Whitworth | 119 | 15 |
13) | Trine | 104 | 16 |
14) | Illinois Wesleyan | 103 | 12 |
15) | RPI | 91 | 18 |
16) | Salisbury | 77 | 22 |
17) | Delaware Valley | 72 | T20 |
18) | Johns Hopkins | 67 | T24 |
19) | Case Western Reserve | 63 | T20 |
20) | Wash & Jeff | 52 | 23 |
21) | Linfield | 36 | T24 |
T22) | Wabash | 27 | NR |
T22) | Wheaton | 27 | NR |
24) | Washington U | 25 | NR |
T25) | Bethel | 24 | NR |
T25) | Wittenberg | 24 | 10 |
Dropped Out: #11 UW-Oshkosh, #17 Muhlenberg, #19 Wesley
Also Receiving Votes: Centre 23, Muhlenberg 17, Ithaca 14, Randolph-Macon 10, Baldwin Wallace 8, Denison 4, UW-Oshkosh 4, Montclair St 3, Cortland 2, Amherst 1, Monmouth 1, Wesley 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bluestreak66, desertcat1, FCGG, MANDGSU, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, Oline89, and smedindy
1) Mount Union 222 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 219 ( 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3) Brockport 205 ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4)
4) St John's 196 ( 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5)
5) UW-Whitewater 187 ( 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6)
6) Frostburg St 185 ( 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7)
7) St Thomas 167 ( 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 9)
8) John Carroll 157 ( 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 10, 11)
9) Hardin-Simmons 150 ( 7, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 11, 15)
T10) Berry 119 ( 9, 11, 12, 12, 12, 13, 14, 16, 16)
T10) North Central 119 ( 9, 10, 10, 10, 11, 11, 13, 15, --)
T10) Whitworth 119 ( 7, 10, 11, 11, 12, 14, 16, 17, 17)
13) Trine 104 (11, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 21)
14) Illinois Wesleyan 103 ( 9, 10, 10, 10, 12, 14, 14, --, --)
15) RPI 91 (10, 13, 13, 15, 15, 16, 17, 18, --)
16) Salisbury 77 (12, 13, 14, 14, 19, 19, 20, 21, 25)
17) Delaware Valley 72 (12, 14, 17, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 24)
18) Johns Hopkins 67 (13, 15, 15, 16, 16, 20, 23, 23, --)
19) Case Western Reserve 63 (13, 13, 16, 19, 20, 20, 22, 22, --)
20) Wash & Jeff 52 (18, 19, 19, 20, 20, 21, 21, 21, 23)
21) Linfield 36 (15, 17, 21, 21, 22, 24, --, --, --)
T22) Wabash 27 (19, 19, 22, 23, 23, 23, --, --, --)
T22) Wheaton 27 (15, 18, 18, --, --, --, --, --, --)
24) Washington U 25 (14, 17, 22, --, --, --, --, --, --)
T25) Bethel 24 (16, 18, 24, 24, 24, --, --, --, --)
T25) Wittenberg 24 (18, 20, 23, 24, 24, 24, 25, --, --)
27) Centre 23 (12, 17)
28) Muhlenberg 17 (18, 21, 23, 25)
29) Ithaca 14 (18, 22, 24)
30) Randolph-Macon 10 (20, 22)
31) Baldwin Wallace 8 (19, 25)
T32) Denison 4 (22)
T32) UW-Oshkosh 4 (22)
34) Montclair St 3 (23)
35) Cortland 2 (25, 25)
T36) Amherst 1 (25)
T36) Monmouth 1 (25)
T36) Wesley 1 (25)
Curious if it's the same person who doesn't think much of the CCIW this year. With ILW and NCC not getting votes by someone(s).
I think there's no question they are two of the best 25 teams in the country right now. Would like to hear the argument against that.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 02, 2018, 08:44:53 AM
Curious if it's the same person who doesn't think much of the CCIW this year. With ILW and NCC not getting votes by someone(s).
I think there's no question they are two of the best 25 teams in the country right now. Would like to hear the argument against that.
Because I said so.... lol..
But seriously, I want to hear that as well! I think they are both easily Top 15 teams.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 02, 2018, 08:44:53 AM
Curious if it's the same person who doesn't think much of the CCIW this year. With ILW and NCC not getting votes by someone(s).
I think there's no question they are two of the best 25 teams in the country right now. Would like to hear the argument against that.
Not i, said the little red hen... ::) #14, #15 for me.. :-*
Quote from: desertcat1 on November 02, 2018, 05:19:34 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 02, 2018, 08:44:53 AM
Curious if it's the same person who doesn't think much of the CCIW this year. With ILW and NCC not getting votes by someone(s).
I think there's no question they are two of the best 25 teams in the country right now. Would like to hear the argument against that.
Not i, said the little red hen... ::) #14, #15 for me.. :-*
After reviewing, I was 10 and 14!
Quote from: bluestreak66 on November 02, 2018, 11:00:06 PM
Quote from: desertcat1 on November 02, 2018, 05:19:34 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 02, 2018, 08:44:53 AM
Curious if it's the same person who doesn't think much of the CCIW this year. With ILW and NCC not getting votes by someone(s).
I think there's no question they are two of the best 25 teams in the country right now. Would like to hear the argument against that.
Not i, said the little red hen... ::) #14, #15 for me.. :-*
After reviewing, I was 10 and 14!
I had them 10 and 11. Seems a little high, but I can't find anyone else I'd put above them.
My ballot is in; glad I wasn't TOO quick on the trigger! Unless I simply read it backwards (possible), the scoreboard initially had the UST @ Gustavus score reversed. I probably would have dropped the Tommies about 10 slots! (I did still drop them two slots.) NCC dropped to #16 after the Wheaton monkey-stomp, but has now risen back to #9. And Wesley, which narrowly avoided dropping off completely after their third 1=point loss, rebounded to #20 with their defeat of previously unbeaten Salisbury. (My gut hunch is that Wesley is still a top 15 power, who is just snake-bit this season.)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 03, 2018, 11:03:49 PM
My ballot is in; glad I wasn't TOO quick on the trigger! Unless I simply read it backwards (possible), the scoreboard initially had the UST @ Gustavus score reversed. I probably would have dropped the Tommies about 10 slots! (I did still drop them two slots.) NCC dropped to #16 after the Wheaton monkey-stomp, but has now risen back to #9. And Wesley, which narrowly avoided dropping off completely after their third 1=point loss, rebounded to #20 with their defeat of previously unbeaten Salisbury. (My gut hunch is that Wesley is still a top 15 power, who is just snake-bit this season.)
Snake bit implies bad luck. Wesley can't stop turning the ball over (5 INTs today), missing extra points (missed one at the end of regulation that would have won and missed one in OT that could have cost them), and committing penalties at the absolute worst times. They self-inflict more than any really good team that I can remember seeing. If they cleaned up, yeah, they'd be great. I think they've earned every bit of that 6-3 and whatever polling consequences come with it.
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 03, 2018, 11:17:09 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 03, 2018, 11:03:49 PM
My ballot is in; glad I wasn't TOO quick on the trigger! Unless I simply read it backwards (possible), the scoreboard initially had the UST @ Gustavus score reversed. I probably would have dropped the Tommies about 10 slots! (I did still drop them two slots.) NCC dropped to #16 after the Wheaton monkey-stomp, but has now risen back to #9. And Wesley, which narrowly avoided dropping off completely after their third 1=point loss, rebounded to #20 with their defeat of previously unbeaten Salisbury. (My gut hunch is that Wesley is still a top 15 power, who is just snake-bit this season.)
Snake bit implies bad luck. Wesley can't stop turning the ball over (5 INTs today), missing extra points (missed one at the end of regulation that would have won and missed one in OT that could have cost them), and committing penalties at the absolute worst times. They self-inflict more than any really good team that I can remember seeing. If they cleaned up, yeah, they'd be great. I think they've earned every bit of that 6-3 and whatever polling consequences come with it.
Oh, I totally agree that most of their problems are self-inflicted. (Maybe THEY are the snake that bit them. ;D) I still can't get past the idea that they are MUCH better than their record says. I try not to vote on 'gut hunch', but it probably inevitably sneaks in to a degree. It's not like I have them top 10 like most years (same with Linfield).
They may be Top 15 in talent, but not in results. Bad things are bad when you turn it over.
2018 WEEK 10 TOP 25 FAN POLL Rank | Team | Points | Prev |
1) | Mount Union (6) | 222 | 1 |
2) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (3)
| 219 | 2 |
3) | Brockport | 201 | 3 |
4) | St John's | 196 | 4 |
5) | UW-Whitewater | 191 | 5 |
6) | Frostburg St | 186 | 6 |
7) | John Carroll | 162 | 8 |
8) | Hardin-Simmons | 158 | 9 |
9) | North Central | 149 | T10 |
10) | St Thomas | 139 | 7 |
11) | Berry | 128 | T10 |
12) | Whitworth | 124 | T10 |
13) | Trine | 96 | 13 |
14) | RPI | 93 | 15 |
15) | Johns Hopkins | 83 | 18 |
16) | Delaware Valley | 80 | 17 |
17) | Wash & Jeff | 67 | 20 |
18) | Case Western Reserve | 66 | 19 |
19) | Illinois Wesleyan | 63 | 14 |
T20) | Wabash | 41 | T22 |
T20) | Wheaton | 41 | T22 |
22) | Bethel | 39 | T25 |
23) | Linfield | 35 | 21 |
24) | Centre | 30 | NR |
25) | Wittenberg | 28 | T25 |
Dropped Out: #16 Salisbury and #24 Washington U
Also Receiving Votes: Washington U 21, Muhlenberg 16, Ithaca 13, Baldwin Wallace 10, Salisbury 9, Wesley 6, Denison 5, Montclair St 5, Cortland 2, Monmouth 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bluestreak66, desertcat1, FCGG, MANDGSU, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, Oline89, and smedindy
1) Mount Union 222 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 219 ( 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3) Brockport 201 ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5, 6)
4) St John's 196 ( 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5)
5) UW-Whitewater 191 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6)
6) Frostburg St 186 ( 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6)
7) John Carroll 162 ( 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 9, 9, 9, 10)
8) Hardin-Simmons 158 ( 7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 10, 10, 12)
9) North Central 149 ( 8, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 10, 11, 14)
10) St Thomas 139 ( 8, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 15, 16)
11) Berry 128 ( 9, 10, 11, 11, 11, 11, 12, 15, 16)
12) Whitworth 124 ( 8, 9, 11, 11, 12, 12, 15, 15, 17)
13) Trine 96 (10, 12, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, --)
14) RPI 93 (12, 13, 13, 14, 14, 15, 16, 18, --)
15) Johns Hopkins 83 (13, 13, 14, 16, 16, 16, 18, 22, 23)
16) Delaware Valley 80 (13, 14, 14, 15, 15, 19, 20, 20, 24)
17) Wash & Jeff 67 (17, 17, 17, 18, 18, 19, 19, 21, 21)
18) Case Western Reserve 66 (12, 13, 18, 18, 19, 19, 21, 22, --)
19) Illinois Wesleyan 63 (11, 12, 16, 19, 20, 20, 23, 24, --)
T20) Wabash 41 (17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 22, 22, 24, --)
T20) Wheaton 41 (14, 17, 18, 19, 21, --, --, --, --)
22) Bethel 39 (13, 15, 21, 23, 24, 24, 25, 25, 25)
23) Linfield 35 (13, 17, 20, 22, 23, --, --, --, --)
24) Centre 30 (11, 16, 23, 25, 25, --, --, --, --)
25) Wittenberg 28 (19, 20, 21, 23, 23, 24, 24, --, --)
26) Washington U 21 (15, 17, 25)
27) Muhlenberg 16 (14, 22)
28) Ithaca 13 (20, 22, 23)
29) Baldwin Wallace 10 (18, 25, 25)
30) Salisbury 9 (21, 22)
31) Wesley 6 (20)
T32) Denison 5 (21)
T32) Montclair St 5 (23, 24)
34) Cortland 2 (24)
35) Monmouth 1 (25)
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 06, 2018, 01:38:37 PM
18) Case Western Reserve 66 (12, 13, 18, 18, 19, 19, 21, 22, --)
19) Illinois Wesleyan 63 (11, 12, 16, 19, 20, 20, 23, 24, --)
T20) Wheaton 41 (14, 17, 18, 19, 21, --, --, --, --)
22) Bethel 39 (13, 15, 21, 23, 24, 24, 25, 25, 25)
23) Linfield 35 (13, 17, 20, 22, 23, --, --, --, --)
24) Centre 30 (11, 16, 23, 25, 25, --, --, --, --)
26) Washington U 21 (15, 17, 25)
Some seriously wide opinion ranges on these teams.
Quote from: hazzben on November 06, 2018, 01:45:10 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 06, 2018, 01:38:37 PM
18) Case Western Reserve 66 (12, 13, 18, 18, 19, 19, 21, 22, --)
19) Illinois Wesleyan 63 (11, 12, 16, 19, 20, 20, 23, 24, --)
T20) Wheaton 41 (14, 17, 18, 19, 21, --, --, --, --)
22) Bethel 39 (13, 15, 21, 23, 24, 24, 25, 25, 25)
23) Linfield 35 (13, 17, 20, 22, 23, --, --, --, --)
24) Centre 30 (11, 16, 23, 25, 25, --, --, --, --)
26) Washington U 21 (15, 17, 25)
Some seriously wide opinion ranges on these teams.
Only 1 received votes on everyone ballot. Wheaton, Linfield, Centre are the real one's that voters have wide opinions of.
Quote from: hazzben on November 06, 2018, 01:45:10 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 06, 2018, 01:38:37 PM
18) Case Western Reserve 66 (12, 13, 18, 18, 19, 19, 21, 22, --)
19) Illinois Wesleyan 63 (11, 12, 16, 19, 20, 20, 23, 24, --)
T20) Wheaton 41 (14, 17, 18, 19, 21, --, --, --, --)
22) Bethel 39 (13, 15, 21, 23, 24, 24, 25, 25, 25)
23) Linfield 35 (13, 17, 20, 22, 23, --, --, --, --)
24) Centre 30 (11, 16, 23, 25, 25, --, --, --, --)
26) Washington U 21 (15, 17, 25)
Some seriously wide opinion ranges on these teams.
Yup, but they seem to average out nicely. I have no problem where they fall into the poll.
I had St. Thomas at 16 (I woke up and thought Bethel is better than they are after examining the entire body of work).
I cast the sole votes for Denison and Monmouth, and I don't have Wheaton nor Centre in my rankings.
Quote from: smedindy on November 07, 2018, 06:08:43 PM
I had St. Thomas at 16 (I woke up and thought Bethel is better than they are after examining the entire body of work).
I cast the sole votes for Denison and Monmouth, and I don't have Wheaton nor Centre in my rankings.
I have no particular quibble with Monmouth, but including them instead of Wheaton may be a stretch - Wheaton monkey-stomped Monmouth in week 1. Since Wheaton also monkey-stomped NCC later on, I just can't see that Monmouth's total 'body of work' outweighs the H2H result.
Wheaton's a bit inconsistent. They lost to my #24 and my #27 or #28 or so. So, you can do it this way or that way. I chose the other way.
Quote from: smedindy on November 07, 2018, 07:39:57 PM
Wheaton's a bit inconsistent. They lost to my #24 and my #27 or #28 or so. So, you can do it this way or that way. I chose the other way.
The CCIW is really challenging this year. Lots of wide ranging results, but NCC seems to have clearly risen to the top. But then you scratch you head at the Wheaton result. I'm chalking it up to NCC having 'one of those days' ???
2018 WEEK 11 TOP 25 FAN POLL Rank | Team | Points | Prev |
1) | Mount Union (6)
| 222 | 1 |
2) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (3)
| 219 | 2 |
3) | Brockport | 203 | 3 |
4) | St John's | 196 | 4 |
5) | UW-Whitewater | 190 | 5 |
6) | Frostburg St | 183 | 6 |
7) | John Carroll | 164 | 7 |
T8) | Hardin-Simmons | 157 | 8 |
T8) | North Central | 157 | 9 |
10) | Whitworth | 139 | 12 |
11) | Bethel | 127 | 22 |
12) | Trine | 121 | 13 |
13) | Johns Hopkins | 102 | 15 |
14) | Delaware Valley | 96 | 16 |
15) | Wash & Jeff | 88 | 17 |
16) | Illinois Wesleyan | 78 | 19 |
17) | St Thomas | 73 | 10 |
18) | Wabash | 59 | T20 |
T19) | Berry | 56 | 11 |
T19) | Wheaton | 56 | T20 |
21) | Linfield | 47 | 23 |
22) | Wittenberg | 44 | 25 |
23) | Muhlenberg | 33 | NR |
24) | Centre | 30 | 24 |
25) | Washington U | 23 | NR |
Dropped Out: #14 RPI and #18 Case Western Reserve
Also Receiving Votes: Ithaca 20, RPI 12, Salisbury 9, Case Western Reserve 7, Denison 7, Baldwin Wallace 3, Montclair St 3, UW-La Crosse 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bluestreak66, desertcat1, FCGG, MANDGSU, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, Oline89, and smedindy
1) Mount Union 222 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 219 ( 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3) Brockport 203 ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5)
4) St John's 196 ( 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5)
5) UW-Whitewater 190 ( 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6)
6) Frostburg St 183 ( 4, 4, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 8)
7) John Carroll 164 ( 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 9, 9, 9)
T8) Hardin-Simmons 157 ( 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 10, 10, 12)
T8) North Central 157 ( 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9, 10, 11)
10) Whitworth 139 ( 7, 9, 9, 10, 10, 11, 12, 12, 15)
11) Bethel 127 ( 9, 10, 10, 10, 12, 13, 13, 14, 16)
12) Trine 121 ( 9, 11, 11, 11, 11, 14, 15, 15, 16)
13) Johns Hopkins 102 (11, 12, 12, 13, 13, 13, 14, 21, 23)
14) Delaware Valley 96 (10, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 17, 17, 22)
15) Wash & Jeff 88 (14, 15, 15, 15, 15, 16, 16, 18, 22)
16) Illinois Wesleyan 78 (11, 12, 13, 17, 18, 20, 20, 22, 23)
17) St Thomas 73 (11, 14, 14, 16, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24)
18) Wabash 59 (15, 16, 18, 19, 19, 19, 20, 23, --)
T19) Berry 56 (16, 18, 18, 19, 20, 20, 21, 23, 23)
T19) Wheaton 56 (13, 14, 17, 18, 18, 21, 25, --, --)
21) Linfield 47 (13, 14, 17, 19, 22, 24, --, --, --)
22) Wittenberg 44 (17, 18, 20, 21, 21, 21, 22, 24, --)
23) Muhlenberg 33 (12, 17, 20, 24, 25, 25, --, --, --)
24) Centre 30 (15, 19, 22, 23, 23, 24, --, --, --)
25) Washington U 23 (16, 17, 22, --, --, --, --, --, --)
26) Ithaca 20 (19, 21, 21, 24, 25)
27) RPI 12 (18, 24, 25, 25)
28) Salisbury 9 (22, 23, 24)
T29) Case Western Reserve 7 (20, 25)
T29) Denison 7 (19)
T31) Baldwin Wallace 3 (23)
T31) Montclair St 3 (24, 25)
33) UW-La Crosse 1 (25)
Since you guys have voted nationally all year, I thought this is as good a place as any to post this ridiculous exercise I did. I thought I would do an "Alternate Universe" Bracket. It is a bracket of 32 teams from all the teams that did not make the playoffs. I listed non-playoff teams that:
1. Received votes in the most recent D3football.com Top25 poll.
2. Were regionally ranked in the Final Regional Rankings
3. Had .500 or better conference records as members of a Top 8 conference (Kickoff).
4. Had a good/respectable results against teams with high national regard.
I then seeded the the way I wanted to, since I am the Creator of the Alternate Universe and all! :):
OK, so my "Because I wanted to" Top Seeds:
One Seeds: Illinois Wesleyan, St. Thomas, Linfield, Wheaton
Two Seeds: Wittenberg, UW-LaCrosse, Wash U, Wabash
Next I will play through the brackets with the Massey Game simulator, but here are the first round match-ups. No travel worries, no money constraints. Just balance and interesting games. Here are the match ups in their pods:
Alfred at Illinois Wesleyan
Gustavus Adolpus at Case Western Reserve
Uw-Oshkosh at Montclair State
Southwestern at Wittenberg
Trinity at Linfield
East Texas Baptist at Ithaca
Framington State at Union
Rowan at Wash U
Marietta at Wheaton
Western New England at Cortland
Wesley at Baldwin Wallace
Millikin at Wabash
Christopher Newport at St. Thomas
Thomas More at Salisbury
Stevenson at Central
Texas Lutheran at UW-La Crosse
First Round Results in Alternate Universe National Championship Playoffs
Illinois Wesleyan 42
Alfred 19
Gustavus Adolphus 34
Case Western Reserve 28
UW-Oshkosh 28
Montclair State 0
Southwestern 45
Wittenberg 24
***********************
Linfield 7
Trinity 6
Ithaca 21
ETBU 17
Union 37
Framington State 7
Wash U 53
Rowan 17
**************************
Wheaton 44
Marietta 7
Cortland 55
Western New England 31
Baldwin Wallace 45
Wesley 22
Wabash 43
Millikin 42
*****************************
St. Thomas 14
Christopher Newport 7
Salisbury 54
Thomas More 48
Central 56
Stevenson 28
UW-La Crosse 34
Texas Lutheran 23
Second Round Match-Ups
Gustavus Adolphus at Illinois Wesleyan
Southwestern at UW-Oshkosh
Ithaca at Linfield
Union at Wash U
Cortland at Wheaton
Baldwin Wallace at Wabash
Salisbury at St. Thomas
Central at UW-La Crosse
bleedpurple
Wow! Some exercise. I'm impressed.
Now. I always read your posts because you're one of the "good guys" on these boards. I also know you to be very knowledgeable. But, ya need a hobby, guy. Seems like you have too much time on your hands. I mean, after all.
Of course I'm kidding. Well, kinda. It's fun to read over your "masterpiece of Alternate Universe Playoffs"!
Will that give me nightmares tonight? Oh, I'll be OK. I do tend to forget things (see below). Good luck to the Warhawks against the Green Knights. 😃❗️
Quote from: MUC57 on November 22, 2018, 05:20:16 PM
bleedpurple
Wow! Some exercise. I'm impressed.
Now. I always read your posts because you're one of the "good guys" on these boards. I also know you to be very knowledgeable. But, ya need a hobby, guy. Seems like you have too much time on your hands. I mean, after all.
Of course I'm kidding. Well, kinda. It's fun to read over your "masterpiece of Alternate Universe Playoffs"!
Will that give me nightmares tonight? Oh, I'll be OK. I do tend to forget things (see below). Good luck to the Warhawks against the Green Knights. 😃❗️
Yes, I do need a hobby. Or a life. Or psychological help, maybe? Hopefully, the Hawks will take care of business Saturday. St. Norbert has a great defense, but we'll show up and let the chips fall where they may! Hope you are enjoying your Thanksgiving MUC57!
bleedpurple
Hope you, as well, are having a happy thanksgiving. You know I was just having fun with ya. Your playoffs are a riot and a work of artistic endeavor at the highest level. Go Warhawks! 🍗 🍷 😃
Second Round Results in Alternate Universe National Championship Playoffs
Illinois Weslayan 14
Gustavus Adolphus 10
Oshkosh 47
Southwestern 24
*******************************
Linfield 9
Ithaca 7
Wash U. 20
Union 14
******************************
Wheaton 63
Cortland 10
Wabash 27
BW 23
**********************************************
St. Thomas 41
Salisbury 20
La Crosse 56
Central 13
********************************************
Quarterfinal Match-ups
UW-Oshkosh at Illinois Wesleyan
Wash U at Linfield
Wabash at Wheaton
UW-La Crosse at St. Thomas
Quarterfinal Round Results in Alternate Universe National Championship Playoffs
UW-Oshkosh 7
Illinois Weslayan 6
Wash U 27
Linfield 16
Wheaton 28
Wabash 7
St Thomas 35
UW- La Crosse 14
Semi-Final Match ups
UW-Oshkosh at Wash U
St. Thomas at Wheaton
Semi-Final Results in Alternate Universe National Championship Playoffs
UW-Oshkosh 28
Wash U 23
St. Thomas 24
Wheaton 10
National Championship Game
UW-Oshkosh vs St. Thomas (Neutral Field)
Championship Game Result in Alternate Universe National Championship Playoff
UW-Oshkosh 32
St. Thomas 10
Wisconsin-Oshkosh found its offense as the playoffs progressed and is the Alternate Universe National Champion.
If nothing else, the result proves I picked the right name for the tournament! ;)
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 22, 2018, 11:29:22 PM
Championship Game Result in Alternate Universe National Championship Playoff
UW-Oshkosh 32
St. Thomas 10
Wisconsin-Oshkosh found its offense as the playoffs progressed and is the Alternate Universe National Champion.
If nothing else, the result proves I picked the right name for the tournament! ;)
True, because in THIS universe, there is no way that UWO would have held IWU to six points!
My apologies for the intrusion, but Framingham State did make the playoffs.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 23, 2018, 01:13:54 AM
My apologies for the intrusion, but Framingham State did make the playoffs.
Oh man! I KNEW when I started this would happen! And they acquitted themselves well, no less! Oh well, I guess they had a special invite! lol
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 22, 2018, 11:43:59 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 22, 2018, 11:29:22 PM
Championship Game Result in Alternate Universe National Championship Playoff
UW-Oshkosh 32
St. Thomas 10
Wisconsin-Oshkosh found its offense as the playoffs progressed and is the Alternate Universe National Champion.
If nothing else, the result proves I picked the right name for the tournament! ;)
Agreed. There were some scores that surprised me for sure!
True, because in THIS universe, there is no way that UWO would have held IWU to six points!
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 23, 2018, 02:59:29 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 23, 2018, 01:13:54 AM
My apologies for the intrusion, but Framingham State did make the playoffs.
Oh man! I KNEW when I started this would happen! And they acquitted themselves well, no less! Oh well, I guess they had a special invite! lol
I think this invalidates the entire result (or maybe just the championship game result) and you should rerun the whole thing until UST wins.
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 22, 2018, 11:29:22 PM
Championship Game Result in Alternate Universe National Championship Playoff
UW-Oshkosh 32
St. Thomas 10
Wisconsin-Oshkosh found its offense as the playoffs progressed and is the Alternate Universe National Champion.
If nothing else, the result proves I picked the right name for the tournament!
bleed
Loved your tournament. I put down a double sawbuck on UWO AT 7 to 1. Not sure what that means but just wanted to say it. Can't wait until next year. Or the next tournament, whichever comes first.
Really enjoyable reading. You don't need another hobby. Got a winner here! 😃 🍺 ❗️
Quote from: MUC57 on November 23, 2018, 04:24:16 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 22, 2018, 11:29:22 PM
Championship Game Result in Alternate Universe National Championship Playoff
UW-Oshkosh 32
St. Thomas 10
Wisconsin-Oshkosh found its offense as the playoffs progressed and is the Alternate Universe National Champion.
If nothing else, the result proves I picked the right name for the tournament!
bleed
Loved your tournament. I put down a double sawbuck on UWO AT 7 to 1. Not sure what that means but just wanted to say it. Can't wait until next year. Or the next tournament, whichever comes first.
Really enjoyable reading. You don't need another hobby. Got a winner here! 😃 🍺 ❗️
Thanks, MUC57. As a Strat-O-Matic fan, I'm prone to stuff like this. You may be close on the odds UW-O would have in a tournament like this. Maybe even longer odds than that this year! I may need to find a different board though. I'd better cede this one back to the D3 Top 25 Fan Poll folks before they charge me rent! Good luck to your Raiders tomorrow, not that they'll need it!
bleedpurple
And best to your Warhawks, not that THEY'll need it. Is this great or what? Go Warhawks and Go Raiders!. 😃 🍺 ❗️
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 23, 2018, 09:34:35 PM
Quote from: MUC57 on November 23, 2018, 04:24:16 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 22, 2018, 11:29:22 PM
Championship Game Result in Alternate Universe National Championship Playoff
UW-Oshkosh 32
St. Thomas 10
Wisconsin-Oshkosh found its offense as the playoffs progressed and is the Alternate Universe National Champion.
If nothing else, the result proves I picked the right name for the tournament!
bleed
Loved your tournament. I put down a double sawbuck on UWO AT 7 to 1. Not sure what that means but just wanted to say it. Can't wait until next year. Or the next tournament, whichever comes first.
Really enjoyable reading. You don't need another hobby. Got a winner here! 😃 🍺 ❗️
Thanks, MUC57. As a Strat-O-Matic fan, I'm prone to stuff like this. You may be close on the odds UW-O would have in a tournament like this. Maybe even longer odds than that this year! I may need to find a different board though. I'd better cede this one back to the D3 Top 25 Fan Poll folks before they charge me rent! Good luck to your Raiders tomorrow, not that they'll need it!
You should be OK for a while bleed. If they haven't changed how it runs they won't be needing it again until the playoffs are over.
Quote from: HSCTiger74 on November 24, 2018, 01:41:31 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 23, 2018, 09:34:35 PM
Quote from: MUC57 on November 23, 2018, 04:24:16 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 22, 2018, 11:29:22 PM
Championship Game Result in Alternate Universe National Championship Playoff
UW-Oshkosh 32
St. Thomas 10
Wisconsin-Oshkosh found its offense as the playoffs progressed and is the Alternate Universe National Champion.
If nothing else, the result proves I picked the right name for the tournament!
bleed
Loved your tournament. I put down a double sawbuck on UWO AT 7 to 1. Not sure what that means but just wanted to say it. Can't wait until next year. Or the next tournament, whichever comes first.
Really enjoyable reading. You don't need another hobby. Got a winner here! 😃 🍺 ❗️
Thanks, MUC57. As a Strat-O-Matic fan, I'm prone to stuff like this. You may be close on the odds UW-O would have in a tournament like this. Maybe even longer odds than that this year! I may need to find a different board though. I'd better cede this one back to the D3 Top 25 Fan Poll folks before they charge me rent! Good luck to your Raiders tomorrow, not that they'll need it!
You should be OK for a while bleed. If they haven't changed how it runs they won't be needing it again until the playoffs are over.
So I've got some space! lol... Maybe I should plunk Hardin-Simmons in the Brockport region and see if they rip through everyone to face Mount Union in the Semi's. In the real universe, I think that would have been a real possible outcome.
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 25, 2018, 04:19:51 PM
Quote from: HSCTiger74 on November 24, 2018, 01:41:31 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 23, 2018, 09:34:35 PM
Quote from: MUC57 on November 23, 2018, 04:24:16 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 22, 2018, 11:29:22 PM
Championship Game Result in Alternate Universe National Championship Playoff
UW-Oshkosh 32
St. Thomas 10
Wisconsin-Oshkosh found its offense as the playoffs progressed and is the Alternate Universe National Champion.
If nothing else, the result proves I picked the right name for the tournament!
bleed
Loved your tournament. I put down a double sawbuck on UWO AT 7 to 1. Not sure what that means but just wanted to say it. Can't wait until next year. Or the next tournament, whichever comes first.
Really enjoyable reading. You don't need another hobby. Got a winner here! 😃 🍺 ❗️
Thanks, MUC57. As a Strat-O-Matic fan, I'm prone to stuff like this. You may be close on the odds UW-O would have in a tournament like this. Maybe even longer odds than that this year! I may need to find a different board though. I'd better cede this one back to the D3 Top 25 Fan Poll folks before they charge me rent! Good luck to your Raiders tomorrow, not that they'll need it!
You should be OK for a while bleed. If they haven't changed how it runs they won't be needing it again until the playoffs are over.
So I've got some space! lol... Maybe I should plunk Hardin-Simmons in the Brockport region and see if they rip through everyone to face Mount Union in the Semi's. In the real universe, I think that would have been a real possible outcome.
I posted a Poll on the ASC board asking if HSU would prefer to be sent on the road to another region than to face UMHB in its bracket. At the time, I was thinking that HSU would get at least one game in the playoffs before having to face UMHB.
I programmed the poll to stay up until just after the Stagg Bowl. The Poll was removed before I could get a final tally. The last time that I saw the Poll, the voting was something like 21 -15 in favor of HSU being flown around the country.
I would have loved to see how HSU would have done against East Region teams.
Ralph
HSU probably wins the East. The East is, er, the East is, the East is NOT GOOD! My 2 cents.
Quote from: MUC57 on November 25, 2018, 05:28:42 PM
Ralph
HSU probably wins the East. The East is, er, the East is, the East is NOT GOOD! My 2 cents.
MUC,
You live in an interesting world, being a a Mt Union fan. I really can not think of another comparison in modern day sports, other than maybe UConn Women's Basketball. Starting every season knowing that the only competitive game may occur in week 15 is some rarefied air. To call the East, "NOT GOOD" is not fair. The second place team in the OAC, lost to Randolph Macon, who then lost to Muhlenberg. I saw the RM-MU in person this weekend, there are 10 teams in the East that could easily compete with either of those teams. My point is this, the East is not weak, it just isn't the Mount Union dominated North, the UMHB dominated South or the UWW dominated West. Perenially, there are 5-6 excellent teams in the East, all have a chance to make the Elite 8. But we don't (nor do I think we will in the near future) have anything resembling Mt Union.
Emphasis mine...
Quote from: Oline89 on November 26, 2018, 12:08:19 PM
Quote from: MUC57 on November 25, 2018, 05:28:42 PM
Ralph
HSU probably wins the East. The East is, er, the East is, the East is NOT GOOD! My 2 cents.
MUC,
You live in an interesting world, being a a Mt Union fan. I really can not think of another comparison in modern day sports, other than maybe UConn Women's Basketball. Starting every season knowing that the only competitive game may occur in week 15 is some rarefied air. To call the East, "NOT GOOD" is not fair. The second place team in the OAC, lost to Randolph Macon, who then lost to Muhlenberg. I saw the RM-MU in person this weekend, there are 10 teams in the East that could easily compete with either of those teams. My point is this, the East is not weak, it just isn't the Mount Union dominated North, the UMHB dominated South or the UWW dominated West. Perenially, there are 5-6 excellent teams in the East, all have a chance to make the Elite 8. But we don't (nor do I think we will in the near future) have anything resembling Mt Union.
I don't know if this point is ever- and I mean ever- going to land, but it's worth making repeatedly on the off chance that it will. The other regions that are really "hard" appear so because they've each been dominated by basically one team. Mnus those ultra-dominators, the regions are much more level than folks are willing to realize.
Online89 and Wally Wabash
I hereby formally retract my earlier statement that the East is not good. I hate to restate that because I'd probably screw up that comment. Gonna go now! ❓ 😳
The East is good, just not great. Removing the top few teams from every region, the east is just as good as the others. The problem is they haven't had that top team that could beat a Mount Union or Wesley (before they became an east team) and geographically they can't get spread out in the bracket which means every year they beat up on each other then get a poor showing against the top team from another region and it makes the whole region seem weak.
There were 7 teams from the North in the tournament this year. 3 of them played teams from other regions in the first round (2 at home) and lost them all. North Central had a shot at a team from another region and lost at home in the 2nd round. If it wasn't for Mount Union we'd be talking about how dreadful the North is.
The East is never going to have that opportunity to prove themselves against other regions in the early rounds.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 26, 2018, 12:53:16 PM
The East is good, just not great. Removing the top few teams from every region, the east is just as good as the others. The problem is they haven't had that top team that could beat a Mount Union or Wesley (before they became an east team) and geographically they can't get spread out in the bracket which means every year they beat up on each other then get a poor showing against the top team from another region and it makes the whole region seem weak.
There were 7 teams from the North in the tournament this year. 3 of them played teams from other regions in the first round (2 at home) and lost them all. North Central had a shot at a team from another region and lost at home in the 2nd round. If it wasn't for Mount Union we'd be talking about how dreadful the North is.
The East is never going to have that opportunity to prove themselves against other regions in the early rounds.
In some ways, I believe we can grasp an idea of the strength of the East versus everyone else.
We have 20 years since the creation of the Pool system. An off-season task would be to look at those games to identify the trend.
The MAC and the ACFC teams have been South Region in that time, so that needs to be considered.
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 26, 2018, 12:14:12 PM
Emphasis mine...
Quote from: Oline89 on November 26, 2018, 12:08:19 PM
Quote from: MUC57 on November 25, 2018, 05:28:42 PM
Ralph
HSU probably wins the East. The East is, er, the East is, the East is NOT GOOD! My 2 cents.
MUC,
You live in an interesting world, being a a Mt Union fan. I really can not think of another comparison in modern day sports, other than maybe UConn Women's Basketball. Starting every season knowing that the only competitive game may occur in week 15 is some rarefied air. To call the East, "NOT GOOD" is not fair. The second place team in the OAC, lost to Randolph Macon, who then lost to Muhlenberg. I saw the RM-MU in person this weekend, there are 10 teams in the East that could easily compete with either of those teams. My point is this, the East is not weak, it just isn't the Mount Union dominated North, the UMHB dominated South or the UWW dominated West. Perenially, there are 5-6 excellent teams in the East, all have a chance to make the Elite 8. But we don't (nor do I think we will in the near future) have anything resembling Mt Union.
I don't know if this point is ever- and I mean ever- going to land, but it's worth making repeatedly on the off chance that it will. The other regions that are really "hard" appear so because they've each been dominated by basically one team. Mnus those ultra-dominators, the regions are much more level than folks are willing to realize.
+K Wally, nice to see that someone with national D3 knowledge, feels similarly
I don't think of the East as "weak", but I also don't think it's as simple as saying if the other regions weren't dominated by one team the regions would be equally competitive.
The West has had a 6 time champ in UWW, but it also had a UWO in the Semis and Stagg- and was competitive w both UMHB and Mt. It also has St T that played in two Stagg Bowls. We will see what happens w the Johnnies Saturday but they sure have caught the eye of the D3 world. The South mostly has UMHB, but many seem to feel HSU is just below elite level. Sure Mt dominates the North, but you had Wheaton play an excellent game vs UMHB recently and NCC was seconds away from beating Mt in the semis not long ago.
The East needs some success stories like the above.
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 26, 2018, 12:14:12 PM
Emphasis mine...
Quote from: Oline89 on November 26, 2018, 12:08:19 PM
Quote from: MUC57 on November 25, 2018, 05:28:42 PM
Ralph
HSU probably wins the East. The East is, er, the East is, the East is NOT GOOD! My 2 cents.
MUC,
You live in an interesting world, being a a Mt Union fan. I really can not think of another comparison in modern day sports, other than maybe UConn Women's Basketball. Starting every season knowing that the only competitive game may occur in week 15 is some rarefied air. To call the East, "NOT GOOD" is not fair. The second place team in the OAC, lost to Randolph Macon, who then lost to Muhlenberg. I saw the RM-MU in person this weekend, there are 10 teams in the East that could easily compete with either of those teams. My point is this, the East is not weak, it just isn't the Mount Union dominated North, the UMHB dominated South or the UWW dominated West. Perenially, there are 5-6 excellent teams in the East, all have a chance to make the Elite 8. But we don't (nor do I think we will in the near future) have anything resembling Mt Union.
I don't know if this point is ever- and I mean ever- going to land, but it's worth making repeatedly on the off chance that it will. The other regions that are really "hard" appear so because they've each been dominated by basically one team. Mnus those ultra-dominators, the regions are much more level than folks are willing to realize.
I think the East lacks not just Elite (aka purple powers), but also very good/great teams year over year.
The North & West in particular produce teams that are really very good, semi-final and even Stagg worthy. Some recent playoff examples: Wheaton, NCC, UST, UWO, Wartburg, Linfield, Bethel, etc.
Yes, the East doesn't have a Purple Power. But they also fail to produce teams that can even push those teams. It's not just a lack of a single elite team, but an apparent lack of the very, very good variety. At least in the D3.com era.
There are good teams in the East. But I can't remember a year when the #2 or #3 team from the North or West didn't look like they could have handled the East bracket and won their way to a Semifinal appearance.
Quote from: hazzben on November 26, 2018, 02:47:12 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 26, 2018, 12:14:12 PM
Emphasis mine...
Quote from: Oline89 on November 26, 2018, 12:08:19 PM
Quote from: MUC57 on November 25, 2018, 05:28:42 PM
Ralph
HSU probably wins the East. The East is, er, the East is, the East is NOT GOOD! My 2 cents.
MUC,
You live in an interesting world, being a a Mt Union fan. I really can not think of another comparison in modern day sports, other than maybe UConn Women's Basketball. Starting every season knowing that the only competitive game may occur in week 15 is some rarefied air. To call the East, "NOT GOOD" is not fair. The second place team in the OAC, lost to Randolph Macon, who then lost to Muhlenberg. I saw the RM-MU in person this weekend, there are 10 teams in the East that could easily compete with either of those teams. My point is this, the East is not weak, it just isn't the Mount Union dominated North, the UMHB dominated South or the UWW dominated West. Perenially, there are 5-6 excellent teams in the East, all have a chance to make the Elite 8. But we don't (nor do I think we will in the near future) have anything resembling Mt Union.
I don't know if this point is ever- and I mean ever- going to land, but it's worth making repeatedly on the off chance that it will. The other regions that are really "hard" appear so because they've each been dominated by basically one team. Mnus those ultra-dominators, the regions are much more level than folks are willing to realize.
I think the East lacks not just Elite (aka purple powers), but also very good/great teams year over year.
The North & West in particular produce teams that are really very good, semi-final and even Stagg worthy. Some recent playoff examples: Wheaton, NCC, UST, UWO, Wartburg, Linfield, Bethel, etc.
Yes, the East doesn't have a Purple Power. But they also fail to produce teams that can even push those teams. It's not just a lack of a single elite team, but an apparent lack of the very, very good variety. At least in the D3.com era.
There are good teams in the East. But I can't remember a year when the #2 or #3 team from the North or West didn't look like they could have handled the East bracket and won their way to a Semifinal appearance.
I disagree with that...
Quote from: hazzben on November 26, 2018, 02:47:12 PM
There are good teams in the East. But I can't remember a year when the #2 or #3 team from the North or West didn't look like they could have handled the East bracket and won their way to a Semifinal appearance.
Don't forget Hardin-Simmons. Hardin-Simmons would probably be an annual finalist if they didn't get jammed by those cheapskates at the NCAA! ::)
Several years back, John Carroll "went east", won all three games then played Mount in the semis. That's one example. To say the East is not good does NOT imply there are no good teams in thr East. I just feel that overall, the region does not match up to the other 3 regions. This has been talked about for years. I wasn't the first to bring it up. I can't find the evidence that says, overall, the regions are on an equal level. If it exists, fine. I am open to revising my opinion. But, of course, who cares what I think!
Yes, each region has it's dominate team. The East has NO dominate team. Brockport, number one in the region, couldn't even get out of its bracket. How many times did Mount get sent east because no one in the east qualified as a number one. Of course, some east teams get beat by other east teams. But that happens all over the country. And yet, certain teams survive to go deep in the playoffs.
That's just my rambling. Maybe not very eloquent but my opinion! 😃 ❗️
I'm done with this issue. As I said above, it's been talked about for years. If the East does better, we'll all notice. No further discussion will be necessary. 😃
Quote from: Oline89 on November 26, 2018, 02:05:07 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 26, 2018, 12:14:12 PM
Emphasis mine...
Quote from: Oline89 on November 26, 2018, 12:08:19 PM
Quote from: MUC57 on November 25, 2018, 05:28:42 PM
Ralph
HSU probably wins the East. The East is, er, the East is, the East is NOT GOOD! My 2 cents.
MUC,
You live in an interesting world, being a a Mt Union fan. I really can not think of another comparison in modern day sports, other than maybe UConn Women's Basketball. Starting every season knowing that the only competitive game may occur in week 15 is some rarefied air. To call the East, "NOT GOOD" is not fair. The second place team in the OAC, lost to Randolph Macon, who then lost to Muhlenberg. I saw the RM-MU in person this weekend, there are 10 teams in the East that could easily compete with either of those teams. My point is this, the East is not weak, it just isn't the Mount Union dominated North, the UMHB dominated South or the UWW dominated West. Perenially, there are 5-6 excellent teams in the East, all have a chance to make the Elite 8. But we don't (nor do I think we will in the near future) have anything resembling Mt Union.
I don't know if this point is ever- and I mean ever- going to land, but it's worth making repeatedly on the off chance that it will. The other regions that are really "hard" appear so because they've each been dominated by basically one team. Mnus those ultra-dominators, the regions are much more level than folks are willing to realize.
+K Wally, nice to see that someone with national D3 knowledge, feels similarly
Here is some perspective about UMHB and the ASC being dominant in the South.
Here is list of all of the games that the ASC teams have played since its first bid in 1999.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on November 03, 2018, 05:31:18 PM
I just hope that the bracket has the chance for UMHB or HSU (or both) to meet Berry. Now that Wesley is gone, UMHB seems to be sent West.
It has been a long time since the ASC has played a team from Eastern Time zone of the South Region.
Here are ASC opponents from the South Region in the post season. (Partial listing of other games.)
2018 UMHB - HSU 27-6; Berry 75-9
HSU - Loss to UMHB
2017 UMHB - None; HSU None
HSU - Loss at Linfield 13-27
2016 UMHB - None: HSU None UMHB beat Redlands by 22, Linfield by 17, Wheaton IL by 22, UMU by 2, and UW-O by 3
HSU - Loss at Linfield 10-24
2015 UMHB - HSU round 1; Huntingdon round 2
HSU --- loss to UMHB
2014 UMHB - TLU (SCAC - Pool B) round 1
2013 UMHB - None
2012 UMHB - Louisiana College round 1; Wesley round 3 (W)
LaColl - Loss at UMHB
2011 UMHB - McMurry round 2; Wesley round 3 (L);
McM McMurry Trinity (W); Loss at UMHB
2010 UMHB - CNU (59-7) Thomas More (69-7) Wesley (9-19)
2009 UMHB - None
Miss Coll Huntingdon 56-35; - round 2 Wesley 9-43
2008 UMHB - HSU 38-35; round 2 Wesley 46-14; Round 3 W&J 63-7
HSU Loss to UMHB in round 1
2007 UMHB - Trinity TX 52-23; round 2 NCWC 64-0; round 3 Wesley 27-10
2006 UMHB - HSU 33-21; W&J 30-27; Wesley 20-34
2005 UMHB - Trinity 35-6; Wesley 36-46
2004 UMHB - Trinity 32-13; HSU 42-28; W&J 52-16 (won at UMU; loss to Linfield in the Stagg)
- HSU bye first round
2003 ETBU - Trinity 42-41; Lycoming 7-13
2002 UMHB - Trinity 38-48 (Stagg finalist)
2001 HSU - loss at Wittenberg 35-38
2000 HSU - McDaniel 32-10; Trinity TX 33-30
1999 HSU - WashUStL 28-21; W&J 51-3; Trinity TX (loss 33-40)
Look at the opponents:
No games against the ODAC.
One game against the MAC (Lycoming in 2003), back in the day.
One game against the Centennial (McDaniel in 2000)
One game against WashStL in 1999, back in the day.
One game against the SAA, Berry, this year.
Five wins against the PAC (W&J 51-3 in 1999; 52-16 in 2004; 30-27 in 2006; 63-7 in 2008; Thomas More 69-7 in 2010)
Nine games against the old SCAC teams (7-2 record).
Three games against the USA South (3-0).
Wesley was the only South Region team to stymie the ASC consistently, with 5 wins against 3 losses.
The ASC has been sent to the West Region in later rounds frequently.
The regions are kind of artificial constructs anyway, since teams bounce around based on the whim of the bracket makers and when teams switch conferences they switch regions in many cases.
Case Western didn't move to Cleveland, TN when it moved to the South region.
So saying the East is 'weak' is a generalization that may not be true depending on who is in the "East" bracket (not that they'd call it that). It seems the regions are just truly useful in the criteria Pool "C" bids, and that's really it.
In D-2, regions are everything and teams from the same conferences play each other all of the time in championships.
OK, time to settle this Alternate Universe style. lol We will have a Regional Ranking Challenge. Since the East Region is on trial, they will participate in three separate 10 game Regional Ranking Challenges. One against each of the other regions. All games will be played at Wrigley Field (neutral site for Massey purposes). First up EAST VS SOUTH!
EAST VS SOUTH
10 V 10 Salisbury vs Maryville ...and the East starts strong as Salisbury downs Maryville 13-7. East Region is 1-0!
9 v 9 Western New England vs Case Western Reserve...Case evens things up in the challenge, downing WNE 34-20. 1-1
8 v 8 Framingham State vs first round darling Randolph Macon...Yellow Jackets show up again! 50-20 blowout. South up 2-1
7 v 7 Stevenson takes on Washington and Jefferson...Wash and Jeff does the South proud 27-14 South up 3-1
6 v 6 MIT vs Muhlenberg ...the Mules leave no doubt 30-7. South up 4-1
5 v 5 Ithaca vs Centre....Centre follows the Mules lead and wins by same score 30-7. South up 5-1
4 v 4 Delaware Valley vs Berry...Del Val says "Not so fast" and gets the upset 42-38. South up 5-2
3 v 3 RPI vs Hardin Simmons...Cowboys have waited for this chance. And take advantage of it. HSU 38-28 South up 6-2
2 v 2 Frostburg St vs Johns Hopkins...Hopkins wins a shootout, 45-37. South up 7-2
1 v 1 UMHB vs Brockport The CRU seals the deal 42-21. South wins the challenge 8-2
First challenge didn't go well for the East, but there are two left!
EAST VS WEST
10 v 10 Salisbury vs Wartburg ... Wartburg wins a grinder 14-10 West leads 1-0.
9 v 9 Western New England vs Monmouth... Monmouth wins another defensive battle 13-10. West leads 2-0.
8 v 8 St. Norbert vs Framingham St. ... SNU holds down FSU and wins 27-14. West leads 3-0
7 v 7 Washington and Jefferson vs St. Thomas...Tommies roll 41-13. West leads 4-0
6 v 6 MIT vs UW-La Crosse...UW-L shuts down MIT offense, 27-9. West leads 5-0
5 v 5 Ithaca vs Linfield...Ithaca takes out east frustration on Cats and rolls 48-18. West leads 5-1
4 v 4 Delaware Valley vs Bethel...Royals have too much. 30-14, BU. West leads 6-1
3 v 3 RPI vs Whitworth...RPI wins shootout 42-35. West leads 6-2
2 v 2 Frostburg State vs St. Johns... Johnnies double up Frosty 42-21. West leads 7-2
1 v 1 Brockport State vs UW-Whitewater...Hawks grind one out 21-14. West Wins the Challenge 8-2
East won a couple and had a few one score losses, but lost the challenge 8-2. EAST VS NORTH TOMORROW.
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 27, 2018, 11:45:17 PM
OK, time to settle this Alternate Universe style. lol We will have a Regional Ranking Challenge. Since the East Region is on trial, they will participate in three separate 10 game Regional Ranking Challenges. One against each of the other regions. All games will be played at Wrigley Field (neutral site for Massey purposes). First up EAST VS SOUTH!
EAST VS SOUTH
10 V 10 Salisbury vs Maryville ...and the East starts strong as Salisbury downs Maryville 13-7. East Region is 1-0!
9 v 9 Western New England vs Case Western Reserve...Case evens things up in the challenge, downing WNE 34-20. 1-1
8 v 8 Framingham State vs first round darling Randolph Macon...Yellow Jackets show up again! 50-20 blowout. South up 2-1
7 v 7 Stevenson takes on Washington and Jefferson...Wash and Jeff does the South proud 27-14 South up 3-1
6 v 6 MIT vs Muhlenberg ...the Mules leave no doubt 30-7. South up 4-1
5 v 5 Ithaca vs Centre....Centre follows the Mules lead and wins by same score 30-7. South up 5-1
4 v 4 Delaware Valley vs Berry...Del Val says "Not so fast" and gets the upset 42-38. South up 5-2
3 v 3 RPI vs Hardin Simmons...Cowboys have waited for this chance. And take advantage of it. HSU 38-28 South up 6-2
2 v 2 Frostburg St vs Johns Hopkins...Hopkins wins a shootout, 45-37. South up 7-2
1 v 1 UMHB vs Brockport The CRU seals the deal 42-21. South wins the challenge 8-2
First challenge didn't go well for the East, but there are two left!
Football on baseball diamonds is a terrible idea even in Masseyland. :)
Soldier Field or Lambeau would be a better choice for neutral field.
Or, how about the NFL HOF field in Canton OH for a neutral field?
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 27, 2018, 11:45:17 PM
OK, time to settle this Alternate Universe style. lol We will have a Regional Ranking Challenge. Since the East Region is on trial, they will participate in three separate 10 game Regional Ranking Challenges. One against each of the other regions. All games will be played at Wrigley Field (neutral site for Massey purposes). First up EAST VS SOUTH!
EAST VS SOUTH
10 V 10 Salisbury vs Maryville ...and the East starts strong as Salisbury downs Maryville 13-7. East Region is 1-0!
9 v 9 Western New England vs Case Western Reserve...Case evens things up in the challenge, downing WNE 34-20. 1-1
8 v 8 Framingham State vs first round darling Randolph Macon...Yellow Jackets show up again! 50-20 blowout. South up 2-1
7 v 7 Stevenson takes on Washington and Jefferson...Wash and Jeff does the South proud 27-14 South up 3-1
6 v 6 MIT vs Muhlenberg ...the Mules leave no doubt 30-7. South up 4-1
5 v 5 Ithaca vs Centre....Centre follows the Mules lead and wins by same score 30-7. South up 5-1
4 v 4 Delaware Valley vs Berry...Del Val says "Not so fast" and gets the upset 42-38. South up 5-2
3 v 3 RPI vs Hardin Simmons...Cowboys have waited for this chance. And take advantage of it. HSU 38-28 South up 6-2
2 v 2 Frostburg St vs Johns Hopkins...Hopkins wins a shootout, 45-37. South up 7-2. It was 58-27 JHU real time!
1 v 1 UMHB vs Brockport The CRU seals the deal 42-21. South wins the challenge 8-2
First challenge didn't go well for the East, but there are two left!
What? Do you mean that we have discovered an East Region bias in Massey? LOL
Quote from: Ralph Turner on November 28, 2018, 09:00:40 AM
Soldier Field or Lambeau would be a better choice for neutral field.
Or, how about the NFL HOF field in Canton OH for a neutral field?
This is actually going to happen in 2020. We don't have to pretend!
One thing I don't like about the regional ranking challenge is that the regional rankings does not reflect the better teams, each regional ranking is different. Not saying that this hypothetical alternative universe would change the outcomes, but that's my 2 cents.
Why not take Massey and Hansen's top 10 by region and see where they stack up, instead of using the RRs?
Quote from: smedindy on November 28, 2018, 01:20:12 PM
Why not take Massey and Hansen's top 10 by region and see where they stack up, instead of using the RRs?
I like the idea, but I want him to run his permutations with all of the regions, all 6 of them, with the NCAA Regional Rankings first.
I was waiting for the Wrigley Field comments. I just thought it would be a fitting tribute to the 2019 World Series Champions. ;)
Anyway, here is EAST VS NORTH
10 v 10 Salisbury vs Baldwin Wallace...BW scores late to sneak by the Gulls 21-20. 1-0 North
9 v 9 Western New England vs Wheaton...Thunder rolls the Golden Bears 41-7 2-0 North
8 v 8 Framingham St. Vs Wash U...The Bears win shootout 37-35. 3-0 North
7 v 7 Stevenson vs Illinois Wesleyan...CCIW gets the trifecta. 37-7 Titans. 4-0 North
6 v 6 MIT vs Wittenberg...Tigers roar. Witt wins 44-7 5-0 North
5 v 5 Ithaca vs Wabash...Bombers strike down Little Giants 39-13 5-1 North
4 v 4 Delaware Valley vs Trine...DelVal makes it two straight for the East 35-12 5-2 North
3 v 3 RPI vs John Carroll...JCU Alternate outperforms reality. JUC wins 17-7 6-2 North
2 v 2 Frostberg State vs North Central...Cardinals offense too much. 43-30 NCC 7-2 North
1 v 1 Brockport vs Mount Union...Mount survives stellar Brokport effort 14-6. 8-2 North
The East Region lost each Regional Ranking Challenge by identical 8-2 margins.
Next, I'll do Regional Ranking Challenges for NORTH/SOUTH, SOUTH/WEST, NORTH/WEST*
*Due to valuable input by experts and fans alike, the location for the remaining three Regional Ranking Challenges will be moved from Wrigley Field to a true football venue.
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 28, 2018, 03:16:29 PM
I was waiting for the Wrigley Field comments. I just thought it would be a fitting tribute to the 2019 World Series Champions. ;)
Anyway, here is EAST VS NORTH
10 v 10 Salisbury vs Baldwin Wallace...BW scores late to sneak by the Gulls 21-20. 1-0 North
9 v 9 Western New England vs Wheaton...Thunder rolls the Golden Bears 41-7 2-0 North
8 v 8 Framingham St. Vs Wash U...The Bears win shootout 37-35. 3-0 North
7 v 7 Stevenson vs Illinois Wesleyan...CCIW gets the trifecta. 37-7 Titans. 4-0 North
6 v 6 MIT vs Wittenberg...Tigers roar. Witt wins 44-7 5-0 North
5 v 5 Ithaca vs Wabash...Bombers strike down Little Giants 39-13 5-1 North
4 v 4 Delaware Valley vs Trine...DelVal makes it two straight for the East 35-12 5-2 North
3 v 3 RPI vs John Carroll...JCU Alternate outperforms reality. JUC wins 17-7 6-2 North
2 v 2 Frostberg State vs North Central...Cardinals offense too much. 43-30 NCC 7-2 North
1 v 1 Brockport vs Mount Union...Mount survives stellar Brokport effort 14-6. 8-2 North
The East Region lost each Regional Ranking Challenge by identical 8-2 margins.
Next, I'll do Regional Ranking Challenges for NORTH/SOUTH, SOUTH/WEST, NORTH/WEST*
*Due to valuable input by experts and fans alike, the location for the remaining three Regional Ranking Challenges will be moved from Wrigley Field to a true football venue.
I guess I should create an equal Doppelganger alternative reality as well.
Alternative Reality Regional Rankings Challenge: NORTH/SOUTH Location: Notre Dame Stadium (neutral site)
10 V 10 Baldwin Wallace vs Maryville...Scots swat Yellow Jackets 29-13. 1-0 South
9 v 9 Wheaton Vs Case Western Reserve...Wheaton sneaks by Spartans 31-25. 1-1
8 v 8 Wash U vs Randolph Macon... Wash U rolls 36-7 2-1 North
7 v 7 Illiniois Wesleyan vs Wash and Jeff...Titans outscore W&J 38-31 3-1 North
6 v 6 Wittenberg vs Muhlenberg...A real Mule-stompin win 45-17 Mules. 3-2 North
5 v 5 Wabash vs Centre... Colonels lay the wood to Little Giants 48-6. 3-3
4 v 4 Trine vs Berry...Berry quiets the Thunder 48-12 giving South the lead. 4-3 South
3 v 3 Hardin Simmons vs John Carroll...HSU wins thriller 29-28. 5-3 South
2 v 2 North Central vs Johns Hopkins...JHU wins to clinch a south victory 35-29. 6-3 South
1x1 Mount Union vs Mary Hardin Baylor...UMHB finishes strong south run 37-24 7-3 South
Very impressive showing by the south. Sweep of seeds 1-6 carried them to victory in the challenge.
Alternative Reality South/West Regional Ranking Challenge. Held in Rose Bowl Stadium
10 v 10 Maryville vs Wartburg...Knights win defensive struggle 13-10 1-0 West
9 v 9 Case Western Reserve vs Monmouth...Monmouth late FG wins it 24-21 2-0 West
8 v 8 Randolph Macon vs St. Norbert...Triple option carries Green Knights 45-40 3-0 West
7 v 7 St. Thomas vs Washington and Jefferson...STU rolls 38-10 4-0 West
6 v 6 UW-LaCrosse vs Muhlenberg...Eagles outscore Mules 45-41 5-0 West
5 v 5 Centre vs Linfield...Cats surprise Centre 35-29 Clinches Challenge 6-0 West
4 v 4 Berry vs Bethel...Vikings upset the Royals to get South on the board 26-20 6-1 West
3 v 3 Hardin Simmons vs Whitworth...Cowboys trample Whitworth 24-10 6-2 West
2 v 2 Johns Hopkins vs St. Johns...Johnnies have just enough 34-31 7-2 West
1 v 1 Mary Hardin Baylor vs UW-Whitewater...CRU rolls 36-19 7-3 North
The West wins the challenge 7-3. They were carried by some significant upsets. I could see this challenge having a wide variety of results if replayed several times.
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 28, 2018, 10:00:25 PM
Alternative Reality Regional Rankings Challenge: NORTH/SOUTH Location: Notre Dame Stadium (neutral site)
10 V 10 Baldwin Wallace vs Maryville...Scots swat Yellow Jackets 29-13. 1-0 South
9 v 9 Wheaton Vs Case Western Reserve...Wheaton sneaks by Spartans 31-25. 1-1
8 v 8 Wash U vs Randolph Macon... Wash U rolls 36-7 2-1 North
7 v 7 Illiniois Wesleyan vs Wash and Jeff...Titans outscore W&J 38-31 3-1 North
6 v 6 Wittenberg vs Muhlenberg...A real Mule-stompin win 45-17 Mules. 3-2 North
5 v 5 Wabash vs Centre... Colonels lay the wood to Little Giants 48-6. 3-3
4 v 4 Trine vs Berry...Berry quiets the Thunder 48-12 giving South the lead. 4-3 South
3 v 3 Hardin Simmons vs John Carroll...HSU wins thriller 29-28. 5-3 South
2 v 2 North Central vs Johns Hopkins...JHU wins to clinch a south victory 35-29. 6-3 South
1x1 Mount Union vs Mary Hardin Baylor...UMHB finishes strong south run 37-24 7-3 South
Very impressive showing by the south. Sweep of seeds 1-6 carried them to victory in the challenge.
Funny that CWRU is in the South. I never really considered Cleveland, OH in the South. ???
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on November 29, 2018, 07:16:49 AM
Funny that CWRU is in the South. I never really considered Cleveland, OH in the South. ???
CWRU is a member of the PAC. The PAC is a South region conference. I trust you can connect the dots.
Quote from: bleedpurple on November 28, 2018, 03:16:29 PM
I was waiting for the Wrigley Field comments. I just thought it would be a fitting tribute to the 2019 World Series Champions. ;)
Anyway, here is EAST VS NORTH
10 v 10 Salisbury vs Baldwin Wallace...BW scores late to sneak by the Gulls 21-20. 1-0 North
9 v 9 Western New England vs Wheaton...Thunder rolls the Golden Bears 41-7 2-0 North
8 v 8 Framingham St. Vs Wash U...The Bears win shootout 37-35. 3-0 North
7 v 7 Stevenson vs Illinois Wesleyan...CCIW gets the trifecta. 37-7 Titans. 4-0 North
6 v 6 MIT vs Wittenberg...Tigers roar. Witt wins 44-7 5-0 North
5 v 5 Ithaca vs Wabash...Bombers strike down Little Giants 39-13 5-1 North
4 v 4 Delaware Valley vs Trine...DelVal makes it two straight for the East 35-12 5-2 North
3 v 3 RPI vs John Carroll...JCU Alternate outperforms reality. JUC wins 17-7 6-2 North
2 v 2 Frostberg State vs North Central...Cardinals offense too much. 43-30 NCC 7-2 North
1 v 1 Brockport vs Mount Union...Mount survives stellar Brokport effort 14-6. 8-2 North
The East Region lost each Regional Ranking Challenge by identical 8-2 margins.
Next, I'll do Regional Ranking Challenges for NORTH/SOUTH, SOUTH/WEST, NORTH/WEST*
*Due to valuable input by experts and fans alike, the location for the remaining three Regional Ranking Challenges will be moved from Wrigley Field to a true football venue.
This might actually happen, since hopefully the team would actually take RPI seriously enough to actually care about the game >:(
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 29, 2018, 08:53:49 AM
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on November 29, 2018, 07:16:49 AM
Funny that CWRU is in the South. I never really considered Cleveland, OH in the South. ???
CWRU is a member of the PAC. The PAC is a South region conference. I trust you can connect the dots.
C'mon Wally
You no very well Cleveland, Ohio is not in the south. If it were any further north, it would be in Lake Erie. Don't think K & J's Dad was thinking about some stupid NCAA classification. Can't always think in terms of Dlll. Ease up, please! 😃
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 29, 2018, 08:53:49 AM
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on November 29, 2018, 07:16:49 AM
Funny that CWRU is in the South. I never really considered Cleveland, OH in the South. ???
CWRU is a member of the PAC. The PAC is a South region conference. I trust you can connect the dots.
Yes Wally, it was an attempt at Humor. Thank you for correcting me again.
I just realized how we should do the playoffs: Instead of an 32 team bracket. We should just had Mount vs. St. Johns and UMHB vs. UW-Whitewater with both games played in Texas the last week of December and 1st week of January and had 28 team using the DIII/Div I-FCS format. Would this save money for the NCAA?
Quote from: MUC57 on November 29, 2018, 09:58:41 AM
...Cleveland, Ohio is not in the south. If it were any further north, it would be in Lake Erie...
Spoken as if you were a Steelers fan, MUC57...
Quote from: MUC57 on November 29, 2018, 09:58:41 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 29, 2018, 08:53:49 AM
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on November 29, 2018, 07:16:49 AM
Funny that CWRU is in the South. I never really considered Cleveland, OH in the South. ???
CWRU is a member of the PAC. The PAC is a South region conference. I trust you can connect the dots.
C'mon Wally
You no very well Cleveland, Ohio is not in the south. If it were any further north, it would be in Lake Erie. Don't think K & J's Dad was thinking about some stupid NCAA classification. Can't always think in terms of Dlll. Ease up, please! 😃
is Cleveland in South Canadia?
Quote from: Toby Taff on November 30, 2018, 11:48:23 AM
Quote from: MUC57 on November 29, 2018, 09:58:41 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 29, 2018, 08:53:49 AM
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on November 29, 2018, 07:16:49 AM
Funny that CWRU is in the South. I never really considered Cleveland, OH in the South. ???
CWRU is a member of the PAC. The PAC is a South region conference. I trust you can connect the dots.
C'mon Wally
You no very well Cleveland, Ohio is not in the south. If it were any further north, it would be in Lake Erie. Don't think K & J's Dad was thinking about some stupid NCAA classification. Can't always think in terms of Dlll. Ease up, please! 😃
is Cleveland in South Canadia?
I'd think Minnesota/Upper Peninsula is South Canadia. But then you have Detroit which is north of Canada so...
Quote from: Bob.Gregg on November 30, 2018, 11:20:21 AM
Quote from: MUC57 on November 29, 2018, 09:58:41 AM
...Cleveland, Ohio is not in the south. If it were any further north, it would be in Lake Erie...
Spoken as if you were a Steelers fan, MUC57...
A Steelers fan? A Steelers fan? Why I ................ 😃 🍺
Actually, after living in the San Francisco Bay Area for 16 years, I'm a 49ers fan. Browns too, I guess.
Alternative Reality North/West Regional Ranking Challenge (Held in Camp Randall Stadium, Madison, WI)
10 V 10 Baldwin Wallace vs Wartburg Knights win a thriller 31-28. 1-0 West
9 v 9 Wheaton vs Monmouth Good Wheaton shows up. 31-3 route. 1-1
8 v 8 Wash U vs St. Norbert Wash u in a shootout 38-27 2-1 North
7 v 7 Illinois Weslayan vs St. Thomas St. Thomas pulls away 34-21 2-2
6 v 6 Wittenberg vs UW-La Crosse Eagles fly high 59-24 3-2 West
5 v 5 Wabash vs Linfield Cats turn vintage 38-7 4-2 West
4 v 4 Trine vs Bethel Royal Roughshod 62-24 5-2 West
3 v 3 John Carroll vs Whitworth Whitworth stymies JCU 24-13 6-2 West
2 v 2 North Central vs St Johns No magic needed, 35-20 SJU 7-2 West
1 v 1 Mount Union vs UW-W Must be a glitch 41-14 Mount 7-3 West
West wins this Alternative Reality Regional Ranking Challenge 7-3
Awaiting the rest of bleedpurple's Alternative Reality Challenges...
Right now, my ballot has some variation of
1-3) MHB/MU/SJU, in alphabetical order for now
4) UWW Lost to UMHB by 17
5-6) HSU (lost to UMHB by 21 twice)/ JHU (two costly pick-sixes away from the Stagg. But, how good is this UMU team which has its fans lamenting how un-Mount-like this team is?)
7) Whitfield Whitworth
8) Bethel
9) North Central
10) ??? Everyone else was a monkey stomp away from the top 2 tiers
I'll wait until Mount Union an MHB Play to do mines. However, our top 4 is the same. Considering matchups and other factors, after Top 5, it's anyone's fair game. Also, I'm sure Whitfield should have been Whitworth.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 10, 2018, 01:05:30 PM
Awaiting the rest of bleedpurple's Alternative Reality Challenges...
Right now, my ballot has some variation of
1-3) MHB/MU/SJU, in alphabetical order for now
4) UWW Lost to UMHB by 17
5-6) HSU (lost to UMHB by 21 twice)/ JHU (two costly pick-sixes away from the Stagg. But, how good is this UMU team which has its fans lamenting how un-Mount-like this team is?)
7) Whitfield Whitworth
8) Bethel
9) North Central
10) ??? Everyone else was a monkey stomp away from the top 2 tiers
RT .. Wondering about your thoughts on Whitworth over Bethel placement. SJU figured Pirates out after a half, but were in a dogfight with Royals into the 4th. And Bethel and freshman QB got better as season wore on. Plus a pretty nice win on road at NCC.
Quote from: repete on December 11, 2018, 02:11:02 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 10, 2018, 01:05:30 PM
Awaiting the rest of bleedpurple's Alternative Reality Challenges...
Right now, my ballot has some variation of
1-3) MHB/MU/SJU, in alphabetical order for now
4) UWW Lost to UMHB by 17
5-6) HSU (lost to UMHB by 21 twice)/ JHU (two costly pick-sixes away from the Stagg. But, how good is this UMU team which has its fans lamenting how un-Mount-like this team is?)
7) Whitfield Whitworth
8) Bethel
9) North Central
10) ??? Everyone else was a monkey stomp away from the top 2 tiers
RT .. Wondering about your thoughts on Whitworth over Bethel placement. SJU figured Pirates out after a half, but were in a dogfight with Royals into the 4th. And Bethel and freshman QB got better as season wore on. Plus a pretty nice win on road at NCC.
Thanks, repete.
It is always dangerous to play the transitive properties game, but I thought that Whitworth just kept coming at the Johnnies. The SJU TD with 00:14 sec in the half and then the opening drive in the 3Q for a TD really put Whitworth in a hole. It became a 21 point final margin of victory for SJU. SJU, in turn, plays UMHB the toughest this season.
Now, if you want to look at the path for Bethel, we have a win over what seems to be a very weak NCC. In fact, one can say that the North Region was relatively weak this year. The freshman QB for bethel may ahve gotten better, but I think Erdmann's offense got better throughout the year, too.
Bethel lost to UWW by 14 and then UWW lost to UMHB by 17. (In our ASC Pick'ems contest, only Bornpowerindex was close to the final margin, projecting a 15 point UMHB win over UWW.)
For UMHB, "Defense wins championships." Once UMHB has you down 2 scores, they get very conservative. UMHB fans scream on the ASC message board about this conservative play! UMHB will pound the rock and kill the clock. Look at the UMHB games in the final rounds against the top foes, UWO, UMU, SJU. It is almost a monkey stomp at that point because most teams (SJU aside) will not come back from a 2 score deficit, even a storied program such as UWW!
Very weak North Central? Not quite sure I see that.
Thanks, RT. Almost always enjoy hearing the thoughts behind these things, especially from the vets. (I'll let you and Wally spar on NCC.)
Quote from: repete on December 11, 2018, 10:41:29 PM
Thanks, RT. Almost always enjoy hearing the thoughts behind these things, especially from the vets. (I'll let you and Wally spar on NCC.)
Thank for the kind words. I also enjoy reading your comments as one of the veterans of the message boards.
I really think that we saw the Stagg Bowl in the QF matchup between UMHB and SJU.
I will juggle HSU and JHU depending on the Stagg. JHU got to enhance its resume with its bracketing against the East Region.
Now we get to see the real strengths of the left versus the right bracket.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 12, 2018, 11:54:57 AM
Quote from: repete on December 11, 2018, 10:41:29 PM
Thanks, RT. Almost always enjoy hearing the thoughts behind these things, especially from the vets. (I'll let you and Wally spar on NCC.)
Thank for the kind words. I also enjoy reading your comments as one of the veterans of the message boards.
I really think that we saw the Stagg Bowl in the QF matchup between UMHB and SJU.
I will juggle HSU and JHU depending on the Stagg. JHU got to enhance its resume with its bracketing against the East Region.
Now we get to see the real strengths of the left versus the right bracket.
I think Friday's game is Mount Union's strengths vs. Mary Hardin-Baylor's strengths and extrapolating anything at all about the different halves of the entire championship tournament is spurious at best.
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 12, 2018, 12:55:11 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 12, 2018, 11:54:57 AM
Quote from: repete on December 11, 2018, 10:41:29 PM
Thanks, RT. Almost always enjoy hearing the thoughts behind these things, especially from the vets. (I'll let you and Wally spar on NCC.)
Thank for the kind words. I also enjoy reading your comments as one of the veterans of the message boards.
I really think that we saw the Stagg Bowl in the QF matchup between UMHB and SJU.
I will juggle HSU and JHU depending on the Stagg. JHU got to enhance its resume with its bracketing against the East Region.
Now we get to see the real strengths of the left versus the right bracket.
I think Friday's game is Mount Union's strengths vs. Mary Hardin-Baylor's strengths and extrapolating anything at all about the different halves of the entire championship tournament is spurious at best.
Respectfully, I believe this game gives us an idea of the relative strengths of the programs that we saw in the playoffs. To use a term from natural sciences, we talk about "quantums" (yes, the 2nd declension neuter plural is quanta) on these boards all of the time.
In the post game interview, the coach who has just played The Machine (e.g., UMU) knows what his program must do to reach the next level. In recent podcasts, Pat and Keith talked about how Brockport was supposed to be approaching the next level and how JHU had played UMU in 2016 and should be approaching the next level for the 2018 game.
I believe we saw a lot out of JHU. I am very happy they were bracketed up the east coast for geographic proximity to help me figure out the strength of that part of the South Region, especially for my ballot in the South Region Fan Poll. And, JHU dispatched the East Region just like the strong Salisbury and Wesley teams from the old ACFC days. That is why I want to see what Mount Union team shows up this year. We saw how UMHB handled the MIAC champ (SJU this time) and the WIAC champ. We have a very good idea of how the champions of the Power Conferences ( IMHO, ASC, CCIW, MIAC, NWC OAC & WIAC perform) and how to rank them for the next year's Kickoff Magazine.
Before this game, my impression is that the left bracket was very weak and I want to see how this UMU team compares the previous teams.
Thanks.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 12, 2018, 01:48:11 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 12, 2018, 12:55:11 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 12, 2018, 11:54:57 AM
Quote from: repete on December 11, 2018, 10:41:29 PM
Thanks, RT. Almost always enjoy hearing the thoughts behind these things, especially from the vets. (I'll let you and Wally spar on NCC.)
Thank for the kind words. I also enjoy reading your comments as one of the veterans of the message boards.
I really think that we saw the Stagg Bowl in the QF matchup between UMHB and SJU.
I will juggle HSU and JHU depending on the Stagg. JHU got to enhance its resume with its bracketing against the East Region.
Now we get to see the real strengths of the left versus the right bracket.
I think Friday's game is Mount Union's strengths vs. Mary Hardin-Baylor's strengths and extrapolating anything at all about the different halves of the entire championship tournament is spurious at best.
Respectfully, I believe this game gives us an idea of the relative strengths of the programs that we saw in the playoffs. To use a term from natural sciences, we talk about "quantums" (yes, the 2nd declension neuter plural is quanta) on these boards all of the time.
In the post game interview, the coach who has just played The Machine (e.g., UMU) knows what his program must do to reach the next level. In recent podcasts, Pat and Keith talked about how Brockport was supposed to be approaching the next level and how JHU had played UMU in 2016 and should be approaching the next level for the 2018 game.
I believe we saw a lot out of JHU. I am very happy they were bracketed up the east coast for geographic proximity to help me figure out the strength of that part of the South Region, especially for my ballot in the South Region Fan Poll. And, JHU dispatched the East Region just like the strong Salisbury and Wesley teams from the old ACFC days. That is why I want to see what Mount Union team shows up this year. We saw how UMHB handled the MIAC champ (SJU this time) and the WIAC champ. We have a very good idea of how the champions of the Power Conferences ( IMHO, ASC, CCIW, MIAC, NWC OAC & WIAC perform) and how to rank them for the next year's Kickoff Magazine.
Before this game, my impression is that the left bracket was very weak and I want to see how this UMU team compares the previous teams.
Thanks.
What result on Friday night would alter that impression?
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 12, 2018, 02:18:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 12, 2018, 01:48:11 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 12, 2018, 12:55:11 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 12, 2018, 11:54:57 AM
Quote from: repete on December 11, 2018, 10:41:29 PM
Thanks, RT. Almost always enjoy hearing the thoughts behind these things, especially from the vets. (I'll let you and Wally spar on NCC.)
Thank for the kind words. I also enjoy reading your comments as one of the veterans of the message boards.
I really think that we saw the Stagg Bowl in the QF matchup between UMHB and SJU.
I will juggle HSU and JHU depending on the Stagg. JHU got to enhance its resume with its bracketing against the East Region.
Now we get to see the real strengths of the left versus the right bracket.
I think Friday's game is Mount Union's strengths vs. Mary Hardin-Baylor's strengths and extrapolating anything at all about the different halves of the entire championship tournament is spurious at best.
Respectfully, I believe this game gives us an idea of the relative strengths of the programs that we saw in the playoffs. To use a term from natural sciences, we talk about "quantums" (yes, the 2nd declension neuter plural is quanta) on these boards all of the time.
In the post game interview, the coach who has just played The Machine (e.g., UMU) knows what his program must do to reach the next level. In recent podcasts, Pat and Keith talked about how Brockport was supposed to be approaching the next level and how JHU had played UMU in 2016 and should be approaching the next level for the 2018 game.
I believe we saw a lot out of JHU. I am very happy they were bracketed up the east coast for geographic proximity to help me figure out the strength of that part of the South Region, especially for my ballot in the South Region Fan Poll. And, JHU dispatched the East Region just like the strong Salisbury and Wesley teams from the old ACFC days. That is why I want to see what Mount Union team shows up this year. We saw how UMHB handled the MIAC champ (SJU this time) and the WIAC champ. We have a very good idea of how the champions of the Power Conferences ( IMHO, ASC, CCIW, MIAC, NWC OAC & WIAC perform) and how to rank them for the next year's Kickoff Magazine.
Before this game, my impression is that the left bracket was very weak and I want to see how this UMU team compares the previous teams.
Thanks.
What result on Friday night would alter that impression?
A never-in-doubt UMHB win by 2 scores and domination of UMU that we have not seen before would tell me that the "West bracket" was much stronger.
A "knock down/drag out" like we have seen in 2004, 2012, 2016 and 2017 would cause me to reconsider JHU's playoff performance ahead of HSU. For me, I believe that HSU would edge JHU head-to-head on a neutral field.
UMU domination would speak for itself.
What result on Friday night would alter that impression?
[/quote]A never-in-doubt UMHB win by 2 scores and domination of UMU that we have not seen before would tell me that the "West bracket" was much stronger.
A "knock down/drag out" like we have seen in 2004, 2012, 2016 and 2017 would cause me to reconsider JHU's playoff performance ahead of HSU. For me, I believe that HSU would edge JHU head-to-head on a neutral field.
UMU domination would speak for itself.
[/quote]
Just chiming in here, but what evidence is there that HSU would beat anyone outside of their conference? They have played MHB close-ish (70-13 in last 3 meetings), lost to Linfield in last years playoff. They are clearly the second best team in the ASC. The second best team in the OAC, took it on the chin in the first round this year against an out of conference team. I just feel that until teams play teams OOC, it is near impossible to judge national rankings. Exact same argument (and one which I completely agree) is why NESCAC teams are never considered in top 25 polls, they play zero OOC games. Not trying to disparage HSU or Texas football at all, but as scientist (I assume :)), you have to agree that opinions can't stand up against hard evidence.
For me, the NWC (Whitworth or Linfield) is among the Power Conferences.
The geographic proximity of the CCIW, WIAC, MIAC, NWC, and the ASC pits really good teams against each other 1-2 games sooner than one would have in normally seeded brackets as we would see in March Madness.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 12, 2018, 02:32:15 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 12, 2018, 02:18:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 12, 2018, 01:48:11 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 12, 2018, 12:55:11 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 12, 2018, 11:54:57 AM
Quote from: repete on December 11, 2018, 10:41:29 PM
Thanks, RT. Almost always enjoy hearing the thoughts behind these things, especially from the vets. (I'll let you and Wally spar on NCC.)
Thank for the kind words. I also enjoy reading your comments as one of the veterans of the message boards.
I really think that we saw the Stagg Bowl in the QF matchup between UMHB and SJU.
I will juggle HSU and JHU depending on the Stagg. JHU got to enhance its resume with its bracketing against the East Region.
Now we get to see the real strengths of the left versus the right bracket.
I think Friday's game is Mount Union's strengths vs. Mary Hardin-Baylor's strengths and extrapolating anything at all about the different halves of the entire championship tournament is spurious at best.
Respectfully, I believe this game gives us an idea of the relative strengths of the programs that we saw in the playoffs. To use a term from natural sciences, we talk about "quantums" (yes, the 2nd declension neuter plural is quanta) on these boards all of the time.
In the post game interview, the coach who has just played The Machine (e.g., UMU) knows what his program must do to reach the next level. In recent podcasts, Pat and Keith talked about how Brockport was supposed to be approaching the next level and how JHU had played UMU in 2016 and should be approaching the next level for the 2018 game.
I believe we saw a lot out of JHU. I am very happy they were bracketed up the east coast for geographic proximity to help me figure out the strength of that part of the South Region, especially for my ballot in the South Region Fan Poll. And, JHU dispatched the East Region just like the strong Salisbury and Wesley teams from the old ACFC days. That is why I want to see what Mount Union team shows up this year. We saw how UMHB handled the MIAC champ (SJU this time) and the WIAC champ. We have a very good idea of how the champions of the Power Conferences ( IMHO, ASC, CCIW, MIAC, NWC OAC & WIAC perform) and how to rank them for the next year's Kickoff Magazine.
Before this game, my impression is that the left bracket was very weak and I want to see how this UMU team compares the previous teams.
Thanks.
What result on Friday night would alter that impression?
A never-in-doubt UMHB win by 2 scores and domination of UMU that we have not seen before would tell me that the "West bracket" was much stronger.
A "knock down/drag out" like we have seen in 2004, 2012, 2016 and 2017 would cause me to reconsider JHU's playoff performance ahead of HSU. For me, I believe that HSU would edge JHU head-to-head on a neutral field.
UMU domination would speak for itself.
Let me ask, if Mt beats UMHB by 9 or more points, is it fair to assume you will agree JHU should be ranked above UMHB?
Quote from: emma17 on December 12, 2018, 04:44:42 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 12, 2018, 02:32:15 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 12, 2018, 02:18:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 12, 2018, 01:48:11 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 12, 2018, 12:55:11 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 12, 2018, 11:54:57 AM
Quote from: repete on December 11, 2018, 10:41:29 PM
Thanks, RT. Almost always enjoy hearing the thoughts behind these things, especially from the vets. (I'll let you and Wally spar on NCC.)
Thank for the kind words. I also enjoy reading your comments as one of the veterans of the message boards.
I really think that we saw the Stagg Bowl in the QF matchup between UMHB and SJU.
I will juggle HSU and JHU depending on the Stagg. JHU got to enhance its resume with its bracketing against the East Region.
Now we get to see the real strengths of the left versus the right bracket.
I think Friday's game is Mount Union's strengths vs. Mary Hardin-Baylor's strengths and extrapolating anything at all about the different halves of the entire championship tournament is spurious at best.
Respectfully, I believe this game gives us an idea of the relative strengths of the programs that we saw in the playoffs. To use a term from natural sciences, we talk about "quantums" (yes, the 2nd declension neuter plural is quanta) on these boards all of the time.
In the post game interview, the coach who has just played The Machine (e.g., UMU) knows what his program must do to reach the next level. In recent podcasts, Pat and Keith talked about how Brockport was supposed to be approaching the next level and how JHU had played UMU in 2016 and should be approaching the next level for the 2018 game.
I believe we saw a lot out of JHU. I am very happy they were bracketed up the east coast for geographic proximity to help me figure out the strength of that part of the South Region, especially for my ballot in the South Region Fan Poll. And, JHU dispatched the East Region just like the strong Salisbury and Wesley teams from the old ACFC days. That is why I want to see what Mount Union team shows up this year. We saw how UMHB handled the MIAC champ (SJU this time) and the WIAC champ. We have a very good idea of how the champions of the Power Conferences ( IMHO, ASC, CCIW, MIAC, NWC OAC & WIAC perform) and how to rank them for the next year's Kickoff Magazine.
Before this game, my impression is that the left bracket was very weak and I want to see how this UMU team compares the previous teams.
Thanks.
What result on Friday night would alter that impression?
A never-in-doubt UMHB win by 2 scores and domination of UMU that we have not seen before would tell me that the "West bracket" was much stronger.
A "knock down/drag out" like we have seen in 2004, 2012, 2016 and 2017 would cause me to reconsider JHU's playoff performance ahead of HSU. For me, I believe that HSU would edge JHU head-to-head on a neutral field.
UMU domination would speak for itself.
Let me ask, if Mt beats UMHB by 9 or more points, is it fair to assume you will agree JHU should be ranked above UMHB?
No, because JHU has another loss on their resume.
If UMHB beats Mount by a couple of touchdowns, maybe one could justify putting SJU ahead of Mount, if one really applied margin of victory.
Quote from: emma17 on December 12, 2018, 04:44:42 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 12, 2018, 02:32:15 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 12, 2018, 02:18:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 12, 2018, 01:48:11 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 12, 2018, 12:55:11 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 12, 2018, 11:54:57 AM
Quote from: repete on December 11, 2018, 10:41:29 PM
Thanks, RT. Almost always enjoy hearing the thoughts behind these things, especially from the vets. (I'll let you and Wally spar on NCC.)
Thank for the kind words. I also enjoy reading your comments as one of the veterans of the message boards.
I really think that we saw the Stagg Bowl in the QF matchup between UMHB and SJU.
I will juggle HSU and JHU depending on the Stagg. JHU got to enhance its resume with its bracketing against the East Region.
Now we get to see the real strengths of the left versus the right bracket.
I think Friday's game is Mount Union's strengths vs. Mary Hardin-Baylor's strengths and extrapolating anything at all about the different halves of the entire championship tournament is spurious at best.
Respectfully, I believe this game gives us an idea of the relative strengths of the programs that we saw in the playoffs. To use a term from natural sciences, we talk about "quantums" (yes, the 2nd declension neuter plural is quanta) on these boards all of the time.
In the post game interview, the coach who has just played The Machine (e.g., UMU) knows what his program must do to reach the next level. In recent podcasts, Pat and Keith talked about how Brockport was supposed to be approaching the next level and how JHU had played UMU in 2016 and should be approaching the next level for the 2018 game.
I believe we saw a lot out of JHU. I am very happy they were bracketed up the east coast for geographic proximity to help me figure out the strength of that part of the South Region, especially for my ballot in the South Region Fan Poll. And, JHU dispatched the East Region just like the strong Salisbury and Wesley teams from the old ACFC days. That is why I want to see what Mount Union team shows up this year. We saw how UMHB handled the MIAC champ (SJU this time) and the WIAC champ. We have a very good idea of how the champions of the Power Conferences ( IMHO, ASC, CCIW, MIAC, NWC OAC & WIAC perform) and how to rank them for the next year's Kickoff Magazine.
Before this game, my impression is that the left bracket was very weak and I want to see how this UMU team compares the previous teams.
Thanks.
What result on Friday night would alter that impression?
A never-in-doubt UMHB win by 2 scores and domination of UMU that we have not seen before would tell me that the "West bracket" was much stronger.
A "knock down/drag out" like we have seen in 2004, 2012, 2016 and 2017 would cause me to reconsider JHU's playoff performance ahead of HSU. For me, I believe that HSU would edge JHU head-to-head on a neutral field.
UMU domination would speak for itself.
Let me ask, if Mt beats UMHB by 9 or more points, is it fair to assume you will agree JHU should be ranked above UMHB?
Not necessarily, I think it all comes down to match-ups. Some teams match-up pretty well against others. However, if Mount wins by 21 points and their "Game Control" is never in doubt, then I think it is a fair assessment. Regarding 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place teams. I think familiarity plays a huge part. For example John Carroll played Mount very close this year, before losing to RM, we assumed they were Top 10. However, in HSU case, they don't have that other data to say measure if they are Top 10 or not, Top 20, sure.
I think that the question for Pat's Top 25 voters for #1 and for #2 is which game looked like the "Stagg Bowl".
UMHB seemed to be in control, but SJU had Erdmann and "Johnnie Magic" If we have that suspense in the Stagg Bowl, the UMHB and UMU are #1 & #2, IMHO.
If UMU smacks down/"monkey stomps" UMHB, then you might consider JHU.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 12, 2018, 05:38:31 PM
I think that the question for Pat's Top 25 voters for #1 and for #2 is which game looked like the "Stagg Bowl".
UMHB seemed to be in control, but SJU had Erdmann and "Johnnie Magic" If we have that suspense in the Stagg Bowl, the UMHB and UMU are #1 & #2, IMHO.
[/b]If UMU smacks down/"monkey stomps" UMHB, then you might consider JHU.
But ,frank said "the east is so tuff". Lol :P :-*
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 10, 2018, 01:05:30 PM
Awaiting the rest of bleedpurple's Alternative Reality Challenges...
Right now, my ballot has some variation of
1-3) MHB/MU/SJU, in alphabetical order for now
4) UWW Lost to UMHB by 17
5-6) HSU (lost to UMHB by 21 twice)/ JHU (two costly pick-sixes away from the Stagg. But, how good is this UMU team which has its fans lamenting how un-Mount-like this team is?)
7) Whitfield Whitworth
8) Bethel
9) North Central
10) ??? Everyone else was a monkey stomp away from the top 2 tiers
My top 9 after the Stagg Bowl.
1) UMHB
2) UMU -- another UMU-UMHB classic
3) SJU -- a close 3rd
4) UWW -- solid 4th but easily handled by UMHB.
5) JHU - hung with UMU
6) HSU-- without Pre-season All-American Jaquan Hemphill who was injured in the 4th game, the game before the regular season UMHB, just not as good.
7) Whitworth -- I still stand by them and their performance relative to a strong SJU team
8) Bethel
9) North Central
...
10) Muhlenberg -- yes, I can see Muhlenberg in the Top 10, but I did not want to seem like a South Region homer.
Final tally for the Official Top 25
South Region - #1, #5, #6, #9
West Region - #3, #4, #7, #10
North Region - #2, #8
East Region's best - # 11,12, 13
Just trying to get your thinking here. Since St John's had the closest game with UMHB this year, scored more points than any other team against the Cru, held them to their lowest point total of the year as well, would there have been any margin of victory for UMHB o?ver UMU that would have made you drop UMU from #2
Quote from: retagent on December 16, 2018, 04:59:43 PM
Just trying to get your thinking here. Since St John's had the closest game with UMHB this year, scored more points than any other team against the Cru, held them to their lowest point total of the year as well, would there have been any margin of victory for UMHB o?ver UMU that would have made you drop UMU from #2
Yes, a dominant two score win.
UMU just kept coming back, even after seeing the 10-point lead disappear.
Let's look at the Final Top 25 which is now posted.
SJU picked up 18 points in the balloting from Week #11 to the Final ballot, from 546 to 564.
UMU dropped from 619 to 597, 24 votes.
In week #11, I believe that UMU got 19 firsts, 5 seconds and 1 third place ballot to equal 619 points.
In week #11, I believe that UMHB got 6 firsts, 18 seconds and 1 third to equal 605 points.
Breakdowns beyond that are too numerous to count.
What we know of the Final Ballot, 2248 points of the possible 2250 were cast for UMU, SJU, UWW and JHU. Someone below the Final Top 5 got one 4th place vote or there were two 5th place votes given to a team(s) lower in the poll. That looks like a near-unanimous Top 5.
In the final balloting, I firmly believe that UMU got 22 seconds and 3 thirds to give 597 points.
I will speculate that SJU got 3 second place votes. That would give them 72 points of their 564. If they had received 22 third place votes, then they would have had 578 points in the final poll. On those other 22 ballots they got a smattering of 4th and 5th place votes, enough to drop them 14 points below what the maximum could have given them.
However, I am then at a loss to figure UWW's vote totals. UWW gets 553 votes for 4th place. If they received 3 third place votes and 22 4th place votes, then that would have given them 553 points. I have a hard time imagining UWW getting a second place vote.
JHU got 534 votes which is 9 more votes than a straight unanimous 5th place balloting, (25 times 21 points for 5th place = 525 points). JHU got some 3rd and 4th place ballots, at someone's expense.
I haven't tried to work out the math, but my hunch would be that Bethel got two fifths, probably at the expense of JHU - they surely wouldn't have been voted above either SJU or UWW, both of whom beat Bethel (which would also mean that JHU got more 3rd or 4th place votes than you had speculated).
eight No. 3 votes, twelve No. 4 votes and two No. 5 votes for UWW.
one No. 3 vote, nine No. 4 votes and 14 No. 5 votes for JHU.
Final poll will be up at some point. Surprisingly we haven't lost anyone as all 9 voters have submitted ballots, but a couple have a duplicate that needs correcting. Once those are taken care of we'll be good to go.
2018 FINAL TOP 25 FAN POLL Rank | Team | Points | Prev |
1) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (9)
| 225 | 2 |
2) | Mount Union | 214 | 1 |
3) | St John's | 209 | 4 |
4) | UW-Whitewater | 197 | 5 |
5) | Johns Hopkins | 187 | 13 |
6) | Bethel | 178 | 11 |
7) | Hardin-Simmons | 161 | T8 |
8) | Muhlenberg | 149 | 23 |
9) | Whitworth | 147 | 10 |
10) | North Central | 143 | T8 |
11) | RPI | 130 | NR |
12) | Brockport | 128 | 3 |
13) | Frostburg St | 125 | 6 |
14) | Centre | 98 | 24 |
15) | St Thomas | 81 | 17 |
16) | Berry | 66 | T19 |
17) | Illinois Wesleyan | 65 | 16 |
T18) | Delaware Valley | 62 | 14 |
T18) | John Carroll | 62 | 7 |
T18) | St Norbert | 62 | NR |
21) | Randolph-Macon | 60 | NR |
T22) | Linfield | 42 | 21 |
T22) | Wheaton | 42 | T19 |
24) | Trine | 24 | 12 |
25) | Wabash | 17 | 18
|
Dropped Out: #15 Washington & Jefferson, #22 Wittenberg, #25 Washington U
Also Receiving Votes: Washington U 15, Montclair St 9, Ithaca 6, Denison 5, Union 4, UW-La Crosse 3, Alfred 2, Salisbury 2, Washington & Jefferson 2, Wittenberg 2, Utica 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bluestreak66, desertcat1, FCGG, MANDGSU, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, Oline89, and smedindy
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 225 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2) Mount Union 214 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3)
3) St John's 209 ( 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4) UW-Whitewater 197 ( 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5)
5) Johns Hopkins 187 ( 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6)
6) Bethel 178 ( 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8)
7) Hardin-Simmons 161 ( 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 9, 12, 13)
8) Muhlenberg 149 ( 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 10, 11, 11, 11)
9) Whitworth 147 ( 6, 7, 8, 8, 9, 10, 10, 12, 17)
10) North Central 143 ( 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 10, 13, 13, 14)
11) RPI 130 ( 9, 10, 11, 11, 11, 12, 12, 13, 15)
12) Brockport 128 ( 7, 10, 10, 12, 12, 12, 13, 14, 16)
13) Frostburg St 125 ( 9, 10, 11, 11, 13, 13, 14, 14, 14)
14) Centre 98 ( 8, 12, 13, 14, 14, 15, 17, 21, 22)
15) St Thomas 81 (14, 14, 15, 15, 16, 17, 18, 18, --)
16) Berry 66 (15, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23)
17) Illinois Wesleyan 65 (10, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 20, --, --)
T18) Delaware Valley 62 ( 9, 16, 17, 17, 20, 20, 21, --, --)
T18) John Carroll 62 (12, 16, 17, 19, 19, 20, 22, 23, 24)
T18) St Norbert 62 (15, 15, 18, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24)
21) Randolph-Macon 60 (16, 18, 18, 19, 19, 19, 21, 21, 23)
T22) Linfield 42 (11, 13, 18, 21, 25, --, --, --, --)
T22) Wheaton 42 (16, 16, 20, 20, 22, 22, 24, --, --)
24) Trine 24 (19, 21, 22, 23, 23, 24, --, --, --)
25) Wabash 17 (17, 22, 25, 25, 25, 25, --, --, --)
26) Washington U 15 (18, 23, 24, 24)
27) Montclair St 9 (18, 25)
28) Ithaca 6 (23, 23)
29) Denison 5 (21)
30) Union 4 (22)
31) UW-La Crosse 3 (23)
T32) Alfred 2 (24)
T32) Salisbury 2 (24)
T32) Washington & Jefferson 2 (25, 25)
T32) Wittenberg 2 (24)
36) Utica 1 (25)
If you're interested in being part of the Fan Poll this year just send me a PM. Ballots are due on Monday nights (I'll be bowling Monday nights but I'll try to get it up late or at the worst during the day Tuesday) during the season. If you need extra time or know you won't be able to get a ballot in that particular week please let me know as soon as you can. The earlier you submit a ballot the more time I'll have to check it and make sure you didn't make any errors or forget a team (and there's usually one every couple weeks that needs revised). Also, please make sure it's clear what team you're selecting... don't use too generic of an abbreviation or something random because I may not know who you're referring to.
If you're in the south or east regions I strongly hope you'll join. There's usually a low turnout from those areas.
I'd like to have the preseason poll up by Sunday September 1st.
We've got 5 ballots in and 2 more I know are coming. A couple people I haven't heard from yet but I'll message. Still time for anyone who wants to join in this season.
For all of you who might think you could do a much better job than the d3football poll voters, there's still time to prove it and join in. I'd like to get the preseason poll up by Sunday night or Monday. I've got 8 ballots so far but as of now that's everybody.
Looks like we're at 8 voters for this season.
2019 PRESEASON TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank | Team | Points | Prev |
1) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (8) | 200 | 1 |
2) | Mount Union | 192 | 2 |
3) | St John's | 183 | 3 |
4) | UW-Whitewater | 174 | 4 |
5) | North Central | 157 | 10 |
6) | Hardin-Simmons | 139 | 7 |
7) | Johns Hopkins | 137 | 5 |
8) | St Thomas | 135 | 15 |
T9) | Muhlenberg | 123 | 8 |
T9) | Whitworth | 123 | 9 |
11) | Linfield | 114 | T22 |
12) | Bethel | 105 | 6 |
T13) | Brockport | 95 | 12 |
T13) | Delaware Valley | 95 | T18 |
15) | Illinois Wesleyan | 79 | 17 |
16) | John Carroll | 72 | T18 |
17) | RPI | 66 | 11 |
18) | Berry | 64 | 16 |
19) | Wheaton | 56 | T22 |
20) | Wittenberg | 39 | NR |
21) | Centre | 34 | 14 |
22) | UW-Oshkosh | 33 | NR |
23) | Wabash | 30 | 25 |
24) | Washington & Jefferson | 28 | NR |
25) | UW-La Crosse | 22 | NR |
Dropped Out: #13 Frostburg St, #T18 St Norbert, #21 Randolph-Macon, #24 Trine
Also Receiving Votes: Randolph-Macon 20, Wesley 16, Montclair St 15, Union 13, Hobart 10, Ithaca 8, Salisbury 6, Baldwin Wallace 5, Wartburg 5, Alfred 2, St Norbert 2, Washington U 2, Trinity (TX) 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bluestreak66, desertcat1, FCGG, MANDGSU, NCF, Oline89, and smedindy
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 200 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2) Mount Union 192 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3) St John's 183 ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4) UW-Whitewater 174 ( 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5)
5) North Central 157 ( 5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 9)
6) Hardin-Simmons 139 ( 6, 6, 8, 8, 8, 8, 12, 13)
7) Johns Hopkins 137 ( 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 9, --)
8) St Thomas 135 ( 3, 4, 5, 5, 8, 10, 12, --)
T9) Muhlenberg 123 ( 7, 9, 9, 10, 11, 11, 11, 17)
T9) Whitworth 123 ( 8, 9, 10, 10, 11, 11, 11, 15)
11) Linfield 114 ( 9, 10, 10, 12, 12, 13, 14, 14)
12) Bethel 105 ( 6, 7, 9, 9, 10, 19, 20, 23)
T13) Brockport 95 ( 7, 7, 12, 13, 14, 15, 19, --)
T13) Delaware Valley 95 ( 8, 8, 14, 14, 16, 16, 18, 19)
15) Illinois Wesleyan 79 (12, 13, 15, 15, 16, 16, 20, 22)
16) John Carroll 72 (13, 14, 15, 15, 17, 18, 18, --)
17) RPI 66 (10, 14, 15, 16, 19, 22, 23, 23)
18) Berry 64 (16, 17, 17, 17, 17, 19, 20, 21)
19) Wheaton 56 (11, 12, 13, 20, 22, 22, --, --)
20) Wittenberg 39 (18, 18, 18, 18, 19, --, --, --)
21) Centre 34 (18, 20, 20, 21, 21, 24, 24, --)
22) UW-Oshkosh 33 (14, 17, 21, 22, 23, --, --, --)
23) Wabash 30 (16, 19, 22, 23, 23, 23, --, --)
24) Wash & Jeff 28 (17, 19, 21, 21, 24, --, --, --)
25) UW-La Crosse 22 (13, 20, 24, 25, --, --, --, --)
26) Randolph-Macon 20 (15, 22, 23, 24)
27) Wesley 16 (11, 25)
28) Montclair St 15 (12, 25)
29) Union 13 (13)
30) Hobart 10 (16)
31) Ithaca 8 (22, 24, 24)
32) Salisbury 6 (20)
T33) Baldwin Wallace 5 (21)
T33) Wartburg 5 (21)
T35) Alfred 2 (24)
T35) St Norbert 2 (25, 25)
T35) WashU 2 (25, 25)
38) Trinity (TX) 1 (25)
St. Thomas...as high as #3 or not ranked at all :o
Justified? Or did someone forget them (and Johns Hopkins)?
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 03, 2019, 03:11:39 PM
St. Thomas...as high as #3 or not ranked at all :o
Justified? Or did someone forget them (and Johns Hopkins)?
Inquiries were made for both St Thomas and Johns Hopkins omissions. St Thomas was intended, Johns Hopkins I didn't hear back about.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 03, 2019, 04:16:04 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 03, 2019, 03:11:39 PM
St. Thomas...as high as #3 or not ranked at all :o
Justified? Or did someone forget them (and Johns Hopkins)?
Inquiries were made for both St Thomas and Johns Hopkins omissions. St Thomas was intended, Johns Hopkins I didn't hear back about.
I'd argue that they were the 3rd best team in their conference last year.
Quote from: MANDGSU on September 03, 2019, 04:38:12 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 03, 2019, 04:16:04 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 03, 2019, 03:11:39 PM
St. Thomas...as high as #3 or not ranked at all :o
Justified? Or did someone forget them (and Johns Hopkins)?
Inquiries were made for both St Thomas and Johns Hopkins omissions. St Thomas was intended, Johns Hopkins I didn't hear back about.
I'd argue that they were the 3rd best team in their conference last year.
Considering we're talking about the MIAC here, I would take the 3rd best team in that conference over at least 50% of the other D3 conference champions.
Quote from: MANDGSU on September 03, 2019, 04:38:12 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 03, 2019, 04:16:04 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 03, 2019, 03:11:39 PM
St. Thomas...as high as #3 or not ranked at all :o
Justified? Or did someone forget them (and Johns Hopkins)?
Inquiries were made for both St Thomas and Johns Hopkins omissions. St Thomas was intended, Johns Hopkins I didn't hear back about.
I'd argue that they were the 3rd best team in their conference last year.
I wouldn't dispute that, while also ranking them somewhere in the top 10 for D3.
2019 WEEK 1 TOP 25 FAN POLL
Rank | Team |
Points |
Prev |
1) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (8) |
200 | 1 |
2) | Mount Union |
192 | 2 |
3) | UW-Whitewater |
179 | 4 |
4) | St John's |
170 | 3 |
5) | North Central |
164 | 5 |
6) | St Thomas |
151 | 8 |
7) | Johns Hopkins |
150 | 7 |
8) | Hardin-Simmons |
139 | 6 |
9) | Whitworth |
131 | T9 |
10) | Muhlenberg |
125 | T9 |
11) | Bethel |
114 | 12 |
12) | Delaware Valley |
107 | T13 |
13) | Linfield |
101 | 11 |
14) | Illinois Wesleyan |
78 | 15 |
15) | Wheaton |
76 | 19 |
16) | Washington & Jefferson |
75 | 24 |
17) | RPI |
70 | 17 |
T18) | Berry |
66 | 18 |
T18) | John Carroll |
66 | 16 |
20) | Centre |
41 | 21 |
21) | UW-La Crosse |
36 | 25 |
22) | Wesley |
35 | NR |
23) | Wabash |
33 | 23 |
24) | Ithaca |
25 | NR |
25) | Hobart |
22 | NR |
Dropped Out: #T13 Brockport, #20 Wittenberg, #22 UW-Oshkosh
Also Receiving Votes: Randolph-Macon 16, UW-Oshkosh 11, Wittenberg 11, Wartburg 7, Washington U 5, Baldwin Wallace 2, Denison 1, Salisbury 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bluestreak66, desertcat1, FCGG, MANDGSU, NCF, Oline89, and smedindy
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 200 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2) Mount Union 192 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3) UW-Whitewater 179 ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5, 5)
4) St John's 170 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 7)
5) North Central 164 ( 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 7, 8, 8)
6) St Thomas 151 ( 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 10, 12, 14)
7) Johns Hopkins 150 ( 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8, 8, 9)
8) Hardin-Simmons 139 ( 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12, 15)
9) Whitworth 131 ( 8, 9, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 12)
10) Muhlenberg 125 ( 7, 7, 9, 10, 11, 11, 13, 15)
11) Bethel 114 ( 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 17, 19)
12) Delaware Valley 107 ( 7, 8, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17)
13) Linfield 101 ( 9, 11, 11, 11, 12, 14, 14, 25)
14) Illinois Wesleyan 78 (12, 14, 14, 14, 16, 18, 19, 23)
15) Wheaton 76 (10, 13, 13, 16, 18, 19, 20, 23)
16) Wash & Jeff 75 (10, 11, 12, 15, 16, 18, 25, --)
17) RPI 70 (10, 13, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22)
T18) Berry 66 (15, 16, 17, 17, 17, 18, 20, 22)
T18) John Carroll 66 (12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, --, --)
20) Centre 41 (17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, --)
21) UW-La Crosse 36 (15, 19, 20, 22, 22, 22, --, --)
22) Wesley 35 (18, 19, 21, 21, 22, 23, 23, --)
23) Wabash 33 (15, 19, 20, 21, 22, --, --, --)
24) Ithaca 25 (13, 21, 23, 24, 24, --, --, --)
25) Hobart 22 (16, 21, 23, 24, 24, --, --, --)
26) Randolph-Macon 16 (15, 21)
T27) UW-Oshkosh 11 (18, 24, 25)
T27) Wittenberg 11 (20, 23, 25, 25)
29) Wartburg 7 (20, 25)
30) Washington U 5 (23, 24)
31) Baldwin Wallace 2 (24)
T32) Denison 1 (25)
T32) Salisbury 1 (25)
Looks like two pollsters* were impressed with the Johns Hopkins and St. Thomas win on Saturday.
One moved JH from unranked to top 10
Another had UST unranked now top 15
:o ;)
*Unless one of the two didn't participate this week, because it looks like we're down someone from last time.
The Bethel votes are interesting to me.
Preseason especially, but still week 1 as well. You could make a good case for them above Whitworth, Muhlenberg, Hardin-Simmons, and even North Central (who they beat at NCC in the playoffs last year). But I can also see why a case could be made for several above Bethel. But people voting them in the low teens or even 20's preseason is just strange to me. Especially with all the talent they had returning.
Same with UST. Someone not ranking UST is just out to lunch. Yes, they were 3rd in the MIAC, and if they'd gotten in as a Pool C (not saying they should have with 2 losses) could easily have played in the quarterfinals. And now they're ranked 14, because they blew out a really terrible team? That's still too low IMO, but also seems like a weird jump considering they didn't beat a good team. If they weren't good enough to be ranked last week, why are they suddenly jumping at least 11 spots on a ballot?
All that to say, fun to watch the polls develop. I've voted in years past, but know I won't have the time to get a ballot in consistently. I realize how much work it is!
Quote from: hazzben on September 10, 2019, 05:48:52 PM
The Bethel votes are interesting to me.
Preseason especially, but still week 1 as well. You could make a good case for them above Whitworth, Muhlenberg, Hardin-Simmons, and even North Central (who they beat at NCC in the playoffs last year). But I can also see why a case could be made for several above Bethel. But people voting them in the low teens or even 20's preseason is just strange to me. Especially with all the talent they had returning.
I agree with you on Bethel, I have at #7 (and UST at #10).
I think I'm the only one high on R-M, having them at #15. I also had them at #15 to start the year considering they finished 2018 strong with a playoff win and they bring back a lot (9 on D and a very good RB). After losing Saturday to #7 Johns Hopkins - by just 5 points - told me I had them right where they should be, IMO. I didn't want to drop a team ranked in the middle of my top 25 for losing to a top 10 team by just 5 points. Reason being, that was the expected outcome between two teams ranked where they were. Now if they were blown out, then yes...I would have dropped them drastically.
Also, I'm the only one that didn't rank Wesley. I'm holding out to see if they can prove themselves against a challenging opponent. Yes they destroyed a D2 school. But that was Franklin Pierce's first full year in D2 after being a member of the Collegiate Sprint Football League ??? I'm guessing many unranked D3 teams would have similar outcomes if they would have played FP.
I have Bethel 6th in the West, so it's comparable for me to rank them 17th. I think it's an "FU Pay Me" year for St. Thomas.
BUT....after UMHB and Mt. Union, there's not much difference in many teams except the order I put them in, as it were. I'm pretty low-ish on IWU and Wheaton in the North, too, but only because I think John Carroll and Wabash are just a skosh better.
It's your ballot Smeds. But UST lost to Bethel last year, and then had their entire D graduate and their QB. Linfield and Whitworth did what last year to justify the love this year?
Quote from: hazzben on September 14, 2019, 10:54:13 PM
Linfield and Whitworth did what last year to justify the love this year?
It's just a little "ISLAND" love. :-*
Quote from: hazzben on September 14, 2019, 10:54:13 PM
It's your ballot Smeds. But UST lost to Bethel last year, and then had their entire D graduate and their QB. Linfield and Whitworth did what last year to justify the love this year?
It's a FU season, man. And a hunch.
And last year isn't this year, ya know. Linfield going to Rowan and pounding the profs rather justified it.
I don't let anyone influence my voting unless they deliver a cache of unmarked bills in a satchel to the bridge in the Umtanum Creek Recreation Area.
Ballot will be up tonight. Still waiting on one ballot but they've been given their final warning for the week.
We're going with only 7 voters this week.
Want to check out the locations of these and every other D3 team? D3 Football Map (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=8975.msg1940087#msg1940087)
2019 WEEK 2 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | Points | Prev |
1) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (7) | 175 | 1 |
2) | Mount Union | 168 | 2 |
3) | UW-Whitewater | 154 | 3 |
4) | St John's | 150 | 4 |
5) | North Central | 146 | 5 |
6) | St Thomas | 141 | 6 |
7) | Hardin-Simmons | 124 | 8 |
8) | Muhlenberg | 121 | 10 |
9) | Whitworth | 120 | 9 |
10) | Bethel | 111 | 11 |
11) | Linfield | 103 | 13 |
12) | Wesley | 90 | 22 |
13) | Washington & Jefferson | 84 | 16 |
14) | John Carroll | 73 | T18 |
15) | Wheaton | 68 | 15 |
16) | Berry | 66 | T18 |
T17) | Delaware Valley | 59 | 12 |
T17) | UW-La Crosse | 59 | 21 |
19) | Centre | 45 | 20 |
20) | Johns Hopkins | 37 | 7 |
21) | Illinois Wesleyan | 30 | 14 |
22) | Hobart | 28 | 25 |
23) | Susquehanna | 27 | NR |
T24) | Ithaca | 21 | 24 |
T24) | Salisbury | 21 | NR |
Dropped Out: #17 RPI, #23 Wabash
Also Receiving Votes: Wittenberg 11, Alfred 8, Trinity (TX) 8, Wartburg 6, Redlands 5, Baldwin Wallace 4, Randolph-Macon 4, Washington U 4, Denison 2, Cortland 1, WPI 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bluestreak66, desertcat1, FCGG, MANDGSU, NCF, Oline89, and smedindy
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 175 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2) Mount Union 168 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3) UW-Whitewater 154 ( 3, 3, 3, 4, 5, 5, 5)
4) St John's 150 ( 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 6, 7)
5) North Central 146 ( 3, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7)
6) St Thomas 141 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 10, 11)
7) Hardin-Simmons 124 ( 6, 6, 7, 8, 8, 11, 12)
8) Muhlenberg 121 ( 7, 7, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13)
9) Whitworth 120 ( 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 11)
10) Bethel 111 ( 6, 6, 7, 8, 10, 13, 21)
11) Linfield 103 ( 9, 10, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14)
12) Wesley 90 ( 9, 10, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17)
13) Wash & Jeff 84 (10, 11, 12, 12, 13, 16, 24)
14) John Carroll 73 (11, 13, 14, 14, 15, 16, --)
15) Wheaton 68 ( 9, 12, 15, 17, 18, 20, 23)
16) Berry 66 (13, 14, 15, 15, 16, 17, --)
T17) Delaware Valley 59 (11, 17, 18, 18, 19, 19, 21)
T17) UW-La Crosse 59 (12, 14, 16, 17, 18, 22, 24)
19) Centre 45 (15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 23, --)
20) Johns Hopkins 37 (16, 17, 19, 19, 22, --, --)
21) Illinois Wesleyan 30 (14, 20, 20, 23, 23, --, --)
22) Hobart 28 (14, 19, 21, 23, 25, --, --)
23) Susquehanna 27 (15, 17, 21, 25, 25, --, --)
T24) Ithaca 21 (18, 19, 24, 24, 24, --, --)
T24) Salisbury 21 (20, 20, 22, 23, 24, --, --)
26) Wittenberg 11 (21, 22, 25, 25)
T27) Alfred 8 (21, 23)
T27) Trinity (TX) 8 (18)
29) Wartburg 6 (20)
30) Redlands 5 (21)
T31) Baldwin Wallace 4 (22)
T31) Randolph-Macon 4 (22)
T31) Washington U 4 (22)
34) Denison 2 (24)
T35) Cortland 1 (25)
T35) WPI 1 (25)
This is not going to be fun trying to sort out the middle of my ballot. Teams losing to higher ranked teams, a loss to a non-D3, teams winning tight games, upsets out west. My ballot from 8-18 had a rough week.
I basically <ctrl> <alt> on mine. Ye Gods!
D3 Football Map (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=8975.msg1940087#msg1940087)
2019 WEEK 3 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | Points | Prev |
1) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (5) | 196 | 1 |
2) | Mount Union (3) | 195 | 2 |
3) | UW-Whitewater | 175 | 3 |
4) | North Central | 172 | 5 |
5) | St John's | 168 | 4 |
6) | St Thomas | 165 | 6 |
7) | Hardin-Simmons | 152 | 7 |
8) | Muhlenberg | 142 | 8 |
9) | Bethel | 134 | 10 |
10) | Wheaton | 124 | 15 |
11) | Wesley | 112 | 12 |
12) | Berry | 103 | 16 |
13) | John Carroll | 93 | 14 |
14) | UW-La Crosse | 67 | T17 |
15) | Susquehanna | 66 | 23 |
16) | Ithaca | 64 | T24 |
T17) | Redlands | 61 | NR |
T17) | Salisbury | 61 | T24 |
19) | Delaware Valley | 59 | T17 |
20) | Johns Hopkins | 57 | 20 |
21) | Hobart | 43 | 22 |
22) | Wartburg | 35 | NR |
23) | Chapman | 34 | NR |
24) | Whitworth | 31 | 9 |
25) | Linfield | 29 | 11 |
Dropped Out: #13 Washington & Jefferson, #19 Centre, #21 Illinois Wesleyan
Also Receiving Votes: Illinois Wesleyan 15, Carnegie Mellon 10, Trine 8, Cortland 7, WPI 7, Southern Virginia 5,
Denison 4, UW-Oshkosh 3, Washington & Jefferson 2, Randolph-Macon 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bluestreak66, desertcat1, FCGG, MANDGSU, NCF, Oline89, and smedindy
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 196 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3)
2) Mount Union 195 ( 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3) UW-Whitewater 175 ( 3, 3, 3, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5)
4) North Central 172 ( 2, 3, 3, 5, 5, 5, 6, 7)
5) St John's 168 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7)
6) St Thomas 165 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 7, 8, 9)
7) Hardin-Simmons 152 ( 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 8, 8, 10)
8) Muhlenberg 142 ( 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9)
9) Bethel 134 ( 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 11, 18)
10) Wheaton 124 ( 8, 9, 10, 10, 10, 12, 12, 13)
11) Wesley 112 ( 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 13, 14, 14)
12) Berry 103 (10, 10, 11, 11, 11, 12, 14, --)
13) John Carroll 93 (11, 11, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 25)
14) UW-La Crosse 67 (12, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 21, --)
15) Susquehanna 66 (13, 15, 15, 16, 17, 17, 23, --)
16) Ithaca 64 (10, 13, 14, 15, 18, 22, --, --)
T17) Redlands 61 (15, 17, 17, 18, 20, 20, 20, 20)
T17) Salisbury 61 (12, 13, 16, 18, 19, 21, 24, 24)
19) Delaware Valley 59 (14, 14, 15, 16, 16, 22, --, --)
20) Johns Hopkins 57 (15, 16, 17, 17, 19, 19, 22, --)
21) Hobart 43 (12, 16, 18, 21, 23, 23, --, --)
22) Wartburg 35 (13, 17, 19, 22, 24, --, --, --)
23) Chapman 34 (18, 18, 20, 20, 21, 25, --, --)
24) Whitworth 31 (19, 19, 21, 22, 23, 23, 24, --)
25) Linfield 29 (20, 20, 21, 21, 22, 23, --, --)
26) Illinois Wesleyan 15 (13, 25, 25)
27) Carnegie Mellon 10 (17, 25)
28) Trine 8 (22, 24, 25, 25)
T29) Cortland 7 (22, 23)
T29) WPI 7 (19)
31) Southern Virginia 5 (21)
32) Denison 4 (24, 24)
33) UW-Oshkosh 3 (23)
34) Wash & Jeff 2 (24)
35) Randolph-Macon 1 (25)
Despite my Green blood, whichever voter ranked IWU 13th should probably be drug-tested! :o
It's true that #14 UW-LAX needed double OT to beat 'em, and the weather definitely conspired against IWU's offensive strength in the loss to #10 Wheaton, 0-2 is still 0-2! :( If they make it to 6-2 before meeting NCC (and I think they will), THEN these extenuating factors can justify a lofty ranking - but not yet.
Well, every 0-2 isn't always equitable. Luck of the draw to have two coin-flip tough games back to back. Not like they're Finlandia
Quote from: smedindy on September 25, 2019, 12:03:07 AM
Well, every 0-2 isn't always equitable. Luck of the draw to have two coin-flip tough games back to back. Not like they're Finlandia
True, but that's why it's a 10 game season. As of now 0-2 is 0-2 and can't qualify you as a top 25 team, no matter how good you "will be".
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 24, 2019, 06:57:55 PM
Despite my Green blood, whichever voter ranked IWU 13th should probably be drug-tested! :o
Not only that, whoever put them at 13 actually moved them
up in the poll, considering their highest rating last week was 14th. Now if it was a good loss, like losing on a last second field goal in Wheaton, then yes....that can be justified. But moving them up
after losing by 14 points is tough to consider.
Quote from: smedindy on September 25, 2019, 12:03:07 AM
Well, every 0-2 isn't always equitable. Luck of the draw to have two coin-flip tough games back to back. Not like they're Finlandia
Not sure it was your intention but I don't think the Wheaton game would be fairly characterized by a "coin flip".
Point is IWU is a top 25 team and that is likely accurate. I think its likely they end up 8-2/7-3
Quote from: USee on September 25, 2019, 10:19:22 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 25, 2019, 12:03:07 AM
Well, every 0-2 isn't always equitable. Luck of the draw to have two coin-flip tough games back to back. Not like they're Finlandia
Not sure it was your intention but I don't think the Wheaton game would be fairly characterized by a "coin flip".
Point is IWU is a top 25 team and that is likely accurate. I think its likely they end up 8-2/7-3
IWU may end up a top 25 team (especially if they end up 8-2), but at 0-2 , on 9/25, I just don't see how that could be justified.
Quote from: Oline89 on September 25, 2019, 10:55:49 AM
Quote from: USee on September 25, 2019, 10:19:22 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 25, 2019, 12:03:07 AM
Well, every 0-2 isn't always equitable. Luck of the draw to have two coin-flip tough games back to back. Not like they're Finlandia
Not sure it was your intention but I don't think the Wheaton game would be fairly characterized by a "coin flip".
Point is IWU is a top 25 team and that is likely accurate. I think its likely they end up 8-2/7-3
IWU may end up a top 25 team (especially if they end up 8-2), but at 0-2 , on 9/25, I just don't see how that could be justified.
My gut/guess is the IWU is indeed a top 25 team at seasons end. But at this point they haven't won a single game. Top 25 is a stretch, but definitely top 15. At some point they need to prove it on the field (and I think they will), but until then this looks like name recognition and past performance. Neither should outweigh what's actually happened on the field in 2019.
That said, the middle of the Top 25 was utter chaos this week.
I guess that if a hypothetical team loses to UMHB by 10 and Mt. Union by 8 then they wouldn't be a Top 25 team if 0-2???
Really??
Mind you I had IWU at #25.
Age-old question: Are we supposed to rank teams on how good they are, or on what their results have been on the field to date?
If you're just voting on what they've done on the field to date, might as well just sort the teams by winning percentage. Not putting a lot of critical analysis into your ranking, then.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 25, 2019, 01:27:23 PM
Age-old question: Are we supposed to rank teams on how good they are, or on what their results have been on the field to date?
Shouldn't that be "How good
we think they are, despite what their results on the field might indicate"? Isn't that the whole thing people struggle with? Trying to decide if a loss or two is a canary in a coal mine, or just the result of a strong early schedule and a few bad breaks?
Take St. John Fisher in 2017. They were 8-3 the year before, and had not won fewer than 7 games since 2002. They were ranked 22 in the preseason, and kicked off the year by losing a close game to Washington & Jefferson on the road. (They had a 27-23 lead and a 1st and 10 at the W&J 34 early in the 4th quarter.) They wound up losing by 10, but all in all, no one would be ringing alarm bells over a loss like that—after all, W&J is always strong. Fisher got dropped from the rankings, but still got votes in the poll, perhaps justifiably.
Fisher, as we all know, finished dead last in the E8 that year, got blown out a ton, and frankly, could have gone winless without much changing. We probably would have said someone dismissing Fisher after that first loss was overreacting—even though they would be proven right in the end.
The reverse is kind of happening this year, right? They weren't good these last two years, and even though they're 3-0, they're not being taken seriously because the schedule has been lousy. But maybe, the schedule is lousy
and Fisher's good, and they're about to party like it's 2006-2012 and smoke the Bombers.
It's more nuanced than that Pat. No one is advocating straight win percentages. But this early in the season we don't actually know a lot about who any teams are yet. How good is LaCrosse? How good is Wheaton? In the MIAC I'm asking the same questions about Bethel, GAC, and UST. A week ago people were high on Linfield and Whitworth.
It gets clearer each week. But to smeds point, IWU didn't lose to Mount and UMHB by 10 and 8 respectively.
Part of it is just timing. If IWU was 5-2 and coming off a loss to Wheaton but had some other games that showed how good they are, that's another thing. At this point we have preseason assumptions about how good IWU was supposed to be, same with Wheaton, and LaCrosse being a WIAC school. To have them at 13, after having them at 14 the prior week, is drinking some CCIW Kool Aid. Not exactly what I'd call a lot of critical analysis.
I can shed some light on the IWU at 13 vote... because I wasn't sure if they knew that they did it. Here was their reply:
QuoteOh **** me....I messed up.
I will say I was the other voter who had them at 25.
I had the same thoughts about Berry's jump to 10 after beating a 1-1 team 14-10. Wesley's close win was lackluster but they beat a (still) Ranked Del Val team the week prior and yet ended up 14th.... You just can't put too much into the poles sometimes....
-Ski
Salisbury moved up the polls by playing this team called "Bye-week", they actually play them again this week. They also show up on everyone's schedule as well from time to time. Nevertheless, you can only use what data points you have. I notice in various rankings you have teams that are still rank in front of teams they actually loss to, while the other team is in fact undefeated. I think we are all having a "SEC" voting dilemna. Do you reward teams just because of their affiliation knowing that 9 times out of 10 the top teams in the conferences could win against 90% of DIII? That will still leave 10% of DIII or 25 teams that they aren't better than.
Note: Disregard those percentages as they were created from a place where the Sun doesn't shine.
Quote from: Bombers798891 on September 25, 2019, 02:23:22 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 25, 2019, 01:27:23 PM
Age-old question: Are we supposed to rank teams on how good they are, or on what their results have been on the field to date?
Shouldn't that be "How good we think they are, despite what their results on the field might indicate"?
This would be my take on that.
Ha! On IWU vote. Been there. And I get IWU at 25. I think they will prove that out by year’s end. I just couldn’t wrap my mind around 13, up from 14 after a loss. Makes sense now. Carry on friends!! Appreciate your work on the poll. Wish I had the time to participate myself.
D3 Football Map (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=8975.msg1940087#msg1940087)
2019 WEEK 4 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | Points | Prev |
1) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (5) | 196 | 1 |
2) | Mount Union (3) | 195 | 2 |
3) | UW-Whitewater | 179 | 3 |
4) | St John's | 175 | 5 |
5) | North Central | 172 | 4 |
6) | Hardin-Simmons | 158 | 7 |
7) | Muhlenberg | 147 | 8 |
T8) | Bethel | 138 | 9 |
T8) | Wheaton | 138 | 10 |
10) | Wesley | 125 | 11 |
11) | Berry | 123 | 12 |
12) | UW-La Crosse | 90 | 14 |
13) | Delaware Valley | 88 | 19 |
14) | Ithaca | 79 | 16 |
15) | Redlands | 71 | T17 |
16) | Salisbury | 67 | T17 |
T17) | St Thomas | 64 | 6 |
T17) | Susquehanna | 64 | 15 |
19) | Hobart | 60 | 21 |
20) | John Carroll | 51 | 13 |
21) | Wartburg | 50 | 22 |
22) | Johns Hopkins | 42 | 20 |
23) | Chapman | 30 | 23 |
24) | Whitworth | 28 | 24 |
25) | Linfield | 22 | 25 |
Dropped Out: None
Also Receiving Votes: Carnegie Mellon 9, WPI 7, Bridgewater 6, Trine 6, Illinois Wesleyan 5, Cortland 4, Baldwin Wallace 3, Washington & Jefferson 3, Wittenberg 3, Case Western Reserve 1, Randolph-Macon 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bluestreak66, desertcat1, FCGG, MANDGSU, NCF, Oline89, and smedindy
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 196 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3)
2) Mount Union 195 ( 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3) UW-Whitewater 179 ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5)
4) St John's 175 ( 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6)
5) North Central 172 ( 2, 3, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 7)
6) Hardin-Simmons 158 ( 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7)
7) Muhlenberg 147 ( 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9)
T8) Bethel 138 ( 5, 6, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 18)
T8) Wheaton 138 ( 6, 7, 8, 8, 9, 10, 11, 11)
10) Wesley 125 ( 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 11, 12, 12)
11) Berry 123 ( 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 11, 12, 14)
12) UW-La Crosse 90 (11, 13, 14, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18)
13) Delaware Valley 88 (12, 12, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, --)
14) Ithaca 79 (10, 12, 13, 13, 17, 17, 23, 24)
15) Redlands 71 (13, 14, 17, 17, 17, 19, 20, 20)
16) Salisbury 67 (13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 21, 22, 22)
T17) St Thomas 64 (13, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22)
T17) Susquehanna 64 (11, 14, 15, 16, 18, 21, 23, --)
19) Hobart 60 (11, 14, 17, 19, 21, 21, 22, 23)
20) John Carroll 51 (11, 16, 18, 20, 20, 22, 24, --)
21) Wartburg 50 (12, 15, 15, 20, 22, 22, --, --)
22) Johns Hopkins 42 (13, 16, 19, 19, 21, --, --, --)
23) Chapman 30 (15, 19, 20, 21, 25, --, --, --)
24) Whitworth 28 (16, 19, 22, 23, 24, 24, --, --)
25) Linfield 22 (18, 18, 23, 24, 25, --, --, --)
26) Carnegie Mellon 9 (17)
27) WPI 7 (19)
T28) Bridgewater 6 (20)
T28) Trine 6 (24, 24, 25, 25)
30) Illinois Wesleyan 5 (21)
31) Cortland 4 (24, 25, 25)
T32) Baldwin Wallace 3 (23)
T32) Wash & Jeff 3 (23)
T32) Wittenberg 3 (23)
T35) Case Western Reserve 1 (25)
T35) Randolph-Macon 1 (25)
I like what you've done with this fan pole. I agree on many points made in previous points. I'm fairly skeptical on a few teams out there, and not sure where I would put them in the pole. There have been some close wins by teams that I thought shouldn't have been close, and some other teams blowing out lesser competition as usual. I definitely think that some teams get ranked a bit higher because of the conference that they're in and they would be expected to beat the vast majority of D3 because of that. Right now, I think Linfield and Whitworth are benefiting from their past, and their conference.
I'm always skeptical about Hardin Simmons. It's not their fault, but they lose every year to UMHB, and sometimes twice (except 2015). And those losses are their only losses. They did play a couple of play-off games against Linfield in the past on the road and at home, and lost both. I guess what I'm trying to say is, who have they beat to justify their ranking. Is it just because they kind of hang in there with UMHB, and the expectation is that they would also hang in there with or beat any other top 10 team? This is one where I just don't know what to do with. They're obviously a good team, but the question is how good, are they top 10? We might never know.
Lastly, John Carroll is definitely benefiting from being in the OAC and playing Mount every year. This year I think they should be on the brink of falling out of the top 25. The defense is for real, but their offense is shaky at best. I suspect if they happen to finish 9-1 (I don't think they will) and they get the nod for the playoffs, they will lose the first round game again.
Also, I dreamt last night that Mount had to play UMHB at Belton in the semis. Not sure what they means. The dream didn't last long enough to show who won the game either...
Quote from: Captainred81 on October 03, 2019, 11:39:03 AM
I like what you've done with this fan pole. I agree on many points made in previous points. I'm fairly skeptical on a few teams out there, and not sure where I would put them in the pole. There have been some close wins by teams that I thought shouldn't have been close, and some other teams blowing out lesser competition as usual. I definitely think that some teams get ranked a bit higher because of the conference that they're in and they would be expected to beat the vast majority of D3 because of that. Right now, I think Linfield and Whitworth are benefiting from their past, and their conference.
I'm always skeptical about Hardin Simmons. It's not their fault, but they lose every year to UMHB, and sometimes twice (except 2015). And those losses are their only losses. They did play a couple of play-off games against Linfield in the past on the road and at home, and lost both. I guess what I'm trying to say is, who have they beat to justify their ranking. Is it just because they kind of hang in there with UMHB, and the expectation is that they would also hang in there with or beat any other top 10 team? This is one where I just don't know what to do with. They're obviously a good team, but the question is how good, are they top 10? We might never know.
Lastly, John Carroll is definitely benefiting from being in the OAC and playing Mount every year. This year I think they should be on the brink of falling out of the top 25. The defense is for real, but their offense is shaky at best. I suspect if they happen to finish 9-1 (I don't think they will) and they get the nod for the playoffs, they will lose the first round game again.
Also, I dreamt last night that Mount had to play UMHB at Belton in the semis. Not sure what they means. The dream didn't last long enough to show who won the game either...
With only 3 to 4 games being played, I think at this point poll positions past the Top 4 are really subjective. Honestly, I think their are multiple teams that could flip flop between 10-25. I honestly think that Hardin-Simmons and Linfield could be any team from Hardin-Simmons to Whitworth. Obviously some teams have already played each other, so I'd expect that team to be rank higher with all other data points being equal.
My frustration with the playoffs is that the ASC gets sent "West" instead of back into the South for playoff games beyond the first round, with exceptions when they matched up with the strong Coach Drass Wesley teams in the previous 10 years.
Frequently, the playoff losses to UMHB by everyone else in the South Region have been "monkey-stomps". In fact, the ASC has never played a Centennial team in the playoffs. Losing to Linfield most years is no slouch.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 03, 2019, 01:52:06 PM
My frustration with the playoffs is that the ASC gets sent "West" instead of back into the South for playoff games beyond the first round, with exceptions when they matched up with the strong Coach Drass Wesley teams in the previous 10 years.
Frequently, the playoff losses to UMHB by everyone else in the South Region have been "monkey-stomps". In fact, the ASC has never played a Centennial team in the playoffs. Losing to Linfield most years is no slouch.
Hardin-Simmons since 2000 has played UW-Whitewater (2W), WASH-U (1W), W&J (1W), McDaniel (1W), St. Johns (1L), Wittenberg (1L), UW-Stout (1L), UW-SP (2W), Linfield (2W, 6L), UW-Lacrosse (1W, 1L), Whitworth (2W), COE (1W), Willamette (1W, 2L).
Granted most of these match-ups with the exception of the playoff matchups against the NWC, most of the matchups were during the season in the early to mid 2000's against some of the WIAC schools. The two Mid-Atlantic matchups were before the expansion. I think there only opportunity would be to look for some of those conferences with 3 open dates, otherwise I think it is the CC (Johns Hopkins) approach, you play your schedule and if you get to the playoffs you have to win against opponents like UMHB and Linfield anyway, you just have to do it. Being such a outlier in TX has its budget constraints, but maybe finding matchups with NJAC, E8 teams or USAC that have openings.
Quote from: MANDGSU on October 03, 2019, 03:58:45 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 03, 2019, 01:52:06 PM
My frustration with the playoffs is that the ASC gets sent "West" instead of back into the South for playoff games beyond the first round, with exceptions when they matched up with the strong Coach Drass Wesley teams in the previous 10 years.
Frequently, the playoff losses to UMHB by everyone else in the South Region have been "monkey-stomps". In fact, the ASC has never played a Centennial team in the playoffs. Losing to Linfield most years is no slouch.
Hardin-Simmons since 2000 has played UW-Whitewater (2W), WASH-U (1W), W&J (1W), McDaniel (1W), St. Johns (1L), Wittenberg (1L), UW-Stout (1L), UW-SP (2W), Linfield (2W, 6L), UW-Lacrosse (1W, 1L), Whitworth (2W), COE (1W), Willamette (1W, 2L).
Granted most of these match-ups with the exception of the playoff matchups against the NWC, most of the matchups were during the season in the early to mid 2000's against some of the WIAC schools. The two Mid-Atlantic matchups were before the expansion. I think there only opportunity would be to look for some of those conferences with 3 open dates, otherwise I think it is the CC (Johns Hopkins) approach, you play your schedule and if you get to the playoffs you have to win against opponents like UMHB and Linfield anyway, you just have to do it. Being such a outlier in TX has its budget constraints, but maybe finding matchups with NJAC, E8 teams or USAC that have openings.
Thanks for the response.
My thought about HSU catching a Linfield or UMHB in the first round is that it is comparable to a #3 or #4 seed playing a #1, or #2 or #3 seed in the first round of the playoffs.
In fact, most years, the SCIAC is a #6, #7, or a #8.
A Huntingdon may be a #6 or #7.
There may be lower seeds in the West Region around Minnesota or Iowa some years, but the road to the Stagg Bowl is tough for everyone west of the 87th longitude.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 03, 2019, 04:19:16 PM
Quote from: MANDGSU on October 03, 2019, 03:58:45 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 03, 2019, 01:52:06 PM
My frustration with the playoffs is that the ASC gets sent "West" instead of back into the South for playoff games beyond the first round, with exceptions when they matched up with the strong Coach Drass Wesley teams in the previous 10 years.
Frequently, the playoff losses to UMHB by everyone else in the South Region have been "monkey-stomps". In fact, the ASC has never played a Centennial team in the playoffs. Losing to Linfield most years is no slouch.
Hardin-Simmons since 2000 has played UW-Whitewater (2W), WASH-U (1W), W&J (1W), McDaniel (1W), St. Johns (1L), Wittenberg (1L), UW-Stout (1L), UW-SP (2W), Linfield (2W, 6L), UW-Lacrosse (1W, 1L), Whitworth (2W), COE (1W), Willamette (1W, 2L).
Granted most of these match-ups with the exception of the playoff matchups against the NWC, most of the matchups were during the season in the early to mid 2000's against some of the WIAC schools. The two Mid-Atlantic matchups were before the expansion. I think there only opportunity would be to look for some of those conferences with 3 open dates, otherwise I think it is the CC (Johns Hopkins) approach, you play your schedule and if you get to the playoffs you have to win against opponents like UMHB and Linfield anyway, you just have to do it. Being such a outlier in TX has its budget constraints, but maybe finding matchups with NJAC, E8 teams or USAC that have openings.
Thanks for the response.
My thought about HSU catching a Linfield or UMHB in the first round is that it is comparable to a #3 or #4 seed playing a #1, or #2 or #3 seed in the first round of the playoffs.
In fact, most years, the SCIAC is a #6, #7, or a #8.
A Huntingdon may be a #6 or #7.
There may be lower seeds in the West Region around Minnesota or Iowa some years, but the road to the Stagg Bowl is tough for everyone west of the 87th longitude.
I don't disagree with you statement at all. The only "people" that can argue about them being overrated would be opponents from the NWC, which has had good success in the most recent years against Hardin-Simmons. Regardless, we can only use the UMHB data point, which indicates that every other year, they play well against or beat UMHB and UMHB does very well in the playoffs including beating HSU. I'm sure this conversation will come up early November after UMHB and HSU face-off and we start discussing Pool C bids.
Quote from: MANDGSU on October 03, 2019, 04:31:07 PM
I don't disagree with you statement at all. The only "people" that can argue about them being overrated would be opponents from the NWC, which has had good success in the most recent years against Hardin-Simmons. Regardless, we can only use the UMHB data point, which indicates that every other year, they play well against or beat UMHB and UMHB does very well in the playoffs including beating HSU. I'm sure this conversation will come up early November after UMHB and HSU face-off and we start discussing Pool C bids.
Again...
Thanks.
Whitworth had a very good season last year and had more than enough returning to make another run, imo. At least on paper it looked that way. Linfield is probably living off their previous success more so in the polls (and I might be guilty of that). Whitworth beat them last year, and Linfield didn't make the playoffs. Plus they graduated a lot from 2018. I currently have Whitworth #16 and Linfield #18, which is probably on the high end compared to some people. I wouldn't be surprised in neither team loses again (before the playoffs).
As far as H-S, they are a little tougher. Their two losses last year was to the best team in the country. Plus they get their stud RB back, who didn't play most of 2018. I have them at #6.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 04, 2019, 09:38:21 AM
Whitworth had a very good season last year and had more than enough returning to make another run, imo. At least on paper it looked that way. Linfield is probably living off their previous success more so in the polls (and I might be guilty of that). Whitworth beat them last year, and Linfield didn't make the playoffs. Plus they graduated a lot from 2018. I currently have Whitworth #16 and Linfield #18, which is probably on the high end compared to some people. I wouldn't be surprised in neither team loses again (before the playoffs).
As far as H-S, they are a little tougher. Their two losses last year was to the best team in the country. Plus they get their stud RB back, who didn't play most of 2018. I have them at #6.
Are you predicting a tie on Nov 9th?
Quote from: tf37 on October 04, 2019, 10:39:31 AM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 04, 2019, 09:38:21 AM
Whitworth had a very good season last year and had more than enough returning to make another run, imo. At least on paper it looked that way. Linfield is probably living off their previous success more so in the polls (and I might be guilty of that). Whitworth beat them last year, and Linfield didn't make the playoffs. Plus they graduated a lot from 2018. I currently have Whitworth #16 and Linfield #18, which is probably on the high end compared to some people. I wouldn't be surprised in neither team loses again (before the playoffs).
As far as H-S, they are a little tougher. Their two losses last year was to the best team in the country. Plus they get their stud RB back, who didn't play most of 2018. I have them at #6.
Are you predicting a tie on Nov 9th?
Lol. Good point, they still have to play each other. Forgot about that.
It's going to be interesting to see where ballots place some of these one-loss teams from strong conferences and some of some good undefeated teams from good conferences. I didn't drop North Central (Ill.) that far, but struggled to put place Hardin-Simmons. I actually showed some love to Bridgwater (Va.) and Hendrix in my ballot.
Crazy that I brought up my skepticism of H-S last week, and here they lose to TLU. Nothing wrong with that, TLU played lights out... I agree with the comment about NCC not dropping too far. They played a good game with Wheaton, but for some reason, they can't hang for all 4 quarters against them. I suspect they will win out and garner a pool C bid. If Wheaton hangs on and wins out, they will most certainly push someone for a #1 seed. It may end up having Mount Union in an eastern type bracket, and Wheaton in the North, and then UMHB, St. johns and UWW battling for the West and South. I think NCC and Wheaton can hang with the top 4 teams, not sure if they could win, but they can hang for sure. After that, I'm not sure who the next best is...rankings aside, I'm not sure if there are any other teams out there that can legitimately challenge the top 4.
I suppose St. Thomas is always a challenge, so they are one. I don't think Berry, Ithaca, Muhlenberg, Bethel, have the squads to do it.
Quote from: Captainred81 on October 08, 2019, 11:37:47 AM
Crazy that I brought up my skepticism of H-S last week, and here they lose to TLU. Nothing wrong with that, TLU played lights out... I agree with the comment about NCC not dropping too far. They played a good game with Wheaton, but for some reason, they can't hang for all 4 quarters against them. I suspect they will win out and garner a pool C bid. If Wheaton hangs on and wins out, they will most certainly push someone for a #1 seed. It may end up having Mount Union in an eastern type bracket, and Wheaton in the North, and then UMHB, St. johns and UWW battling for the West and South. I think NCC and Wheaton can hang with the top 4 teams, not sure if they could win, but they can hang for sure. After that, I'm not sure who the next best is...rankings aside, I'm not sure if there are any other teams out there that can legitimately challenge the top 4.
I suppose St. Thomas is always a challenge, so they are one. I don't think Berry, Ithaca, Muhlenberg, Bethel, have the squads to do it.
We'll find out a lot more about Bethel's squad (and SJU) this weekend in collegeville. Might not turn out well for my royals, but I think we've got some really unique players (Roste, Larson, Gibas, Janes, Delich, Boros, Swanson) that gives us fair shot at the upset. SJU has a stable of their own studs. Gonna be a game with plenty of national implications! Winner has the inside track on a #1 Seed IMO.
Early #1 Seed Stack ranking:
1. UMHB
2. Mount
3. UWW
4. SJU/Bethel winner
5. Wheaton
6. Muhlenberg
I think it is shaping up for a season where Mount goes "east" and the North #1 goes to an unbeaten UWW or Wheaton, with SJU/Bethel winner holding down the West. Obviously the MIAC, WIAC, and CCIW will have a lot to say about those teams remaining unbeaten in the coming weeks.
D3 Football Map (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=8975.msg1940087#msg1940087)
2019 WEEK 5 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | Points | Prev |
1) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (5) | 197 | 1 |
2) | Mount Union (3) | 195 | 2 |
3) | UW-Whitewater | 178 | 3 |
4) | St John's | 177 | 4 |
5) | Wheaton | 170 | T8 |
6) | Muhlenberg | 158 | 7 |
7) | Berry | 147 | 11 |
8) | Bethel | 143 | T8 |
9) | Wesley | 121 | 10 |
10) | North Central | 111 | 5 |
11) | Ithaca | 105 | 14 |
12) | Delaware Valley | 98 | 13 |
13) | Susquehanna | 91 | T17 |
14) | Redlands | 84 | 15 |
15) | Salisbury | 81 | 16 |
16) | St Thomas | 80 | T17 |
17) | Wartburg | 63 | 21 |
18) | Johns Hopkins | 62 | 22 |
19) | John Carroll | 51 | 20 |
T20) | Chapman | 49 | 23 |
T20) | UW-Platteville | 49 | NR |
T22) | Cortland | 34 | NR |
T22) | Linfield | 34 | 25 |
24) | Whitworth | 31 | 24 |
25) | Union | 18 | NR |
Dropped Out: #6 Hardin-Simmons, #12 UW-La Crosse, #19 Hobart
Also Receiving Votes: Hardin-Simmons 15, Hendrix 13, Texas Lutheran 13, Case Western Reserve 11, Illinois Wesleyan 7, UW-La Crosse 6, Wittenberg 3, Hope 2, WPI 2, Bridgewater 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bluestreak66, desertcat1, FCGG, MANDGSU, NCF, Oline89, and smedindy
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 197 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2)
2) Mount Union 195 ( 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3) UW-Whitewater 178 ( 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5)
4) St John's 177 ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5, 5, 5)
5) Wheaton 170 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 7)
6) Muhlenberg 158 ( 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8)
7) Berry 147 ( 7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 9)
8) Bethel 143 ( 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 9, 17)
9) Wesley 121 ( 8, 8, 9, 10, 10, 11, 14, 17)
10) North Central 111 ( 9, 9, 10, 10, 11, 12, 14, 22)
11) Ithaca 105 ( 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 16, 22)
12) Delaware Valley 98 ( 9, 10, 10, 11, 13, 14, 17, --)
13) Susquehanna 91 ( 9, 11, 12, 15, 15, 15, 20, 20)
14) Redlands 84 (10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, --)
15) Salisbury 81 (11, 13, 13, 15, 15, 17, 21, 22)
16) St Thomas 80 (12, 12, 14, 16, 16, 18, 19, 21)
17) Wartburg 63 (11, 12, 13, 16, 18, 23, --, --)
18) Johns Hopkins 62 (11, 16, 16, 17, 17, 18, 25, --)
19) John Carroll 51 (12, 15, 18, 19, 20, 22, 25, --)
T20) Chapman 49 (14, 18, 18, 19, 19, 20, 25, --)
T20) UW-Platteville 49 (13, 16, 17, 18, 21, 22, --, --)
T22) Cortland 34 (12, 19, 20, 21, 24, --, --, --)
T22) Linfield 34 (14, 17, 19, 20, --, --, --, --)
24) Whitworth 31 (15, 19, 20, 21, 24, --, --, --)
25) Union 18 (13, 22, 25, --, --, --, --, --)
26) Hardin-Simmons 15 (22, 23, 23, 24, 24, 25)
T27) Hendrix 13 (21, 21, 23)
T27) Texas Lutheran 13 (23, 23, 23, 24, 24)
29) Case Western Reserve 11 (21, 22, 25, 25)
30) Illinois Wesleyan 7 (19)
31) UW-La Crosse 6 (20)
32) Wittenberg 3 (23)
T33) Hope 2 (24)
T33) WPI 2 (24)
35) Bridgewater 1 (25)
Quote from: MANDGSU on October 06, 2019, 03:44:42 PM
It's going to be interesting to see where ballots place some of these one-loss teams from strong conferences and some of some good undefeated teams from good conferences. I didn't drop North Central (Ill.) that far, but struggled to put place Hardin-Simmons. I actually showed some love to Bridgwater (Va.) and Hendrix in my ballot.
Same here for Hendrix. They're undefeated and they beat Texas Lutheran who just knocked off Hardin-Simmons. Based on head-to-head results it's easy to suggest Hendrix > Texas Lutheran > Hardin Simmons. I
had H-S really high, but I dropped them a ton after their double-digit home loss to unranked TL.
Also, I dropped my Warhawks a couple of spots. They seem to do enough to beat average teams, but I can see them struggling against the top tier (like against MHB last year). That could change if their offense can finally get it going.
Taking an early look at potential playoff teams and flights. I think people would root for Hendrix to win this weekend or make the field in general, because that would give UMHB a team within 500 miles without a flight. Then their can be two flights to and from California. Berry can still easily play the USAC leaders.
Quote from: MANDGSU on October 09, 2019, 01:51:44 PM
Taking an early look at potential playoff teams and flights. I think people would root for Hendrix to win this weekend or make the field in general, because that would give UMHB a team within 500 miles without a flight. Then their can be two flights to and from California. Berry can still easily play the USAC leaders.
Are you assuming two SCIAC teams make the field?
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 09, 2019, 01:56:23 PM
Quote from: MANDGSU on October 09, 2019, 01:51:44 PM
Taking an early look at potential playoff teams and flights. I think people would root for Hendrix to win this weekend or make the field in general, because that would give UMHB a team within 500 miles without a flight. Then their can be two flights to and from California. Berry can still easily play the USAC leaders.
Are you assuming two SCIAC teams make the field?
Yes. Regardless, you'd want Hendrix to make the field to possibly avoid a conference rematch.
Quote from: MANDGSU on October 09, 2019, 02:01:36 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 09, 2019, 01:56:23 PM
Quote from: MANDGSU on October 09, 2019, 01:51:44 PM
Taking an early look at potential playoff teams and flights. I think people would root for Hendrix to win this weekend or make the field in general, because that would give UMHB a team within 500 miles without a flight. Then their can be two flights to and from California. Berry can still easily play the USAC leaders.
Are you assuming two SCIAC teams make the field?
Yes. Regardless, you'd want Hendrix to make the field to possibly avoid a conference rematch.
Hendrix in or out probably wouldn't save the SCIAC from a round 1 rematch IF that conference does have a second team invited. Creating two flights out of zero is probably not a thing that's going to happen. I would assume a SCIAC rematch in round 1 and be happy to be surprised if they figure out a way to not do it. Also worth mentioning that a SCIAC Pool C invitation isn't close to a sure thing.
Hendrix would alleviate the annual ASC conundrum, except that TLU may have alleviated the ASC conundrum without the Hendrix assist. Go figure.
I would love to see both Chapman and Redlands in the playoffs. I do think that they would be forced to play in Round 1, but they could also avoid flights in round 2 if they don't. Whoever wins the NWC will most likely have a flight in round 1. And if they match up SCIAC teams in round 1, the winner of said game will have a flight in round 2, either someone coming in or the SCIAC team going out.
I think this year's playoff is shaping up nicely. I love to see the shake ups and have new teams in and new teams take top spots. For instance, I think Muhlenberg beats JHU this year and gets a number seat in the east.
It would be nice to see something like NWC travels to SCIAC 1 and SCIAC 2 travels to UMHB.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 10, 2019, 04:22:25 PM
It would be nice to see something like NWC travels to SCIAC 1 and SCIAC 2 travels to UMHB.
Nice for who? ;D
Quote from: Captainred81 on October 10, 2019, 11:53:57 AM
I would love to see both Chapman and Redlands in the playoffs. I do think that they would be forced to play in Round 1, but they could also avoid flights in round 2 if they don't. Whoever wins the NWC will most likely have a flight in round 1. And if they match up SCIAC teams in round 1, the winner of said game will have a flight in round 2, either someone coming in or the SCIAC team going out.
I think this year's playoff is shaping up nicely. I love to see the shake ups and have new teams in and new teams take top spots. For instance, I think Muhlenberg beats JHU this year and gets a number seat in the east.
There's a lot of season left. But the SCIAC would be pretty far down the list of conferences I think it'd be good to see get two teams into the playoffs. When's the last time a SCIAC team went deep, let alone the SCIAC runner up? I think Redlands and Chapman are living high off of past NWC conference success. Linfield's win at Rowan looks less impressive by the week. My gut is that the SCIAC is a little better than usual, but that the NWC is also not nearly as good (at least at the top) as usual.
Well, the SCIAC has built-in limitations on how far they can advance thanks to their island status so they're forced to play some of the elite way too early.
Quote from: smedindy on October 11, 2019, 02:55:16 PM
Well, the SCIAC has built-in limitations on how far they can advance thanks to their island status so they're forced to play some of the elite way too early.
The island set up certainly isn't ideal. But it hasn't kept the NWC from sending teams deep into the postseason. I didn't mean it as a rip on the SCIAC. But I do think there are other leagues that have Pool C teams that go deeper than the SCIAC's Pool A teams in most years. WIAC, MIAC, CCIW, and others have had multiple at large teams make deep runs. Some years, those leagues have a third team that is probably good for Rd 1 victory with the right matchup.
Ideally if the NWC and SCIAC each only get one team, it won't require a re-match of earlier season non-con games and they could avoid UMHB as well. The travel restrictions make it tricky for sure.
So, um, I just noticed this in the Pre-Championship Manual: (https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/championships/sports/football/d3/2019-20D3MFB_PreChampsManual.pdf)
QuoteTeams from the same conference may not play each other in the first-round of competition.
It appears that the all-SCIAC round one matchup is no longer an option.
Quote from: Inkblot on October 11, 2019, 09:29:14 PM
So, um, I just noticed this in the Pre-Championship Manual: (https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/championships/sports/football/d3/2019-20D3MFB_PreChampsManual.pdf)
QuoteTeams from the same conference may not play each other in the first-round of competition.
It appears that the all-SCIAC round one matchup is no longer an option.
That must have been added in recently because last year the Hardins had a round 1 rematch.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 11, 2019, 09:42:37 PM
Quote from: Inkblot on October 11, 2019, 09:29:14 PM
So, um, I just noticed this in the Pre-Championship Manual: (https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/championships/sports/football/d3/2019-20D3MFB_PreChampsManual.pdf)
QuoteTeams from the same conference may not play each other in the first-round of competition.
It appears that the all-SCIAC round one matchup is no longer an option.
That must have been added in recently because last year the Hardins had a round 1 rematch.
Yep. I checked last year's handbook and in the same spot it said:
QuoteTeams from the same conference may play each other in order to maintain geographic proximity
Quote from: Inkblot on October 11, 2019, 10:02:04 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 11, 2019, 09:42:37 PM
Quote from: Inkblot on October 11, 2019, 09:29:14 PM
So, um, I just noticed this in the Pre-Championship Manual: (https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/championships/sports/football/d3/2019-20D3MFB_PreChampsManual.pdf)
QuoteTeams from the same conference may not play each other in the first-round of competition.
It appears that the all-SCIAC round one matchup is no longer an option.
That must have been added in recently because last year the Hardins had a round 1 rematch.
Yep. I checked last year's handbook and in the same spot it said:
QuoteTeams from the same conference may play each other in order to maintain geographic proximity
But as Pat Coleman noted on another board, the section is headed: "Should", not "Must".
Until we see the implementation, I wouldn't yet celebrate the end of "Island rematches".
The change in syntax is significant though, yes? I mean, why change that language in that way if you're still resigned to pairing ASC teams in the first round? This feels deliberate and something done with an understanding between the national committee and whoever gives their suggested bracket the green light.
D3 Football Map (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=8975.msg1940087#msg1940087)
2019 WEEK 6 TOP 25 FAN POLL Rank | Team | Points | Prev |
1) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (5) | 197 | 1 |
2) | Mount Union (3) | 195 | 2 |
3) | St John's | 180 | 4 |
4) | UW-Whitewater | 175 | 3 |
5) | Wheaton | 172 | 5 |
6) | Muhlenberg | 159 | 6 |
7) | Berry | 148 | 7 |
8) | Salisbury | 126 | 15 |
9) | North Central | 119 | 10 |
10) | Ithaca | 118 | 11 |
11) | Bethel | 111 | 8 |
12) | Delaware Valley | 91 | 12 |
13) | Wartburg | 90 | 17 |
14) | Susquehanna | 89 | 13 |
15) | St Thomas | 84 | 16 |
16) | Chapman | 83 | T20 |
17) | Johns Hopkins | 72 | 18 |
18) | John Carroll | 65 | 19 |
19) | Wesley | 60 | 9 |
20) | UW-Platteville | 46 | T20 |
21) | Union | 34 | 25 |
22) | Cortland | 31 | T22 |
23) | Case Western Reserve | 29 | NR |
T24) | Redlands | 25 | 14 |
T24) | Whitworth | 25 | 24 |
Dropped Out: #T22 Linfield
Also Receiving Votes: Linfield 21, Hardin-Simmons 19, Texas Lutheran 10, Illinois Wesleyan 6, Hobart 5, UW-La Crosse 5, Wittenberg 4, Hope 2, WPI 2, Baldwin Wallace 1, Bridgewater 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bluestreak66, desertcat1, FCGG, MANDGSU, NCF, Oline89, and smedindy
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 197 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2)
2) Mount Union 195 ( 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3) St John's 180 ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5)
4) UW-Whitewater 175 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5)
5) Wheaton 172 ( 3, 3, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6)
6) Muhlenberg 159 ( 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 8)
7) Berry 148 ( 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 11)
8) Salisbury 126 ( 7, 8, 9, 9, 10, 11, 14, 14)
9) North Central 119 ( 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 13, 13, 20)
10) Ithaca 118 ( 8, 8, 9, 10, 10, 11, 12, 22)
11) Bethel 111 ( 7, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 16, 25)
12) Delaware Valley 91 ( 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 17, 20, --)
13) Wartburg 90 (10, 10, 13, 14, 14, 16, 17, 24)
14) Susquehanna 89 ( 9, 11, 14, 15, 15, 16, 19, 20)
15) St Thomas 84 (11, 12, 13, 15, 17, 18, 19, 19)
16) Chapman 83 (12, 12, 12, 14, 15, 17, 21, 22)
17) Johns Hopkins 72 (12, 15, 15, 16, 16, 17, 21, 24)
18) John Carroll 65 (11, 13, 13, 18, 18, 21, 23, --)
19) Wesley 60 (15, 16, 16, 17, 18, 18, 22, --)
20) UW-Platteville 46 (14, 17, 18, 19, 21, 21, --, --)
21) Union 34 (10, 19, 19, 23, 25, --, --, --)
22) Cortland 31 (15, 19, 20, 23, 24, 25, 25, --)
23) Case Western Reserve 29 (16, 20, 20, 22, 23, --, --, --)
T24) Redlands 25 (17, 19, 21, 23, 25, --, --, --)
T24) Whitworth 25 (13, 18, 22, --, --, --, --, --)
26) Linfield 21 (14, 20, 24, 25)
27) Hardin-Simmons 19 (18, 22, 23, 24, 24)
28) Texas Lutheran 10 (22, 23, 23)
29) Illinois Wesleyan 6 (20)
T30) Hobart 5 (21)
T30) UW-La Crosse 5 (21)
32) Wittenberg 4 (22)
T33) Hope 2 (24)
T33) WPI 2 (24)
T35) Baldwin Wallace 1 (25)
T35) Bridgewater 1 (25)
I like where Berry and Salisbury are. I'm thinking Berry could 'jump the hump' this year and maybe win 2 or postseason games.
Quote from: Captainred81 on October 17, 2019, 10:52:30 AM
I like where Berry and Salisbury are. I'm thinking Berry could 'jump the hump' this year and maybe win 2 or postseason games.
"How do you like me know?" :-*
They / berry could drop out ? ;D
D3 Football Map (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=8975.msg1940087#msg1940087)
2019 WEEK 7 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | Points | Prev |
T1) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (4) | 196 | 1 |
T1) | Mount Union (4) | 196 | 2 |
3) | St John's | 180 | 3 |
4) | UW-Whitewater | 175 | 4 |
5) | Wheaton | 172 | 5 |
6) | Muhlenberg | 159 | 6 |
7) | Salisbury | 137 | 8 |
8) | North Central | 136 | 9 |
9) | Ithaca | 135 | 10 |
10) | Bethel | 118 | 11 |
11) | Wartburg | 99 | 13 |
T12) | Delaware Valley | 98 | 12 |
T12) | Susquehanna | 98 | 14 |
14) | Chapman | 93 | 16 |
15) | Wesley | 83 | 19 |
16) | John Carroll | 79 | 18 |
17) | Cortland | 71 | 22 |
18) | UW-Platteville | 60 | 20 |
19) | Case Western Reserve | 45 | 23 |
20) | Union | 41 | 21 |
T21) | Hardin-Simmons | 38 | NR |
T21) | Redlands | 38 | T24 |
23) | St Thomas | 27 | 15 |
T24) | Berry | 26 | 7 |
T24) | Linfield | 26 | NR |
Dropped Out: #17 Johns Hopkins, #T24 Whitworth
Also Receiving Votes: Texas Lutheran 20, Whitworth 20, Illinois Wesleyan 8, Bridgewater 7, Baldwin Wallace 5, UW-Oshkosh 5, WPI 5, Hope 2, Brockport 1, UW-La Crosse 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bluestreak66, desertcat1, FCGG, MANDGSU, NCF, Oline89, and smedindy
T1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 196 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2)
T1) Mount Union 196 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3) St John's 180 ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5)
4) UW-Whitewater 175 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5)
5) Wheaton 172 ( 3, 3, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6)
6) Muhlenberg 159 ( 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 8)
7) Salisbury 137 ( 6, 7, 7, 9, 9, 10, 11, 12)
8) North Central 136 ( 7, 8, 8, 8, 9, 10, 11, 11)
9) Ithaca 135 ( 7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 10, 19)
10) Bethel 118 ( 7, 8, 8, 9, 10, 10, 14, 24)
11) Wartburg 99 ( 9, 9, 12, 12, 12, 14, 20, 21)
T12) Delaware Valley 98 ( 9, 10, 11, 13, 15, 16, 17, 19)
T12) Susquehanna 98 ( 9, 11, 11, 13, 14, 15, 17, 20)
14) Chapman 93 (10, 12, 13, 14, 14, 15, 18, 19)
15) Wesley 83 (12, 13, 14, 14, 15, 16, 17, 24)
16) John Carroll 79 (10, 11, 12, 15, 17, 19, 20, 25)
17) Cortland 71 (11, 13, 15, 16, 17, 20, 22, 23)
18) UW-Platteville 60 (12, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 22, --)
19) Case Western Reserve 45 (14, 16, 17, 21, 22, 23, 24, --)
20) Union 41 (13, 15, 16, 23, 23, 25, --, --)
T21) Hardin-Simmons 38 (18, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, --, --)
T21) Redlands 38 (16, 18, 18, 22, 22, 23, 25, --)
23) St Thomas 27 (16, 17, 18, --, --, --, --, --)
T24) Berry 26 (19, 21, 22, 23, 23, 24, 24, --)
T24) Linfield 26 (13, 17, 22, --, --, --, --, --)
T26) Texas Lutheran 20 (20, 20, 21, 24, 25)
T26) Whitworth 20 (13, 19)
28) Illinois Wesleyan 8 (18)
29) Bridgewater 7 (21, 25, 25)
T30) Baldwin Wallace 5 (21)
T30) UW-Oshkosh 5 (23, 24)
T30) WPI 5 (21)
33) Hope 2 (24)
T34) Brockport 1 (25)
T34) UW-La Crosse 1 (25)
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 12, 2019, 12:49:33 AM
The change in syntax is significant though, yes? I mean, why change that language in that way if you're still resigned to pairing ASC teams in the first round? This feels deliberate and something done with an understanding between the national committee and whoever gives their suggested bracket the green light.
Question/concern regarding the possible elimination of conference foes playing in the first round. Does this potential mandate come with increased overall funding? If not, will the change lesson the creativity of all the brackets across the board as a measure to "tighten up" and make up for the increase cost of implementing the change? Now, people may still be in favor of the change and that's a reasonable position. However, in my mind, the news would be better news if money came with the proclamation. If not, the predictability and repetition of the rest of the pods may be a bit over the top because of the change.
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 23, 2019, 02:15:41 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 12, 2019, 12:49:33 AM
The change in syntax is significant though, yes? I mean, why change that language in that way if you're still resigned to pairing ASC teams in the first round? This feels deliberate and something done with an understanding between the national committee and whoever gives their suggested bracket the green light.
Question/concern regarding the possible elimination of conference foes playing in the first round. Does this potential mandate come with increased overall funding? If not, will the change lesson the creativity of all the brackets across the board as a measure to "tighten up" and make up for the increase cost of implementing the change? Now, people may still be in favor of the change and that's a reasonable position. However, in my mind, the news would be better news if money came with the proclamation. If not, the predictability and repetition of the rest of the pods may be a bit over the top because of the change.
I thought about this as well. Without increasing the funding, you are going to see more of the Eastern/Mid-Atlantic Pod teams playing each other until the Semi-finals. What you may find is one of the West Coast/Texas Pod winners flying somewhere in the 2nd round to fill-out the "travel pod". The NCAA has always been about the money and I don't see that changing. Barring some strange teams winning conferences from varying locations, we are going to see this. This may upset quite a few West/North Region fans regarding playing a team they should play maybe 3rd round or Semi's in the 2nd or 3rd round, respectively.
A) I was obviously wrong about Berry. Although, sometimes it takes a loss to get a team straight. if they make it to the playoffs, they could be dangerous.
B) There are so many scenarios in the playoffs that could happen to avoid flights. If UMHB beats HSU this weekend, and then beats TLU later, that will most asuuredly leave 1 school from TX in the playoffs. Also, it will open a space for potentially Chapman and Redlands to get in. I think then you have 2 flights in the first rounds (similar to past years), and one flight destined for the 2nd round (also similar to years past). Last year, by my calculations, there were 6 flights total, and that included a first round match up with UMHB and HSU. If they had used this new rule, they would have added 2 more flights and potentially 3. I guess the question is, how much of they budget do they use year over year? I imagine that some years they come in under budget, which is always the goal, but it means maybe they could afford a few more flights. I guess time will tell. All I know for sure, is that I appreciate the fact that conference opponents may not have to play each other in the first round.
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 23, 2019, 02:15:41 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 12, 2019, 12:49:33 AM
The change in syntax is significant though, yes? I mean, why change that language in that way if you're still resigned to pairing ASC teams in the first round? This feels deliberate and something done with an understanding between the national committee and whoever gives their suggested bracket the green light.
Question/concern regarding the possible elimination of conference foes playing in the first round. Does this potential mandate come with increased overall funding? If not, will the change lesson the creativity of all the brackets across the board as a measure to "tighten up" and make up for the increase cost of implementing the change? Now, people may still be in favor of the change and that's a reasonable position. However, in my mind, the news would be better news if money came with the proclamation. If not, the predictability and repetition of the rest of the pods may be a bit over the top because of the change.
I think Jim Catanzaro and the national committee don't pursue this at the competitive expense of the rest of the bracket. That group does their damndest to put together the best possible bracket given- and this is really important-
the published selection and seeding criteria. I don't think you had to read too hard between the lines in various post-bracket interviews with the Chair to know that there were things in last year's bracket that were not their first choice.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 23, 2019, 03:42:38 PM
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 23, 2019, 02:15:41 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 12, 2019, 12:49:33 AM
The change in syntax is significant though, yes? I mean, why change that language in that way if you're still resigned to pairing ASC teams in the first round? This feels deliberate and something done with an understanding between the national committee and whoever gives their suggested bracket the green light.
Question/concern regarding the possible elimination of conference foes playing in the first round. Does this potential mandate come with increased overall funding? If not, will the change lesson the creativity of all the brackets across the board as a measure to "tighten up" and make up for the increase cost of implementing the change? Now, people may still be in favor of the change and that's a reasonable position. However, in my mind, the news would be better news if money came with the proclamation. If not, the predictability and repetition of the rest of the pods may be a bit over the top because of the change.
I think Jim Catanzaro and the national committee don't pursue this at the competitive expense of the rest of the bracket. That group does their damndest to put together the best possible bracket given- and this is really important- the published selection and seeding criteria. I don't think you had to read too hard between the lines in various post-bracket interviews with the Chair to know that there were things in last year's bracket that were not their first choice.
Agreed Wally. I'm reading this as a positive outcome until I see evidence otherwise. The interviews were really helpful in getting a sense of how hard they work to create the right bracket, but also how much their hands can be tied at times.
I have always thought that one should add about 5 more playoff wins to the totals of the ASC and the NWC to compensate for games in which a #1 or #2 seed was playing a #3,#4,#5 seed in the first round because of "geographic proximity".
Ralph,
I'm with you boo boo. :-*
Go cats
Go big D
Go cru.
Poll will be up at some point. Had one ballot come in late that then needed a correction.
D3 Football Map (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=8975.msg1940087#msg1940087)
2019 WEEK 8 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | Points | Prev |
1) | Mount Union (7) | 199 | T1 |
2) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (1) | 192 | T1 |
3) | St John's | 179 | 3 |
4) | UW-Whitewater | 175 | 4 |
5) | Wheaton | 174 | 5 |
6) | Muhlenberg | 159 | 6 |
7) | Salisbury | 138 | 7 |
8) | North Central | 137 | 8 |
9) | Ithaca | 133 | 9 |
10) | Bethel | 118 | 10 |
11) | Wartburg | 109 | 11 |
12) | Delaware Valley | 99 | T12 |
13) | Chapman | 92 | 14 |
14) | Susquehanna | 87 | T12 |
15) | UW-Platteville | 82 | 18 |
16) | John Carroll | 81 | 16 |
17) | Wesley | 74 | 15 |
18) | Cortland | 69 | 17 |
19) | Case Western Reserve | 46 | 19 |
20) | Hardin-Simmons | 42 | T21 |
21) | Union | 41 | 20 |
22) | Redlands | 40 | T21 |
T23) | Linfield | 31 | T24 |
T23) | St Thomas | 31 | 23 |
25) | Berry | 26 | T24 |
Dropped Out: None
Also Receiving Votes: Texas Lutheran 22, Baldwin Wallace 6, Bridgewater 6, WPI 6, Brockport 4, Johns Hopkins 1, UW-La Crosse 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bluestreak66, desertcat1, FCGG, MANDGSU, NCF, Oline89, and smedindy
1) Mount Union 199 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 192 ( 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3) St John's 179 ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5, 5)
4) UW-Whitewater 175 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5)
5) Wheaton 174 ( 2, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6)
6) Muhlenberg 159 ( 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 8)
7) Salisbury 138 ( 6, 7, 7, 9, 9, 9, 11, 12)
8) North Central 137 ( 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 10, 11, 11)
9) Ithaca 133 ( 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 10, 10, 18)
10) Bethel 118 ( 7, 8, 8, 8, 10, 11, 14, 24)
11) Wartburg 109 ( 9, 9, 12, 12, 12, 12, 14, 19)
12) Delaware Valley 99 ( 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, 16, 17, 19)
13) Chapman 92 (10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 15, 18, 19)
14) Susquehanna 87 ( 9, 11, 13, 14, 17, 18, 18, 21)
15) UW-Platteville 82 (10, 11, 12, 16, 17, 18, 20, 22)
16) John Carroll 81 (10, 11, 13, 15, 17, 18, 21, 22)
17) Wesley 74 (13, 15, 15, 15, 16, 16, 20, 24)
18) Cortland 69 (13, 13, 16, 16, 17, 19, 21, 24)
19) Case Western Reserve 46 (14, 16, 17, 21, 22, 22, 24, --)
20) Hardin-Simmons 42 (15, 19, 19, 20, 20, 21, --, --)
21) Union 41 (14, 14, 16, 23, 24, 24, --, --)
22) Redlands 40 (13, 18, 20, 22, 23, 23, 24, 25)
T23) Linfield 31 (13, 14, 21, 25, --, --, --, --)
T23) St Thomas 31 (17, 17, 18, 21, --, --, --, --)
25) Berry 26 (19, 22, 22, 23, 23, 23, 24, --)
26) Texas Lutheran 22 (19, 20, 21, 23, 25)
T27) Baldwin Wallace 6 (20)
T27) Bridgewater 6 (22, 25, 25)
T27) WPI 6 (20)
30) Brockport 4 (23, 25)
T31) Johns Hopkins 1 (25)
T31) UW-La Crosse 1 (25)
D3 Football Map (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=8975.msg1940087#msg1940087)
2019 WEEK 9 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | Points | Prev |
1) | Mount Union (7) | 199 | 1 |
2) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (1) | 192 | 2 |
3) | UW-Whitewater | 181 | 4 |
4) | Wheaton | 179 | 5 |
5) | Muhlenberg | 168 | 6 |
6) | Salisbury | 150 | 7 |
7) | North Central | 143 | 8 |
8) | St John's | 129 | 3 |
9) | Wartburg | 122 | 11 |
10) | Bethel | 120 | 10 |
11) | Delaware Valley | 113 | 12 |
T12) | Chapman | 100 | 13 |
T12) | Union | 100 | 21 |
14) | Susquehanna | 99 | 14 |
15) | Wesley | 96 | 17 |
16) | John Carroll | 87 | 16 |
17) | Case Western Reserve | 57 | 19 |
18) | Hardin-Simmons | 56 | 20 |
19) | Redlands | 54 | 22 |
20) | Linfield | 48 | T23 |
21) | Ithaca | 46 | 9 |
22) | Texas Lutheran | 37 | NR |
23) | St Thomas | 36 | T23 |
24) | Berry | 34 | 25 |
25) | Brockport | 21 | NR |
Dropped Out: #15 UW-Platteville, #18 Cortland
Also Receiving Votes: Bridgewater 14, Baldwin Wallace 7, Cortland 6, UW-Oshkosh 2, Middlebury 1, UW-Platteville 1, W New England 1, Wabash 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bluestreak66, desertcat1, FCGG, MANDGSU, NCF, Oline89, and smedindy
1) Mount Union 199 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 192 ( 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3) UW-Whitewater 181 ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4)
4) Wheaton 179 ( 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5)
5) Muhlenberg 168 ( 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6)
6) Salisbury 150 ( 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 9, 9, 11)
7) North Central 143 ( 6, 7, 7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10)
8) St John's 129 ( 7, 8, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14)
9) Wartburg 122 ( 7, 8, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 17)
10) Bethel 120 ( 6, 6, 8, 9, 9, 13, 15, 22)
11) Delaware Valley 113 ( 7, 8, 11, 13, 13, 14, 14, 15)
T12) Chapman 100 (10, 11, 11, 13, 14, 16, 16, 17)
T12) Union 100 ( 7, 7, 8, 14, 15, 17, 20, 20)
14) Susquehanna 99 ( 7, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 17)
15) Wesley 96 (11, 12, 12, 12, 14, 15, 15, 21)
16) John Carroll 87 (10, 10, 10, 14, 16, 17, 21, 23)
17) Case Western Reserve 57 (13, 15, 16, 18, 20, 20, 23, --)
18) Hardin-Simmons 56 (13, 16, 18, 18, 19, 20, 22, --)
19) Redlands 54 (12, 17, 18, 19, 21, 21, 22, 24)
20) Linfield 48 (12, 13, 18, 21, 22, 24, 25, 25)
21) Ithaca 46 (10, 16, 17, 21, 22, 24, --, --)
22) Texas Lutheran 37 (18, 19, 19, 21, 23, 23, 23, 25)
23) St Thomas 36 (15, 16, 18, 19, --, --, --, --)
24) Berry 34 (18, 19, 21, 22, 22, 23, 23, --)
25) Brockport 21 (19, 20, 20, 24, --, --, --, --)
26) Bridgewater 14 (20, 23, 24, 24, 25)
27) Baldwin Wallace 7 (19)
28) Cortland 6 (22, 24)
29) UW-Oshkosh 2 (24)
T30) Middlebury 1 (25)
T30) UW-Platteville 1 (25)
T30) W New England 1 (25)
T30) Wabash 1 (25)
Quote from: Baldini on November 05, 2019, 06:38:01 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 05, 2019, 05:32:29 PM
1) Mount Union 199 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 192 ( 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3) UW-Whitewater 181 ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4)
4) Wheaton 179 ( 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5)
5) Muhlenberg 168 ( 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6)
6) Salisbury 150 ( 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 9, 9, 11)
7) North Central 143 ( 6, 7, 7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10)
8) St John's 129 ( 7, 8, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14)
9) Wartburg 122 ( 7, 8, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 17)
10) Bethel 120 ( 6, 6, 8, 9, 9, 13, 15, 22)
11) Delaware Valley 113 ( 7, 8, 11, 13, 13, 14, 14, 15)
T12) Chapman 100 (10, 11, 11, 13, 14, 16, 16, 17)
T12) Union 100 ( 7, 7, 8, 14, 15, 17, 20, 20)
14) Susquehanna 99 ( 7, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 17)
15) Wesley 96 (11, 12, 12, 12, 14, 15, 15, 21)
16) John Carroll 87 (10, 10, 10, 14, 16, 17, 21, 23)
17) Case Western Reserve 57 (13, 15, 16, 18, 20, 20, 23, --)
18) Hardin-Simmons 56 (13, 16, 18, 18, 19, 20, 22, --)
19) Redlands 54 (12, 17, 18, 19, 21, 21, 22, 24)
20) Linfield 48 (12, 13, 18, 21, 22, 24, 25, 25)
21) Ithaca 46 (10, 16, 17, 21, 22, 24, --, --)
22) Texas Lutheran 37 (18, 19, 19, 21, 23, 23, 23, 25)
23) St Thomas 36 (15, 16, 18, 19, --, --, --, --)
24) Berry 34 (18, 19, 21, 22, 22, 23, 23, --)
25) Brockport 21 (19, 20, 20, 24, --, --, --, --)
26) Bridgewater 14 (20, 23, 24, 24, 25)
27) Baldwin Wallace 7 (19)
28) Cortland 6 (22, 24)
29) UW-Oshkosh 2 (24)
T30) Middlebury 1 (25)
T30) UW-Platteville 1 (25)
T30) W New England 1 (25)
T30) Wabash 1 (25)
Middlebury???
By this point in the season if the NESCAC has an undefeated team that has been winning by fairly comfortable margins they'll usually get a vote or two.
Quote from: HSCTiger74 on November 05, 2019, 07:58:23 PM
Quote from: Baldini on November 05, 2019, 06:38:01 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 05, 2019, 05:32:29 PM
1) Mount Union 199 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 192 ( 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3) UW-Whitewater 181 ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4)
4) Wheaton 179 ( 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5)
5) Muhlenberg 168 ( 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6)
6) Salisbury 150 ( 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 9, 9, 11)
7) North Central 143 ( 6, 7, 7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10)
8) St John's 129 ( 7, 8, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14)
9) Wartburg 122 ( 7, 8, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 17)
10) Bethel 120 ( 6, 6, 8, 9, 9, 13, 15, 22)
11) Delaware Valley 113 ( 7, 8, 11, 13, 13, 14, 14, 15)
T12) Chapman 100 (10, 11, 11, 13, 14, 16, 16, 17)
T12) Union 100 ( 7, 7, 8, 14, 15, 17, 20, 20)
14) Susquehanna 99 ( 7, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 17)
15) Wesley 96 (11, 12, 12, 12, 14, 15, 15, 21)
16) John Carroll 87 (10, 10, 10, 14, 16, 17, 21, 23)
17) Case Western Reserve 57 (13, 15, 16, 18, 20, 20, 23, --)
18) Hardin-Simmons 56 (13, 16, 18, 18, 19, 20, 22, --)
19) Redlands 54 (12, 17, 18, 19, 21, 21, 22, 24)
20) Linfield 48 (12, 13, 18, 21, 22, 24, 25, 25)
21) Ithaca 46 (10, 16, 17, 21, 22, 24, --, --)
22) Texas Lutheran 37 (18, 19, 19, 21, 23, 23, 23, 25)
23) St Thomas 36 (15, 16, 18, 19, --, --, --, --)
24) Berry 34 (18, 19, 21, 22, 22, 23, 23, --)
25) Brockport 21 (19, 20, 20, 24, --, --, --, --)
26) Bridgewater 14 (20, 23, 24, 24, 25)
27) Baldwin Wallace 7 (19)
28) Cortland 6 (22, 24)
29) UW-Oshkosh 2 (24)
T30) Middlebury 1 (25)
T30) UW-Platteville 1 (25)
T30) W New England 1 (25)
T30) Wabash 1 (25)
Middlebury???
By this point in the season if the NESCAC has an undefeated team that has been winning by fairly comfortable margins they'll usually get a vote or two.
this might sound unfair, but I find it very hard to rank any NESCAC teams, simply due to the lack of any non-conference games. There's no gauge as to how they compare with the other conferences
H-S (6-2) #18
TLU (7-1) #22
10/5: TLU 38 @ H-S 27
DV (8-1) #11
Wesley (7-1) #15
9/14: Wesley 24 @ DV 18
???
Quote from: bluestreak66 on November 06, 2019, 08:33:23 AM
Quote from: HSCTiger74 on November 05, 2019, 07:58:23 PM
Quote from: Baldini on November 05, 2019, 06:38:01 PM
29) UW-Oshkosh 2 (24)
T30) Middlebury 1 (25)
T30) UW-Platteville 1 (25)
T30) W New England 1 (25)
T30) Wabash 1 (25)[/font]
Middlebury???
By this point in the season if the NESCAC has an undefeated team that has been winning by fairly comfortable margins they'll usually get a vote or two.
this might sound unfair, but I find it very hard to rank any NESCAC teams, simply
due to the lack of any non-conference games. There's no gauge as to how they compare with the other conferences
*******************************************************************As a pollster in the East Region Fan Poll I can only offer you this... https://newenglandfootballwriters.com/d-iii-coaches-poll or this https://noontimesports.com/2019/11/04/d3-football-week-10-poll-monday-nov-4th-2019/
The NESCAC, and this year Middlebury, have been ignored by those of us on the ERFP board for the exact reasons you state but they obviously get acclaim from writers and coaches
in New England.
Sorry about the ad that wants to pop up on my previous post, if it's still there. I'm not sure why or how to remove it. :-\
Quote from: UfanBill on November 06, 2019, 10:06:43 AM
Quote from: bluestreak66 on November 06, 2019, 08:33:23 AM
Quote from: HSCTiger74 on November 05, 2019, 07:58:23 PM
Quote from: Baldini on November 05, 2019, 06:38:01 PM
29) UW-Oshkosh 2 (24)
T30) Middlebury 1 (25)
T30) UW-Platteville 1 (25)
T30) W New England 1 (25)
T30) Wabash 1 (25)[/font]
Middlebury???
By this point in the season if the NESCAC has an undefeated team that has been winning by fairly comfortable margins they'll usually get a vote or two.
this might sound unfair, but I find it very hard to rank any NESCAC teams, simply due to the lack of any non-conference games. There's no gauge as to how they compare with the other conferences
*******************************************************************
As a pollster in the East Region Fan Poll I can only offer you this... https://newenglandfootballwriters.com/d-iii-coaches-poll or this https://noontimesports.com/2019/11/04/d3-football-week-10-poll-monday-nov-4th-2019/
The NESCAC, and this year Middlebury, have been ignored by those of us on the ERFP board for the exact reasons you state but they obviously get acclaim from writers and coaches in New England.
That's hard to do considering there's literally no data available to suggest teams from the NESCAC are better than the teams in the CCC, NEWMAC, ECFC, etc. As well as vice versa.
What are they basing that off? Comparing team stats? Eye tests?
I would suspect it's largely reputation and a feeling that the NESCAC recruits better players than the rest. The writers and coaches know who the best kids are coming out of New England high schools.
Quote from: UfanBill on November 06, 2019, 10:23:58 AM
I would suspect it's largely reputation and a feeling that the NESCAC recruits better players than the rest. The writers and coaches know who the best kids are coming out of New England high schools.
Hate to say it, but high school play doesn't always equate to the college game. Plus the time commitment in college far exceeds high school, many kids just don't love the game enough to stick with it.
Quote from: UfanBill on November 06, 2019, 10:23:58 AM
I would suspect it's largely reputation and a feeling that the NESCAC recruits better players than the rest. The writers and coaches know who the best kids are coming out of New England high schools.
That's pretty much my point against NESCAC being a good D3 football conference. There's a huge cluster of D3 programs in the North East part of the country (not to mention all the D1 and D2 programs as well), which I'm sure makes recruiting a nightmare. I don't think it's a coincidence that Non-NESCAC conferences in that region fail to make deep runs in the playoffs. Also D3football.com consistently ranks those conferences towards the bottom of D3 each year. Of the 27 conferences ECFC is 27th, MSCAC 25th, CCC 22nd, NEWMAC 18th.
Point being is that odds are the NESCAC will probably just be as competitive as the other D3 conferences around them, considering how watered down the recruiting pool is in that region. I don't see why they would be an exception to that.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 06, 2019, 10:46:29 AM
Quote from: UfanBill on November 06, 2019, 10:23:58 AM
I would suspect it's largely reputation and a feeling that the NESCAC recruits better players than the rest. The writers and coaches know who the best kids are coming out of New England high schools.
That's pretty much my point against NESCAC being a good D3 football conference. There's a huge cluster of D3 programs in the North East part of the country (not to mention all the D1 and D2 programs as well), which I'm sure makes recruiting a nightmare. I don't think it's a coincidence that Non-NESCAC conferences in that region fail to make deep runs in the playoffs. Also D3football.com consistently ranks those conferences towards the bottom of D3 each year. Of the 27 conferences ECFC is 27th, MSCAC 25th, CCC 22nd, NEWMAC 18th.
Point being is that odds are the NESCAC will probably just be as competitive as the other D3 conferences around them, considering how watered down the recruiting pool is in that region. I don't see why they would be an exception to that.
They are great at every other sport in all of DIII if that helps...I would argue as a conference they are Top 5 in all other sports.
Quote from: MANDGSU on November 06, 2019, 11:07:51 AM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 06, 2019, 10:46:29 AM
Quote from: UfanBill on November 06, 2019, 10:23:58 AM
I would suspect it's largely reputation and a feeling that the NESCAC recruits better players than the rest. The writers and coaches know who the best kids are coming out of New England high schools.
That's pretty much my point against NESCAC being a good D3 football conference. There's a huge cluster of D3 programs in the North East part of the country (not to mention all the D1 and D2 programs as well), which I'm sure makes recruiting a nightmare. I don't think it's a coincidence that Non-NESCAC conferences in that region fail to make deep runs in the playoffs. Also D3football.com consistently ranks those conferences towards the bottom of D3 each year. Of the 27 conferences ECFC is 27th, MSCAC 25th, CCC 22nd, NEWMAC 18th.
Point being is that odds are the NESCAC will probably just be as competitive as the other D3 conferences around them, considering how watered down the recruiting pool is in that region. I don't see why they would be an exception to that.
They are great at every other sport in all of DIII if that helps...I would argue as a conference they are Top 5 in all other sports.
Fair point, but we'll never know for certain unless they change their ways. It's a shame the NESCAC closes its doors to outsiders when it comes to football.
Quote from: MANDGSU on November 06, 2019, 11:07:51 AM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 06, 2019, 10:46:29 AM
Quote from: UfanBill on November 06, 2019, 10:23:58 AM
I would suspect it's largely reputation and a feeling that the NESCAC recruits better players than the rest. The writers and coaches know who the best kids are coming out of New England high schools.
That's pretty much my point against NESCAC being a good D3 football conference. There's a huge cluster of D3 programs in the North East part of the country (not to mention all the D1 and D2 programs as well), which I'm sure makes recruiting a nightmare. I don't think it's a coincidence that Non-NESCAC conferences in that region fail to make deep runs in the playoffs. Also D3football.com consistently ranks those conferences towards the bottom of D3 each year. Of the 27 conferences ECFC is 27th, MSCAC 25th, CCC 22nd, NEWMAC 18th.
Point being is that odds are the NESCAC will probably just be as competitive as the other D3 conferences around them, considering how watered down the recruiting pool is in that region. I don't see why they would be an exception to that.
They are great at every other sport in all of DIII if that helps...I would argue as a conference they are Top 5 in all other sports.
For my own selfish curiosity I would like to see them play a non-conference game each year, but they probably have no desire to do that.
Quote from: MANDGSU on November 06, 2019, 11:07:51 AM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 06, 2019, 10:46:29 AM
Quote from: UfanBill on November 06, 2019, 10:23:58 AM
I would suspect it's largely reputation and a feeling that the NESCAC recruits better players than the rest. The writers and coaches know who the best kids are coming out of New England high schools.
That's pretty much my point against NESCAC being a good D3 football conference. There's a huge cluster of D3 programs in the North East part of the country (not to mention all the D1 and D2 programs as well), which I'm sure makes recruiting a nightmare. I don't think it's a coincidence that Non-NESCAC conferences in that region fail to make deep runs in the playoffs. Also D3football.com consistently ranks those conferences towards the bottom of D3 each year. Of the 27 conferences ECFC is 27th, MSCAC 25th, CCC 22nd, NEWMAC 18th.
Point being is that odds are the NESCAC will probably just be as competitive as the other D3 conferences around them, considering how watered down the recruiting pool is in that region. I don't see why they would be an exception to that.
They are great at every other sport in all of DIII if that helps...I would argue as a conference they are Top 5 in all other sports.
This is exactly my thinking. Take the top NESCAC team in any other sport and they're quite good, and much better than the other conferences in the northeast. I have no reason to believe it's any different in football. The lack of non-conference games means they won't rise any higher, but it's hard to be undefeated this late in the season (they're one of only 12 unbeatens at this point). Also, in the d3football poll they received 5 points.
Quote from: MANDGSU on November 06, 2019, 11:07:51 AM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 06, 2019, 10:46:29 AM
Quote from: UfanBill on November 06, 2019, 10:23:58 AM
I would suspect it's largely reputation and a feeling that the NESCAC recruits better players than the rest. The writers and coaches know who the best kids are coming out of New England high schools.
That's pretty much my point against NESCAC being a good D3 football conference. There's a huge cluster of D3 programs in the North East part of the country (not to mention all the D1 and D2 programs as well), which I'm sure makes recruiting a nightmare. I don't think it's a coincidence that Non-NESCAC conferences in that region fail to make deep runs in the playoffs. Also D3football.com consistently ranks those conferences towards the bottom of D3 each year. Of the 27 conferences ECFC is 27th, MSCAC 25th, CCC 22nd, NEWMAC 18th.
Point being is that odds are the NESCAC will probably just be as competitive as the other D3 conferences around them, considering how watered down the recruiting pool is in that region. I don't see why they would be an exception to that.
They are great at every other sport in all of DIII if that helps...I would argue as a conference they are Top 5 in all other sports.
Football in D3 is a different animal than other sports. Top teams carry huge rosters often 100 players or more which might not be consistent with the mission for the high academic schools in the NESCAC (to their credit). In a brief review of the last 4 years' playoff quarterfinals, one high academic school in Johns Hopkins made it to the quarterfinal round (last year semifinal loss out of a purely eastern bracket). If you want to be less exclusive and count Rensselaer as a high academic school (ranked #50 national university), they made it to the quarterfinals too.
Quote from: TheChucker on November 11, 2019, 08:39:02 PM
Football in D3 is a different animal than other sports. Top teams carry huge rosters often 100 players or more which might not be consistent with the mission for the high academic schools in the NESCAC (to their credit). In a brief review of the last 4 years' playoff quarterfinals, one high academic school in Johns Hopkins made it to the quarterfinal round (last year semifinal loss out of a purely eastern bracket). If you want to be less exclusive and count Rennselaer as a high academic school (ranked #50 national university), they made it to the quarterfinals too.
LOL - don't let the RPI alumni association see this.
Quote from: Ron Boerger on November 12, 2019, 10:33:37 AM
Quote from: TheChucker on November 11, 2019, 08:39:02 PM
Football in D3 is a different animal than other sports. Top teams carry huge rosters often 100 players or more which might not be consistent with the mission for the high academic schools in the NESCAC (to their credit). In a brief review of the last 4 years' playoff quarterfinals, one high academic school in Johns Hopkins made it to the quarterfinal round (last year semifinal loss out of a purely eastern bracket). If you want to be less exclusive and count Rensselaer as a high academic school (ranked #50 national university), they made it to the quarterfinals too.
LOL - don't let the RPI alumni association see this.
I didn't mean to be condescending. US News has them sandwiched between U of Texas, Georgia and Ohio State which most would consider excellent but not high academic institutions [yeah, I know, many don't like the US News rankings].
Most D3 schools are Liberal Arts, though. Some of the Top Liberal Arts schools are D1, even.
Denison is #43 and they have over 100 players.
Before people yell, I still have Wartburg over Central (Central is #26 in my eyes). OT losses on the road outweighs Central's loss to Dubuque.
Quote from: smedindy on November 12, 2019, 12:35:18 PM
Before people yell, I still have Wartburg over Central (Central is #26 in my eyes). OT losses on the road outweighs Central's loss to Dubuque.
I wouldn't argue with that. I think I came away rather unimpressed with both teams and their lack of D. But a road OT loss because you didn't stop a two point conversion play isn't a resounding foundation for "But Central beat them in the H2H!"
I've wondered most of the season why people aren't ranking Susquehanna higher (especially the d3f voters). Their only loss was in OT @ Muhlenberg who everyone has ranked around 5 or so but Susquehanna sits at 16 in the d3f poll (behind 6 one loss teams and a 2 loss team) and have been bouncing around 13-14 here for half the season with myself as the only one putting them in the top 10.
I have Susquehanna at #13 (Muhlenberg at #4). It's a tough call.
D3 Football Map (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=8975.msg1940087#msg1940087)
2019 WEEK 10 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | Points | Prev |
1) | Mount Union (7) | 199 | 1 |
2) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (1) | 192 | 2 |
T3) | UW-Whitewater | 180 | 3 |
T3) | Wheaton | 180 | 4 |
5) | Muhlenberg | 168 | 5 |
6) | Salisbury | 149 | 6 |
7) | North Central | 146 | 7 |
8) | St John's | 130 | 8 |
T9) | Bethel | 124 | 10 |
T9) | Chapman | 124 | T12 |
11) | Delaware Valley | 120 | 11 |
12) | Susquehanna | 108 | 14 |
13) | Union | 106 | T12 |
14) | Wesley | 104 | 15 |
15) | John Carroll | 94 | 16 |
T16) | Case Western Reserve | 63 | 17 |
T16) | Redlands | 63 | 19 |
18) | Linfield | 56 | 20 |
19) | Hardin-Simmons | 53 | 18 |
20) | Berry | 45 | 24 |
T21) | Bridgewater | 40 | NR |
T21) | St Thomas | 40 | 23 |
23) | Brockport | 35 | 25 |
24) | Wartburg | 25 | 9 |
25) | Central | 21 | NR |
Dropped Out: #21 Ithaca, #22 Texas Lutheran
Also Receiving Votes: Cortland 7, UW-Oshkosh 7, UW-Platteville 7, UW-La Crosse 5, W New England 3, Trinity (TX) 2, Wabash 2, Middlebury 1, WPI 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bluestreak66, desertcat1, FCGG, MANDGSU, NCF, Oline89, and smedindy
1) Mount Union 199 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 192 ( 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
T3) UW-Whitewater 180 ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4)
T3) Wheaton 180 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5)
5) Muhlenberg 168 ( 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6)
6) Salisbury 149 ( 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 9, 11)
7) North Central 146 ( 6, 6, 6, 7, 9, 9, 9, 10)
8) St John's 130 ( 7, 8, 8, 8, 9, 12, 13, 13)
9) Bethel 124 ( 6, 6, 8, 9, 9, 12, 14, 20)
10) Chapman 124 ( 7, 8, 10, 10, 11, 11, 12, 15)
11) Delaware Valley 120 ( 7, 8, 10, 12, 12, 13, 13, 13)
12) Susquehanna 108 ( 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 16)
13) Union 106 ( 7, 8, 9, 13, 14, 15, 17, 19)
14) Wesley 104 (11, 11, 11, 12, 12, 14, 14, 19)
15) John Carroll 94 (10, 10, 10, 14, 15, 16, 16, 23)
T16) Case Western Reserve 63 (13, 14, 17, 18, 19, 19, 21, 24)
T16) Redlands 63 (15, 16, 17, 17, 18, 20, 20, 22)
18) Linfield 56 (11, 16, 17, 20, 20, 21, 21, --)
19) Hardin-Simmons 53 (14, 15, 15, 16, 17, --, --, --)
20) Berry 45 (17, 18, 19, 20, 20, 21, 22, --)
T21) Bridgewater 40 (16, 18, 19, 21, 22, 22, 25, 25)
T21) St Thomas 40 (14, 15, 17, 19, 25, --, --, --)
23) Brockport 35 (18, 18, 18, 20, 21, --, --, --)
24) Wartburg 25 (18, 22, 22, 23, 24, 24, 24, --)
25) Central 21 (21, 22, 23, 23, 23, 24, 25, --)
T26) Cortland 7 (19)
T26) UW-Oshkosh 7 (23, 23, 25)
T26) UW-Platteville 7 (21, 24)
29) UW-La Crosse 5 (22, 25)
30) W New England 3 (23)
T31) Trinity (TX) 2 (24)
T31) Wabash 2 (24)
T33) Middlebury 1 (25)
T33) WPI 1 (25)
Good looking poll. The only thing that stands out to me is Bethel 20th. huh??!?
Not sure there are 19 better teams in the country than a one-loss MIAC team. Unless someone put a ton of stock into the fact Bethel lost to a St. John's team who lost to an under .500 Moorhead team, maybe?
I would say that the one difference between the fan poll and the national poll is that the "fans" don't give as much clout to the 2 loss teams (H-S , St Thomas) as the national guys.
Quote from: Oline89 on November 13, 2019, 09:28:49 AM
I would say that the one difference between the fan poll and the national poll is that the "fans" don't give as much clout to the 2 loss teams (H-S , St Thomas) as the national guys.
As a "casual" fan, I think it's tough to get that national perspective. For example: Sure, St. Thomas has 2 losses, but I honestly think they're much better than #21. The Eau Claire loss was fluky (similar to the Johnnie loss to Concordia), and despite they final score, they were definitely in the Johnnie/Tommie game. But as a "casual" fan from elsewhere in the country, I doubt too many of the fan voters have dug too deeply into teams outside of their region.
This weekend's Bethel/U$T matchup will tell us a lot.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 13, 2019, 08:50:30 AM
Good looking poll. [/b]The only thing that stands out to me is Bethel 20th. huh??!?
The homer here , someone missed Linfield in the top 25 . ???
High 11, low 0, avg throw those out you get linfield at 19. Looks better me . :-*
In my opinion regarding two losses. Any of the traditional teams that are frequenly in the Top 10 to Top 15 can somewhat get a pass on that "Fluke" game, however, if you go on to lose to the best team you played. I can't place you in front of the same traditional Top 10 to Top 15 teams that have no losses or one losses. I think you would fall into the category of undefeated teams from conferences that every so often have quality teams. So IMHO, I think two losses that aren't to two Top 25 teams put you in the Top 20 or bubble category.
@Duff
I think that's a fair assessment. I'm not expecting fan poll voters to do a deep dive into national stuff. I know the West really well, the North pretty well, and the South and East only as far as the top 3ish teams in the top conferences go.
I do think Linfield being unranked is a strange one. Their only loss is to Redlands, but then if you've got Redlands in the low 20's that doesn't leave much room for Linfield.
We will find out about Bethel and UST on Saturday. Both have really good wins on the resume, but no defining victories. Talked to a Bethel coach on Saturday who said after watching the UST v UWEC film "I think UST beats them 99 times out of 100, but they didn't on the one that counted." That's why we play the games!
Quote from: hazzben on November 13, 2019, 12:35:03 PM
Talked to a Bethel coach on Saturday who said after watching the UST v UWEC film "I think UST beats them 99 times out of 100, but they didn't on the one that counted."
I almost posted "9 outta 10," but that didn't even seem high enough. I think a Johnnie/Cobber series, while maybe not 99/100, would favor the Johnnies quite heavily, too.
In a perfect world, the top 32 teams in this poll would be the playoff field. The top 4 teams would be the #1's. There would be no regional consideration, only ranking.
Mount would play Wabash, UMHB would play Trinity, UWW would play Western NE and Wheaton would play UW-LAX.
I think when I write it down this way, it makes the field really difficult. I think this would be a great first round and super competitive. IN the middle you would have CWRU against Redlands. Both ranked 16th. Crazy
Quote from: Captainred81 on November 15, 2019, 02:13:33 PM
In a perfect world, the top 32 teams in this poll would be the playoff field. The top 4 teams would be the #1's. There would be no regional consideration, only ranking.
Mount would play Wabash, UMHB would play Trinity, UWW would play Western NE and Wheaton would play UW-LAX.
I think when I write it down this way, it makes the field really difficult. I think this would be a great first round and super competitive. IN the middle you would have CWRU against Redlands. Both ranked 16th. Crazy
So all of those teams that won their conference titles each year that aren't ranked don't count? What's the purpose of winning then?
-Ski
Quote from: Teamski on November 17, 2019, 11:44:53 AM
Quote from: Captainred81 on November 15, 2019, 02:13:33 PM
In a perfect world, the top 32 teams in this poll would be the playoff field. The top 4 teams would be the #1's. There would be no regional consideration, only ranking.
Mount would play Wabash, UMHB would play Trinity, UWW would play Western NE and Wheaton would play UW-LAX.
I think when I write it down this way, it makes the field really difficult. I think this would be a great first round and super competitive. IN the middle you would have CWRU against Redlands. Both ranked 16th. Crazy
So all of those teams that won their conference titles each year that aren't ranked don't count? What's the purpose of winning then?
-Ski
While I do believe in AQs, with respect to taking care of one's own laundry, I would've liked to see some of the upper tier nationally ranked teams get in that were left out this year. Can't change their records though. Again as I've stated before only so many seats at the big table. 8-2s this year were left at a disadvantage based on the AQ Process. SOS comes into play hindering that as well when they beat one another every other week. No cakewalk in the south again.....BSU, Hendrix, HSU, TLU, Trinity basically beat up on each other throughout the year that hurt the other's chance of getting any at large consideration. The South had a lot of competition this year with no true juggernaut. Hendrix over TLU early on, then, back to back losses by trinity @ HSU and Berry losing the lead late in the 4th in one possession old fashion defensive battles, TLU @ HSU and wins on a multi turnover game by the the cowboys while Hemphill runs loose all over the bulldogs, HSU stumbles in the FG loss to UMHB, BSU's RB Robert Shufford destroys Berry with his third 200+ yard game in a row, UMHB puts TLU 6ft under in an old fashion barn burner, Trinity takes care of Hendrix and BSU in tested matchups to become co-champions of the SAA, etc. there were a lot of good regional games between both the ASC and SAA as well as good interconference play. Reminds me of the the Wisconsin comeptition we've seen annually. In a perfect world it makes you wonder how any of them would have done against another out of region team in a 1st round game....especially with momentum HSU and Trinity had built up the last half of the season. Not arguing the committee didn't get it right, just stating that this year was as close as it got to having someone else push UMHB in the playoffs without conceding to the annual 1st/2nd round boxing match they usually go through before meeting up with other contenders in country....huge opportunity lost for the teams left out by not taking advantage to a some what off year for normal CRU powerhouse. Good luck to all take got their golden ticket. Now for the playoffs! Exciting!!
I should have qualified...I like the way the system is right now with the AQ. I get it, and I like it. What I was trying to say is that sometimes, the current system doesn't get the best 32 teams in the field. Some teams get left out, aka all the 9-1 or 8-2 teams this year.
In a perfect world, the top 32 teams in the country could get a bid to the playoffs. And they would set the brackets with #1 playing #32, and #2 playing #31 etc...
No playoff system gets the Top X teams in, thanks to automatic qualifiers. Not D-1AA, not D-2, certainly not the D-1 hoops tournament. It's the way it goes. But teams deserve a chance for the post season if they win their league.
And the NCAA is penny wise and pound foolish, especially in not allowing Redlands a home game. But I digress...
D3 Football Map (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=8975.msg1940087#msg1940087)
2019 WEEK 11 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | Points | Prev |
1) | Mount Union (7) | 199 | 1 |
2) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (1) | 191 | 2 |
3) | Wheaton | 185 | T3 |
4) | Muhlenberg | 175 | 5 |
5) | Salisbury | 162 | 6 |
6) | North Central | 151 | 7 |
7) | St John's | 145 | 8 |
8) | UW-Whitewater | 136 | T3 |
9) | Delaware Valley | 129 | 11 |
10) | Chapman | 128 | T9 |
11) | Susquehanna | 116 | 12 |
T12) | Union | 113 | 13 |
T12) | Wesley | 113 | 14 |
14) | John Carroll | 96 | 15 |
15) | Redlands | 77 | T16 |
16) | St Thomas | 61 | T21 |
17) | Linfield | 59 | 18 |
T18) | Bridgewater | 54 | T21 |
T18) | UW-Oshkosh | 54 | NR |
20) | Hardin-Simmons | 50 | 19 |
21) | Wartburg | 47 | 24 |
22) | Berry | 44 | 20 |
23) | Central | 36 | 25 |
24) | Bethel | 30 | T9 |
25) | W New England | 10 | NR |
Dropped Out: #T16 Case Western Reserve, #23 Brockport
Also Receiving Votes: Brockport 8, Hope 8, UW-La Crosse 8, Trinity (TX) 4, Case Western Reserve 3, Ithaca 3, Stevenson 2, Hobart 1, Middlebury 1, Texas Lutheran 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bluestreak66, desertcat1, FCGG, MANDGSU, NCF, Oline89, and smedindy
1) Mount Union 199 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 191 ( 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3)
3) Wheaton 185 ( 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4) Muhlenberg 175 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5)
5) Salisbury 162 ( 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 9)
6) North Central 151 ( 5, 5, 6, 6, 8, 8, 8, 11)
7) St John's 145 ( 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 13)
8) UW-Whitewater 136 ( 4, 7, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14)
9) Delaware Valley 129 ( 6, 9, 9, 10, 11, 11, 11, 12)
10) Chapman 128 ( 6, 8, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14)
11) Susquehanna 116 ( 6, 9, 10, 11, 13, 13, 15, 15)
T12) Union 113 ( 6, 7, 9, 12, 12, 14, 17, 18)
T12) Wesley 113 (10, 10, 10, 11, 11, 13, 13, 17)
14) John Carroll 96 ( 9, 10, 12, 13, 15, 15, 16, 22)
15) Redlands 77 (14, 14, 16, 16, 16, 17, 18, 20)
16) St Thomas 61 (12, 14, 15, 17, 20, 21, 23, 25)
17) Linfield 59 (10, 18, 18, 19, 19, 19, 21, 25)
T18) Bridgewater 54 (14, 15, 15, 20, 21, 21, 22, --)
T18) UW-Oshkosh 54 (16, 16, 17, 18, 19, 22, 22, 24)
20) Hardin-Simmons 50 (14, 15, 17, 17, 18, 25, --, --)
21) Wartburg 47 (12, 17, 20, 21, 22, 22, 23, 24)
22) Berry 44 (18, 18, 19, 19, 19, 20, 25, --)
23) Central 36 (16, 20, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, --)
24) Bethel 30 (13, 19, 23, 23, 24, 24, --, --)
25) W New England 10 (16, --, --, --, --, --, --, --)
T26) Brockport 8 (20, 24)
T26) Hope 8 (21, 24, 25)
T26) UW-La Crosse 8 (21, 23)
29) Trinity (TX) 4 (22)
T30) Case Western Reserve 3 (23)
T30) Ithaca 3 (23)
32) Stevenson 2 (24)
T33) Hobart 1 (25)
T33) Middlebury 1 (25)
T33) Texas Lutheran 1 (25)
Had WNE not gotten the one #16 vote, I would have had the entire Top 25 (Hope instead of Brockport on my ballot).
Not sure where to put this question so I will ask it here. Is there a D3 bracket challenge anywhere to be played? Not finding it on the D3 photography site.
Quote from: Baldini on November 20, 2019, 06:19:30 PM
Is there a D3 bracket challenge anywhere to be played?
D3Football.com has done a bracket challenge in the past. Pat?
d3photography has hosted that bracket challenge, but they are not this year.
Ice Bear says this is really a good looking poll. Ice appreciates the work and thought that obviously goes into it each week on a national scale. Ice believes in D3 with so many teams, not tons of coverage (like D1), life's busy schedule, etc, it certainly isn't easy to come up with this. Nice ****ing job.
Ice Bear also like the recent discussion. Honestly he doesn't know exactly how he feels about the AQ system. At times he likes it and at others it annoys him because like what has already been said it does not include the best 32...or however many, teams in the country. Ice knows there are so many reasons why this is, many valid and/or practical. He guesses he should sit back and really think about his view of the current playoff set up in D3 football and across the board.
Believe it or not, I think the AQ system and having a field of 32 as it is now reduces arguments.
Question for the group, does a loss in the first round drop a team out of the top 25 and open it up to a team that wins a non NCAA (bowl) game?
It depends. As with everything in life.
Quote from: smedindy on November 22, 2019, 04:58:04 PM
It depends. As with everything in life.
Ain't that the truth.
Well said Smed.
Does anyone really look back and think, "We were ranked #25 in the final poll!"?
Quote from: DuffMan on November 22, 2019, 09:47:40 PM
Does anyone really look back and think, "We were ranked #25 in the final poll!"?
Teams that don't get ranked often enough to take it for granted might. The D3 top 25 is a pretty exclusive club, really.
So how does the final poll shake on out? I view the first 4 as North Central, Wheaton, Mount Union and UW-W. Am I incorrect in that thinking? And is St. John's, Muhlenberg and Mary Hardin-Baylor the next 3? And if so, in what order? Who rounds out the top 10?
Since SJU defeated Wheaton in the Quarterfinal, and based on last years final ranking, I would think; 1.} NCC, 2.) UWW, 3.) SJU, 4.) UMU, 5.) Muhlenburg, 6.) Wheaton, 7.) UMHB.
Could swap #3 and #4. And switch around #5, #6 and #7 in any order.
Checking the Massey top 10 this morning and a little surprised by 8-10.
1.) North Central
2.) Wheaton
3.) Mount Union
4.) UW-Whitewater
5.) Muhlenberg
6.) St. John's
7.) Mary Hardin-Baylor
8.) Susquehanna
9.) Delaware Valley
10.) Bridgewater
Quote from: retagent on December 21, 2019, 09:55:59 AM
Since SJU defeated Wheaton in the Quarterfinal, and based on last years final ranking, I would think; 1.} NCC, 2.) UWW, 3.) SJU, 4.) UMU, 5.) Muhlenburg, 6.) Wheaton, 7.) UMHB.
Could swap #3 and #4. And switch around #5, #6 and #7 in any order.
How can you put that much space between
a) NCC and UMU
b) SJU and Wheaton
??
Quote from: ncc_fan on December 21, 2019, 04:26:11 PM
Quote from: retagent on December 21, 2019, 09:55:59 AM
Since SJU defeated Wheaton in the Quarterfinal, and based on last years final ranking, I would think; 1.} NCC, 2.) UWW, 3.) SJU, 4.) UMU, 5.) Muhlenburg, 6.) Wheaton, 7.) UMHB.
Could swap #3 and #4. And switch around #5, #6 and #7 in any order.
How can you put that much space between
a) NCC and UMU
b) SJU and Wheaton
??
How d'ya like me now? I did give myself some wiggle room, but still, with my "possible switches", pretty good
You guys putting a final one together? I'm super curious to see your 2-8!
Quote from: New Tradition on December 30, 2019, 08:58:38 AM
You guys putting a final one together? I'm super curious to see your 2-8!
You would be curious to see who 2 to 8 are. :)
Quote from: FANOFD3 on December 30, 2019, 09:01:15 AM
Quote from: New Tradition on December 30, 2019, 08:58:38 AM
You guys putting a final one together? I'm super curious to see your 2-8!
You would be curious to see who 2 to 8 are. :)
Mine are in on 23rd.
#2 mtu,uww,sju,wheat,umhb,Chapman, #8 Muhlenberg.. :-*. Happy Holidays.
Ballots are still trickling in. Got one today, still waiting on one more. I will post it in the next couple days whether that last ballot comes in or not.
Sorry for the extended delay. We finish one ballot short.
D3 Football Map (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=8975.msg1940087#msg1940087)
2019 FINAL TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | Points | Prev |
1) | North Central (7) | 175 | 6 |
2) | Mount Union | 158 | 1 |
3) | UW-Whitewater | 156 | 8 |
4) | Wheaton | 155 | 3 |
5) | St John's | 146 | 7 |
6) | Muhlenberg | 142 | 4 |
7) | Mary Hardin-Baylor | 133 | 2 |
8) | Delaware Valley | 127 | 9 |
9) | Salisbury | 120 | 5 |
10) | Chapman | 101 | 10 |
11) | Susquehanna | 93 | 11 |
12) | Wesley | 89 | T12 |
13) | Union | 85 | T12 |
14) | Wartburg | 73 | 21 |
15) | John Carroll | 71 | 14 |
T16) | Linfield | 59 | 17 |
T16) | St Thomas | 59 | 16 |
18) | Bridgewater | 58 | T18 |
19) | Central | 50 | 23 |
20) | Hardin-Simmons | 47 | 20 |
21) | Redlands | 42 | 15 |
22) | UW-Oshkosh | 34 | T18 |
23) | Aurora | 33 | NR |
24) | Brockport | 20 | NR |
25) | Bethel | 16 | 24 |
Dropped Out: #22 Berry, #25 Western New England
Also Receiving Votes: Berry 10, Case Western Reserve 9, W New England 7, UW-La Crosse 3, Ithaca 2, Hobart 1, Washington U 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, bluestreak66, desertcat1, FCGG, MANDGSU, NCF, Oline89, and smedindy
1) North Central 175 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2) Mount Union 158 ( 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 6, 6)
3) UW-Whitewater 156 ( 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 4, 7)
4) Wheaton 155 ( 2, 2, 3, 3, 5, 5, 7)
5) St John's 146 ( 3, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8)
6) Muhlenberg 142 ( 4, 4, 5, 5, 7, 7, 8)
7) Mary Hardin-Baylor 133 ( 5, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 9)
8) Delaware Valley 127 ( 4, 6, 6, 8, 9, 9, 13)
9) Salisbury 120 ( 6, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10)
10) Chapman 101 ( 7, 10, 11, 11, 12, 14, 16)
11) Susquehanna 93 ( 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16)
12) Wesley 89 (11, 11, 11, 12, 12, 13, 23)
13) Union 85 (10, 10, 11, 12, 13, 17, 24)
14) Wartburg 73 ( 8, 14, 16, 16, 18, 18, 19)
15) John Carroll 71 ( 8, 11, 14, 15, 17, 20, --)
T16) Linfield 59 (12, 15, 15, 17, 19, 19, --)
T16) St Thomas 59 (13, 14, 14, 19, 20, 21, 22)
18) Bridgewater 58 (12, 13, 14, 16, 21, 22, --)
19) Central 50 (15, 17, 17, 18, 20, 21, 24)
20) Hardin-Simmons 47 (13, 16, 17, 18, 20, 25, --)
21) Redlands 42 (15, 16, 18, 21, 22, 23, 25)
22) UW-Oshkosh 34 (17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, --)
23) Aurora 33 (18, 19, 19, 21, 21, 25, --)
24) Brockport 20 (18, 22, 23, 24, 24, 25, --)
25) Bethel 16 (15, 23, 24, --, --, --, --)
26) Berry 10 (20, 22)
27) Case Western Reserve 9 (20, 24, 25)
28) W New England 7 (22, 23)
29) UW-La Crosse 3 (23)
30) Ithaca 2 (24)
T31) Hobart 1 (25)
T31) Washington U 1 (25)
Since Wheaton was beaten by St John's AT WHEATON, I question having Wheaton ahead of SJU on your ballot. And there are other factors. The Johnnies played UWW pretty even AT UWW. Would love to hear some justification, even though this Poll means nothing. Just curious.
Quote from: retagent on January 09, 2020, 08:38:30 AM
Since Wheaton was beaten by St John's AT WHEATON, I question having Wheaton ahead of SJU on your ballot. And there are other factors. The Johnnies played UWW pretty even AT UWW. Would love to hear some justification, even though this Poll means nothing. Just curious.
My justification is:
North Central was the best team, and Wheaton beat them. From what I understand, Wheaton played a very under-whelming game against SJU, and still almost pulled it out. Really, if someone put SJU ahead, that would be perfectly reasonable. I feel like after the top 2, you could slot the next 3 any way you see fit
Since Wheaton beat North Central, should we question having North Central ahead of Wheaton? Since UW-EC beat St. Thomas, should we question having St. Thomas ahead of UW-EC? When applying that logic no one can be voted ahead of someone else unless they are an undefeated team. Since there were no undefeated teams no one can be ranked ahead of anyone.
Massey final top 5 are NC, Wheaton, Mt. Union, Muhlenberg and UW-W.
Hansen final top 5 are NC, Mt. Union, Wheaton, St. John's and UW-W.
Not part of this Fan Poll but here was my top 6 in the final Top 25:
1- North Central
2- UWW
3- St. John's
4- Wheaton
5- Mount Union
6- Muhlenberg
There are a lot of justifiable ways to go with 2-5/6.
I think there's value in advancing through the tournament. Whitewater won at UMHB and beat St. John's- two extremely impressive wins that Mount Union doesn't have. In fact, Mount Union did not beat a single team in my final top 25 in 2019. If Mount Union's best result is a close home loss to the national champion, that overall resume is pretty thin. At least it is to me. I know a lot of voters put a lot of value on John Carroll- I didn't. Just never saw it from the Streaks this year.
Could Mount Union have won those games that UWW did? Maybe? Maybe even probably. I think if there's anything that this season and this tournament in general should have taught us is that we shouldn't presume wins for anybody. Which is why I ended up valuing tournament results a bit more than hypothetical tournament results. Once I'm settled into that path, UWW over St. John's and St. John's over Wheaton was an easy order. Then I went with Wheaton over Mount Union as Wheaton's best results (W NCC, 1-point loss to SJU) were better than Mount Union's best results (particularly the common opponent). It sounds strange, but the debate I ended up having was Mount Union at #2 or #5.
None of that is to say that I'm right and anybody placing Mount Union #2 is wrong. There's not really a wrong way to have voted in this final poll.
Quote from: wally_wabash on January 09, 2020, 03:49:18 PM
Not part of this Fan Poll but here was my top 6 in the final Top 25:
1- North Central
2- UWW
3- St. John's
4- Wheaton
5- Mount Union
6- Muhlenberg
There are a lot of justifiable ways to go with 2-5/6.
I think there's value in advancing through the tournament. Whitewater won at UMHB and beat St. John's- two extremely impressive wins that Mount Union doesn't have. In fact, Mount Union did not beat a single team in my final top 25 in 2019. If Mount Union's best result is a close home loss to the national champion, that overall resume is pretty thin. At least it is to me. I know a lot of voters put a lot of value on John Carroll- I didn't. Just never saw it from the Streaks this year.
Could Mount Union have won those games that UWW did? Maybe? Maybe even probably. I think if there's anything that this season and this tournament in general should have taught us is that we shouldn't presume wins for anybody. Which is why I ended up valuing tournament results a bit more than hypothetical tournament results. Once I'm settled into that path, UWW over St. John's and St. John's over Wheaton was an easy order. Then I went with Wheaton over Mount Union as Wheaton's best results (W NCC, 1-point loss to SJU) were better than Mount Union's best results (particularly the common opponent). It sounds strange, but the debate I ended up having was Mount Union at #2 or #5.
None of that is to say that I'm right and anybody placing Mount Union #2 is wrong. There's not really a wrong way to have voted in this final poll.
Let's say you are voting for 2019 in a complete vacuum, no historical influence at all, no preseason poll based on 2018 results. What are your top 10? Can you still find a way to justify placing MU in top 5?
Quote from: Oline89 on January 10, 2020, 12:35:14 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on January 09, 2020, 03:49:18 PM
Not part of this Fan Poll but here was my top 6 in the final Top 25:
1- North Central
2- UWW
3- St. John's
4- Wheaton
5- Mount Union
6- Muhlenberg
There are a lot of justifiable ways to go with 2-5/6.
I think there's value in advancing through the tournament. Whitewater won at UMHB and beat St. John's- two extremely impressive wins that Mount Union doesn't have. In fact, Mount Union did not beat a single team in my final top 25 in 2019. If Mount Union's best result is a close home loss to the national champion, that overall resume is pretty thin. At least it is to me. I know a lot of voters put a lot of value on John Carroll- I didn't. Just never saw it from the Streaks this year.
Could Mount Union have won those games that UWW did? Maybe? Maybe even probably. I think if there's anything that this season and this tournament in general should have taught us is that we shouldn't presume wins for anybody. Which is why I ended up valuing tournament results a bit more than hypothetical tournament results. Once I'm settled into that path, UWW over St. John's and St. John's over Wheaton was an easy order. Then I went with Wheaton over Mount Union as Wheaton's best results (W NCC, 1-point loss to SJU) were better than Mount Union's best results (particularly the common opponent). It sounds strange, but the debate I ended up having was Mount Union at #2 or #5.
None of that is to say that I'm right and anybody placing Mount Union #2 is wrong. There's not really a wrong way to have voted in this final poll.
Let's say you are voting for 2019 in a complete vacuum, no historical influence at all, no preseason poll based on 2018 results. What are your top 10? Can you still find a way to justify placing MU in top 5?
It was tough this year. Usually you have several unbeatens make the semifinals and can slot them in at the top and build off of that... Muhlenberg was the only unbeaten to get that far which makes everything much more difficult and subjective.
I think a team who definitely was the closest to beating the champs in the playoffs (lost by 7 after leading a lot of the way, Del Val was the only other team within 3 scores) and was otherwise unbeaten is worthy of a Top 5 spot even without the history of Mount.
Quote from: Oline89 on January 10, 2020, 12:35:14 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on January 09, 2020, 03:49:18 PM
Not part of this Fan Poll but here was my top 6 in the final Top 25:
1- North Central
2- UWW
3- St. John's
4- Wheaton
5- Mount Union
6- Muhlenberg
There are a lot of justifiable ways to go with 2-5/6.
I think there's value in advancing through the tournament. Whitewater won at UMHB and beat St. John's- two extremely impressive wins that Mount Union doesn't have. In fact, Mount Union did not beat a single team in my final top 25 in 2019. If Mount Union's best result is a close home loss to the national champion, that overall resume is pretty thin. At least it is to me. I know a lot of voters put a lot of value on John Carroll- I didn't. Just never saw it from the Streaks this year.
Could Mount Union have won those games that UWW did? Maybe? Maybe even probably. I think if there's anything that this season and this tournament in general should have taught us is that we shouldn't presume wins for anybody. Which is why I ended up valuing tournament results a bit more than hypothetical tournament results. Once I'm settled into that path, UWW over St. John's and St. John's over Wheaton was an easy order. Then I went with Wheaton over Mount Union as Wheaton's best results (W NCC, 1-point loss to SJU) were better than Mount Union's best results (particularly the common opponent). It sounds strange, but the debate I ended up having was Mount Union at #2 or #5.
None of that is to say that I'm right and anybody placing Mount Union #2 is wrong. There's not really a wrong way to have voted in this final poll.
Let's say you are voting for 2019 in a complete vacuum, no historical influence at all, no preseason poll based on 2018 results. What are your top 10? Can you still find a way to justify placing MU in top 5?
Yes, because you still have to go on the limited data available to you and they placed North Central very tough. Quality loss is not a perfect measure, but when limited information is available, it has to factor in as meaningful.
Quote from: Oline89 on January 10, 2020, 12:35:14 PM
Let's say you are voting for 2019 in a complete vacuum, no historical influence at all, no preseason poll based on 2018 results. What are your top 10? Can you still find a way to justify placing MU in top 5?
I think I did that. Mount Union was a top seed in the tournament, dominated every team less one, and took the national champions to the final snap. It took huge games (at the same time!) from the NCAA's career passing leader, a 2000 yard receiver and a 2000 yard rusher to beat them- barely. So yeah, I think, with blinders on to everything except what transpired in 2019, Mount Union is certainly in the top 5. This wasn't a rebuilding/down cycle Mount Union team (2016, for example).
Now, if you're looking at placing Mount Union outside of the top 10, I think that the bias pendulum has swung all the way to the other side. Basing their final ranking singularly on the fact that they went out somewhere with teams grouped between 9 and 16 I think is blatantly ignoring their results and performance throughout the season.
Time to wake up from your hibernation. It's football season
If you're interested in being part of the Fan Poll this year just send me a PM. Ballots are due on Monday nights. If you need extra time or know you won't be able to get a ballot in that particular week please let me know as soon as you can. The earlier you submit a ballot the more time I'll have to check it and make sure you didn't make any errors or forget a team (and there's usually one every couple weeks that needs revised). Also, please make sure it's clear what team you're selecting... don't use too generic of an abbreviation or something random because I may not know who you're referring to.
If you're in she aouth or east regions Regions 1-3 I strongly hope you'll join. There's usually a low turnout from those areas.
No preseason poll this year so the first poll will be after week 1.
Submitted mine. Had no clue what to base it on. These results should be all over the board.
Last call for ballots. I'll have the poll up in 24 hours unless someone says they need more time. We have 6 people so far so plenty of room for more.
One voter had a duplicate team and never replied so there is a blank 25th place.
D3 Football Map (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=8975.msg1940087#msg1940087)
2021 WEEK 1 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | W-L | Points | Prev Rank |
1) | Mount Union (3) | 1-0 | 146 | 2 |
2) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (1) | 1-0 | 142 | 7 |
3) | North Central (2) | 0-0 | 138 | 1 |
4) | UW-Whitewater | 1-0 | 134 | 3 |
5) | Wheaton | 1-0 | 124 | 4 |
6) | St John's | 1-0 | 108 | 5 |
7) | Salisbury | 1-0 | 106 | 9 |
8) | Muhlenberg | 1-0 | 104 | 6 |
9) | Hardin-Simmons | 1-0 | 101 | 20 |
10) | Delaware Valley | 1-0 | 87 | 8 |
11) | UW-Oshkosh | 1-0 | 83 | 22 |
12) | Wartburg | 1-0 | 75 | 14 |
13) | Linfield | 0-0 | 70 | T16 |
14) | Washington & Jefferson | 1-0 | 69 | NR |
15) | Union | 1-0 | 66 | 13 |
16) | Central | 1-0 | 56 | 19 |
17) | Bethel | 1-0 | 52 | 25 |
18) | Chapman | 1-0 | 47 | 10 |
19) | Aurora | 0-1 | 42 | 23 |
20) | Brockport | 1-0 | 35 | 24 |
21) | Johns Hopkins | 1-0 | 31 | NR |
22) | Heidelberg | 1-0 | 19 | NR |
23) | Susquehanna | 1-0 | 17 | 11 |
24) | Randolph Macon | 1-0 | 16 | NR |
T25) | Berry | 1-0 | 14 | NR |
T25) | John Carroll | 0-1 | 14 | 15 |
Dropped Out: #12 Wesley, #T16 St Thomas, #18 Bridgewater, #21 Redlands
Also Receiving Votes: Redlands 13, Bridgewater 8, UW-La Crosse 7, St Norbert 6, Whitworth 6, Hope 4, Huntingdon 4, Wabash 3, Endicott 2
Voters: 02 Warhawk, desertcat1, FANOFD3, FCGG, NCF, and Oline89
1) Mount Union 146 ( 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 142 ( 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4)
3) North Central 138 ( 1, 1, 3, 4, 4, 5)
4) UW-Whitewater 134 ( 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 6)
5) Wheaton 124 ( 3, 4, 5, 5, 6, 9)
6) St John's 108 ( 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11)
7) Salisbury 106 ( 6, 7, 8, 8, 10, 11)
8) Muhlenberg 104 ( 5, 6, 7, 11, 11, 12)
9) Hardin-Simmons 101 ( 5, 7, 7, 10, 10, 16)
10) Delaware Valley 87 ( 9, 9, 12, 12, 13, 14)
11) UW-Oshkosh 83 ( 6, 9, 9, 10, 18, 21)
12) Wartburg 75 ( 8, 11, 14, 15, 15, 18)
13) Linfield 70 ( 8, 10, 11, 13, 19, 25)
14) Wash & Jeff 69 (13, 13, 14, 14, 15, 18)
15) Union 66 ( 8, 12, 15, 16, 16, 23)
16) Central 56 (13, 13, 17, 17, 18, 22)
17) Bethel 52 ( 7, 12, 16, 17, --, --)
18) Chapman 47 (12, 16, 18, 18, 19, --)
19) Aurora 42 (14, 15, 19, 20, 20, --)
20) Brockport 35 (15, 17, 19, 21, 23, --)
21) Johns Hopkins 31 ( 8, 16, 24, 25, --, --)
22) Heidelberg 19 (14, 22, 23, --, --, --)
23) Susquehanna 17 (20, 20, 21, --, --, --)
24) Randolph Macon 16 (19, 21, 24, 24, --, --)
T25) Berry 14 (17, 21, --, --, --, --)
T25) John Carroll 14 (19, 22, 24, 25, --, --)
27) Redlands 13 (17, 22)
28) Bridgewater 8 (21, 23)
29) UW-La Crosse 7 (20, 25)
T30) St Norbert 6 (20)
T30) Whitworth 6 (23, 24, 25)
T32) Hope 4 (22)
T32) Huntingdon 4 (22)
34) Wabash 3 (23)
35) Endicott 2 (24)
Considering we have just 6 ballots, there is a lot of uncertainty. Also lots of ties.
D3 Football Map (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=8975.msg1940087#msg1940087)
2021 WEEK 2 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | W-L | Points | Prev |
1) | Mount Union (2) | 1-0 | 144 | 1 |
2) | North Central (3) | 1-0 | 141 | 3 |
3) | UW-Whitewater | 2-0 | 139 | 4 |
4) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (1) | 2-0 | 138 | 2 |
5) | Wheaton | 1-0 | 125 | 5 |
6) | Muhlenberg | 2-0 | 107 | 8 |
T7) | Hardin-Simmons | 2-0 | 105 | 9 |
T7) | St John's | 1-0 | 105 | 6 |
T9) | Delaware Valley | 2-0 | 92 | 10 |
T9) | UW-Oshkosh | 2-0 | 92 | 11 |
11) | Linfield | 1-0 | 88 | 13 |
T12) | Union | 2-0 | 77 | 15 |
T12) | Washington & Jefferson | 2-0 | 77 | 14 |
14) | Salisbury | 1-1 | 62 | 7 |
15) | Bethel | 2-0 | 59 | 17 |
16) | Central | 2-0 | 56 | 16 |
17) | Chapman | 2-0 | 48 | 18 |
18) | Ithaca | 2-0 | 42 | NR |
19) | Johns Hopkins | 2-0 | 40 | 21 |
T20) | Berry | 2-0 | 24 | T25 |
T20) | Randolph Macon | 2-0 | 24 | 24 |
22) | Gustavus Adolphus | 2-0 | 20 | NR |
23) | Redlands | 2-0 | 19 | NR |
24) | John Carroll | 0-1 | 17 | T25 |
25) | UW-La Crosse | 2-0 | 14 | NR |
Dropped Out: #12 Wartburg, #19 Aurora, #20 Brockport, #22 Heidelberg, #23 Susquehanna
Also Receiving Votes: Cortland 13, Heidelberg 12, Hobart 12, Whitworth 11, Birmingham Southern 8, Wartburg 8, Bridgewater 6, Western New England 6, RPI 5, Wabash 5, Susquehanna 4, Endicott 3, Aurora 1, Baldwin Wallace 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, desertcat1, FANOFD3, FCGG, NCF, and Oline89
1) Mount Union 144 ( 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 4)
2) North Central 141 ( 1, 1, 1, 3, 4, 5)
3) UW-Whitewater 139 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4) Mary Hardin-Baylor 138 ( 1, 2, 2, 4, 4, 5)
5) Wheaton 125 ( 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 8)
6) Muhlenberg 107 ( 6, 6, 6, 10, 10, 11)
T7) Hardin-Simmons 105 ( 6, 7, 7, 9, 9, 13)
T7) St John's 105 ( 5, 6, 8, 8, 8, 16)
T9) Delaware Valley 92 ( 8, 10, 10, 11, 12, 13)
T9) UW-Oshkosh 92 ( 6, 8, 9, 9, 13, 19)
11) Linfield 88 ( 7, 9, 10, 10, 14, 18)
T12) Union 77 ( 7, 7, 13, 15, 15, 22)
T12) Wash & Jeff 77 (11, 12, 12, 13, 14, 17)
14) Salisbury 62 (12, 14, 14, 17, 18, 19)
15) Bethel 59 ( 7, 9, 14, 16, 25, --)
16) Central 56 (11, 12, 15, 16, 20, --)
17) Chapman 48 (11, 15, 16, 18, 22, --)
18) Ithaca 42 (15, 17, 18, 19, 19, --)
19) Johns Hopkins 40 (11, 12, 22, 22, 23, --)
T20) Berry 24 (14, 19, 24, 24, 25, --)
T20) Randolph Macon 24 (17, 19, 21, 23, --, --)
22) Gustavus Adolphus 20 (15, 17, --, --, --, --)
23) Redlands 19 (13, 20, --, --, --, --)
24) John Carroll 17 (18, 20, 23, --, --, --)
25) UW-La Crosse 14 (17, 24, 24, 25, --, --)
26) Cortland 13 (16, 23)
T27) Heidelberg 12 (20, 21, 25)
T27) Hobart 12 (16, 24)
29) Whitworth 11 (21, 22, 24)
T30) Birmingham Southern 8 (18)
T30) Wartburg 8 (21, 23)
T32) Bridgewater 6 (20)
T32) W New England 6 (20)
T34) RPI 5 (21)
T34) Wabash 5 (21)
36) Susquehanna 4 (22)
37) Endicott 3 (23)
T38) Aurora 1 (25)
T38) Baldwin Wallace 1 (25)
A No vote for Bethel....interesting
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 16, 2021, 02:49:05 PM
A No vote for Bethel....interesting
I'm so completely unsure of who should be where that I wasn't positive that I wasn't the non vote... turns out it's not me as I had them 9th. My highest non vote was Chapman who is just off my ballot.
A lot more unity this week
D3 Football Map (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=8975.msg1940087#msg1940087)
2021 WEEK 3 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | W-L | Points | Prev |
1) | North Central (4) | 2-0 | 148 | 2 |
2) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (2) | 3-0 | 141 | 4 |
3) | Mount Union | 2-0 | 138 | 1 |
4) | UW-Whitewater | 3-0 | 135 | 3 |
5) | Linfield | 2-0 | 111 | 11 |
6) | St John's | 2-0 | 109 | T7 |
7) | Wheaton | 1-1 | 108 | 5 |
8) | Delaware Valley | 3-0 | 103 | T9 |
9) | Hardin-Simmons | 3-0 | 99 | T7 |
10) | UW-Oshkosh | 2-0 | 97 | T9 |
11) | Bethel | 2-0 | 85 | 15 |
12) | Washington & Jefferson | 3-0 | 80 | T12 |
13) | Union | 3-0 | 76 | T12 |
14) | Central | 3-0 | 73 | 16 |
15) | Johns Hopkins | 3-0 | 64 | 19 |
16) | Salisbury | 1-1 | 59 | 14 |
17) | Randolph-Macon | 3-0 | 53 | T20 |
18) | Ithaca | 3-0 | 43 | 18 |
19) | Chapman | 3-0 | 39 | 17 |
20) | Gustavus Adolphus | 2-0 | 22 | 22 |
21) | John Carroll | 1-1 | 21 | 24 |
22) | UW-La Crosse | 2-1 | 20 | 25 |
23) | Heidelberg | 2-0 | 18 | NR |
T24) | Cortland | 3-0 | 14 | NR |
T24) | Muhlenberg | 2-1 | 14 | 6 |
Dropped Out: #T20 Berry, #23 Redlands
Also Receiving Votes: Birmingham-Southern 12, Ursinus 12, Whitworth 12, Wartburg 11, Susquehanna 9, Hobart 8, Berry 7, Wabash 6, Aurora 2, UW-Stout 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, desertcat1, FANOFD3, FCGG, NCF, and Oline89
1) North Central 148 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 141 ( 1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 4)
3) Mount Union 138 ( 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4)
4) UW-Whitewater 135 ( 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5)
5) Linfield 111 ( 5, 7, 7, 8, 9, 9)
6) St John's 109 ( 5, 6, 6, 7, 8, 15)
7) Wheaton 108 ( 3, 5, 5, 5, 9, 21)
8) Delaware Valley 103 ( 6, 6, 9, 10, 11, 11)
9) Hardin-Simmons 99 ( 6, 7, 10, 11, 11, 12)
10) UW-Oshkosh 97 ( 6, 8, 8, 10, 12, 15)
11) Bethel 85 ( 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 17)
12) Wash & Jeff 80 ( 9, 10, 11, 12, 12, 22)
13) Union 76 ( 7, 10, 12, 13, 15, 23)
14) Central 73 (10, 13, 13, 14, 14, 19)
15) Johns Hopkins 64 ( 8, 9, 14, 19, 21, 21)
16) Salisbury 59 (11, 13, 13, 15, 20, 25)
17) Randolph-Macon 53 (14, 16, 17, 18, 18, 20)
18) Ithaca 43 (15, 16, 17, 18, 21, --)
19) Chapman 39 (15, 17, 17, 20, 22, --)
20) Gustavus Adolphus 22 (14, 16, --, --, --, --)
21) John Carroll 21 (17, 18, 22, --, --, --)
22) UW-La Crosse 20 (16, 23, 23, 24, 24, --)
23) Heidelberg 18 (18, 20, 22, --, --, --)
T24) Cortland 14 (16, 23, 25, --, --, --)
T24) Muhlenberg 14 (19, 23, 24, 24, --, --)
T26) Birmingham-Southern 12 (16, 24)
T26) Ursinus 12 (18, 22)
T26) Whitworth 12 (19, 21)
29) Wartburg 11 (20, 21)
30) Susquehanna 9 (19, 24)
31) Hobart 8 (22, 23, 25)
32) Berry 7 (19)
33) Wabash 6 (20)
34) Aurora 2 (25, 25)
35) UW-Stout 1 (25)
Whichever voter had Wheaton #21, please come on and justify your pick.
They got a 5 from me
Out west they got a # 9 here.
Quote from: desertcat1 on September 21, 2021, 09:30:51 PM
Out west they got a # 9 here.
Not nearly as absurd, but care to explain your reasoning? 6 or 7 I could understand, but my mind boggles at 8 teams better.
And I'm an IWU fan - definitely NOT a Wheatie supporter! ;)
I knew there'd be a few comments about that 21 vote. Wasn't me though, I kept them at 5. I am the St John's at 15 vote though. And I have 4 WIAC teams on my ballot.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 21, 2021, 11:05:52 PM
I knew there'd be a few comments about that 21 vote. Wasn't me though, I kept them at 5. I am the St John's at 15 vote though. And I have 4 WIAC teams on my ballot.
Mea culpa. I had them at 8 the week before, somehow screwed up on my "copy and paste" this week. I would still keep them at 8.
Edited list:
1 N Central
2 Mary Hardin Baylor
3 M Union
4 UWW
5 St Johns
6 Del Val
7 Union
8 Wheaton
9 Linfield
10 UWO
11 Hardin Simmons
12 W&J
13 Bethel
14 Central
15 Johns Hop
16 Ithaca
17 Cortland
18 Chapman
19 Rand Macon
20 Berry
21 Wabash
22 Hiedelberg
23 UW lacrosse
24 Hobart
25 Salisbury
You have Wheaton listed twice, 8 and 23
If there's no objections, we have a 7th pollster who would like to join starting next week.
Not much movement in the top half, quite a bit in the bottom half
D3 Football Map (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=8975.msg1940087#msg1940087)
2021 WEEK 4 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | W-L | Points | Prev |
1) | North Central (5) | 3-0 | 173 | 1 |
2) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (2) | 4-0 | 166 | 2 |
T3) | Mount Union | 3-0 | 157 | 3 |
T3) | UW-Whitewater | 3-0 | 157 | 4 |
5) | Wheaton | 2-1 | 145 | 7 |
6) | St John's | 3-0 | 133 | 6 |
7) | Linfield | 2-0 | 125 | 5 |
8) | Delaware Valley | 3-0 | 122 | 8 |
9) | UW-Oshkosh | 2-0 | 118 | 10 |
10) | Hardin-Simmons | 3-1 | 110 | 9 |
11) | Washington & Jefferson | 4-0 | 100 | 12 |
T12) | Johns Hopkins | 4-0 | 92 | 15 |
T12) | Union | 4-0 | 92 | 13 |
14) | Bethel | 2-1 | 79 | 11 |
15) | Central | 4-0 | 75 | 14 |
16) | Salisbury | 2-1 | 74 | 16 |
17) | Ithaca | 3-0 | 52 | 18 |
18) | Cortland | 3-0 | 39 | T24 |
19) | UW-La Crosse | 2-1 | 36 | 22 |
20) | Whitworth | 3-0 | 33 | NR |
21) | Hobart | 4-0 | 29 | NR |
T22) | Gustavus Adolphus | 3-0 | 24 | 20 |
T22) | Susquehanna | 4-0 | 24 | NR |
24) | Muhlenberg | 3-1 | 22 | T24 |
25) | Wartburg | 2-1 | 15 | NR |
Dropped Out: #17 Randolph-Macon, #19 Chapman, #21 John Carroll, #23 Heidelberg
Also Receiving Votes: John Carroll 14, Ursinus 14, RPI 9, Chapman 7, Wabash 7, Aurora 6, Birmingham Southern 6, Baldwin Wallace 4, Washington & Lee 4, Berry 3, Claremont-Mudd-Scripps 3, UW-Stout 3, Salve Regina 1, Trinity (TX) 1, Westminster (PA) 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, Captainred81, desertcat1, FANOFD3, FCGG, NCF, and Oline89
1) North Central 173 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 166 ( 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 4, 4)
T3) Mount Union 157 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 6)
T3) UW-Whitewater 157 ( 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5)
5) Wheaton 145 ( 3, 3, 5, 5, 5, 8, 8)
6) St John's 133 ( 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 11)
7) Linfield 125 ( 5, 7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10)
8) Delaware Valley 122 ( 6, 6, 8, 9, 10, 10, 11)
9) UW-Oshkosh 118 ( 6, 7, 8, 10, 10, 10, 13)
10) Hardin-Simmons 110 ( 5, 7, 9, 11, 11, 13, 16)
11) Washington & Jefferson 100 ( 9, 11, 11, 11, 12, 12, 16)
T12) Johns Hopkins 92 ( 6, 8, 13, 13, 14, 17, 19)
T12) Union 92 ( 7, 10, 12, 12, 13, 15, 21)
14) Bethel 79 ( 8, 12, 13, 15, 17, 18, 20)
15) Central 75 ( 9, 12, 14, 14, 14, 18, --)
16) Salisbury 74 (12, 13, 14, 14, 15, 19, 21)
17) Ithaca 52 (14, 15, 16, 17, 21, 21, --)
18) Cortland 39 (15, 16, 17, 21, 22, --, --)
19) UW-La Crosse 36 (16, 18, 20, 20, 21, 25, --)
20) Whitworth 33 (15, 17, 18, 22, 25, --, --)
21) Hobart 29 (18, 20, 20, 20, 23, --, --)
T22) Gustavus Adolphus 24 (15, 16, 23, --, --, --, --)
T22) Susquehanna 24 (17, 19, 23, 24, 24, 25, --)
24) Muhlenberg 22 (19, 21, 22, 22, 24, --, --)
25) Wartburg 15 (18, 19, --, --, --, --, --)
T26) John Carroll 14 (16, 24, 24)
T26) Ursinus 14 (18, 20)
28) RPI 9 (17)
T29) Chapman 7 (19)
T29) Wabash 7 (19)
T31) Aurora 6 (22, 24)
T31) Birmingham Southern 6 (22, 24)
T33) Baldwin Wallace 4 (23, 25)
T33) Washington & Lee 4 (22)
T35) Berry 3 (23)
T35) Claremont-Mudd-Scripps 3 (23)
T35) UW-Stout 3 (23)
T38) Salve Regina 1 (25)
T38) Trinity (TX) 1 (25)
T38) Westminster (PA) 1 (25)
Poll is slightly delayed. Just waiting on a correction from one ballot.
It just wouldn't be a poll without a ballot duplicating someone or omitting a top 10 team. I dream of a week where all the ballots are good first try and submitted before the weekend is over. :P
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 06, 2021, 03:18:05 AM
Poll is slightly delayed. Just waiting on a correction from one ballot.
It just wouldn't be a poll without a ballot duplicating someone or omitting a top 10 team. I dream of a week where all the ballots are good first try and submitted before the weekend is over. :P
It's good to have dreams....
A little more movement than the d3football poll but overall still a quiet week
D3 Football Map (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=8975.msg1940087#msg1940087)
2021 WEEK 5 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | | Points | Prev |
1) | North Central (5) | 4-0 | 173 | 1 |
2) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (2) | 5-0 | 164 | 2 |
T3) | Mount Union | 4-0 | 159 | T3 |
T3) | UW-Whitewater | 4-0 | 159 | T3 |
5) | Wheaton | 3-1 | 141 | 5 |
6) | St John's | 4-0 | 131 | 6 |
7) | Linfield | 3-0 | 129 | 7 |
8) | Delaware Valley | 4-0 | 127 | 8 |
9) | UW-Oshkosh | 3-0 | 115 | 9 |
10) | Hardin-Simmons | 4-1 | 99 | 10 |
11) | Johns Hopkins | 5-0 | 96 | T12 |
12) | Central | 5-0 | 95 | 15 |
13) | Union | 5-0 | 93 | T12 |
14) | Washington & Jefferson | 5-0 | 92 | 11 |
15) | Salisbury | 3-1 | 76 | 16 |
16) | Bethel | 3-1 | 73 | 14 |
17) | Ithaca | 4-0 | 64 | 17 |
18) | UW-La Crosse | 3-1 | 48 | 19 |
19) | Cortland | 4-0 | 46 | 18 |
20) | Whitworth | 4-0 | 40 | 20 |
21) | Susquehanna | 5-0 | 38 | T22 |
22) | Muhlenberg | 4-1 | 22 | 24 |
T23) | Hobart | 4-1 | 15 | 21 |
T23) | John Carroll | 2-2 | 15 | NR |
T25) | Aurora | 3-2 | 10 | NR |
T25) | Birmingham Southern | 4-0 | 10 | NR |
Dropped Out: #T22 Gustavus Adolphus, #25 Wartburg
Also Receiving Votes: Wabash 8, Chapman 7, Baldwin Wallace 5, RPI 5, Trinity (TX) 5, Washington & Lee 5, Westminster (PA) 5, Gustavus Adolphus 4, Redlands 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, Captainred81, desertcat1, FANOFD3, FCGG, NCF, and Oline89
1) North Central 173 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 164 ( 1, 1, 2, 2, 4, 4, 4)
T3) Mount Union 159 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 6)
T3) UW-Whitewater 159 ( 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5)
5) Wheaton 141 ( 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 8, 10)
6) St John's 131 ( 5, 5, 6, 7, 9, 9, 10)
7) Linfield 129 ( 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 9, 9)
8) Delaware Valley 127 ( 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 10, 11)
9) UW-Oshkosh 115 ( 8, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10, 13)
10) Hardin-Simmons 99 ( 7, 7, 10, 13, 14, 16, 16)
11) Johns Hopkins 96 ( 6, 8, 12, 13, 13, 17, 17)
12) Central 95 ( 6, 11, 12, 14, 14, 15, 15)
13) Union 93 ( 7, 11, 11, 12, 15, 15, 18)
14) Washington & Jefferson 92 (11, 11, 11, 12, 12, 16, 17)
15) Salisbury 76 (10, 13, 13, 15, 16, 19, 20)
16) Bethel 73 ( 8, 12, 13, 17, 18, 20, 21)
17) Ithaca 64 (12, 14, 14, 16, 17, 21, 24)
18) UW-La Crosse 48 (14, 15, 18, 20, 20, 21, --)
19) Cortland 46 (15, 17, 18, 18, 21, 22, 25)
20) Whitworth 40 (14, 17, 18, 18, 23, --, --)
21) Susquehanna 38 (16, 16, 19, 22, 23, 23, 25)
22) Muhlenberg 22 (19, 22, 22, 22, 23, --, --)
T23) Hobart 15 (19, 20, 25, 25, --, --, --)
T23) John Carroll 15 (20, 23, 24, 24, 24, --, --)
T25) Aurora 10 (20, 22, --, --, --, --, --)
T25) Birmingham Southern 10 (19, 23, --, --, --, --, --)
27) Wabash 8 (19, 25)
28) Chapman 7 (19)
T29) Baldwin Wallace 5 (24, 24, 25)
T29) RPI 5 (21)
T29) Trinity (TX) 5 (21)
T29) Washington & Lee 5 (21)
T29) Westminster (PA) 5 (23, 24)
34) Gustavus Adolphus 4 (22)
35) Redlands 1 (25)
I can see Mount Union 3rd or 4th, but 6th? ??? ??? ???
I'm not sure that Mount is as good this year as they have been in the past that is why I went with #6. I think the OAC as a whole has gone done hill slowly and that has hurt Mount playoff performance. There was a time when I would have put the top 4 teams in the OAC and the top 4 in any other conference but not anymore.
Don't get me wrong they have the talent and potential, but the execution that used to be almost flawless every game... doesn't seem to be there. Also, defensively, they seem to be very vulnerable to the deep ball. I think if they are lined up against a St. Johns or Linfield, not to mention UMHB, NCC, UWW and Wheaton, I could see them giving up multiple scores on that kind of a play.
Quote from: Captainred81 on October 07, 2021, 03:47:36 PM
I'm not sure that Mount is as good this year as they have been in the past that is why I went with #6. I think the OAC as a whole has gone done hill slowly and that has hurt Mount playoff performance. There was a time when I would have put the top 4 teams in the OAC and the top 4 in any other conference but not anymore.
Don't get me wrong they have the talent and potential, but the execution that used to be almost flawless every game... doesn't seem to be there. Also, defensively, they seem to be very vulnerable to the deep ball. I think if they are lined up against a St. Johns or Linfield, not to mention UMHB, NCC, UWW and Wheaton, I could see them giving up multiple scores on that kind of a play.
Mount has played three top 30 teams in four games and has given up a total of 28 points...very vulnerable lol. JCU hit a couple of desperation balls once the game was already decided, I'm guessing that is what your expert opinion is based on.
How has Mount's playoff performance been hurt? '15 - Champs, '16 - 3rd string freshman QB still in the semis, '17 - Champs, '18 - Runner up, '19 - the championship game was played in Nov in Alliance, lost by 7.
Keep up such an educated vote
Mount has played three top 30 teams in four games and has given up a total of 28 points...very vulnerable lol. JCU hit a couple of desperation balls once the game was already decided, I'm guessing that is what your expert opinion is based on.
How has Mount's playoff performance been hurt? '15 - Champs, '16 - 3rd string freshman QB still in the semis, '17 - Champs, '18 - Runner up, '19 - the championship game was played in Nov in Alliance, lost by 7.
Keep up such an educated vote
[/quote]
According to D3 Fanboy, I have declared my self and expert...Let me set the record straight...I am no expert, IMO.
Also, I am certainly entitled to an opinion and as such I stated mine. I'm pretty sure that my opinion did not include anything about Mount Union's playoff record, or that their performance has been hurt. I will say this, the 2019 championship happened in Texas and Mount Union wasn't there. They lost in the quarterfinals that year to the eventual champions.
Quote from: Captainred81 on October 12, 2021, 04:51:18 PM
Mount has played three top 30 teams in four games and has given up a total of 28 points...very vulnerable lol. JCU hit a couple of desperation balls once the game was already decided, I'm guessing that is what your expert opinion is based on.
How has Mount's playoff performance been hurt? '15 - Champs, '16 - 3rd string freshman QB still in the semis, '17 - Champs, '18 - Runner up, '19 - the championship game was played in Nov in Alliance, lost by 7.
Keep up such an educated vote
According to D3 Fanboy, I have declared my self and expert...Let me set the record straight...I am no expert, IMO.
Also, I am certainly entitled to an opinion and as such I stated mine.
I'm pretty sure that my opinion did not include anything about Mount Union's playoff record, or that their performance has been hurt. I will say this, the 2019 championship happened in Texas and Mount Union wasn't there. They lost in the quarterfinals that year to the eventual champions.
[/quote]
Quote from: Captainred81 on October 07, 2021, 03:47:36 PM
I'm not sure that Mount is as good this year as they have been in the past that is why I went with #6. I think the OAC as a whole has gone done hill slowly and that has hurt Mount playoff performance. There was a time when I would have put the top 4 teams in the OAC and the top 4 in any other conference but not anymore.
Don't get me wrong they have the talent and potential, but the execution that used to be almost flawless every game... doesn't seem to be there. Also, defensively, they seem to be very vulnerable to the deep ball. I think if they are lined up against a St. Johns or Linfield, not to mention UMHB, NCC, UWW and Wheaton, I could see them giving up multiple scores on that kind of a play.
man, you really screwed up the quote stuff. the bold text is from you....
we all know that the '19 national championship game was in Alliance and not Texas
Quote from: D3fanboy on October 12, 2021, 05:21:08 PM
snip...
man, you really screwed up the quote stuff. the bold text is from you....
we all know that the '19 national championship game was in Alliance and not Texas
So by your logic the 2018 national championship was played in the 3rd round in Belton? Come on man...
Quote from: Etchglow on October 13, 2021, 09:15:46 AM
Quote from: D3fanboy on October 12, 2021, 05:21:08 PM
snip...
man, you really screwed up the quote stuff. the bold text is from you....
we all know that the '19 national championship game was in Alliance and not Texas
So by your logic the 2018 national championship was played in the 3rd round in Belton? Come on man...
And who is we?
We had one voter tell me they would be absent this week and one who just hasn't responded so we're going with 5 ballots.
D3 Football Map (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=8975.msg1940087#msg1940087)
2021 WEEK 6 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | W-L | Points | Prev |
1) | North Central (4) | 5-0 | 124 | 1 |
2) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (1) | 5-0 | 116 | 2 |
T3) | Mount Union | 5-0 | 113 | T3 |
T3) | UW-Whitewater | 5-0 | 113 | T3 |
5) | Wheaton | 4-1 | 102 | 5 |
6) | Linfield | 4-0 | 101 | 7 |
7) | Delaware Valley | 5-0 | 90 | 8 |
8) | St John's | 5-0 | 89 | 6 |
9) | UW-La Crosse | 4-1 | 75 | 18 |
10) | Central | 6-0 | 73 | 12 |
11) | Hardin-Simmons | 4-1 | 72 | 10 |
12) | Johns Hopkins | 5-0 | 68 | 11 |
13) | Washington & Jefferson | 6-0 | 65 | 14 |
14) | Salisbury | 3-1 | 62 | 15 |
15) | Union | 6-0 | 61 | 13 |
16) | Bethel | 4-1 | 55 | 16 |
17) | Ithaca | 5-0 | 38 | 17 |
18) | Cortland | 5-0 | 34 | 19 |
19) | Susquehanna | 5-0 | 30 | 21 |
T20) | Muhlenberg | 4-1 | 22 | 22 |
T20) | UW-Oshkosh | 3-1 | 22 | 9 |
22) | John Carroll | 3-2 | 18 | T23 |
23) | Birmingham Southern | 5-0 | 16 | T25 |
24) | Trinity (TX) | 4-0 | 15 | NR |
25) | Whitworth | 4-1 | 13 | 20 |
Dropped Out: #T23 Hobart and #T25 Aurora
Also Receiving Votes: Aurora 11, Hobart 10, Baldwin Wallace 7, Gustavus Adolphus 4, Wabash 3, Merchant Marine 1, Pacific 1, Redlands 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, Captainred81, desertcat1, FANOFD3, FCGG, NCF, and Oline89
1) North Central 124 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 2)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 116 ( 1, 2, 3, 4, 4)
T3) Mount Union 113 ( 3, 3, 3, 4, 4)
T3) UW-Whitewater 113 ( 2, 2, 3, 5, 5)
5) Wheaton 102 ( 4, 5, 5, 5, 9)
6) Linfield 101 ( 2, 6, 6, 7, 8)
7) Delaware Valley 90 ( 6, 7, 8, 9, 10)
8) St John's 89 ( 6, 7, 8, 10, 10)
9) UW-La Crosse 75 ( 9, 10, 11, 12, 13)
10) Central 73 ( 6, 9, 14, 14, 14)
11) Hardin-Simmons 72 ( 7, 9, 13, 13, 16)
12) Johns Hopkins 68 ( 7, 8, 12, 17, 18)
13) Wash & Jeff 65 (11, 11, 11, 14, 18)
14) Salisbury 62 (11, 12, 13, 15, 17)
15) Union 61 (10, 12, 14, 16, 17)
16) Bethel 55 ( 8, 12, 13, 16, --)
17) Ithaca 38 (15, 16, 18, 19, 24)
18) Cortland 34 (15, 16, 18, 22, 25)
19) Susquehanna 30 (17, 17, 20, 23, 23)
T20) Muhlenberg 22 (19, 20, 21, 22, --)
T20) UW-Oshkosh 22 (15, 15, --, --, --)
22) John Carroll 18 (18, 21, 23, 24, --)
23) Birmingham Southern 16 (19, 19, 24, --, --)
24) Trinity (TX) 15 (21, 21, 23, 24, --)
25) Whitworth 13 (19, 20, --, --, --)
26) Aurora 11 (20, 21)
27) Hobart 10 (20, 22)
28) Baldwin Wallace 7 (22, 23)
29) Gustavus Adolphus 4 (22)
30) Wabash 3 (24, 25)
T31) Merchant Marine 1 (25)
T31) Pacific 1 (25)
T31) Redlands 1 (25)
Quote from: Etchglow on October 13, 2021, 09:15:46 AM
Quote from: D3fanboy on October 12, 2021, 05:21:08 PM
snip...
man, you really screwed up the quote stuff. the bold text is from you....
we all know that the '19 national championship game was in Alliance and not Texas
So by your logic the 2018 national championship was played in the 3rd round in Belton? Come on man...
'18 - three point win vs an eight point win, '19 seven point game in Alliance but NCC didnt have another even semi-close game...what a stretch, come on man
First seventiesraider, then PurpleSuit, now D3fanboy
;)
Lots of ties this week. Gained one voter from last week but still one voter MIA.
D3 Football Map (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=8975.msg1940087#msg1940087)
2021 WEEK 7 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | W-L | Points | Prev |
1) | North Central (5) | 6-0 | 149 | 1 |
2) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (1) | 6-0 | 139 | 2 |
T3) | Mount Union | 6-0 | 136 | T3 |
T3) | UW-Whitewater | 6-0 | 136 | T3 |
T5) | Linfield | 5-0 | 117 | 6 |
T5) | Wheaton | 5-1 | 117 | 5 |
7) | St John's | 6-0 | 115 | 8 |
8) | Delaware Valley | 6-0 | 110 | 7 |
9) | Central | 6-0 | 90 | 10 |
T10) | Union | 6-0 | 88 | 15 |
T10) | Washington & Jefferson | 6-0 | 88 | 13 |
12) | Hardin-Simmons | 5-1 | 86 | 11 |
13) | UW-La Crosse | 5-1 | 84 | 9 |
14) | Bethel | 5-1 | 74 | 16 |
15) | Salisbury | 4-1 | 71 | 14 |
16) | Ithaca | 6-0 | 51 | 17 |
T17) | Cortland | 6-0 | 49 | 18 |
T17) | Susquehanna | 6-0 | 49 | 19 |
19) | Muhlenberg | 5-1 | 42 | T20 |
20) | Johns Hopkins | 5-1 | 31 | 12 |
21) | UW-Oshkosh | 3-2 | 23 | T20 |
T22) | Birmingham Southern | 6-0 | 19 | 23 |
T22) | Trinity (TX) | 5-0 | 19 | 24 |
24) | Whitworth | 5-1 | 17 | 25 |
25) | John Carroll | 4-2 | 16 | 22 |
Dropped Out: None
Also Receiving Votes: Baldwin Wallace 9, Aurora 7, Hobart 7, Washington & Lee 7, UW-Platteville 2, Merchant Marine 1, Randolph-Macon 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, Captainred81, desertcat1, FANOFD3, FCGG, NCF, and Oline89
1) North Central 149 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 139 ( 1, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4)
T3) Mount Union 136 ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4)
T3) UW-Whitewater 136 ( 2, 2, 2, 4, 5, 5)
T5) Linfield 117 ( 2, 6, 7, 7, 8, 9)
T5) Wheaton 117 ( 4, 5, 5, 6, 8, 11)
7) St John's 115 ( 5, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10)
8) Delaware Valley 110 ( 6, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10)
9) Central 90 ( 6, 9, 11, 13, 13, 14)
T10) Union 88 ( 7, 8, 12, 12, 14, 15)
T11) Washington & Jefferson 88 (10, 10, 11, 11, 13, 13)
12) Hardin-Simmons 86 ( 7, 8, 12, 14, 14, 15)
13) UW-La Crosse 84 ( 9, 9, 10, 14, 15, 15)
14) Bethel 74 ( 9, 11, 13, 15, 16, 18)
15) Salisbury 71 (11, 12, 12, 15, 16, 19)
16) Ithaca 51 (12, 16, 16, 16, 20, 25)
T17) Cortland 49 (13, 14, 17, 20, 21, 22)
T17) Susquehanna 49 (10, 17, 19, 19, 20, 22)
19) Muhlenberg 42 (17, 18, 18, 20, 20, 21)
20) Johns Hopkins 31 (18, 19, 21, 22, 22, 23)
21) UW-Oshkosh 23 (16, 17, 23, 25, --, --)
T22) Birmingham Southern 19 (17, 21, 23, 24, --, --)
T22) Trinity (TX) 19 (18, 20, 22, 25, --, --)
24) Whitworth 17 (17, 18, --, --, --, --)
25) John Carroll 16 (19, 21, 23, 25, --, --)
26) Baldwin Wallace 9 (22, 23, 24)
T27) Aurora 7 (19)
T27) Hobart 7 (23, 24, 24)
T27) Washington & Lee 7 (21, 24)
30) UW-Platteville 2 (24)
T31) Merchant Marine 1 (25)
T31) Randolph-Macon 1 (25)
For the consideration of the voters who don't think 5-0 Trinity (TX) is a top 25 team, some NCAA stats (https://stats.ncaa.org/teams/524294):
Total defense: 158.2 yds/game, 2nd
Rushing defense: 36.0 yds/game, 1st
Scoring defense: 5.4 ppg, 1st
Total offense: 498.4 yds/game, 15th
Scoring offense: 43.0 ppg, T-16th
Time of possession: 37:28, 1st
So yeah, they haven't played the toughest schedule, but those results include knocking off five-time defending SAA champion Berry 27-6 at their place* as well as handing a 4-0 Centre team a 27-7 loss - the same Centre that led Birmingham Southern most of the way before falling by 7 last week. You can only play the teams in front of you and IMBO** the way they have taken care of business shows they are worthy of top 25 consideration.
* - only the second time Berry has lost at home in SAA play since their stadium was completed in 2015 (https://www.berryvikings.com/news/2021/10/2/football-vikings-handed-rare-conference-loss-at-valhalla-by-trinity.aspx)
** - B = biased ;D
I'm one of those who didn't give Trinity a vote. There's just so many teams to consider for the bottom 5 to squeeze into the top 25. However, Trinity is definitely in the discussion and should be considered.
Looks like I'm the only one who's picking Aurora. They lost by only 6 at St. John's (who's ranked 7th). It's a game they could have easily won if it wasn't for a 4th and goal stand by SJU on the 5 yard line. If you lost by only 6, on the road to a top 10 team, you're definitely top 25 worthy. I'm one who puts a lot of stock in underdogs who have close games against good opponents. Yes, they got trucked by NCC....but who doesn't. They're clearly the best team in the country until someone beats them. Since those two losses Aurora has been on a tear. They will probably win out b/c their conference isn't very strong and Aurora has one of the better QBs in the nation.
Bottom line, one-score losses against top 10 teams (especially on the road) are more impressive to me than blowout wins against weak opponents, imho. However, once that team loses a game they should have won, then all bets are off...which Aurora hasn't done yet. I'm not trying to convince people to vote for Aurora, I just wanted to let you know where I'm coming from b/c I have them at 19.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 21, 2021, 08:26:38 AM
I'm one of those who didn't give Trinity a vote. There's just so many teams to consider for the bottom 5 to squeeze into the top 25. However, Trinity is definitely in the discussion and should be considered.
Looks like I'm the only one who's picking Aurora. They lost by only 6 at St. John's (who's ranked 7th). It's a game they could have easily won if it wasn't for a 4th and goal stand by SJU on the 5 yard line. If you lost by only 6, on the road to a top 10 team, you're definitely top 25 worthy. I'm one who puts a lot of stock in underdogs who have close games against good opponents. Yes, they got trucked by NCC....but who doesn't. They're clearly the best team in the country until someone beats them. Since those two losses Aurora has been on a tear. They will probably win out b/c their conference isn't very strong and Aurora has one of the better QBs in the nation.
Bottom line, one-score losses against top 10 teams (especially on the road) are more impressive to me than blowout wins against weak opponents, imho. However, once that team loses a game they should have won, then all bets are off...which Aurora hasn't done yet. I'm not trying to convince people to vote for Aurora, I just wanted to let you know where I'm coming from b/c I have them at 19.
That SJU D has also pitched 3 straight shutouts. And Aurora moved the ball on them.
I know there's a huge gap between the top 10 and the rest of the division, but I find it hard to give a vote a to a team that lost so big North Central, even if they hung around with SJU. I guess you can read into those results a bunch of way, but if Mount Union had beaten BW or John Carroll by that margin, I'm sure they would not be getting votes, even if they hung in there with WJ like Carroll did
Quote from: Captainred81 on October 21, 2021, 04:55:09 PM
I know there's a huge gap between the top 10 and the rest of the division, but I find it hard to give a vote a to a team that lost so big North Central, even if they hung around with SJU. I guess you can read into those results a bunch of way, but if Mount Union had beaten BW or John Carroll by that margin, I'm sure they would not be getting votes, even if they hung in there with WJ like Carroll did
Yeah, but there's also a gap between the Top 4-6 as well. There are very good (top 25) teams that get boat raced in the Semi-finals by the truly elite of D3. So in Aurora you have a close road loss to a very good SJU team and a blowout loss to a very good NCC team. FWIW, having seen SJU, I doubt there more than 5 other teams ranked 10-25 that could have kept it as close as Aurora did. And having only watched the Wheaton v. NCC game, I'll bet there are easily another 10 schools in the top 25 capable of getting blown out by 5+ scores against NCC (Or UMHB, Mount, UWW).
Yeah, if you take Johns Hopkins (who we all voted on) and match them up against NCC. I wouldn't be surprised if the outcome would be very similar to the NCC/Aurora game.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 21, 2021, 08:26:38 AM
I'm one of those who didn't give Trinity a vote. There's just so many teams to consider for the bottom 5 to squeeze into the top 25. However, Trinity is definitely in the discussion and should be considered.
Looks like I'm the only one who's picking Aurora. They lost by only 6 at St. John's (who's ranked 7th). It's a game they could have easily won if it wasn't for a 4th and goal stand by SJU on the 5 yard line. If you lost by only 6, on the road to a top 10 team, you're definitely top 25 worthy. I'm one who puts a lot of stock in underdogs who have close games against good opponents. Yes, they got trucked by NCC....but who doesn't. They're clearly the best team in the country until someone beats them. Since those two losses Aurora has been on a tear. They will probably win out b/c their conference isn't very strong and Aurora has one of the better QBs in the nation.
Bottom line, one-score losses against top 10 teams (especially on the road) are more impressive to me than blowout wins against weak opponents, imho. However, once that team loses a game they should have won, then all bets are off...which Aurora hasn't done yet. I'm not trying to convince people to vote for Aurora, I just wanted to let you know where I'm coming from b/c I have them at 19.
Ice Bear feels this is a very valid point, especially in regards to the tiers within D3. Ice Bear says someone else made the good point that within even the top 10, there are two possibly three tiers, and many a good ****ing top 25 (top 15) teams have been smoked in Semi-final games.
Of course this point could be moot if that top 10 team is HIGHLY overrated which Ice doesn't think happens too often (and definitely not in this case with SJU).
Back to full strength with all 7 voters this week.
D3 Football Map (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=8975.msg1940087#msg1940087)
2021 WEEK 8 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | W-L | Points | Prev |
1) | North Central (6) | 7-0 | 174 | 1 |
2) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (1) | 7-0 | 163 | 2 |
3) | UW-Whitewater | 7-0 | 159 | T3 |
4) | Mount Union | 7-0 | 157 | T3 |
5) | Linfield | 6-0 | 139 | T5 |
6) | Wheaton | 6-1 | 137 | T5 |
7) | St John's | 7-0 | 135 | 7 |
8) | Delaware Valley | 7-0 | 125 | 8 |
9) | UW-La Crosse | 6-1 | 111 | 13 |
10) | Central | 7-0 | 108 | 9 |
11) | Hardin-Simmons | 6-1 | 103 | 12 |
12) | Union | 7-0 | 98 | T10 |
13) | Bethel | 6-1 | 88 | 14 |
14) | Salisbury | 5-1 | 86 | 15 |
15) | Cortland | 7-0 | 75 | T17 |
16) | Ithaca | 7-0 | 73 | 16 |
17) | Susquehanna | 7-0 | 67 | T17 |
18) | Muhlenberg | 6-1 | 57 | 19 |
19) | Trinity (TX) | 6-0 | 43 | T22 |
20) | Birmingham Southern | 7-0 | 32 | T22 |
21) | UW-Oshkosh | 4-2 | 30 | 21 |
22) | Johns Hopkins | 6-1 | 29 | 20 |
23) | Whitworth | 6-1 | 16 | 24 |
24) | Baldwin Wallace | 6-1 | 15 | NR |
T25) | John Carroll | 5-2 | 14 | 25 |
T25) | Washington & Jefferson | 6-1 | 14 | T10 |
Dropped Out: None
Also Receiving Votes: Aurora 9, Hobart 6, Westminster (PA) 4, Washington & Lee 3, Randolph Macon 2, Redlands 2, Merchant Marine 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, Captainred81, desertcat1, FANOFD3, FCGG, NCF, and Oline89
1) North Central 174 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 163 ( 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4)
3) UW-Whitewater 159 ( 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 5, 5)
4) Mount Union 157 ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5)
5) Linfield 139 ( 2, 6, 6, 6, 6, 8, 9)
6) Wheaton 137 ( 4, 5, 5, 5, 7, 8, 11)
7) St John's 135 ( 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8, 10)
8) Delaware Valley 125 ( 6, 7, 7, 8, 9, 10, 10)
9) UW-La Crosse 111 ( 9, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 14)
10) Central 108 ( 6, 9, 11, 11, 12, 12, 13)
11) Hardin-Simmons 103 ( 7, 8, 8, 12, 13, 14, 17)
12) Union 98 ( 7, 8, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16)
13) Bethel 88 ( 9, 10, 12, 13, 15, 17, 18)
14) Salisbury 86 (11, 11, 14, 14, 14, 15, 17)
15) Cortland 75 (11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 20, 20)
16) Ithaca 73 (12, 13, 13, 15, 15, 16, 25)
17) Susquehanna 67 (12, 14, 16, 18, 18, 18, 19)
18) Muhlenberg 57 (16, 16, 17, 17, 19, 19, 21)
19) Trinity (TX) 43 (17, 18, 18, 19, 20, 21, --)
20) Birmingham Southern 32 (16, 19, 21, 22, 22, 24, --)
21) UW-Oshkosh 30 (15, 20, 21, 21, 23, --, --)
22) Johns Hopkins 29 (20, 20, 21, 22, 22, 22, --)
23) Whitworth 16 (17, 19, --, --, --, --, --)
24) Baldwin Wallace 15 (20, 22, 23, 24, --, --, --)
T25) John Carroll 14 (21, 22, 23, 24, --, --, --)
T25) Washington & Jefferson 14 (19, 23, 24, 25, 25, --, --)
27) Aurora 9 (18, 25)
28) Hobart 6 (23, 24, 25)
29) Westminster (PA) 4 (23, 25)
30) Washington & Lee 3 (23)
T31) Randolph Macon 2 (24)
T31) Redlands 2 (24)
33) Merchant Marine 1 (25)
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 27, 2021, 02:21:09 PM
1) North Central 174 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 163 ( 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4)
3) UW-Whitewater 159 ( 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 5, 5)
4) Mount Union 157 ( 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5)
5) Linfield 139 ( 2, 6, 6, 6, 6, 8, 9)
6) Wheaton 137 ( 4, 5, 5, 5, 7, 8, 11)
7) St John's 135 ( 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8, 10)
8) Delaware Valley 125 ( 6, 7, 7, 8, 9, 10, 10)
9) UW-La Crosse 111 ( 9, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 14)
10) Central 108 ( 6, 9, 11, 11, 12, 12, 13)
11) Hardin-Simmons 103 ( 7, 8, 8, 12, 13, 14, 17)
12) Union 98 ( 7, 8, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16)
13) Bethel 88 ( 9, 10, 12, 13, 15, 17, 18)
14) Salisbury 86 (11, 11, 14, 14, 14, 15, 17)
15) Cortland 75 (11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 20, 20)
16) Ithaca 73 (12, 13, 13, 15, 15, 16, 25)
17) Susquehanna 67 (12, 14, 16, 18, 18, 18, 19)
18) Muhlenberg 57 (16, 16, 17, 17, 19, 19, 21)
19) Trinity (TX) 43 (17, 18, 18, 19, 20, 21, --)
20) Birmingham Southern 32 (16, 19, 21, 22, 22, 24, --)
21) UW-Oshkosh 30 (15, 20, 21, 21, 23, --, --)
22) Johns Hopkins 29 (20, 20, 21, 22, 22, 22, --)
23) Whitworth 16 (17, 19, --, --, --, --, --)
24) Baldwin Wallace 15 (20, 22, 23, 24, --, --, --)
T25) John Carroll 14 (21, 22, 23, 24, --, --, --)
T25) Washington & Jefferson 14 (19, 23, 24, 25, 25, --, --)
27) Aurora 9 (18, 25)
28) Hobart 6 (23, 24, 25)
29) Westminster (PA) 4 (23, 25)
30) Washington & Lee 3 (23)
T31) Randolph Macon 2 (24)
T31) Redlands 2 (24)
33) Merchant Marine 1 (25)
Ice Bear says he thinks the LL teams hold a solid spot no higher than 15 and no lower than 30 (so this looks pretty good with the exception of Union being a bit high). Excellent conference with 4 solid top tier 3 (low tier 2 teams).
Ice Bear says Del Val may be a legitimate #8-10 team and Cortland and Salisbury sit very close no higher than 10 and maybe no lower than 20.
Ice Bear says great ****ing job on the poll everyone and he apologizes for only being able to offer insight from regions 1 and 2. Ice must expand his ****ing horizons like the great Vanilla and see more in person play outside of the East. He'll check with his wife to see if this is possible.
North, South, West baby
North, South, West baby
Not much movement in the top 15
D3 Football Map (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=8975.msg1940087#msg1940087)
2021 WEEK 9 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | W-L | Points | Prev |
1) | North Central (6) | 8-0 | 174 | 1 |
2) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (1) | 8-0 | 165 | 2 |
3) | UW-Whitewater | 8-0 | 160 | 3 |
4) | Mount Union | 8-0 | 152 | 4 |
5) | Linfield | 7-0 | 141 | 5 |
6) | St John's | 8-0 | 137 | 7 |
7) | Wheaton | 7-1 | 135 | 6 |
8) | Delaware Valley | 8-0 | 119 | 8 |
9) | Central | 8-0 | 111 | 10 |
10) | UW-La Crosse | 7-1 | 109 | 9 |
11) | Hardin-Simmons | 7-1 | 108 | 11 |
12) | Union | 8-0 | 104 | 12 |
13) | Bethel | 7-1 | 97 | 13 |
14) | Salisbury | 6-1 | 93 | 14 |
15) | Cortland | 8-0 | 75 | 15 |
16) | Muhlenberg | 7-1 | 69 | 18 |
17) | Trinity (TX) | 7-0 | 53 | 19 |
18) | Birmingham Southern | 8-0 | 46 | 20 |
19) | Johns Hopkins | 7-1 | 45 | 22 |
20) | UW-Oshkosh | 5-2 | 38 | 21 |
21) | RPI | 7-1 | 27 | NR |
T22) | Baldwin Wallace | 7-1 | 23 | 24 |
T22) | Washington & Jefferson | 7-1 | 23 | T25 |
24) | Whitworth | 7-1 | 19 | 23 |
25) | Ithaca | 7-1 | 15 | 16 |
Dropped Out: #17 Susquehanna and #T25 John Carroll
Also Receiving Votes: Susquehanna 12, Aurora 8, Redlands 5, John Carroll 4, Washington & Lee 4, Westminster (PA) 3, Randolph-Macon 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, Captainred81, desertcat1, FANOFD3, FCGG, NCF, and Oline89
1) North Central 174 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 165 ( 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3)
3) UW-Whitewater 160 ( 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 5)
4) Mount Union 152 ( 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 7)
5) Linfield 141 ( 2, 4, 6, 6, 6, 8, 9)
6) St John's 137 ( 5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 10)
7) Wheaton 135 ( 4, 5, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12)
8) Delaware Valley 119 ( 6, 7, 8, 8, 9, 10, 15)
9) Central 111 ( 6, 9, 9, 11, 11, 12, 13)
10) UW-La Crosse 109 ( 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 12, 13)
11) Hardin-Simmons 108 ( 7, 8, 8, 11, 13, 13, 14)
12) Union 104 ( 7, 8, 10, 11, 14, 14, 14)
13) Bethel 97 ( 9, 10, 12, 12, 13, 14, 15)
14) Salisbury 93 (11, 11, 11, 12, 14, 14, 16)
15) Cortland 75 (12, 13, 15, 15, 15, 17, 20)
16) Muhlenberg 69 (13, 16, 16, 16, 17, 17, 18)
17) Trinity (TX) 53 (16, 16, 17, 17, 18, 19, --)
18) Birmingham Southern 46 (15, 17, 18, 20, 20, 20, --)
19) Johns Hopkins 45 (19, 19, 19, 19, 19, 20, 22)
20) UW-Oshkosh 38 (15, 18, 20, 21, 21, 23, --)
21) RPI 27 (18, 19, 21, 23, 23, 25, --)
T22) Baldwin Wallace 23 (18, 20, 21, 23, 25, --, --)
T22) Washington & Jefferson 23 (22, 22, 22, 22, 23, 24, 24)
24) Whitworth 19 (16, 17, --, --, --, --, --)
25) Ithaca 15 (21, 23, 24, 24, 24, 25, --)
26) Susquehanna 12 (21, 24, 24, 25, 25, 25)
27) Aurora 8 (18)
28) Redlands 5 (21)
T29) John Carroll 4 (22)
T29) Washington & Lee 4 (22)
31) Westminster (PA) 3 (23)
32) Randolph-Macon 1 (25)
D3 Football Map (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=8975.msg1940087#msg1940087)
2021 WEEK 10 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | | Points | Prev |
1) | North Central (4) | 9-0 | 172 | 1 |
2) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (2) | 9-0 | 166 | 2 |
3) | UW-Whitewater | 9-0 | 160 | 3 |
4) | Mount Union | 9-0 | 152 | 4 |
5) | Linfield (1) | 8-0 | 142 | 5 |
T6) | St John's | 9-0 | 138 | 6 |
T6) | Wheaton | 8-1 | 138 | 7 |
8) | Delaware Valley | 9-0 | 123 | 8 |
T9) | Hardin-Simmons | 8-1 | 111 | 11 |
T9) | UW-La Crosse | 7-2 | 111 | 10 |
11) | Central | 9-0 | 110 | 9 |
12) | Bethel | 8-1 | 99 | 13 |
13) | Salisbury | 7-1 | 91 | 14 |
14) | Cortland | 9-0 | 86 | 15 |
15) | Muhlenberg | 8-1 | 79 | 16 |
16) | Trinity (TX) | 8-0 | 64 | 17 |
17) | Johns Hopkins | 8-1 | 54 | 19 |
18) | Ithaca | 8-1 | 49 | 25 |
19) | Union | 8-1 | 38 | 12 |
20) | Baldwin Wallace | 8-1 | 36 | T22 |
21) | Birmingham-Southern | 8-1 | 35 | 18 |
22) | RPI | 8-1 | 34 | 21 |
23) | UW-Oshkosh | 6-2 | 30 | 20 |
24) | Redlands | 7-1 | 12 | NR |
25) | Aurora | 7-2 | 10 | NR |
Dropped Out: #T22 Washington & Jefferson and #24 Whitworth
Also Receiving Votes: Randolph-Macon 8, DePauw 7, Washington & Lee 5, Carnegie Mellon 3, Endicott 3, UW-River Falls 3, Heidelberg 2, Pacific 2, Rose-Hulman 1, Susquehanna 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, Captainred81, desertcat1, FANOFD3, FCGG, NCF, and Oline89
1) North Central 172 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 166 ( 1, 1, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3)
3) UW-Whitewater 160 ( 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 5)
4) Mount Union 152 ( 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 7)
5) Linfield 142 ( 1, 5, 6, 6, 6, 8, 8)
T6) St John's 138 ( 4, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 9)
T6) Wheaton 138 ( 4, 5, 5, 5, 7, 7, 11)
8) Delaware Valley 123 ( 6, 7, 8, 8, 9, 10, 11)
T9) Hardin-Simmons 111 ( 7, 8, 8, 9, 12, 13, 14)
T9) UW-La Crosse 111 ( 8, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 15)
11) Central 110 ( 6, 9, 10, 11, 11, 12, 13)
12) Bethel 99 ( 9, 10, 12, 12, 12, 14, 14)
13) Salisbury 91 (11, 12, 13, 13, 13, 14, 15)
14) Cortland 86 (10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 15, 18)
15) Muhlenberg 79 (12, 13, 15, 15, 16, 16, 16)
16) Trinity (TX) 64 (14, 15, 16, 16, 17, 18, 22)
17) Johns Hopkins 54 (16, 17, 18, 19, 19, 19, 20)
18) Ithaca 49 (17, 17, 18, 19, 20, 20, 22)
19) Union 38 (11, 21, 21, 22, 22, 23, 24)
20) Baldwin Wallace 36 (18, 18, 20, 20, 21, 24, 25)
21) Birmingham-Southern 35 (17, 18, 19, 20, 21, --, --)
22) RPI 34 (17, 19, 19, 21, 23, 23, --)
23) UW-Oshkosh 30 (14, 20, 21, 21, 24, --, --)
24) Redlands 12 (17, 23, --, --, --, --, --)
25) Aurora 10 (16, --, --, --, --, --, --)
26) Randolph-Macon 8 (22, 23, 25)
27) DePauw 7 (22, 23)
28) Washington & Lee 5 (22, 25)
T29) Carnegie Mellon 3 (24, 25)
T29) Endicott 3 (23)
T29) UW-River Falls 3 (24, 25)
T32) Heidelberg 2 (24)
T32) Pacific 2 (24)
T34) Rose-Hulman 1 (25)
T34) Susquehanna 1 (25)
Mount Union at 7 is a Joke. Sorry.
Sorry for the lateness... people disappear once the regular season ends. We've only got five ballots this week.
D3 Football Map (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=8975.msg1940087#msg1940087)
2021 WEEK 11 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | | Points | Prev |
1) | North Central (3) | 10-0 | 123 | 1 |
2) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (1) | 10-0 | 118 | 2 |
3) | UW-Whitewater | 10-0 | 113 | 3 |
4) | Mount Union | 10-0 | 111 | 4 |
5) | Linfield (1) | 9-0 | 101 | 5 |
6) | Wheaton | 9-1 | 95 | T6 |
7) | St John's | 10-0 | 94 | T6 |
8) | Delaware Valley | 10-0 | 91 | 8 |
9) | UW-La Crosse | 8-2 | 83 | T9 |
10) | Hardin-Simmons | 9-1 | 82 | T9 |
11) | Central | 10-0 | 78 | 11 |
12) | Bethel | 8-2 | 71 | 12 |
13) | Salisbury | 8-1 | 63 | 13 |
14) | Cortland | 10-0 | 62 | 14 |
15) | Muhlenberg | 9-1 | 58 | 15 |
16) | Trinity (TX) | 9-0 | 50 | 16 |
17) | Johns Hopkins | 9-1 | 42 | 17 |
18) | RPI | 9-1 | 36 | 22 |
19) | Birmingham-Southern | 9-1 | 24 | 21 |
20) | Ithaca | 8-2 | 20 | 18 |
21) | Aurora | 8-2 | 17 | 25 |
22) | Redlands | 8-1 | 15 | 24 |
23) | UW-River Falls | 8-2 | 14 | NR |
24) | Randolph-Macon | 9-1 | 13 | NR |
25) | Baldwin Wallace | 8-2 | 12 | 20 |
Dropped Out: #19 Union and #23 UW-Oshkosh
Also Receiving Votes: Carnegie Mellon 6, Heidelberg 6, Lake Forest 6, John Carroll 5, Endicott 4, Union 4, UW-Oshkosh 3, DePauw 2, George Fox 1, Rose-Hulman 1, Williams 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, Captainred81, desertcat1, FANOFD3, FCGG, NCF, and Oline89
Rank School (No. 1 votes) W-L Points Prev.
1 North Central (Ill.) (18) 10-0 616 1 Lost in the Stagg by 33
2 Mary Hardin-Baylor (7) 10-0 597 2 Won the Stagg
3 UW-Whitewater 10-0 580 3 Lost for the first time ever to UMHB at home, by 17
4 Mount Union 10-0 548 4 Barely escaped Muhlenberg in OT in Round 3
5 St. John's 10-0 499 5 Hosted and lost by 31-28 to Linfield in Round 2
6 Wheaton (Ill.) 9-1 497 6 Lost at Central by 30-28 in Round 2
7 Linfield 9-0 476 7 Beat Redlands and then beat SJU on the road before 49-24 loss at UMHB
8 Central 10-0 412 9 Stomped Bethel, edged Wheaton and then stomped by UWW 51-21
9 Delaware Valley 10-0 406 10 Shut out by Muhlenberg in Round 2, 14-10
10 Hardin-Simmons 9-1 399 8 Still at the table...
11 UW-La Crosse 8-2 359 12 Lost at NCC in Round 2, 34-20
12 Salisbury 8-1 347 11 Lost to JHU 45-20 in Round 1
13 Cortland 10-0 333 14 Lost to RPI in Round 2
14 Bethel 8-2 295 13 Stomped by Central in Round 1
15 Muhlenberg 9-1 278 15 Lost on OT to UMU in Round 3
16 Trinity (Texas) 9-0 265 16 Lost in Round 1 to UMHB, 13-3. Gave UMHB its hardest game of the year.
With the playoff games showing relative strengths,
My ballot would go:
1) UMHB
2) NCC
3) Trinity
4) HSU
5) UWW
6) Linfield
7) UMU
8) Muhlenberg
9) Johnnies
10) Central
11) Wheaton, on the basis of their performance against NCC in the CCIW...
then I think that the drop-off is significant
Ralph ,
I turned in mine this way,
1. UMHB
2. Linfield
3. Trinity, texass
4. HS
5. SJU
6. uww
7. ncc
8. mt. U
9. Muhl
10. cent
11. Wheat
Happy Holidays. :-*
Go Cats 8-)
Quote from: desertcat1 on December 20, 2021, 02:23:13 PM
Ralph ,
I turned in mine this way,
1. UMHB
2. Linfield
3. Trinity, texass
4. HS
5. SJU
6. uww
7. ncc
8. mt. U
9. Muhl
10. cent
11. Wheat
Happy Holidays. :-*
Go Cats 8-)
That upper left quadrant on the west bracket sure was stacked!
Ballots kept trickling in even after New Years so I decided to wait until the FBS finally got around to their championship game to post this.
D3 Football Map (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=8975.msg1940087#msg1940087)
2021 FINAL TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | | Points | Prev |
1) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (6) | C | 150 | 2 |
2) | UW-Whitewater | SF | 137 | 3 |
3) | North Central | F | 136 | 1 |
4) | Linfield | QF | 123 | 5 |
5) | Mount Union | SF | 122 | 4 |
6) | St John's | R2 | 111 | 7 |
T7) | Central | QF | 109 | 11 |
T7) | Muhlenberg | QF | 109 | 15 |
9) | Wheaton | R2 | 103 | 6 |
10) | Hardin-Simmons | NP | 100 | 10 |
11) | Trinity (TX) | R1 | 97 | 16 |
12) | UW-La Crosse | R2 | 89 | 9 |
13) | Johns Hopkins | R2 | 82 | 17 |
14) | Delaware Valley | R2 | 68 | 8 |
15) | Bethel | R1 | 61 | 12 |
16) | RPI | QF | 60 | 18 |
17) | Cortland | R2 | 55 | 14 |
18) | Birmingham-Southern | R2 | 45 | 19 |
19) | Salisbury | R1 | 43 | 13 |
20) | Ithaca | NP | 26 | 20 |
21) | Randolph-Macon | NP | 24 | 24 |
22) | UW-River Falls | NP | 21 | 23 |
23) | Baldwin Wallace | NP | 18 | 25 |
24) | Redlands | NP | 13 | 22 |
25) | Lake Forest | R1 | 10 | NR |
Dropped Out: #21 Aurora
Also Receiving Votes: Aurora 9, Carnegie Mellon 8, Heidelberg 5, Endicott 4, Union 3, Hobart 2, Huntingdon 2, Union 2, DePauw 1, George Fox 1, Williams 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, Captainred81, desertcat1, FANOFD3, FCGG, NCF, and Oline89
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 150 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2) UW-Whitewater 137 ( 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 6)
3) North Central 136 ( 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 7)
4) Linfield 123 ( 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9)
5) Mount Union 122 ( 4, 4, 4, 4, 8, 10)
6) St John's 111 ( 5, 7, 7, 8, 9, 9)
T7) Central 109 ( 5, 5, 7, 10, 10, 10)
T7) Muhlenberg 109 ( 5, 5, 6, 9, 10, 12)
9) Wheaton 103 ( 6, 6, 8, 11, 11, 11)
10) Hardin-Simmons 100 ( 4, 7, 7, 11, 13, 14)
11) Trinity (TX) 97 ( 3, 6, 9, 13, 13, 15)
12) UW-La Crosse 89 ( 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14)
13) Johns Hopkins 82 ( 8, 11, 13, 13, 14, 15)
14) Delaware Valley 68 (12, 14, 14, 14, 16, 18)
15) Bethel 61 (12, 15, 15, 17, 18, 18)
16) RPI 60 (10, 16, 16, 16, 17, 21)
17) Cortland 55 (12, 17, 17, 18, 18, 19)
18) Birmingham-Southern 45 (12, 15, 15, 20, 23, --)
19) Salisbury 43 (16, 19, 19, 19, 20, 20)
20) Ithaca 26 (19, 21, 21, 22, 23, 24)
21) Randolph-Macon 24 (17, 21, 22, 23, 23, --)
22) UW-River Falls 21 (18, 19, 20, --, --, --)
23) Baldwin Wallace 18 (17, 20, 23, --, --, --)
24) Redlands 13 (16, 23, --, --, --, --)
25) Lake Forest 10 (22, 22, 24, --, --, --)
26) Aurora 9 (21, 22)
27) Carnegie Mellon 8 (20, 24)
28) Heidelberg 5 (21)
29) Endicott 4 (22)
30) Union 3 (24, 25)
T31) Hobart 2 (25, 25)
T31) Huntingdon 2 (24)
T31) Union 2 (24)
T34) DePauw 1 (25)
T34) George Fox 1 (25)
T34) Williams 1 (25)
Time to wake up from your hibernation. We're less than 10 days from the opening kickoff.
If you're interested in being part of the Fan Poll this year just send me a PM. Ballots are due on Monday nights. If you need extra time or know you won't be able to get a ballot in that particular week please let me know as soon as you can. The earlier you submit a ballot the more time I'll have to check it and make sure you didn't make any errors or forget a team (and there's usually one every couple weeks that needs revised). Also, please make sure it's clear what team you're selecting... don't use too generic of an abbreviation or something random because I may not know who you're referring to.
No preseason poll so the first poll will be after week 1.
Last call for ballots. I'll have the poll up later tonight if no one else shows interest. We currently have 7 so far: myself, 02 Warhawk, desertcat1, FANOFD3, HOPEful, NCF, and smedindy.
First poll of the year.
2022 WEEK 1 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | W-L | Points | Prev |
1) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (7) | 1-0 | 175 | 1 |
2) | North Central | 0-0 | 165 | 3 |
3) | St John's | 1-0 | 162 | 6 |
4) | Mount Union | 1-0 | 156 | 5 |
5) | Hardin-Simmons | 1-0 | 144 | 10 |
6) | Wheaton | 0-0 | 128 | 9 |
7) | Linfield | 1-0 | 125 | 4 |
8) | UW-Whitewater | 0-1 | 122 | 2 |
9) | Johns Hopkins | 1-0 | 120 | 13 |
10) | Trinity (TX) | 1-0 | 113 | 11 |
11) | UW-La Crosse | 1-0 | 110 | 12 |
12) | Bethel | 1-0 | 101 | 15 |
13) | Delaware Valley | 1-0 | 80 | 14 |
14) | UW-Oshkosh | 1-0 | 74 | NR |
15) | Central | 1-0 | 69 | T7 |
16) | Cortland | 1-0 | 68 | 17 |
17) | UW-River Falls | 1-0 | 63 | 22 |
18) | Muhlenberg | 0-1 | 53 | T7 |
19) | Ithaca | 1-0 | 47 | 20 |
20) | Salisbury | 1-0 | 39 | 19 |
T21) | Randolph-Macon | 1-0 | 37 | 21 |
T21) | RPI | 1-0 | 37 | 16 |
23) | Susquehanna | 1-0 | 22 | NR |
24) | Carnegie Mellon | 1-0 | 14 | NR |
25) | Hobart | 1-0 | 11 | NR |
Dropped Out: #18 Birmingham-Southern, #23 Baldwin Wallace, #24 Redlands, #25 Lake Forest
Also Receiving Votes: Wartburg 10, Heidelberg 9, George Fox 6, Washington & Jefferson 5, Union 4, DePauw 2, Hope 2, Albion 1, Birmingham-Southern 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, desertcat1, FANOFD3, FCGG, HOPEful, NCF, and smedindy
1) Mary Hardin-Baylor 175 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2) North Central 165 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4)
3) St John's 162 ( 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4) Mount Union 156 ( 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4)
5) Hardin-Simmons 144 ( 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 7)
6) Wheaton 128 ( 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 9, 14)
7) Linfield 125 ( 5, 6, 6, 7, 8, 12, 13)
8) UW-Whitewater 122 ( 6, 7, 7, 8, 10, 10, 12)
9) Johns Hopkins 120 ( 7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10, 10)
10) Trinity (TX) 113 ( 8, 8, 8, 8, 10, 11, 16)
11) UW-La Crosse 110 ( 6, 9, 11, 11, 11, 11, 13)
12) Bethel 101 ( 9, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15)
13) Delaware Valley 80 (12, 13, 14, 14, 15, 15, 19)
14) UW-Oshkosh 74 (11, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18, 21)
15) Central 69 (12, 13, 13, 16, 16, 17, --)
16) Cortland 68 (12, 14, 15, 15, 16, 17, 25)
17) UW-River Falls 63 (10, 12, 13, 19, 19, 20, --)
18) Muhlenberg 53 (15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 23)
19) Ithaca 47 (16, 17, 17, 19, 19, 21, --)
20) Salisbury 39 (14, 17, 20, 21, 22, 23, --)
T21) Randolph-Macon 37 (18, 18, 20, 20, 21, 22, --)
T21) RPI 37 (18, 18, 20, 20, 21, 22, --)
23) Susquehanna 22 (18, 19, 20, 25, --, --, --)
24) Carnegie Mellon 14 (21, 22, 23, 24, --, --, --)
25) Hobart 11 (22, 23, 24, 25, 25, --, --)
26) Wartburg 10 (16)
27) Heidelberg 9 (22, 23, 24)
28) George Fox 6 (23, 23)
29) Wash & Jeff 5 (24, 24, 25)
30) Union 4 (22)
T31) DePauw 2 (24)
T31) Hope 2 (24)
T33) Albion 1 (25)
T33) Birmingham-Southern 1 (25)
Feels a little like we all used the D3Football rankings and just tweaked them to our bias/liking. At some point, I'll take the time to blow up my rankings and do them more justice and without referencing pre-existing rankings. But with the holiday weekend, I didn't have time and was somewhat lazy about it.
Did a bit of checking comparing ballots to the top 26 (our only top 25 team not in the actual poll, Carnegie Mellon, was 26th in the D3F poll) and used 26th as a holder for not including on a ballot.
5 of the 7 ballots were about what you'd expect, between 1.65 and 2.08 positions different on average and between 17 and 22 teams within 2 spots of the D3F poll.
One ballot was quite similar averaging just 0.69 positions different on average and 24 teams within 2 of their D3F position.
And one ballot averaged 3.81 different per team and just 11 teams within 2 of the D3F poll.
Only 4 teams (from just 2 voters) were more than 7 positions different than the D3F poll (#19 UWRF at 10, #15 Cortland at 25, #16 Ithaca and #13 Central not ranked)
2022 WEEK 2 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | W-L | Points | Prev |
1) | St John's (4) | 2-0 | 195 | 3 |
2) | North Central (4) | 1-0 | 194 | 2 |
T3) | Mount Union | 1-0 | 177 | 4 |
T3) | UW-Whitewater | 1-1 | 177 | 8 |
5) | Mary Hardin-Baylor | 1-1 | 169 | 1 |
6) | Hardin-Simmons | 1-0 | 154 | 5 |
7) | Trinity (TX) | 2-0 | 148 | 10 |
8) | Linfield | 1-0 | 146 | 7 |
9) | UW-La Crosse | 2-0 | 130 | 11 |
10) | Wheaton | 0-1 | 126 | 6 |
11) | Johns Hopkins | 2-0 | 119 | 9 |
12) | UW-River Falls | 1-1 | 103 | 17 |
13) | Central | 2-0 | 98 | 15 |
14) | Delaware Valley | 2-0 | 95 | 13 |
15) | Cortland | 2-0 | 79 | 16 |
16) | Ithaca | 2-0 | 74 | 19 |
17) | UW-Oshkosh | 1-1 | 68 | 14 |
18) | Muhlenberg | 1-1 | 66 | 18 |
19) | Carnegie Mellon | 2-0 | 44 | 24 |
T20) | Randolph-Macon | 2-0 | 42 | T21 |
T20) | UW-Platteville | 1-1 | 42 | NR |
22) | Bethel | 1-1 | 32 | 12 |
23) | Heidelberg | 2-0 | 26 | NR |
24) | Wartburg | 2-0 | 15 | NR |
25) | Susquehanna | 2-0 | 14 | 23 |
Dropped Out: #20 Salisbury, #T21 RPI, #25 Hobart
Also Receiving Votes: George Fox 12, Union 12, Huntingdon 11, RPI 8, Wash & Jeff 6, DePauw 5, Salisbury 5, Birmingham-Southern 3, Albion 2, Stevenson 2, Hope 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, Captainred81, desertcat1, FANOFD3, FCGG, HOPEful, NCF, and smedindy
1) St John's 195 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3)
2) North Central 194 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 4)
T3) Mount Union 177 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 5, 5, 5, 5)
T3) UW-Whitewater 177 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 7)
5) Mary Hardin-Baylor 169 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 8)
6) Hardin-Simmons 154 ( 4, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 10, 10)
7) Trinity (TX) 148 ( 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 9, 9, 10)
8) Linfield 146 ( 4, 6, 7, 7, 7, 9, 9, 13)
9) UW-La Crosse 130 ( 7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10, 12, 14)
10) Wheaton 126 ( 8, 8, 8, 8, 10, 11, 13, 16)
11) Johns Hopkins 119 ( 8, 9, 10, 10, 11, 11, 14, 16)
12) UW-River Falls 103 ( 8, 10, 11, 11, 12, 17, 17, 19)
13) Central 98 (11, 12, 13, 13, 14, 15, 15, 17)
14) Delaware Valley 95 (12, 12, 13, 13, 13, 16, 16, 18)
15) Cortland 79 (11, 14, 14, 14, 15, 18, 20, 23)
16) Ithaca 74 (12, 15, 15, 15, 16, 16, 19, --)
17) UW-Oshkosh 68 (11, 12, 14, 16, 17, 18, --, --)
18) Muhlenberg 66 (15, 16, 17, 18, 18, 18, 19, 21)
19) Carnegie Mellon 44 (15, 18, 19, 20, 20, 23, 24, 25)
T20) Randolph-Macon 42 (17, 18, 20, 20, 20, 21, 24, --)
T20) UW-Platteville 42 (12, 13, 22, 23, 23, 24, 24, 25)
22) Bethel 32 (17, 17, 21, 21, 23, 25, --, --)
23) Heidelberg 26 (20, 22, 22, 22, 22, 22, --, --)
24) Wartburg 15 (14, 24, 25, --, --, --, --, --)
25) Susquehanna 14 (19, 23, 23, 25, --, --, --, --)
T26) George Fox 12 (20, 21, 25)
T26) Union 12 (19, 21)
28) Huntingdon 11 (19, 22)
29) RPI 8 (19, 25)
30) Wash & Jeff 6 (22, 24)
T31) DePauw 5 (21)
T31) Salisbury 5 (21)
33) Birmingham-Southern 3 (23)
T34) Albion 2 (24)
T34) Stevenson 2 (24)
36) Hope 1 (25)
Had some delayed ballots this week. Hopefully the poll will be up earlier next week.
2022 WEEK 3 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | W-L | Points | Prev |
1) | St John's (4) | 2-0 | 195 | 1 |
2) | North Central (4) | 2-0 | 191 | 2 |
3) | UW-Whitewater | 2-1 | 179 | T3 |
4) | Mount Union | 2-0 | 173 | T3 |
5) | Mary Hardin-Baylor | 2-1 | 171 | 5 |
6) | Hardin-Simmons | 2-0 | 164 | 6 |
7) | Trinity (TX) | 3-0 | 147 | 7 |
8) | Linfield | 2-0 | 144 | 8 |
9) | Wheaton | 1-1 | 127 | 10 |
10) | UW-La Crosse | 3-0 | 126 | 9 |
11) | Johns Hopkins | 3-0 | 124 | 11 |
12) | Cortland | 3-0 | 99 | 15 |
13) | UW-River Falls | 2-1 | 98 | 12 |
T14) | Delaware Valley | 3-0 | 93 | 14 |
T14) | Ithaca | 3-0 | 93 | 16 |
16) | UW-Oshkosh | 2-1 | 81 | 17 |
17) | Carnegie Mellon | 3-0 | 62 | 19 |
18) | Randolph-Macon | 3-0 | 60 | T20 |
19) | Heidelberg | 3-0 | 50 | 23 |
20) | Susquehanna | 3-0 | 34 | 25 |
21) | Wartburg | 3-0 | 30 | 24 |
22) | Union | 3-0 | 29 | NR |
T23) | Albion | 3-0 | 24 | NR |
T23) | George Fox | 3-0 | 24 | NR |
25) | Bethel | 1-1 | 21 | 22 |
Dropped Out: #13 Central, #18 Muhlenberg, #T20 UW-Platteville
Also Receiving Votes: Huntingdon 18, Case Western Reserve 9, Stevenson 9, DePauw 7, Central 6, Birmingham-Southern 5, Ursinus 2, Mount St Joseph 1, Muhlenberg 1, Rowan 1, RPI 1, Washington U 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, Captainred81, desertcat1, FANOFD3, FCGG, HOPEful, NCF, and smedindy
1) St John's 195 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3)
2) North Central 191 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 4, 5)
3) UW-Whitewater 179 ( 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5, 7)
4) Mount Union 173 ( 2, 3, 3, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6)
5) Mary Hardin-Baylor 171 ( 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6, 8)
6) Hardin-Simmons 164 ( 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7)
7) Trinity (TX) 147 ( 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 9, 9, 10)
8) Linfield 144 ( 4, 6, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 13)
9) Wheaton 127 ( 8, 9, 9, 10, 10, 11, 11, 13)
10) UW-La Crosse 126 ( 7, 8, 8, 8, 10, 11, 12, 18)
11) Johns Hopkins 124 ( 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 11, 12, 13)
12) Cortland 99 (10, 11, 12, 13, 13, 14, 16, 20)
13) UW-River Falls 98 ( 8, 11, 12, 15, 15, 16, 16, 17)
T14) Delaware Valley 93 (12, 12, 13, 14, 14, 15, 17, 18)
T14) Ithaca 93 (11, 12, 13, 14, 14, 14, 15, 22)
16) UW-Oshkosh 81 (11, 12, 13, 15, 15, 16, 19, --)
17) Carnegie Mellon 62 (15, 16, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 21)
18) Randolph-Macon 60 (16, 17, 17, 17, 17, 18, 20, --)
19) Heidelberg 50 (15, 16, 18, 18, 20, 22, 23, --)
20) Susquehanna 34 (17, 21, 21, 22, 22, 22, 23, --)
21) Wartburg 30 (14, 20, 22, 22, 24, 25, 25, --)
22) Union 29 (17, 19, 21, 23, 23, 24, --, --)
T23) Albion 24 (18, 19, 21, 24, 24, --, --, --)
T23) George Fox 24 (18, 19, 20, 24, 25, --, --, --)
25) Bethel 21 (19, 19, 23, 24, 24, --, --, --)
26) Huntingdon 18 (14, 20)
T27) Case Western Reserve 9 (21, 22)
T27) Stevenson 9 (20, 23)
29) DePauw 7 (19)
30) Central 6 (23, 23)
31) Birmingham-Southern 5 (21)
32) Ursinus 2 (24)
T33) Mount St Joseph 1 (25)
T33) Muhlenberg 1 (25)
T33) Rowan 1 (25)
T33) RPI 1 (25)
T33) Washington U 1 (25)
If UMHB beats Hardin-Simmons tonight, it will be super fun figuring out who's ahead of who ::)... Hardin-Simmons beat Platteville who beat Bethel who beat St John's who beat Whitewater who beat Mary Hardin-Baylor who could potentially beat Hardin-Simmons tonight. A nice little loop of 4 teams in the top 6, another ranked team, and Platteville.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 24, 2022, 07:04:03 PM
If UMHB beats Hardin-Simmons tonight, it will be super fun figuring out who's ahead of who ::)... Hardin-Simmons beat Platteville who beat Bethel who beat St John's who beat Whitewater who beat Mary Hardin-Baylor who could potentially beat Hardin-Simmons tonight. A nice little loop of 4 teams in the top 6, another ranked team, and Platteville.
Correction...If HSU beats themselves*
was a good game up the last two minutes. Let's see how they respond second half.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 24, 2022, 07:04:03 PM
If UMHB beats Hardin-Simmons tonight, it will be super fun figuring out who's ahead of who ::)... Hardin-Simmons beat Platteville who beat Bethel who beat St John's who beat Whitewater who beat Mary Hardin-Baylor who could potentially beat Hardin-Simmons tonight. A nice little loop of 4 teams in the top 6, another ranked team, and Platteville.
There is no answer.
Today's results could either scramble everything or simply change things for a couple of teams. Looking in the aggregate (based on the poll, not on my assessment of the teams) maybe a reasonable (but far from perfect) Top 10 would be:
1. NCC
2. Mount Union
3. St. John's
4. UW-W
5. UMHB
6. Trinity
7 Bethel
8. Linfield
9. Johns Hopkins
10 UW-LC
This puts a premium on head to head results. Even though it doesn't do Bethel justice being behind St. John's, given the previous ranking gap, maybe it is palatable, if not perfect. This result honors the head to heads (for the most part) and puts a premium on quality wins without excessive punishment for losses to power teams.
Quote from: bleedpurple on September 24, 2022, 10:28:48 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 24, 2022, 07:04:03 PM
If UMHB beats Hardin-Simmons tonight, it will be super fun figuring out who's ahead of who ::)... Hardin-Simmons beat Platteville who beat Bethel who beat St John's who beat Whitewater who beat Mary Hardin-Baylor who could potentially beat Hardin-Simmons tonight. A nice little loop of 4 teams in the top 6, another ranked team, and Platteville.
There is no answer.
Today's results could either scramble everything or simply change things for a couple of teams. Looking in the aggregate (based on the poll, not on my assessment of the teams) maybe a reasonable (but far from perfect) Top 10 would be:
1. NCC
2. Mount Union
3. St. John's
4. UW-W
5. UMHB
6. Trinity
7 Bethel
8. Linfield
9. Johns Hopkins
10 UW-LC
This puts a premium on head to head results. Even though it doesn't do Bethel justice being behind St. John's, given the previous ranking gap, maybe it is palatable, if not perfect. This result honors the head to heads (for the most part) and puts a premium on quality wins without excessive punishment for losses to power teams.
The good thing about all of the OOC matchups, is that they show there is parity amongst the regions now. I'm sure we may get some movement or affirmation in the coming weeks:
1. NCC - still has to play Wheaton
2. Mount Union - a long ways to go before they play John Carroll
3. St. John's - can get another crack at Bethal in conf ship
4. UW-W - Still has the WIAC
5. UMHB - should coast until playoffs
6. Trinity - BSC/Centre/Berry still on schedule
7 Bethel - Gustavus next week
8. Linfield - could be top 5 in a few weeks
9. Johns Hopkins - still play muhlenberg and susquehanna
10 UW-LC - still has WIAC
Your too late boys my ballot was in early, ;D
Show me a good loss and I will show you all a loser. :'(
15 and 0 could still win it all . :-*
New D3 top 25 just released. Bethel jumped up but still outside of the top 10...
Yeah, this was the toughest poll I've ever done. I usually put a lot of stock into H2H matchups, but this week it formed kind of a paradox of sorts. Like FCG mentioned above.
UWW>MHB>H-S>UWP>Bethel>SJU
But then SJU beat UWW. Not to mention all those teams have just one (D3) loss. So one or two of those teams won't make sense in the poll, considering they beat a team that'll be ranked right above them.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 26, 2022, 08:13:54 AM
...UWW>MHB>H-S>UWP>Bethel>SJU
But then SJU beat UWW. Not to mention all those teams have just one (D3) loss. So one or two of those teams won't make sense in the poll, considering they beat a team that'll be ranked right above them.
Ah, but a little more parity at the top is so so so much more fun, isn't it?! Add Mount, North Central, Trinity, Wheaton, Johns Hopkins, and Linfield to your list, and you have a dozen teams capable of making a run in the playoffs. Since 2000, there have only been 3 Stagg Bowls that neither Mount Union or Whitewater were a part of. One was last year and another was MHB's vacated championship in 2016. And although Mount and/or Whitewater playing in and winning the Stagg Bowl this season would surprise nobody, if neither make it, it would be the first time since 1995 that the Championship game lacked either school in back-to-back seasons.
Most years in my adult life, the question has been, "Can anyone stand in the way of Mount and Whitewater?" Whether or not they WILL is one thing, but the answer to whether or not anyone CAN is yes, about a dozen or so teams CAN. And I think that's pretty cool.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 26, 2022, 08:13:54 AM
Yeah, this was the toughest poll I've ever done. I usually put a lot of stock into H2H matchups, but this week it formed kind of a paradox of sorts. Like FCG mentioned above.
UWW>MHB>H-S>UWP>Bethel>SJU
But then SJU beat UWW. Not to mention all those teams have just one (D3) loss. So one or two of those teams won't make sense in the poll, considering they beat a team that'll be ranked right above them.
I think injuries plays a huge part in this equation. Regardless, it is up to the coaching staffs to have contingency plans. However, we all know and have witness that teams can have players that can significantly turn a team from being good to being very good. However, I would like to mention that most of these teams listed are teams that recruit really well, but also coaches their team(s) to be able to beat opponents either via the pass and/or run. You can watch these teams 10 times and one week they may dominate either via the run or pass, sometimes both. That's what I really love about the Tier 1/Tier 1A/Tier 2 teams.
Quote from: FANOFD3 on September 26, 2022, 10:28:42 AM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 26, 2022, 08:13:54 AM
Yeah, this was the toughest poll I've ever done. I usually put a lot of stock into H2H matchups, but this week it formed kind of a paradox of sorts. Like FCG mentioned above.
UWW>MHB>H-S>UWP>Bethel>SJU
But then SJU beat UWW. Not to mention all those teams have just one (D3) loss. So one or two of those teams won't make sense in the poll, considering they beat a team that'll be ranked right above them.
I think injuries plays a huge part in this equation. Regardless, it is up to the coaching staffs to have contingency plans. However, we all know and have witness that teams can have players that can significantly turn a team from being good to being very good. However, I would like to mention that most of these teams listed are teams that recruit really well, but also coaches their team(s) to be able to beat opponents either via the pass and/or run. You can watch these teams 10 times and one week they may dominate either via the run or pass, sometimes both. That's what I really love about the Tier 1/Tier 1A/Tier 2 teams.
Sometimes though there is no contingency plan that leaves you in a space equivalent to the one you were in prior to injury. Nobody in the Division is going to go to their bench and plug in a guy that gets them anywhere close to a 0.0 WAR (that's Wins Above Roste for you advanced stats people).
2022 WEEK 4 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | W-L | Points | Prev |
1) | North Central (5) | 3-0 | 195 | 2 |
2) | Mount Union (1) | 3-0 | 183 | 4 |
3) | Mary Hardin-Baylor | 3-1 | 180 | 5 |
4) | UW-Whitewater (2) | 2-1 | 176 | 3 |
5) | Trinity (TX) | 3-0 | 161 | 7 |
6) | Linfield | 2-0 | 156 | 8 |
7) | St John's | 2-1 | 151 | 1 |
8) | Johns Hopkins | 4-0 | 135 | 11 |
9) | UW-La Crosse | 3-0 | 131 | 10 |
10) | Wheaton | 2-1 | 129 | 9 |
11) | Bethel | 2-1 | 112 | 25 |
12) | Cortland | 3-0 | 97 | 12 |
13) | Delaware Valley | 4-0 | 94 | T14 |
14) | Hardin-Simmons | 2-1 | 88 | 6 |
15) | Ithaca | 3-0 | 84 | T14 |
16) | UW-Oshkosh | 2-1 | 76 | 16 |
17) | UW-River Falls | 2-1 | 72 | 13 |
18) | Carnegie Mellon | 4-0 | 59 | 17 |
19) | Randolph-Macon | 3-0 | 53 | 18 |
20) | Wartburg | 4-0 | 49 | 21 |
21) | Susquehanna | 4-0 | 41 | 20 |
22) | Albion | 4-0 | 39 | T23 |
23) | George Fox | 3-0 | 35 | T23 |
24) | Huntingdon | 3-1 | 28 | NR |
25) | DePauw | 4-0 | 19 | NR |
Dropped Out: #19 Heidelberg and #22 Union
Also Receiving Votes: Case Western Reserve 13, Stevenson 10, Central 8, Ursinus 8, Utica 6, UW-Platteville 6, Union 3, Washington U 2, John Carroll 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, Captainred81, desertcat1, FANOFD3, FCGG, HOPEful, NCF, and smedindy
1) North Central 195 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 3, 3)
2) Mount Union 183 ( 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6)
3) Mary Hardin-Baylor 180 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7)
4) UW-Whitewater 176 ( 1, 1, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 11)
5) Trinity (TX) 161 ( 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 7, 8, 8)
6) Linfield 156 ( 3, 3, 5, 7, 7, 7, 8, 12)
7) St John's 151 ( 4, 6, 6, 6, 6, 9, 10, 10)
8) Johns Hopkins 135 ( 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 11, 12)
9) UW-La Crosse 131 ( 4, 4, 6, 7, 8, 11, 14, 23)
10) Wheaton 129 ( 8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 10, 11, 14)
11) Bethel 112 ( 8, 9, 10, 10, 10, 12, 15, 22)
12) Cortland 97 ( 6, 12, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 20)
13) Delaware Valley 94 (11, 13, 13, 13, 15, 15, 16, 18)
14) Hardin-Simmons 88 ( 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 17, --, --)
15) Ithaca 84 (13, 14, 14, 14, 14, 15, 18, 22)
16) UW-Oshkosh 76 (11, 12, 13, 16, 16, 16, 24, 24)
17) UW-River Falls 72 ( 7, 15, 16, 17, 17, 17, 22, 25)
18) Carnegie Mellon 59 (16, 18, 19, 19, 19, 19, 19, 20)
19) Randolph-Macon 53 (16, 17, 18, 18, 18, 20, 22, --)
20) Wartburg 49 (13, 14, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24, 24)
21) Susquehanna 41 (17, 20, 20, 20, 21, 21, 22, --)
22) Albion 39 (14, 15, 20, 21, 23, 25, 25, --)
23) George Fox 35 (15, 17, 19, 21, 24, 25, --, --)
24) Huntingdon 28 (12, 12, --, --, --, --, --, --)
25) DePauw 19 (18, 20, 23, 24, --, --, --, --)
26) Case Western Reserve 13 (19, 21, 25)
27) Stevenson 10 (19, 23)
T28) Central 8 (22, 22)
T28) Ursinus 8 (21, 24, 25)
T30) Utica 6 (23, 23)
T30) UW-Platteville 6 (21, 25)
32) Union 3 (23)
33) Washington U 2 (24)
34) John Carroll 1 (25)
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 28, 2022, 02:19:07 AM
1) North Central 195 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 3, 3)
2) Mount Union 183 ( 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6)
3) Mary Hardin-Baylor 180 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7)
4) UW-Whitewater 176 ( 1, 1, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 11)
5) Trinity (TX) 161 ( 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 7, 8, 8)
6) Linfield 156 ( 3, 3, 5, 7, 7, 7, 8, 12)
7) St John's 151 ( 4, 6, 6, 6, 6, 9, 10, 10)
8) Johns Hopkins 135 ( 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 11, 12)
9) UW-La Crosse 131 ( 4, 4, 6, 7, 8, 11, 14, 23)
10) Wheaton 129 ( 8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 10, 11, 14)
11) Bethel 112 ( 8, 9, 10, 10, 10, 12, 15, 22)
12) Cortland 97 ( 6, 12, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 20)
13) Delaware Valley 94 (11, 13, 13, 13, 15, 15, 16, 18)
14) Hardin-Simmons 88 ( 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 17, --, --)
15) Ithaca 84 (13, 14, 14, 14, 14, 15, 18, 22)
16) UW-Oshkosh 76 (11, 12, 13, 16, 16, 16, 24, 24)
17) UW-River Falls 72 ( 7, 15, 16, 17, 17, 17, 22, 25)
18) Carnegie Mellon 59 (16, 18, 19, 19, 19, 19, 19, 20)
19) Randolph-Macon 53 (16, 17, 18, 18, 18, 20, 22, --)
20) Wartburg 49 (13, 14, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24, 24)
21) Susquehanna 41 (17, 20, 20, 20, 21, 21, 22, --)
22) Albion 39 (14, 15, 20, 21, 23, 25, 25, --)
23) George Fox 35 (15, 17, 19, 21, 24, 25, --, --)
24) Huntingdon 28 (12, 12, --, --, --, --, --, --)
25) DePauw 19 (18, 20, 23, 24, --, --, --, --)
26) Case Western Reserve 13 (19, 21, 25)
27) Stevenson 10 (19, 23)
T28) Central 8 (22, 22)
T28) Ursinus 8 (21, 24, 25)
T30) Utica 6 (23, 23)
T30) UW-Platteville 6 (21, 25)
32) Union 3 (23)
33) Washington U 2 (24)
34) John Carroll 1 (25)
UWW has a loss and close win over unranked Berry yet received a 1st place vote and remains top 5. I see one voter has them as ranked #11. That seems reasonable. Am I missing something?
Quote from: D3Navy on September 28, 2022, 08:40:19 AM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 28, 2022, 02:19:07 AM
1) North Central 195 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 3, 3)
2) Mount Union 183 ( 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6)
3) Mary Hardin-Baylor 180 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7)
4) UW-Whitewater 176 ( 1, 1, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 11)
5) Trinity (TX) 161 ( 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 7, 8, 8)
6) Linfield 156 ( 3, 3, 5, 7, 7, 7, 8, 12)
7) St John's 151 ( 4, 6, 6, 6, 6, 9, 10, 10)
8) Johns Hopkins 135 ( 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 11, 12)
9) UW-La Crosse 131 ( 4, 4, 6, 7, 8, 11, 14, 23)
10) Wheaton 129 ( 8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 10, 11, 14)
11) Bethel 112 ( 8, 9, 10, 10, 10, 12, 15, 22)
12) Cortland 97 ( 6, 12, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 20)
13) Delaware Valley 94 (11, 13, 13, 13, 15, 15, 16, 18)
14) Hardin-Simmons 88 ( 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 17, --, --)
15) Ithaca 84 (13, 14, 14, 14, 14, 15, 18, 22)
16) UW-Oshkosh 76 (11, 12, 13, 16, 16, 16, 24, 24)
17) UW-River Falls 72 ( 7, 15, 16, 17, 17, 17, 22, 25)
18) Carnegie Mellon 59 (16, 18, 19, 19, 19, 19, 19, 20)
19) Randolph-Macon 53 (16, 17, 18, 18, 18, 20, 22, --)
20) Wartburg 49 (13, 14, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24, 24)
21) Susquehanna 41 (17, 20, 20, 20, 21, 21, 22, --)
22) Albion 39 (14, 15, 20, 21, 23, 25, 25, --)
23) George Fox 35 (15, 17, 19, 21, 24, 25, --, --)
24) Huntingdon 28 (12, 12, --, --, --, --, --, --)
25) DePauw 19 (18, 20, 23, 24, --, --, --, --)
26) Case Western Reserve 13 (19, 21, 25)
27) Stevenson 10 (19, 23)
T28) Central 8 (22, 22)
T28) Ursinus 8 (21, 24, 25)
T30) Utica 6 (23, 23)
T30) UW-Platteville 6 (21, 25)
32) Union 3 (23)
33) Washington U 2 (24)
34) John Carroll 1 (25)
UWW has a loss and close win over unranked Berry yet received a 1st place vote and remains top 5. I see one voter has them as ranked #11. That seems reasonable. Am I missing something?
Knocking off the #1 team in the country, and the defending national champs, who is currently ranked ahead of them at #3.
....this isn't even the homer in me....but who put UWW at #11?!
I have very good guess who :-*
;)
lol...No, I'm not talking about me.
I had them 5th
I had them at 3. Clarity is needed outside of North Central and Mt. Union.
We may get clarity Saturday.
2022 WEEK 5 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | W-L | Points | Prev |
1) | North Central (5) | 4-0 | 195 | 1 |
2) | UW-Whitewater (2) | 3-1 | 183 | 4 |
3) | Mount Union (1) | 4-0 | 179 | 2 |
4) | Mary Hardin-Baylor | 4-1 | 177 | 3 |
5) | Trinity (TX) | 4-0 | 160 | 5 |
6) | St John's | 3-1 | 155 | 7 |
7) | Linfield | 3-0 | 154 | 6 |
T8) | Johns Hopkins | 5-0 | 136 | 8 |
T8) | UW-La Crosse | 3-1 | 136 | 9 |
10) | Bethel | 3-1 | 124 | 11 |
11) | Hardin-Simmons | 3-1 | 118 | 14 |
12) | Cortland | 4-0 | 102 | 12 |
13) | Delaware Valley | 5-0 | 96 | 13 |
14) | Ithaca | 4-0 | 94 | 15 |
15) | Wheaton | 2-2 | 92 | 10 |
16) | UW-Oshkosh | 3-1 | 86 | 16 |
17) | UW-River Falls | 3-1 | 83 | 17 |
18) | Carnegie Mellon | 5-0 | 59 | 18 |
19) | Wartburg | 5-0 | 55 | 20 |
20) | Randolph-Macon | 4-0 | 54 | 19 |
21) | Susquehanna | 5-0 | 40 | 21 |
22) | Albion | 5-0 | 38 | 22 |
23) | Huntingdon | 4-1 | 28 | 24 |
24) | DePauw | 5-0 | 26 | 25 |
25) | Central | 3-1 | 8 | NR |
Dropped Out: #23 George Fox
Also Receiving Votes: Mount St Joseph 4, Washington U 4, Alma 3, Chicago 3, Utica 3, Birmingham-Southern 1, Endicott 1, Grove City 1, John Carroll 1, UW-Stout 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, Captainred81, desertcat1, FCGG, HOPEful, MRMIKESMITH, NCF, and smedindy
1) North Central 195 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 3, 3)
2) UW-Whitewater 183 ( 1, 1, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 7)
3) Mount Union 179 ( 1, 2, 2, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7)
4) Mary Hardin-Baylor 177 ( 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 5, 5, 8)
5) Trinity (TX) 160 ( 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 8, 8, 8)
6) St John's 155 ( 4, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 9, 10)
7) Linfield 154 ( 3, 3, 5, 7, 7, 8, 10, 11)
T8) Johns Hopkins 136 ( 5, 7, 9, 9, 10, 10, 11, 11)
T8) UW-La Crosse 136 ( 4, 6, 6, 7, 8, 10, 10, 21)
10) Bethel 124 ( 3, 9, 9, 9, 11, 11, 15, 17)
11) Hardin-Simmons 118 ( 8, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 16)
12) Cortland 102 ( 6, 12, 12, 12, 12, 15, 18, 19)
13) Delaware Valley 96 (11, 12, 13, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18)
14) Ithaca 94 (11, 13, 13, 14, 14, 14, 15, 20)
15) Wheaton 92 ( 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 14, 18, --)
16) UW-Oshkosh 86 (12, 13, 15, 16, 16, 16, 17, 17)
17) UW-River Falls 83 ( 7, 15, 16, 17, 17, 17, 18, 18)
18) Carnegie Mellon 59 (15, 17, 18, 19, 19, 19, 20, 22)
19) Wartburg 55 (13, 16, 19, 20, 20, 20, 21, 24)
20) Randolph-Macon 54 (14, 16, 17, 18, 21, 21, 21, --)
21) Susquehanna 40 (19, 20, 20, 21, 21, 22, 22, 23)
22) Albion 38 (15, 19, 21, 22, 22, 23, 24, 24)
23) Huntingdon 28 (11, 19, 24, 24, 25, 25, --, --)
24) DePauw 26 (18, 20, 22, 23, 23, 24, --, --)
25) Central 8 (22, 24, 24, --, --, --, --, --)
T26) Mount St Joseph 4 (22)
T26) Washington U 4 (23, 25)
T28) Alma 3 (23)
T28) Chicago 3 (23)
T28) Utica 3 (23)
T31) Birmingham-Southern 1 (25)
T31) Endicott 1 (25)
T31) Grove City 1 (25)
T31) John Carroll 1 (25)
T31) UW-Stout 1 (25)
I know they haven't played anyone near Top 25 caliber, but I have a feeling Wash U might be a sleeper this year.
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 05, 2022, 10:09:45 AM
I know they haven't played anyone near Top 25 caliber, but I have a feeling Wash U might be a sleeper this year.
They pass my subjective sniff test at this point as well. We'll get a lot more intel when they play the other top dogs in the CCIW.
So much unique intel at the top of the poll this year. All these head to heads don't necessarily make things cleaner, but definitely more interesting. UWL holding its water against UWW underscores their street cred, even though they didn't win. UWW beats UMHB, but loses to SJU, who lost to Bethel, who lost to UWP (BU w/o QB), UWP loses to Hardin Simmons, HSU loses to UMHB ... my head hurts. Throw in Wartburg's growing resume... :o
I think y'all do a great job and appreciate the insights from around the country. Thanks!
That said if you haven't already seen it (and use Twitter) go have a look at the @d3football twitter. There's this one UMU fan who takes it as a personal affront if anyone doesn't think the Raiders are #1 and has been ragging on Pat and Keith Mc and anyone else who doesn't share his POV. And if you want to see something truly hilarious look at the bragging in the guy's profile. He obviously doesn't know the message board exists, or if he does he hasn't seen this poll, because I have no doubt he'd be ragging on you guys too if he had.
Yup, his rants have been going on for days now.
Quote from: Ron Boerger on October 05, 2022, 01:30:28 PM
I think y'all do a great job and appreciate the insights from around the country. Thanks!
That said if you haven't already seen it (and use Twitter) go have a look at the @d3football twitter. There's this one UMU fan who takes it as a personal affront if anyone doesn't think the Raiders are #1 and has been ragging on Pat and Keith Mc and anyone else who doesn't share his POV. And if you want to see something truly hilarious look at the bragging in the guy's profile. He obviously doesn't know the message board exists, or if he does he hasn't seen this poll, because I have no doubt he'd be ragging on you guys too if he had.
"But my name is on a building!"
Plus an old Mount Union friend of ours, who I believe was kicked off this board, is chiming in to help this guy.
Good times
The top 25 is a weird place right now. Because of the h2h's among some of the very top teams, Mount Union has benefitted from some floating, buoyed by things pollsters believe about their returning roster and, of course, their stellar history. I'm currently voting UMU #2. If I had to pick a winner between Mount Union and UMHB, UWW, NCC, and probably even UWL right now, I'm not sure I could confidently pick Mount Union. There are a couple of other teams that while I wouldn't pick to beat Mount Union, I wouldn't be terribly surprised if they did. We're just not going to have certainty about Mount Union until the tournament and if voters want to rank them 1 or 2 for being undefeated and presumably very good, that's cool. And if voters like Keith and whoever is ranking them 6/7 here have put Mount Union in the "prove it" bucket, that's also cool. Both are totally reasonable.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 05, 2022, 01:46:27 PM
Plus an old Mount Union friend of ours, who I believe was kicked off this board, is chiming in to help this guy.
Good times
I think all three of his iterations were kicked off lol
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 05, 2022, 10:09:45 AM
I know they haven't played anyone near Top 25 caliber, but I have a feeling Wash U might be a sleeper this year.
Purple, thanks for putting them on my radar.
They can wreak havoc if they are as good as you suspect. Otherwise, an 8-2 season gets them into the Top 20.
One might even keep a 7-3 Wheaton in the Top 25.
Quote from: Ron Boerger on October 05, 2022, 01:30:28 PM
I think y'all do a great job and appreciate the insights from around the country. Thanks!
That said if you haven't already seen it (and use Twitter) go have a look at the @d3football twitter. There's this one UMU fan who takes it as a personal affront if anyone doesn't think the Raiders are #1 and has been ragging on Pat and Keith Mc and anyone else who doesn't share his POV. And if you want to see something truly hilarious look at the bragging in the guy's profile. He obviously doesn't know the message board exists, or if he does he hasn't seen this poll, because I have no doubt he'd be ragging on you guys too if he had.
If you go, and I encourage you too because it is hilarious stuff, make sure you have a good hour or so because this guy is fighting with everyone.
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 05, 2022, 10:09:45 AM
I know they haven't played anyone near Top 25 caliber, but I have a feeling Wash U might be a sleeper this year.
Nationally, I think this is very true. However, within the CCIW you won't find many fans who don't have a healthy respect for the WashU squad. Few would be surprised if they finish 9-1.
What is the legitimate rationale for UMU ranked above NCC? I am flummoxed. NCC 2 straight wins over them in Alliance and two straight Stagg Bowls. NCC with 16 or so returning starters and a much bigger win so far. This defies logic.
Quote from: USee on October 05, 2022, 09:11:50 PM
What is the legitimate rationale for UMU ranked above NCC? I am flummoxed. NCC 2 straight wins over them in Alliance and two straight Stagg Bowls. NCC with 16 or so returning starters and a much bigger win so far. This defies logic.
UMU opponents have a combined record of 5-12 while NCC's opponents are 6-11.
One of NCC's wins came against then #11 Wheaton.
Quote from: USee on October 05, 2022, 09:11:50 PM
What is the legitimate rationale for UMU ranked above NCC? I am flummoxed. NCC 2 straight wins over them in Alliance and two straight Stagg Bowls. NCC with 16 or so returning starters and a much bigger win so far. This defies logic.
While NCC returns a lot of players who started games, the lost some studs. They also lost their head coach. Could some people take that information and decide that wiped out the margin between NCC and Mount and then some? No idea if that's a valid thought, I'm just trying to come up with a logical explanation.
Pat admitted on the podcast that there are not "tangible" reasons to point to him voting Mount #1. But to him, there are "intangibles" in place to warrant the vote.
Quote from: Next Man Up on October 05, 2022, 11:24:09 PM
Quote from: USee on October 05, 2022, 09:11:50 PM
What is the legitimate rationale for UMU ranked above NCC? I am flummoxed. NCC 2 straight wins over them in Alliance and two straight Stagg Bowls. NCC with 16 or so returning starters and a much bigger win so far. This defies logic.
UMU opponents have a combined record of 5-12 while NCC's opponents are 6-11.
One of NCC's wins came against then #11 Wheaton.
I am the individual who has Mount ahead of North Central currently, standing in defiance of logic.
Here's why...
As pointed out, their strength of schedules are similar, with a game against Wheaton favoring NC. However, I stopped judging elite D3 teams based solely on their SOS years ago. If I didn't, UWW would just be permanently my number 1 and MHB number 2.
Giving North Central credit for anything they did last year seems like a silly leap for the next go-to criteria. By that logic, Mount has been in the Stagg Bowl 15 of the last 20 seasons. When I compare the elite teams, I go to the eye test before previous seasons. What jumps out? This season's Mount team just looks exceptionally fast on both sides of the ball, both compared to last season and other elite teams. So for now, I give them the edge. It's similar to D1 and Ohio State. They haven't beat anyone of note yet (Notre Dame was a fraud) and still national pundits seem to believe they're the only team out there capable of playing with Alabama and Georgia. Because their QB play, speed of their playmakers, etc. pass the eye test.
I have North Central number 2. Are you judging the best resume or simply who you think the best teams are? MHB lost at WW, but absolutely punished Muhlenberg and Hardin Simmons. Those two wins combine for the most impressive resume out of anyone, so how much do you punish them for a four point loss at Whitewater? Aren't we conditioned at this point to just assume the Stagg Bowl will be played by some combination of Mount, UWW, MHB, and NC? I prefer to think of the top four teams more like 1a, 1b, 1c, 1d... because you're really splitting hairs trying to figure out who "deserves" to be ranked higher.
Quote from: HOPEful on October 06, 2022, 08:17:51 AM
Quote from: Next Man Up on October 05, 2022, 11:24:09 PM
Quote from: USee on October 05, 2022, 09:11:50 PM
What is the legitimate rationale for UMU ranked above NCC? I am flummoxed. NCC 2 straight wins over them in Alliance and two straight Stagg Bowls. NCC with 16 or so returning starters and a much bigger win so far. This defies logic.
UMU opponents have a combined record of 5-12 while NCC's opponents are 6-11.
One of NCC's wins came against then #11 Wheaton.
I am the individual who has Mount ahead of North Central currently, standing in defiance of logic.
Here's why...
As pointed out, their strength of schedules are similar, with a game against Wheaton favoring NC. However, I stopped judging elite D3 teams based solely on their SOS years ago. If I didn't, UWW would just be permanently my number 1 and MHB number 2.
Giving North Central credit for anything they did last year seems like a silly leap for the next go-to criteria. By that logic, Mount has been in the Stagg Bowl 15 of the last 20 seasons. When I compare the elite teams, I go to the eye test before previous seasons. What jumps out? This season's Mount team just looks exceptionally fast on both sides of the ball, both compared to last season and other elite teams. So for now, I give them the edge. It's similar to D1 and Ohio State. They haven't beat anyone of note yet (Notre Dame was a fraud) and still national pundits seem to believe they're the only team out there capable of playing with Alabama and Georgia. Because their QB play, speed of their playmakers, etc. pass the eye test.
I have North Central number 2. Are you judging the best resume or simply who you think the best teams are? MHB lost at WW, but absolutely punished Muhlenberg and Hardin Simmons. Those two wins combine for the most impressive resume out of anyone, so how much do you punish them for a four point loss at Whitewater? Aren't we conditioned at this point to just assume the Stagg Bowl will be played by some combination of Mount, UWW, MHB, and NC? I prefer to think of the top four teams more like 1a, 1b, 1c, 1d... because you're really splitting hairs trying to figure out who "deserves" to be ranked higher.
UWW on line one...
I'll see your Muhlenberg (unranked) and Hardin Simmons (#10) and raise you a MHB (#1 at the time) and a UW-La Crosse (#9), with the only loss coming at St. John's (#6) as a kicker.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 06, 2022, 09:09:15 AM
I'll see your Muhlenberg (unranked) and Hardin Simmons (#10) and raise you a MHB (#1 at the time) and a UW-La Crosse (#9), with the only loss coming at St. John's (#6) as a kicker.
Fair point. But again, we're splitting hairs. And doesn't elevating UWW's resume only further strengthen my overall argument?
Quote from: HOPEful on October 06, 2022, 09:32:25 AM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 06, 2022, 09:09:15 AM
I'll see your Muhlenberg (unranked) and Hardin Simmons (#10) and raise you a MHB (#1 at the time) and a UW-La Crosse (#9), with the only loss coming at St. John's (#6) as a kicker.
Fair point. But again, we're splitting hairs. And doesn't elevating UWW's resume only further strengthen my overall argument?
But we're not "judging elite D3 teams based solely on their SOS years ago", i thought. ;) I kid....
Head to head matchups holds the most water for me when filling out my poll, all though it's not a perfect science (but nothing is, really). Followed by who they played (good wins vs. good losses vs. bad losses, etc...)
Massey currently ranks them...
1. Mount
2. MHB
3. NC
4. UWW
Massey is just one rating system and certainly not without flaws. My only point by bringing it up is that it is a tangible, logic based algorithm that has Mount #1.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 06, 2022, 09:39:42 AM
Head to head matchups holds the most water for me when filling out my poll, all though it's not a perfect science (but nothing is, really). Followed by who they played (good wins vs. good losses vs. bad losses, etc...)
I agree to a certain extent. Which is why, despite the losses, I still consider MHB and UWW firmly in my 1c and 1d positions.
A fourteen point loss to St. Johns falls somewhere between "good" and "bad" loss. Knowing they actually led 10-9 well into the third quarter moves it closer to a "good" loss, but you still have to take it into consideration when weighing them against the other three. It's a very inexact science. And a fun exercise on who values what most when trying to split hairs...
UWW sure looked bad against SJU. Tons of mistakes and quite literally gave them the game. But to start the season playing 3 top 10 teams (two of which were on the road), and go 2-1. Not sure if there's any team in the country who could have passed the eye test and looked good all three of those games.
Quote from: HOPEful on October 06, 2022, 08:17:51 AM
Giving North Central credit for anything they did last year seems like a silly leap for the next go-to criteria. By that logic, Mount has been in the Stagg Bowl 15 of the last 20 seasons. When I compare the elite teams, I go to the eye test before previous seasons. What jumps out? This season's Mount team just looks exceptionally fast on both sides of the ball, both compared to last season and other elite teams. So for now, I give them the edge. It's similar to D1 and Ohio State. They haven't beat anyone of note yet (Notre Dame was a fraud) and still national pundits seem to believe they're the only team out there capable of playing with Alabama and Georgia. Because their QB play, speed of their playmakers, etc. pass the eye test.
Not the first time I've seen a similar argument, and it may be true, but-
- Mount Union is always fast. This seems to be a given.
- We've only seen Mount Union play against teams that were never, ever going to look like peers. They're Billy Madison playing dodgeball at recess. I don't know if Billy Madison is actually really good at dodgeball, or if he's just really good relative to six year olds that are 1/3 his size. We've got several more weeks before Mount Union lines up against peers. Until then, we're guessing (which is ok!).
This all comes out in the wash, anyway. Barring upsets we'll have the same debates going into the playoffs (and beyond).
Thing is we have a big clog at the top right now with very worthy teams that can all claim to be the best. And sometimes, the best loses a game.
Quote from: HOPEful on October 06, 2022, 08:17:51 AM
Quote from: Next Man Up on October 05, 2022, 11:24:09 PM
Quote from: USee on October 05, 2022, 09:11:50 PM
What is the legitimate rationale for UMU ranked above NCC? I am flummoxed. NCC 2 straight wins over them in Alliance and two straight Stagg Bowls. NCC with 16 or so returning starters and a much bigger win so far. This defies logic.
UMU opponents have a combined record of 5-12 while NCC's opponents are 6-11.
One of NCC's wins came against then #11 Wheaton.
I am the individual who has Mount ahead of North Central currently, standing in defiance of logic.
Here's why...
As pointed out, their strength of schedules are similar, with a game against Wheaton favoring NC. However, I stopped judging elite D3 teams based solely on their SOS years ago. If I didn't, UWW would just be permanently my number 1 and MHB number 2.
Giving North Central credit for anything they did last year seems like a silly leap for the next go-to criteria. By that logic, Mount has been in the Stagg Bowl 15 of the last 20 seasons. When I compare the elite teams, I go to the eye test before previous seasons. What jumps out? This season's Mount team just looks exceptionally fast on both sides of the ball, both compared to last season and other elite teams. So for now, I give them the edge. It's similar to D1 and Ohio State. They haven't beat anyone of note yet (Notre Dame was a fraud) and still national pundits seem to believe they're the only team out there capable of playing with Alabama and Georgia. Because their QB play, speed of their playmakers, etc. pass the eye test.
I have North Central number 2. Are you judging the best resume or simply who you think the best teams are? MHB lost at WW, but absolutely punished Muhlenberg and Hardin Simmons. Those two wins combine for the most impressive resume out of anyone, so how much do you punish them for a four point loss at Whitewater? Aren't we conditioned at this point to just assume the Stagg Bowl will be played by some combination of Mount, UWW, MHB, and NC? I prefer to think of the top four teams more like 1a, 1b, 1c, 1d... because you're really splitting hairs trying to figure out who "deserves" to be ranked higher.
I am a big fan of the eye test. But what trumps it, to me, are returning players. We aren't comparing legacies here when we talk about last year. We are comparing the actual same players, which is quite far from a "silly leap" and has nothing to do with 15-20 years of history. NCC has the same QB, 2 RB's and 4 of 5 OL that ran for 293 yds against Mt Union last year. NCC has 15 returning starters to UMU's 12 from last years contest. (UMU has same QB, 2 Ol, and a couple WR's and 7 defensive starters back). The eye test can't trump actual results from the same people in my mind. And my eye test doesn't see a lot of separation between these two programs so actual results from returning players gets me solidly over the hump.
Different Head Coach? Maybe. That's not a lot different than Dartt taking over at UMU last year and that got NCC sent to Alliance for the playoff game. Brad Spencer, like Dartt, is a long time assistant and alum at NCC Both teams lost a few studs. Both have reloaded. NCC has a starting corner who is a D1 transfer and is arguably better than Jake Beasely.
I'm a bullet point guy...
A) What an awesome conversation. This is why I love D3 and these boards. (spending a part of my work day reading...LOL)
B) Eye Test: I just mentioned this on the OAC page. Watching Mount this year is different than last year. They are really, really fast and aggressive. Wally Wabash is correct, they are always fast. So is NCC and UMHB and UWW. I watched NCC and Wheaton. They dont look like the team that they were last year. I cant quite tell with their offense, because Wheaton's D-Line is not the star studded line it was last year. I remember watching that game last year and thinking HOLY $#!T...they're fast. This year...mmm...not-so-much. I whole heartedly admit that I'm biased for Mount.
C) History comes into play when you think that normally fast teams look fast. All be it playing against some lesser opponents, btu still. You can compare this years team to last years or other years and come up with a legit perspective. IE: Is this years UMU D as fast as the one that shut out UMHB in the Stagg? I'm sure Mount did not play a top 10 team in the OOC game that year.
D) I totally appreciate the 1a, 1b, 1c and 1d options. I think if each of these teams played each other 10 times, you might have each team be 5-5.
Quote from: Captainred81 on October 06, 2022, 02:34:27 PM
I'm a bullet point guy...
A) What an awesome conversation. This is why I love D3 and these boards. (spending a part of my work day reading...LOL)
B) Eye Test: I just mentioned this on the OAC page. Watching Mount this year is different than last year. They are really, really fast and aggressive. Wally Wabash is correct, they are always fast. So is NCC and UMHB and UWW. I watched NCC and Wheaton. They dont look like the team that they were last year. I cant quite tell with their offense, because Wheaton's D-Line is not the star studded line it was last year. I remember watching that game last year and thinking HOLY $#!T...they're fast. This year...mmm...not-so-much. I whole heartedly admit that I'm biased for Mount.
C) History comes into play when you think that normally fast teams look fast. All be it playing against some lesser opponents, btu still. You can compare this years team to last years or other years and come up with a legit perspective. IE: Is this years UMU D as fast as the one that shut out UMHB in the Stagg? I'm sure Mount did not play a top 10 team in the OOC game that year.
D) I totally appreciate the 1a, 1b, 1c and 1d options. I think if each of these teams played each other 10 times, you might have each team be 5-5.
7 of 12 returning starters on Mount's defense. We know these guys and their speed. It's not a mystery. It's not speculation about whether they are the team that shut out UMHB. It is actually the same guys who gave up 293 yds rushing vs NCC. Speed doesn't matter when a team runs it down your throat 51 times for 5.7 yds per rush. Same Offensive line and RBs, same Defense. #definitionofinsanity
Quote from: USee on October 06, 2022, 12:56:21 PM
I am a big fan of the eye test. But what trumps it, to me, are returning players. We aren't comparing legacies here when we talk about last year. We are comparing the actual same players, which is quite far from a "silly leap" and has nothing to do with 15-20 years of history...
You're comparing one team's result against another team from a previous year based on a majority of those players returning. That's just a convoluted way of saying head-to-head and justifying the time between meetings. I'm not saying that it shouldn't be considered or hold value. I'm just saying it shouldn't be exhibit A. It's a new season. And even the same returning players have had an off-season and year to reflect, grow, develop, etc. Even assuming replaying that game last year the following weekend would have produced the exact same results would be arrogant on the part of North Central.
Last year I picked North Central to win it all in my bracket. Then I watched Aphonso Thomas and Kyle King have their way with them. By your logic, since those same players are back for MHB, and I've seen them dismantle the NC defense, obviously I should have them ahead of North Central in my rankings, right?
North Central is a very, very, good team. They could win it all this year and I wouldn't be surprised. I have them as my #2 team in the country, or as I already said, my 1b. I just think right now Mount looks a little faster, and therefore, better. And I don't think my reasoning defies logic, is based on solely intangibles, or is #definitionofinsanity.
I am not suggesting players don't grow or games played with the same players will yield the exact result. But my reasoning is based on some pretty factual data. North Central runs it on everybody and ran it down Mt Unions throat. 293 yards worth. What does increased speed have to do with that? While I think the result could certainly be different, with both teams playing at a high level, and NCC with a much better result this year than anything UMU has produced, the head to head with most of the same players isn't such a "silly leap" is it? And if UMHB hadn't lost to UWW, they would certainly be ranked ahead of NCC and UMU right? So we can only compare undefeated teams. I just wasn't sure people who were voting (in the D3.com poll and the fan poll) actually understood the nature of the beat down last year in Alliance and who each team has returning. If they (and you) do, and choose to base their opinion on subjective measures, so be it. Pat gave his reasons on the podcast for UMU at #1 and that's totally cool. Keith has them #6 and has reasons for it, which is fine as well. I was more interested in peoples reasoning for the fan poll.
I haven't seen enough Mt Union this year to have an opinion and I don't vote in any polls. I have seen a lot of NCC this year (too much unfortunately) and while I am not convinced they have what it takes this year to win it all, I do believe at this point, based on what we have seen, they should be #1 in the polls (and they are).
If UMHB had held off UWW before 14,213 fans at the Perk, and considering the Muhlenberg and HSU scores, might we be talking about how The Cru is building a dynasty?
(LOL, 14,213 fans might be the over/under number of the number of fans to watch a regular season's worth of games for the average D3 player, i.e., the cumulative attendance for 10 games in a season!)
Muhlenberg stinks and aren't we all still waiting for HSU's first big win...ever
Quote from: D3fanboy on October 06, 2022, 06:08:53 PM
Muhlenberg stinks and aren't we all still waiting for HSU's first big win...ever
I think that Muhlenberg is headed to 6-3 in the Centennial this year. That is no-slouch conference.
As for HSU's big win, I feel sorry for the Cowboys. The head coach called 160 schools for a game.
So, he goes to Platteville and does something no one else has done since 2005; shut out the Pioneers.
The Cowboy win over UW-P (41-0) was of Oshkoshian proportions (46-7).
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 06, 2022, 06:46:58 PM
Quote from: D3fanboy on October 06, 2022, 06:08:53 PM
Muhlenberg stinks and aren't we all still waiting for HSU's first big win...ever
I think that Muhlenberg is headed to 6-3 in the Centennial this year. That is no-slouch conference.
As for HSU's big win, I feel sorry for the Cowboys. The head coach called 160 schools for a game.
So, he goes to Platteville and does something no one else has done since 2005; shut out the Pioneers.
The Cowboy win over UW-P (41-0) was of Oshkoshian proportions (46-7).
I'm no HSU fan, but what Ralph said. Plus, Hardin Simmons HAS made a deep run or two into the playoffs before. It might have been 20+ years ago but pretty sure they made the semis in 2000...
Quote from: HOPEful on October 06, 2022, 08:17:51 AM
Quote from: Next Man Up on October 05, 2022, 11:24:09 PM
Quote from: USee on October 05, 2022, 09:11:50 PM
What is the legitimate rationale for UMU ranked above NCC? I am flummoxed. NCC 2 straight wins over them in Alliance and two straight Stagg Bowls. NCC with 16 or so returning starters and a much bigger win so far. This defies logic.
UMU opponents have a combined record of 5-12 while NCC's opponents are 6-11.
One of NCC's wins came against then #11 Wheaton.
I am the individual who has Mount ahead of North Central currently, standing in defiance of logic.
Here's why...
As pointed out, their strength of schedules are similar, with a game against Wheaton favoring NC. However, I stopped judging elite D3 teams based solely on their SOS years ago. If I didn't, UWW would just be permanently my number 1 and MHB number 2.
Giving North Central credit for anything they did last year seems like a silly leap for the next go-to criteria. By that logic, Mount has been in the Stagg Bowl 15 of the last 20 seasons. When I compare the elite teams, I go to the eye test before previous seasons. What jumps out? This season's Mount team just looks exceptionally fast on both sides of the ball, both compared to last season and other elite teams. So for now, I give them the edge. It's similar to D1 and Ohio State. They haven't beat anyone of note yet (Notre Dame was a fraud) and still national pundits seem to believe they're the only team out there capable of playing with Alabama and Georgia. Because their QB play, speed of their playmakers, etc. pass the eye test.
I have North Central number 2. Are you judging the best resume or simply who you think the best teams are? MHB lost at WW, but absolutely punished Muhlenberg and Hardin Simmons. Those two wins combine for the most impressive resume out of anyone, so how much do you punish them for a four point loss at Whitewater? Aren't we conditioned at this point to just assume the Stagg Bowl will be played by some combination of Mount, UWW, MHB, and NC? I prefer to think of the top four teams more like 1a, 1b, 1c, 1d... because you're really splitting hairs trying to figure out who "deserves" to be ranked higher.
1e might like a word: they gave UMHB their toughest challenge last year and return 21 starters this season.
Yeah, I am wondering what the committee will do with this scenario in Region 3. (Record against D-3; Pool A in bold.)
1) Trinity 10-0; RR 2-0
2) RMC 10-0; RR 1-0
3) UMHB 9-1; RR 1-1
4) Huntingdon 9-1; RR 1-1
5) HSU 8-1; RR 0-1
6) Bwater/Shen 9-1; RR 0-1
7) BSC 7-2; RR 0-2
Geographic proximity? Does Trinity host UMHB in the 1st round?
Only 5 Pool C bids. HSU might be on the bubble. Platteville may pick up 3 -4 losses. That doesn't look good for UWP getting in the RR for Region 5 for the sake of HSU.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 06, 2022, 05:54:51 PM
might we be talking about how The Cru is building a dynasty?
Mary Hardin Baylor is already a dynasty. But it's difficult to talk about any of MHB, UWW, or Mount without mentioning the others... I'd suggest D3 football has created a different kind of dynasty. The top 1-2% dynasty.
Since 2000, St. John's, Linfield, and North Central are the only schools to win the Stagg Bowl not named Whitewater, Mount Union, or Mary Hardin Baylor. Add Oshkosh, St. Thomas, Trinity, and Bridgewater, and you have every team that's even played in the game since 2000. One of those isn't even a D3 school anymore. We already have a dynasty, it's just a shared dynasty between 3 teams with North Central making a case to join them.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 06, 2022, 05:54:51 PM
If UMHB had held off UWW before 14,213 fans at the Perk, and considering the Muhlenberg and HSU scores, might we be talking about how The Cru is building a dynasty?
(LOL, 14,213 fans might be the over/under number of the number of fans to watch a regular season's worth of games for the average D3 player, i.e., the cumulative attendance for 10 games in a season!)
Obviously it's over! Wait isn't it?
240 programs...24 starters...2-3 (if fortunate) family members or peers watching every game...pretty close Ralph!
Quote from: Cowboy2 on October 07, 2022, 09:14:21 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 06, 2022, 05:54:51 PM
If UMHB had held off UWW before 14,213 fans at the Perk, and considering the Muhlenberg and HSU scores, might we be talking about how The Cru is building a dynasty?
(LOL, 14,213 fans might be the over/under number of the number of fans to watch a regular season's worth of games for the average D3 player, i.e., the cumulative attendance for 10 games in a season!)
Obviously it's over! Wait isn't it?
240 programs...24 starters...2-3 (if fortunate) family members or peers watching every game...pretty close Ralph!
Thanks Cowboy, actually I was thinking of an announced attendance at each game of 1,421 fans times 10 games.
Quote from: D3fanboy on October 06, 2022, 06:08:53 PM
Muhlenberg stinks and aren't we all still waiting for HSU's first big win...ever
Oh, to stink like that, dude.
Muhlenberg's last losing season was 2009.
Quote from: smedindy on October 07, 2022, 02:15:21 PM
Quote from: D3fanboy on October 06, 2022, 06:08:53 PM
Muhlenberg stinks and aren't we all still waiting for HSU's first big win...ever
Oh, to stink like that, dude.
Muhlenberg's last losing season was 2009.
+1! Smed!
Yeah, some of the players were in pre-school that year. LOL
Quote from: smedindy on October 07, 2022, 02:15:21 PM
Quote from: D3fanboy on October 06, 2022, 06:08:53 PM
Muhlenberg stinks and aren't we all still waiting for HSU's first big win...ever
Oh, to stink like that, dude.
Muhlenberg's last losing season was 2009.
big time brag. I had no idea that you were a Baldwin Wallace guy
Quote from: D3fanboy on October 07, 2022, 04:16:29 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 07, 2022, 02:15:21 PM
Quote from: D3fanboy on October 06, 2022, 06:08:53 PM
Muhlenberg stinks and aren't we all still waiting for HSU's first big win...ever
Oh, to stink like that, dude.
Muhlenberg's last losing season was 2009.
big time brag. I had no idea that you were a Baldwin Wallace guy
BW? Nope. Try again.
Quote from: smedindy on October 07, 2022, 02:15:21 PM
Quote from: D3fanboy on October 06, 2022, 06:08:53 PM
Muhlenberg stinks and aren't we all still waiting for HSU's first big win...ever
Oh, to stink like that, dude.
Muhlenberg's last losing season was 2009.
One of the biggest problems when you have this handful of super dynasty teams is people lose sight of how good teams are outside of those programs, so everyone "stinks". Even the 8-9 win program they were before they started making these playoff runs...do people not realize how hard it is to be successful like that? And the number of D3 programs that would take it in a heartbeat?
So is Heidelberg tough or did Mount hiccup? I think a little of both!!
Heidelberg is good...John Carroll is better.
Quote from: Captainred81 on October 10, 2022, 04:45:12 PM
So is Heidelberg tough or did Mount hiccup? I think a little of both!!
It makes me chuckle sometimes how much differently we judge the elite d3 teams from everyone else. A 22 point win against a team that was ranked #19 in the country just 3 weeks ago would be seen as an epic win for anyone else in region 4. For Mount, however, it's a hiccup.
Quote from: IC798891 on October 10, 2022, 08:09:04 AM
Quote from: smedindy on October 07, 2022, 02:15:21 PM
Quote from: D3fanboy on October 06, 2022, 06:08:53 PM
Muhlenberg stinks and aren't we all still waiting for HSU's first big win...ever
Oh, to stink like that, dude.
Muhlenberg's last losing season was 2009.
One of the biggest problems when you have this handful of super dynasty teams is people lose sight of how good teams are outside of those programs, so everyone "stinks". Even the 8-9 win program they were before they started making these playoff runs...do people not realize how hard it is to be successful like that? And the number of D3 programs that would take it in a heartbeat?
Shout it from the mountaintops, friend. UMHB, UWW, UMU (maybe NCC creeping into the club)...these are outliers of outliers.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 11, 2022, 12:31:46 PM
Quote from: IC798891 on October 10, 2022, 08:09:04 AM
Quote from: smedindy on October 07, 2022, 02:15:21 PM
Quote from: D3fanboy on October 06, 2022, 06:08:53 PM
Muhlenberg stinks and aren't we all still waiting for HSU's first big win...ever
Oh, to stink like that, dude.
Muhlenberg's last losing season was 2009.
One of the biggest problems when you have this handful of super dynasty teams is people lose sight of how good teams are outside of those programs, so everyone "stinks". Even the 8-9 win program they were before they started making these playoff runs...do people not realize how hard it is to be successful like that? And the number of D3 programs that would take it in a heartbeat?
Shout it from the mountaintops, friend. UMHB, UWW, UMU (maybe NCC creeping into the club)...these are outliers of outliers.
I' think there are some just behind them, where two regular season losses is very rare: Johns Hopkins, Linfield, Del Val, Wheaton, H-S, St. John's. There are others. Some are due to their conference and schedule, but a three-loss regular season would cause angst and the wearing of sackcloth and ashes.
Quote from: smedindy on October 11, 2022, 01:20:19 PM
I' think there are some just behind them, where two regular season losses is very rare: Johns Hopkins, Linfield, Del Val, Wheaton, H-S, St. John's. There are others. Some are due to their conference and schedule, but a three-loss regular season would cause angst and the wearing of sackcloth and ashes.
For me, the biggest difference is seasonal expectations. For fans of MHB, Mount, WW, and recently North Central, the expectation seems to be that anything short of the Stagg Bowl is a disappointing season. There are certainly years where that may be true in McMinnville, Wheaton, and Doylestown, but it is not a reasonable expectation of those schools to be perennially playing for walnut and bronze. Heck, with the exception of Oshkosh in 2016 and no longer D3 St. Thomas, it's been almost 20 years since someone outside those 4 played in the Stagg Bowl. If you want to be perceived as elite, you have to play on the biggest stage... and fair or not, that means getting there.
Quote from: HOPEful on October 11, 2022, 02:05:17 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 11, 2022, 01:20:19 PM
I' think there are some just behind them, where two regular season losses is very rare: Johns Hopkins, Linfield, Del Val, Wheaton, H-S, St. John's. There are others. Some are due to their conference and schedule, but a three-loss regular season would cause angst and the wearing of sackcloth and ashes.
For me, the biggest difference is seasonal expectations. For fans of MHB, Mount, WW, and recently North Central, the expectation seems to be that anything short of the Stagg Bowl is a disappointing season. There are certainly years where that may be true in McMinnville, Wheaton, and Doylestown, but it is not a reasonable expectation of those schools to be perennially playing for walnut and bronze. Heck, with the exception of Oshkosh in 2016 and no longer D3 St. Thomas, it's been almost 20 years since someone outside those 4 played in the Stagg Bowl. If you want to be perceived as elite, you have to play on the biggest stage... and fair or not, that means getting there.
I agree. To be the best you have to beat the best.
I know different regions have their own bias, based on regional powerhouses, but this year we have seen a lot of parity amongst OOC and out of region play. Have the rest of the league's good teams gotten better or have the best teams fallen a bit? Who knows. Not way of telling unless looking at head to head matchups or common opponents.
I know it won't happen but for those teams fortunate enough to punch their playoff ticket, it would be fun as a fan to see the entire bracket go to a lottery system. If the NCAA is all for fairness, as in "win your league and in," while not having to go to Pool C option; how cool would it be to see a randomized bracket instead of regional or geographical seeding...yes you may have 2- #1seeds going at it the first round or two (common out west or in the south), or you may have a dark horse, you may have a sweet 16 darling arise, but basically you get rid of the gridlock that essentially puts the 1a-1d tier teams in situation where it's almost given they meet in the final 4. Thoughts?
Quote from: HOPEful on October 11, 2022, 02:05:17 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 11, 2022, 01:20:19 PM
I' think there are some just behind them, where two regular season losses is very rare: Johns Hopkins, Linfield, Del Val, Wheaton, H-S, St. John's. There are others. Some are due to their conference and schedule, but a three-loss regular season would cause angst and the wearing of sackcloth and ashes.
For me, the biggest difference is seasonal expectations. For fans of MHB, Mount, WW, and recently North Central, the expectation seems to be that anything short of the Stagg Bowl is a disappointing season. There are certainly years where that may be true in McMinnville, Wheaton, and Doylestown, but it is not a reasonable expectation of those schools to be perennially playing for walnut and bronze. Heck, with the exception of Oshkosh in 2016 and no longer D3 St. Thomas, it's been almost 20 years since someone outside those 4 played in the Stagg Bowl. If you want to be perceived as elite, you have to play on the biggest stage... and fair or not, that means getting there.
You aren't kidding! After last season's disappointing semi-final loss against UMHB, there were fan's calling for Coach Bullis at UW-W to be fired. His career record: 71-11. His record in the WIAC, the consensus most powerful conference in D-III, is 41-3. Goes to your point about expectations.
Quote from: bleedpurple on October 11, 2022, 10:11:07 PM
Quote from: HOPEful on October 11, 2022, 02:05:17 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 11, 2022, 01:20:19 PM
I' think there are some just behind them, where two regular season losses is very rare: Johns Hopkins, Linfield, Del Val, Wheaton, H-S, St. John's. There are others. Some are due to their conference and schedule, but a three-loss regular season would cause angst and the wearing of sackcloth and ashes.
For me, the biggest difference is seasonal expectations. For fans of MHB, Mount, WW, and recently North Central, the expectation seems to be that anything short of the Stagg Bowl is a disappointing season. There are certainly years where that may be true in McMinnville, Wheaton, and Doylestown, but it is not a reasonable expectation of those schools to be perennially playing for walnut and bronze. Heck, with the exception of Oshkosh in 2016 and no longer D3 St. Thomas, it's been almost 20 years since someone outside those 4 played in the Stagg Bowl. If you want to be perceived as elite, you have to play on the biggest stage... and fair or not, that means getting there.
You aren't kidding! After last season's disappointing semi-final loss against UMHB, there were fan's calling for Coach Bullis at UW-W to be fired. His career record: 71-11. His record in the WIAC, the consensus most powerful conference in D-III, is 41-3. Goes to your point about expectations.
I've been guilty of that as a UWW alumn....I admit it. Got a little spoiled, I guess. But I've never gone as far as to say Bullis should be let go though. Going forward, I think this team has a good chance to win the WIAC each year, along with advancing a few rounds in the playoffs. My Stagg Bowl or bust mentality is slowly dwindling as a fan. The program has suffered some bad playoff losses (as in boarderline blow outs) over the past few years that have brought expectations back down to earth. Since last winning it all in 2014 - coincidently since Leipold left - UWW has exited the post season by an average loss of over 21 points.
2015: Lost by 30 (Mount)
2016: Lost by 17 (John Carroll)
2017: Missed the playoffs
2018: Lost by 17 (MHB)
2019: Lost by 27 (NCC) - Stagg Bowl
2020: No season
2021: Lost by 17 (MHB)
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 12, 2022, 07:53:21 AM
I've been guilty of that as a UWW alumn....I admit it.
Guilty is harsh and implies you did something wrong. Look at Mount Union for example.... most seasons, there's not a team in the OAC that can challenge them outside of John Carroll occasionally. They're currently lamenting a 28-6 win over a team that was ranked as high as #17 in the country earlier this season. Most games they win by the score of their choosing. I think it would be very hard to get excited for an undefeated regular season with the success they've had. In many ways, to a Mount fan, the season starts the first round of the playoffs. I do like that some of the other teams have worked hard to schedule each other, regardless of distance. It would have been fun to see Mount play someone other than Defiance in non-conference play, prefarably someone much better.
Replace John Carroll with Wheaton or Hardin-Simmons, and you could tell a similar story about North Central and Mary Hardin Baylor fans. Whitewater is a little different seeing as they have to go through the WIAC... but when you go to 10 Stagg Bowls in a 15 year stretch, those expectations are probably pretty entrenched into the culture.
2022 WEEK 6 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | W-L | Points | Prev |
1) | North Central (5) | 5-0 | 195 | 1 |
2) | UW-Whitewater (2) | 4-1 | 183 | 2 |
3) | Mount Union (1) | 5-0 | 180 | 3 |
4) | Mary Hardin-Baylor | 5-1 | 179 | 4 |
5) | Trinity (TX) | 5-0 | 158 | 5 |
6) | Linfield | 4-0 | 157 | 7 |
7) | St John's | 4-1 | 154 | 6 |
8) | Johns Hopkins | 5-0 | 136 | T8 |
9) | UW-La Crosse | 4-1 | 128 | T8 |
10) | Bethel | 4-1 | 122 | 10 |
11) | Hardin-Simmons | 4-1 | 116 | 11 |
12) | Cortland | 5-0 | 106 | 12 |
13) | UW-River Falls | 4-1 | 103 | 17 |
T14) | Ithaca | 5-0 | 95 | 14 |
T14) | Wheaton | 3-2 | 95 | 15 |
16) | Delaware Valley | 6-0 | 92 | 13 |
17) | Wartburg | 6-0 | 66 | 19 |
18) | UW-Oshkosh | 3-2 | 61 | 16 |
19) | Carnegie Mellon | 6-0 | 56 | 18 |
20) | Randolph-Macon | 5-0 | 53 | 20 |
21) | Susquehanna | 5-0 | 45 | 21 |
22) | Albion | 6-0 | 42 | 22 |
23) | Huntingdon | 4-1 | 35 | 23 |
24) | Washington U | 5-0 | 13 | NR |
T25) | Bridgewater | 5-0 | 5 | NR |
T25) | Mount St Joseph | 5-0 | 5 | NR |
Dropped Out: #24 DePauw and #25 Central
Also Receiving Votes: John Carroll 4, Monmouth 4, Utica 4, Endicott 2, Grove City 2, Carleton 1, Central 1, DePauw 1, Washington & Jefferson 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, Captainred81, desertcat1, FCGG, HOPEful, MRMIKESMITH, NCF, and smedindy
1) North Central 195 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 3, 3)
2) UW-Whitewater 183 ( 1, 1, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 7)
3) Mount Union 180 ( 1, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 5, 7)
4) Mary Hardin-Baylor 179 ( 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 5, 8)
5) Trinity (TX) 158 ( 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10)
6) Linfield 157 ( 2, 3, 5, 7, 7, 8, 9, 10)
7) St John's 154 ( 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 10)
8) Johns Hopkins 136 ( 5, 7, 8, 9, 9, 11, 11, 12)
9) UW-La Crosse 128 ( 4, 6, 8, 8, 10, 10, 13, 21)
10) Bethel 122 ( 5, 9, 9, 10, 10, 11, 15, 17)
11) Hardin-Simmons 116 ( 8, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 16, 17)
12) Cortland 106 ( 6, 12, 12, 12, 12, 12, 17, 19)
13) UW-River Falls 103 ( 6, 7, 13, 14, 15, 16, 16, 18)
T14) Ithaca 95 (11, 13, 13, 13, 14, 14, 15, 20)
T14) Wheaton 95 ( 9, 11, 14, 14, 15, 15, 17, 18)
16) Delaware Valley 92 (11, 12, 13, 14, 14, 15, 18, 19)
17) Wartburg 66 (12, 16, 16, 18, 18, 19, 21, 22)
18) UW-Oshkosh 61 (13, 15, 16, 17, 17, 18, 25, --)
19) Carnegie Mellon 56 (16, 17, 19, 19, 19, 20, 20, 22)
20) Randolph-Macon 53 (14, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21, 23, --)
21) Susquehanna 45 (18, 20, 20, 20, 21, 21, 21, 22)
22) Albion 42 (15, 19, 20, 22, 22, 22, 23, 23)
23) Huntingdon 35 (11, 19, 22, 23, 24, 24, 24, --)
24) Washington U 13 (23, 23, 23, 24, 25, 25, --, --)
T25) Bridgewater 5 (21, --, --, --, --, --, --, --)
T25) Mount St Joseph 5 (21, --, --, --, --, --, --, --)
T27) John Carroll 4 (24, 24)
T27) Monmouth 4 (22)
T27) Utica 4 (23, 25)
T30) Endicott 2 (24)
T30) Grove City 2 (24)
T32) Carleton 1 (25)
T32) Central 1 (25)
T32) DePauw 1 (25)
T32) Wash & Jeff 1 (25)
Quote from: HOPEful on October 11, 2022, 02:05:17 PM
If you want to be perceived as elite, you have to play on the biggest stage... and fair or not, that means getting there.
I guess my point wasn't what you need to do to be considered elite.
It's more this sense of not being able to appreciate good football teams because we're too busy lamenting that they aren't "great." Too busy complaining about what they aren't to be proud of what they are.
Quote from: IC798891 on October 12, 2022, 03:39:30 PM
It's more this sense of not being able to appreciate good football teams because we're too busy lamenting that they aren't "great." Too busy complaining about what they aren't to be proud of what they are.
I totally understand. And it's somewhat unfortunate that the elite teams have taken a lot of the luster away from the rest of d3 over the last 20 years. I do think that gap has diminished, which is exciting to see, and I think what you're getting at. The distance between MHB, Mount, WW, and NC is much smaller when comparing those teams to Linfield, Wheaton, Trinity, Johns Hopkins, St. John's, etc. And all those programs have really, really good teams that are fun to watch. We've unfortunately diminished the accomplishment of going undefeated and annihilating every team in your conference if it means a first round exit from the playoffs. Or, closer to home, it sometimes feels like region 4 isn't worth talking about because it's Mount Union and a bunch of nobodies. How good is Albion this year? The prevailing thought seems to be "Meh, we'll find out when they actually play someone in the postseason."
A) Someone has LaCrosse at 21... Seems unfair.
B) Mount took a beating in this poll with a hard fought win over a pretty talented team.
C) As a Mount grad I can definitely confirm the expectation is the Stagg Bowl. However, one of the most impressive things (and maybe toughest) is the mentality that is tough each week. The goals set before the team are the same as everywhere. Win the game, win the conference, win the title. The coaches let each player know that they can be replaced (there is always another player waiting for their shot), and that each week they can be beat. This is not to say that they don't get caught looking ahead or underestimating a team, but it does show that they are not expecting a win to be handed to them.
D) As Mount fan, I always want them to win and go to the Stagg. I think that these "Dynasties" are cyclical. In the 80's Ithaca, Dayton...In the 90's LaCrosse, Rowan, Albion, Mount...In the OT's Mount, UWW... In the 10's Mount, UWW, UMHB, Wesley, St Thomas, 2020's still TBD, but at least UMHB, UWW, Mount...NCC is making a case. I think the term Dynasty in D3 has a different meaning, since some these Dynasties (UWW and UMU) are so long lasting. In 10 more years who knows what teams will be at the top. It might be HSU, and Wheaton or John Carroll and Bethel.
And...
E) I think that the match ups in the playoffs ( I know the 600 miles rule) should rotate. IE East plays, south North Plays west, then West plays Norths, and East Plays South you get the point. That way the matchups can change years to year.
Quote from: Captainred81 on October 13, 2022, 01:23:03 PM
B) Mount took a beating in this poll with a hard fought win over a pretty talented team.
Mount actually gained a point this week. And UMHB gained 2 points. Top two stayed even.
Quote from: Captainred81 on October 13, 2022, 01:23:03 PM
A) Someone has LaCrosse at 21... Seems unfair.
B) Mount took a beating in this poll with a hard fought win over a pretty talented team.
C) As a Mount grad I can definitely confirm the expectation is the Stagg Bowl. However, one of the most impressive things (and maybe toughest) is the mentality that is tough each week. The goals set before the team are the same as everywhere. Win the game, win the conference, win the title. The coaches let each player know that they can be replaced (there is always another player waiting for their shot), and that each week they can be beat. This is not to say that they don't get caught looking ahead or underestimating a team, but it does show that they are not expecting a win to be handed to them.
D) As Mount fan, I always want them to win and go to the Stagg. I think that these "Dynasties" are cyclical. In the 80's Ithaca, Dayton...In the 90's LaCrosse, Rowan, Albion, Mount...In the OT's Mount, UWW... In the 10's Mount, UWW, UMHB, Wesley, St Thomas, 2020's still TBD, but at least UMHB, UWW, Mount...NCC is making a case. I think the term Dynasty in D3 has a different meaning, since some these Dynasties (UWW and UMU) are so long lasting. In 10 more years who knows what teams will be at the top. It might be HSU, and Wheaton or John Carroll and Bethel.
Good post. For the 80s, don't forget Augustana. 4 straight national titles and (I think) 60 consecutive victories.
Quote from: Captainred81 on October 13, 2022, 01:23:03 PM
A) Someone has LaCrosse at 21... Seems unfair.
Someone had them at 4. It balances out. It always does, it seems.
Quote from: smedindy on October 14, 2022, 12:46:17 AM
Someone had them at 4. It balances out. It always does, it seems.
Massey has them 6. D3football has them 9. I feel like there are good arguments for 5-10 being whatever order you want. Any order of St. John's, Trinity, Hardin Simmons, Linfield, Johns Hopkins, and La Crosse feels fine after MHB, WW, Mount, and NC in whatever order.
LaCrosse at 21 had to be either a mistake or haters gonna hate.
Yeah there are not 21 teams better than La Crosse (either by actual team performance or by 2022 season resumé), but that's why we don't do polls of 1. :)
Not sure what's worse, saying there's 20 teams better than UWL, or saying there's at least 25 teams better than UWO. They only lost to 13th ranked UWRF (by only 3 points in RF) and a D2 school.
How do we compare JHU's 34-27 win over Muhlenberg in which the Mules missed a 31 yd FG and a PAT?
Muhlenberg takes the #1 or #2 team in Region 2 down to the wire.
UMHB dominated Muhlenberg.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 15, 2022, 12:08:40 AM
How do we compare JHU's 34-27 win over Muhlenberg in which the Mules missed a 31 yd FG and a PAT?
Muhlenberg takes the #1 or #2 team in Region 2 down to the wire.
UMHB dominated Muhlenberg.
I thought the same thing....also, JHU made some plays to win the game. The INT early. The 4&1 on their own 29 to convert. The fake punt. They played to win! They also had 90-100 KR TD taken off the board. Yea, could have been 34-31, or could have been 42-20ish, but it was 34-27. I thought the mules played well and had a chance to win but they didn't make the needed stops. JHU look to be a bit better.
I also thought the same about the UWW - UWO game. Reminded me of the UWW Berry contest earlier in the season. Same score as well....
Quote from: Cowboy2 on October 15, 2022, 11:07:33 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 15, 2022, 12:08:40 AM
How do we compare JHU's 34-27 win over Muhlenberg in which the Mules missed a 31 yd FG and a PAT?
Muhlenberg takes the #1 or #2 team in Region 2 down to the wire.
UMHB dominated Muhlenberg.
I thought the same thing....also, JHU made some plays to win the game. The INT early. The 4&1 on their own 29 to convert. The fake punt. They played to win! They also had 90-100 KR TD taken off the board. Yea, could have been 34-31, or could have been 42-20ish, but it was 34-27. I thought the mules played well and had a chance to win but they didn't make the needed stops. JHU look to be a bit better.
I also thought the same about the UWW - UWO game. Reminded me of the UWW Berry contest earlier in the season. Same score as well....
It's about familiarity. Each team has many years of film and tendency data. Muhlenberg could have been winless and played a good game against Johns Hopkins and vice versa.
The loud noise that we heard coming from the plains of west Texas was the HSU crowd hearing the score of the UWP/ UWRF game. Once again, the WIAC is Wiac-ky!
Good post. For the 80s, don't forget Augustana. 4 straight national titles and (I think) 60 consecutive victories.
[/quote]
1000% My bad, I was shooting from the hip.
Only 7 ballots this week.
2022 WEEK 7 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | W-L | Points | Prev |
1) | North Central (4) | 6-0 | 170 | 1 |
2) | UW-Whitewater (2) | 5-1 | 160 | 2 |
T3) | Mary Hardin-Baylor | 6-1 | 156 | 4 |
T3) | Mount Union (1) | 6-0 | 156 | 3 |
5) | Linfield | 5-0 | 143 | 6 |
6) | Trinity (TX) | 6-0 | 137 | 5 |
7) | St John's | 5-1 | 134 | 7 |
8) | Johns Hopkins | 6-0 | 122 | 8 |
9) | UW-La Crosse | 5-1 | 111 | 9 |
10) | Bethel | 5-1 | 108 | 10 |
11) | Hardin-Simmons | 5-1 | 106 | 11 |
12) | Cortland | 6-0 | 95 | 12 |
13) | Delaware Valley | 7-0 | 86 | 16 |
14) | Wheaton | 4-2 | 84 | T14 |
15) | Ithaca | 6-0 | 83 | T14 |
16) | Wartburg | 7-0 | 65 | 17 |
T17) | Carnegie Mellon | 7-0 | 61 | 19 |
T17) | Randolph-Macon | 6-0 | 61 | 20 |
19) | Susquehanna | 6-0 | 47 | 21 |
20) | Albion | 6-0 | 46 | 22 |
21) | UW-River Falls | 4-2 | 31 | 13 |
22) | Huntingdon | 5-1 | 29 | 23 |
23) | UW-Oshkosh | 3-3 | 28 | 18 |
24) | Washington U | 6-0 | 19 | 24 |
25) | John Carroll | 5-1 | 16 | NR |
Dropped Out: #T25 Bridgewater and #T25 Mount St Joseph
Also Receiving Votes: Mount St Joseph 5, Utica 5, Monmouth 4, Carleton 2, Grove City 2, UW-Platteville 2, Trinity (CT) 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, Captainred81, desertcat1, FCGG, HOPEful, MRMIKESMITH, NCF, and smedindy
The Top 25 is out for Oct 23, and someone needs to let the voters know the WIAC is not the SEC. I get that UW-WW won six national championships, but the last one was eight years ago. Currently the top 25 has 5 WIAC schools ranked, they have a combined 11 loses. The rest of the top 25 has a combined 8 losses. The first team ranked with 2 losses is a UW team and two teams with three losses are ranked.
Platteville, seriously???? They have three losses, the last two were by 41 and 39 respectively. That's not even competitive in those games. One was 41-0, the other 46-7.......that is not top 25 performance.
Quote from: BSCpanthers on October 23, 2022, 10:30:06 PM
The Top 25 is out for Oct 23, and someone needs to let the voters know the WIAC is not the SEC. I get that UW-WW won six national championships, but the last one was eight years ago. Currently the top 25 has 5 WIAC schools ranked, they have a combined 11 loses. The rest of the top 25 has a combined 8 losses. The first team ranked with 2 losses is a UW team and two teams with three losses are ranked.
Platteville, seriously???? They have three losses, the last two were by 41 and 39 respectively. That's not even competitive in those games. One was 41-0, the other 46-7.......that is not top 25 performance.
I can't argue the points you made about Platteville (even if they did beat Whitewater) but in D3 the WIAC
is the SEC.
Quote from: BSCpanthers on October 23, 2022, 10:30:06 PM
The Top 25 is out for Oct 23, and someone needs to let the voters know the WIAC is not the SEC. I get that UW-WW won six national championships, but the last one was eight years ago. Currently the top 25 has 5 WIAC schools ranked, they have a combined 11 loses. The rest of the top 25 has a combined 8 losses. The first team ranked with 2 losses is a UW team and two teams with three losses are ranked.
Platteville, seriously???? They have three losses, the last two were by 41 and 39 respectively. That's not even competitive in those games. One was 41-0, the other 46-7.......that is not top 25 performance.
Yeah, they kind of are the SEC and HSC Tiger said.
Platteville has won 3 in a row, and must have fixed their issues. Plus, one of the losses was against a D-2 school, so that doesn't count really.
The SEC wins national championships, the WIAC hasn't won one in 8 years. And the two games Platteville lost by 40 were both D3 schools. So give me more reasons why they deserve to 25.
Quote from: BSCpanthers on October 24, 2022, 08:24:52 AM
The SEC wins national championships, the WIAC hasn't won one in 8 years. And the two games Platteville lost by 40 were both D3 schools. So give me more reasons why they deserve to 25.
The Stagg goes thru the WIAC. No other "conference" (not a single team, e.g., NCC, UMHB, UMU and the Tommies are gone) has the same dominance. The WIAC has had a team, either UWW or UWO, in the semifinals every year since 2005. Maybe the CCIW would be second with Wheaton.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 24, 2022, 09:53:25 AM
Quote from: BSCpanthers on October 24, 2022, 08:24:52 AM
The SEC wins national championships, the WIAC hasn't won one in 8 years. And the two games Platteville lost by 40 were both D3 schools. So give me more reasons why they deserve to 25.
The Stagg goes thru the WIAC. No other "conference" (not a single team, e.g., NCC, UMHB, UMU and the Tommies are gone) has the same dominance. The WIAC has had a team, either UWW or UWO, in the semifinals every year since 2005. Maybe the CCIW would be second with Wheaton.
See Question 9.
https://www.d3football.com/interactive/faq/playoffs
For the ASC, 5 of those losses since 2011 were an ASC opponent losing to UMHB in the 1st or 2nd round. Geographic proximity, you know.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 24, 2022, 09:53:25 AM
Quote from: BSCpanthers on October 24, 2022, 08:24:52 AM
The SEC wins national championships, the WIAC hasn't won one in 8 years. And the two games Platteville lost by 40 were both D3 schools. So give me more reasons why they deserve to 25.
The Stagg goes thru the WIAC. No other "conference" (not a single team, e.g., NCC, UMHB, UMU and the Tommies are gone) has the same dominance. The WIAC has had a team, either UWW or UWO, in the semifinals every year since 2005. Maybe the CCIW would be second with Wheaton.
I'd say the American Southwest is stacked, perhaps even to the same level as the WIAC. They just get the geographical short stick come playoff time. Wish we could see a bracket that didn't pit the best teams in Texas/Southwest against each other the first two rounds.
If we're comparing The WIAC, CCIW, and ASW, I think Hardin Simmons and Howard Payne stand up pretty well against Wheaton and Wash U. I'd even argue they stand up to River Falls and La Crosse, but no one has the depth of the WIAC. The next two teams in the CCIW and ASW are not at the same level as Platteville and OshKosh.
I think the fact that year after year the depth of the CCIW is what it is just magnifies how ridiculous it is what Whitewater has been able to achieve over the last 2 decades.
The WIAC should have won more than they have in the last 8 years. Public schools without the same financial situation as the 97% of DIII, since they are all private, as well as enrollment that is 5x's that of most DIII schools.
But the results don't agree. Since 1973, the WIAC makes up 8 championships, 2 by La Crosse, the rest by Whitewater. The SEC has won 11 in the last 29 years, by 5 different schools. That is conference domination, not 1 team 8 years ago.
Quote from: BSCpanthers on October 24, 2022, 10:19:26 AM
The WIAC should have won more than they have in the last 8 years. Public schools without the same financial situation as the 97% of DIII, since they are all private, as well as enrollment that is 5x's that of most DIII schools.
But the results don't agree. Since 1973, the WIAC makes up 8 championships, 2 by La Crosse, the rest by Whitewater. The SEC has won 11 in the last 29 years, by 5 different schools. That is conference domination, not 1 team 8 years ago.
First, this isn't an apples to apples argument.
But the WIAC also has NAIA National Titles as well. The major difference here being, WIAC teams have had to run through a genuine playoff system. How many national titles does the WIAC have if they were given 2 of the 4 slots in a playoff? Or 2 of 2 in a rematch of, say UWO and UWW? Or if all the teams in the vaunted WIAC didn't actually all play each other (protecting their records and preventing canablization) and played non-con games against the UMAC, and played 1 less conference game than the other top conferences? Or if D3football.com's financial fortune was tied to continually propping up the WIAC as the greatest conference, giving the teams extra exposure on TV, centering ATN Podcast around the WIAC's greatness every week, and D3football.com also had undo influence on which teams got selected for a tiny "playoff"? Shall we go on ... ;)
Put a 12 or 16 team playoff in place for the last 29 years like D3 has, where every conference champ gets access, and there are limited at large bids, and I'd bet the results of the SEC's national titles looks a little different.
Quote from: hazzben on October 24, 2022, 10:36:35 AM
Quote from: BSCpanthers on October 24, 2022, 10:19:26 AM
The WIAC should have won more than they have in the last 8 years. Public schools without the same financial situation as the 97% of DIII, since they are all private, as well as enrollment that is 5x's that of most DIII schools.
But the results don't agree. Since 1973, the WIAC makes up 8 championships, 2 by La Crosse, the rest by Whitewater. The SEC has won 11 in the last 29 years, by 5 different schools. That is conference domination, not 1 team 8 years ago.
First, this isn't an apples to apples argument.
But the WIAC also has NAIA National Titles as well. The major difference here being, WIAC teams have had to run through a genuine playoff system. How many national titles does the WIAC have if they were given 2 of the 4 slots in a playoff? Or 2 of 2 in a rematch of, say UWO and UWW? Or if all the teams in the vaunted WIAC didn't actually all play each other (protecting their records and preventing canablization) and played non-con games against the UMAC, and played 1 less conference game than the other top conferences? Or if D3football.com's financial fortune was tied to continually propping up the WIAC as the greatest conference, giving the teams extra exposure on TV, centering ATN Podcast around the WIAC's greatness every week, and D3football.com also had undo influence on which teams got selected for a tiny "playoff"? Shall we go on ... ;)
Put a 12 or 16 team playoff in place for the last 29 years like D3 has, where every conference champ gets access, and there are limited at large bids, and I'd bet the results of the SEC's national titles looks a little different.
That argument is one I can agree with. The fact still remains that the WIAC hasn't won one in 8 years, and a 3 loss team that has 2 losses by 40 doesn't belong in the top 25 over some other teams. They also lost to a not good DII school.
I agree with Hazzben, it's not apples to apples. I also think it's unfair to mitigate the success of the WIAC based on the fact that the schools are public and large universities. The point is valid that there is a competitive advantage based on size and $. Across all sports, I think arguing their success should be greater based on that advantage is crazy, but if you feel that way, I'd entertain the debate. But none of that really has anything to do with how one should assess Platteville or OshKosh this season.
1. Michigan Tech is a D2 school. So is Northern Michigan. Saying that Platteville and OshKosh are 3 loss teams is deceptive and holding a loss against at D2 school against a D3 team is not fair IMO. I wouldn't hold it against Mount Union, MHB, or North Central either.
2. The better question then is... for Platteville, how to I weigh wins against Bethel, Whitewater, and River Falls against two bad losses against OshKosh and Hardin Simmons. To me, the bottom of the top 25 seems totally fair. As an MIAA fan, in a head to head matchup, I would objectively take either over #20 Albion, who barely got by Eau Claire.
Personally, I want to see good teams schedule each other in non-conference games. The only way to see more of it is to incentivize it. By that logic, I will always weigh good/great wins above losses to good teams. To me, a team capable of beating a top 10 team is more deserving of being ranked than a team that's undefeated but hasn't played anyone in the top 25.
I'll concede to the DII losses, it's hard to impossible to gauge when playing a scholarship program.
In DIII, with so many teams, and ultimately, so many bad teams, there are a lot of teams that end the season 10-0 and 9-1 that might play 3 teams with a winning record. I do enjoy the big OOC games, helps get a better idea of how good the conferences are. We play instate Huntingdon every year and they are a consistent USAC champ. Would love to see DIII add an 11th game for more OOC games, with most conferences playing a round robin type schedule, it leaves so few available games for OOC. Would also like to see some later season OOC games.
Quote from: BSCpanthers on October 24, 2022, 11:40:25 AM
I'll concede to the DII losses, it's hard to impossible to gauge when playing a scholarship program.
In DIII, with so many teams, and ultimately, so many bad teams, there are a lot of teams that end the season 10-0 and 9-1 that might play 3 teams with a winning record. I do enjoy the big OOC games, helps get a better idea of how good the conferences are. We play instate Huntingdon every year and they are a consistent USAC champ. Would love to see DIII add an 11th game for more OOC games, with most conferences playing a round robin type schedule, it leaves so few available games for OOC. Would also like to see some later season OOC games.
I think the vast majority of D3 teams do not care to play another game unless it's for playoffs or some sort of regional post season bowl between #2 or #3 programs that didn't make it into the playoffs. That is also added costs that most programs don't have funding for. It wouldn't necessarily mean more high profile OOC matchups...it would probably turn in to who is closest and available for budget needs.
Teams that have no OOC schedule know if they win their league they are in. It's more so a product of a lot of good teams fighting for one of the remaining coveted spots that didn't win their league. With D3 being so large, there are only so many seats at the table. Last year BSC beat huntingdon. This year they didn't. They have two very close losses and they will probably be in the discussion as will a Wheaton or UW team on the bubble. It's hard to gauge on who beat who when everyone has beaten one another in some form or fashion this year. The ASC and SAA have recently shown to have deeper conferences which will help BSCs cause. As do a lot of the Northeast teams that are not being discussed with all the WIAC turmoil.
I know you mentioned the "what have WIAC teams done lately," but part of the process is what did a team so last year when determining muddy water playoff fielding. At the end of the day if you win your league you're guaranteed a spot. The problem isn't that a team makes the playoffs is undeserving, a team who won their league deserves to be in it. Some conferences are SOS wise stronger. All of this will be taken into consideration by the RR committees. Polls are fun, but top 25 doesn't determine who gets in or not. Should the panthers win out, and other teams continue to beat each other, or an unlikely upset happens, y'all may sneak in. However, adding an 11th game would only be beneficial if it was against another team on the bubble of pool C to be a mini playoff or wild card type game....not so much nation wide. Money isn't there nor the time for another game with a 5 week playoff schedule.
Quote from: BSCpanthers on October 24, 2022, 11:40:25 AM
In DIII, with so many teams, and ultimately, so many bad teams, there are a lot of teams that end the season 10-0 and 9-1 that might play 3 teams with a winning record. I do enjoy the big OOC games, helps get a better idea of how good the conferences are...
For sure. Geography just makes it so hard. It's impossible NOT to have a perceived "regional bias" when being from anywhere other than the Midwest is a disadvantage. If the WIAC is the SEC, then the CCIW is the Big10. And the OAC is the ACC, with Mount being Clemson.
My mind wants to think that adding more Pool C teams would help, but it still wouldn't fix the geographic issues. What do you do with an undefeated Endicott team? How do you rate 3 loss WIAC teams against them, when all three losses were against teams objectively much better than any team Endicott has played this season. Albion has the same issue, and they don't have the excuse of not being close enough to better teams. Even if the ASW #2 had an easier pathway to getting in, it would almost certainly be to play the SAA #1, with a second-round matchup against the ASW #1 looming for either one. At large Midwest teams have a better opportunity to prove themselves when there are options to put them up against beyond Mary Hardin Baylor, Trinity, or Linfield.
Quote from: BSCpanthers on October 24, 2022, 11:40:25 AM
I'll concede to the DII losses, it's hard to impossible to gauge when playing a scholarship program.
In DIII, with so many teams, and ultimately, so many bad teams, there are a lot of teams that end the season 10-0 and 9-1 that might play 3 teams with a winning record. I do enjoy the big OOC games, helps get a better idea of how good the conferences are. We play instate Huntingdon every year and they are a consistent USAC champ. Would love to see DIII add an 11th game for more OOC games, with most conferences playing a round robin type schedule, it leaves so few available games for OOC. Would also like to see some later season OOC games.
There are some that only play 9 games by choice. 11 with a 32-team playoff is too many.
Quote from: BSCpanthers on October 24, 2022, 10:19:26 AM
The WIAC should have won more than they have in the last 8 years. Public schools without the same financial situation as the 97% of DIII, since they are all private, as well as enrollment that is 5x's that of most DIII schools.
But the results don't agree. Since 1973, the WIAC makes up 8 championships, 2 by La Crosse, the rest by Whitewater. The SEC has won 11 in the last 29 years, by 5 different schools. That is conference domination, not 1 team 8 years ago.
By your logic, the MASCAC, NJAC, and the SUNY schools should also have domination because of large enrollment state schools.
1. The WIAC is the best. No question. It may not have always been, but it is now.
2. This years WIAC champ may not be a top 5 team. Just sayin'. Between Mount, NCC, UMHB, St. Johns, Linfield...It's hard top say that UWW would be beat UMHB again, or St. Johns if they played again.
3. Teams like North Central and Mount Union schedule the best they can for their OOC game (I have examples). Just because their conference is weaker than the WIAC, ASC, MIAC, does not mean that they aren't the best team in country, as evidenced by them winning National titles.
4. This is (IMHO) going down as the most competitive and greatest D3 season ever. I truly think that that the top 10-11 is very close to equal.
5. I just want to say it. St' Johns beat UWW, UWW beat UMHB, UMHB beat hardin simmons, hardin simmons beat UWP, UWP beat Bethel and UWW, Bethel beat St. Johns, Oshkosh Beat UWP, UWW beat Oshkosh... How in the world do you rank that?
Quote from: Captainred81 on October 24, 2022, 04:59:02 PM
1. The WIAC is the best. No question. It may not have always been, but it is now.
2. This years WIAC champ may not be a top 5 team. Just sayin'. Between Mount, NCC, UMHB, St. Johns, Linfield...It's hard top say that UWW would be beat UMHB again, or St. Johns if they played again.
3. Teams like North Central and Mount Union schedule the best they can for their OOC game (I have examples). Just because their conference is weaker than the WIAC, ASC, MIAC, does not mean that they aren't the best team in country, as evidenced by them winning National titles.
4. This is (IMHO) going down as the most competitive and greatest D3 season ever. I truly think that that the top 10-11 is very close to equal.
5. I just want to say it. St' Johns beat UWW, UWW beat UMHB, UMHB beat hardin simmons, hardin simmons beat UWP, UWP beat Bethel and UWW, Bethel beat St. Johns, Oshkosh Beat UWP, UWW beat Oshkosh... How in the world do you rank that?
Absolutely. I strongly believe that their strength isn't that their top teams are the best in the division (though they usually are close), its that top to bottom, no one can compete with the shear depth of the conference.
they currently have 5 ranked teams, and I think Stout could give a game to most top 25 teams. Even Eau Claire and Stevens Point, who are also-rans in the WIAC, I believe are legitimately in the top half of the division. Heck, Eau Claire came pretty close to beating Albion, who is the top of a pretty decent conference.
If you look at the dreads of other top conferences (North Park, Macalaster, Capital, MacMurry, ect.), I strongly believe either Stevens Point or Eau Claire would beat them by at least 3-4 scores
Yeah the WIAC is very good at the top (sometimes elite) and just much deeper than any other conference, by a long shot. The top 2-3 from MIAC, ASC, CCIW could all hang in the WIAC. But the 4th or 5th place team in the WIAC could win or nearly win a conference title in all but the top handful of leagues. Or be capable of winning a game or two in the playoffs. That depth is very unique and makes the conference an absolute grind.
Everyone was quicker getting their ballots in so you get an earlier poll :)
2022 WEEK 8 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | W-L | Points | Prev |
1) | North Central (5) | 7-0 | 197 | 1 |
T2) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (2) | 7-1 | 184 | T3 |
T2) | Mount Union (1) | 7-0 | 184 | T3 |
4) | Linfield | 6-0 | 169 | 5 |
5) | Trinity (TX) | 7-0 | 163 | 6 |
6) | St John's | 6-1 | 161 | 7 |
7) | Johns Hopkins | 7-0 | 148 | 8 |
8) | Hardin-Simmons | 6-1 | 127 | 11 |
9) | Bethel | 6-1 | 126 | 10 |
10) | UW-La Crosse | 6-1 | 122 | 9 |
11) | Cortland | 7-0 | 117 | 12 |
12) | UW-Whitewater | 5-2 | 108 | 2 |
13) | Delaware Valley | 8-0 | 103 | 13 |
14) | Ithaca | 7-0 | 101 | 15 |
15) | Wheaton | 5-2 | 89 | 14 |
16) | Wartburg | 7-0 | 88 | 16 |
17) | Carnegie Mellon | 8-0 | 74 | T17 |
18) | Randolph-Macon | 7-0 | 71 | T17 |
19) | Susquehanna | 7-0 | 50 | 19 |
20) | Albion | 7-0 | 49 | 20 |
21) | Huntingdon | 6-1 | 46 | 22 |
22) | UW-River Falls | 5-2 | 29 | 21 |
T23) | John Carroll | 6-1 | 23 | 25 |
T23) | UW-Platteville | 4-3 | 23 | NR |
25) | UW-Oshkosh | 4-3 | 20 | 23 |
Dropped Out: #24 Washington U
Also Receiving Votes: Endicott 7, Washington & Jefferson 5, Mount St Joseph 4, Birmingham-Southern 3, Monmouth 3, George Fox 2, Ripon 2, Salisbury 1, Trinity (CT) 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, Captainred81, desertcat1, FCGG, HOPEful, MRMIKESMITH, NCF, and smedindy
1) North Central 197 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2)
T2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 184 ( 1, 1, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 7)
T2) Mount Union 184 ( 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 6)
4) Linfield 169 ( 2, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 7, 9)
5) Trinity (TX) 163 ( 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 8, 9)
6) St John's 161 ( 2, 3, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 14)
7) Johns Hopkins 148 ( 4, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 10, 10)
8) Hardin-Simmons 127 ( 7, 7, 8, 8, 11, 12, 13, 15)
9) Bethel 126 ( 6, 6, 8, 10, 10, 11, 14, 17)
10) UW-La Crosse 122 ( 5, 7, 9, 9, 10, 10, 14, 22)
11) Cortland 117 ( 5, 10, 11, 11, 12, 12, 13, 17)
12) UW-Whitewater 108 ( 9, 9, 9, 10, 13, 13, 14, 23)
13) Delaware Valley 103 (11, 11, 11, 12, 14, 14, 16, 16)
14) Ithaca 101 (11, 12, 12, 12, 13, 14, 15, 18)
15) Wheaton 89 ( 7, 14, 15, 15, 16, 17, 17, 18)
16) Wartburg 88 ( 8, 8, 15, 15, 16, 19, 19, 20)
17) Carnegie Mellon 74 (12, 13, 16, 18, 18, 18, 19, 20)
18) Randolph-Macon 71 (13, 13, 15, 16, 16, 18, 20, --)
19) Susquehanna 50 (17, 18, 19, 19, 19, 20, 20, --)
20) Albion 49 (17, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24)
21) Huntingdon 46 ( 9, 17, 21, 21, 21, 22, 25, --)
22) UW-River Falls 29 (19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 24, --)
T23) John Carroll 23 (20, 22, 22, 23, 23, 24, 25, --)
T23) UW-Platteville 23 (16, 21, 22, 24, 25, 25, --, --)
25) UW-Oshkosh 20 (15, 21, 23, 25, --, --, --, --)
26) Endicott 7 (22, 24, 25)
27) Wash & Jeff 5 (21)
28) Mount St Joseph 4 (22)
T29) Birmingham-Southern 3 (23)
T29) Monmouth 3 (23)
T31) George Fox 2 (24)
T31) Ripon 2 (24)
T33) Salisbury 1 (25)
T33) Trinity (CT) 1 (25)
I think I'm in the minority of keeping UWW above UWL. Have a hard time giving UWL the edge considering the strongest D3 win they have is against unranked UW-Stout. Not to mention UWW beat UWL in LaCrosse a few weeks ago.
They close their season against UWO, UWRF and UWP. I guess we'll see what happens then.
Sorry for the delay. Had one ballot that needed correcting and never got a response. I made an executive decision to alter that ballot to include a team they omitted (a top 5 team so clearly just a mistake) in the same position they had them in last week and slide the rest of the ballot down one.
2022 WEEK 9 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | W-L | Points | Prev |
1) | North Central (5) | 8-0 | 197 | 1 |
2) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (2) | 7-1 | 185 | T2 |
3) | Mount Union (1) | 8-0 | 185 | T2 |
4) | Linfield | 7-0 | 170 | 4 |
5) | Trinity (TX) | 8-0 | 168 | 5 |
6) | St John's | 7-1 | 157 | 6 |
7) | UW-La Crosse | 7-1 | 125 | 10 |
8) | Bethel | 7-1 | 123 | 9 |
9) | Cortland | 8-0 | 120 | 11 |
10) | Hardin-Simmons | 7-1 | 117 | 8 |
11) | Susquehanna | 8-0 | 112 | 19 |
12) | UW-Whitewater | 6-2 | 108 | 12 |
13) | Delaware Valley | 8-0 | 107 | 13 |
14) | Ithaca | 8-0 | 101 | 14 |
15) | Wartburg | 8-0 | 100 | 16 |
16) | Wheaton | 6-2 | 86 | 15 |
17) | Randolph-Macon | 8-0 | 80 | 18 |
18) | Carnegie Mellon | 9-0 | 78 | 17 |
19) | Johns Hopkins | 7-1 | 76 | 7 |
20) | Albion | 8-0 | 60 | 20 |
21) | Huntingdon | 7-1 | 43 | 21 |
22) | John Carroll | 7-1 | 36 | T23 |
23) | UW-River Falls | 5-3 | 22 | 22 |
24) | Endicott | 8-0 | 11 | NR |
25) | Mount St Joseph | 8-0 | 6 | NR |
Dropped Out: #T23 UW-Platteville and #25 UW-Oshkosh
Also Receiving Votes: UW-Oshkosh 5, Birmingham-Southern 3, Utica 3, UW-Platteville 3, Wash & Jeff 3, Alma 2, Ripon 2, Washington U 2, Claremont-Mudd-Scripps 1, Salisbury 1, Trinity (CT) 1, UW-Stout 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, Captainred81, desertcat1, FCGG, HOPEful, MRMIKESMITH, NCF, and smedindy
1) North Central 197 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2)
2) Mary Hardin-Baylor 185 ( 1, 1, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 6)
3) Mount Union 185 ( 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5)
4) Linfield 170 ( 2, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 7, 8)
5) Trinity (TX) 168 ( 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 8)
6) St John's 157 ( 2, 3, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 18)
7) UW-La Crosse 125 ( 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 15, 20)
8) Bethel 123 ( 6, 6, 7, 9, 10, 14, 16, 17)
9) Cortland 120 ( 5, 9, 10, 10, 11, 12, 13, 18)
10) Hardin-Simmons 117 ( 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, 14, 16)
11) Susquehanna 112 (10, 10, 11, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15)
12) UW-Whitewater 108 ( 8, 8, 9, 9, 14, 15, 16, 21)
13) Delaware Valley 107 ( 7, 11, 11, 12, 13, 13, 17, 17)
14) Ithaca 101 ( 8, 10, 12, 13, 13, 14, 18, 19)
15) Wartburg 100 ( 6, 7, 9, 15, 15, 18, 19, 19)
16) Wheaton 86 ( 7, 12, 16, 16, 16, 17, 18, 22)
17) Randolph-Macon 80 (11, 12, 12, 14, 15, 19, 21, 24)
18) Carnegie Mellon 78 (10, 11, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, 20)
19) Johns Hopkins 76 (11, 12, 14, 18, 18, 19, 20, 20)
20) Albion 60 (13, 17, 17, 19, 19, 20, 21, 22)
21) Huntingdon 43 (15, 18, 20, 21, 21, 21, 23, --)
22) John Carroll 36 (16, 21, 21, 22, 22, 22, 22, --)
23) UW-River Falls 22 (17, 22, 23, 23, 24, 25, --, --)
24) Endicott 11 (22, 23, 24, 24, --, --, --, --)
25) Mount St Joseph 6 (20, --, --, --, --, --, --, --)
26) UW-Oshkosh 5 (23, 24)
T27) Birmingham-Southern 3 (23)
T27) Utica 3 (23)
T27) UW-Platteville 3 (24, 25)
T27) Wash & Jeff 3 (23)
T31) Alma 2 (24)
T31) Ripon 2 (24)
T31) Washington U 2 (25, 25)
T34) Claremont-Mudd-Scripps 1 (25)
T34) Salisbury 1 (25)
T34) Trinity (CT) 1 (25)
T34) UW-Stout 1 (25)
I had the lone CMS vote. I feel special.
Not this week you won me over? ;)
If and when it gets posted? :o :P
More. Rules ? Set a dead line/ cut off time :-*
Mine was in Sunday morning. 8-) ;D
2022 WEEK 10 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | W-L | Points | Prev |
1) | North Central (6) | 9-0 | 198 | 1 |
2) | Mount Union | 9-0 | 184 | T2 |
3) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (2) | 8-1 | 175 | T2 |
4) | Linfield | 8-0 | 173 | 4 |
5) | Trinity (TX) | 9-0 | 170 | 5 |
6) | St John's | 8-1 | 154 | 6 |
7) | Bethel | 8-1 | 138 | 8 |
8) | UW-La Crosse | 8-1 | 126 | 7 |
9) | Cortland | 9-0 | 119 | 9 |
10) | Hardin-Simmons | 8-1 | 117 | 10 |
11) | UW-Whitewater | 7-2 | 109 | 12 |
12) | Susquehanna | 9-0 | 107 | 11 |
T13) | Delaware Valley | 9-0 | 102 | 13 |
T13) | Wartburg | 9-0 | 102 | 15 |
15) | Ithaca | 9-0 | 101 | 14 |
16) | Wheaton | 7-2 | 93 | 16 |
17) | Randolph-Macon | 9-0 | 79 | 17 |
18) | Carnegie Mellon | 9-0 | 78 | 18 |
19) | Johns Hopkins | 8-1 | 77 | 19 |
20) | Albion | 9-0 | 58 | 20 |
21) | Huntingdon | 8-1 | 43 | 21 |
22) | John Carroll | 7-2 | 31 | 22 |
23) | UW-River Falls | 5-4 | 13 | 23 |
24) | Endicott | 9-0 | 12 | 24 |
25) | Mount St Joseph | 9-0 | 7 | 25 |
Dropped Out: None
Also Receiving Votes: Alma 5, Birmingham-Southern 5, Claremont-Mudd-Scripps 5, Utica 5, UW-Oshkosh 4, Washington & Jefferson 4, Salisbury 2, UW-Platteville 2, Trinity (CT) 1, Washington U 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, Captainred81, desertcat1, FCGG, HOPEful, MRMIKESMITH, NCF, and smedindy
1) North Central 198 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2)
2) Mount Union 184 ( 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5)
3) Mary Hardin-Baylor 175 ( 1, 1, 3, 3, 4, 4, 8, 9)
4) Linfield 173 ( 2, 2, 3, 3, 5, 5, 7, 8)
5) Trinity (TX) 170 ( 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 8)
6) St John's 154 ( 2, 4, 4, 5, 6, 8, 8, 17)
7) Bethel 138 ( 6, 6, 6, 7, 9, 10, 10, 16)
8) UW-La Crosse 126 ( 6, 7, 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, 20)
9) Cortland 119 ( 5, 9, 10, 10, 11, 12, 14, 18)
10) Hardin-Simmons 117 ( 7, 7, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15, 16)
11) UW-Whitewater 109 ( 8, 9, 9, 9, 14, 15, 16, 19)
12) Susquehanna 107 (11, 11, 11, 12, 13, 14, 14, 15)
T13) Delaware Valley 102 ( 6, 11, 13, 13, 13, 16, 17, 17)
T13) Wartburg 102 ( 6, 7, 8, 13, 16, 18, 19, 19)
15) Ithaca 101 ( 7, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 19)
16) Wheaton 93 ( 6, 11, 12, 16, 16, 16, 17, 21)
17) Randolph-Macon 79 (11, 12, 12, 14, 15, 20, 21, 24)
18) Carnegie Mellon 78 (10, 11, 15, 17, 18, 18, 20, 21)
19) Johns Hopkins 77 (12, 12, 14, 17, 18, 18, 20, 20)
20) Albion 58 (13, 17, 19, 19, 19, 20, 21, 22)
21) Huntingdon 43 (15, 18, 20, 21, 21, 22, 22, --)
22) John Carroll 31 (18, 20, 21, 22, 22, 23, 25, --)
23) UW-River Falls 13 (19, 23, 23, --, --, --, --, --)
24) Endicott 12 (22, 23, 23, 24, --, --, --, --)
25) Mount St Joseph 7 (21, 25, 25, --, --, --, --, --)
T26) Alma 5 (23, 24)
T26) Birmingham-Southern 5 (23, 24)
T26) Claremont-Mudd-Scripps 5 (24, 24, 25)
T26) Utica 5 (22, 25)
T30) UW-Oshkosh 4 (23, 25)
T30) Washington & Jefferson 4 (22)
T32) Salisbury 2 (24)
T32) UW-Platteville 2 (24)
T34) Trinity (CT) 1 (25)
T34) Washington U 1 (25)
I had CMS instead of River Falls. So it goes.
Sorry for the lateness. I can only get the poll up as fast as I get all the ballots (or don't get as is the case this week)
2022 WEEK 11 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | W-L | Points | Prev |
1) | North Central (6) | 10-0 | 174 | 1 |
2) | Linfield | 9-0 | 158 | 4 |
3) | Mary Hardin-Baylor (1) | 9-1 | 156 | 3 |
4) | Trinity (TX) | 10-0 | 151 | 5 |
5) | Mount Union | 10-0 | 149 | 2 |
6) | St John's | 9-1 | 140 | 6 |
7) | UW-La Crosse | 9-1 | 116 | 8 |
8) | Hardin-Simmons | 9-1 | 109 | 10 |
9) | UW-Whitewater | 8-2 | 107 | 11 |
10) | Ithaca | 10-0 | 106 | 15 |
11) | Wartburg | 10-0 | 102 | T13 |
12) | Susquehanna | 10-0 | 97 | 12 |
13) | Delaware Valley | 10-0 | 90 | T13 |
14) | Wheaton | 8-2 | 85 | 16 |
15) | Bethel | 8-2 | 76 | 7 |
16) | Randolph-Macon | 10-0 | 74 | 17 |
17) | Carnegie Mellon | 10-0 | 73 | 18 |
18) | Johns Hopkins | 9-1 | 69 | 19 |
19) | Cortland | 9-1 | 68 | 9 |
20) | Huntingdon | 9-1 | 50 | 21 |
21) | John Carroll | 8-2 | 30 | 22 |
22) | Alma | 10-0 | 24 | NR |
23) | Mount St Joseph | 10-0 | 13 | 25 |
T24) | Endicott | 10-0 | 11 | 24 |
T24) | UW-River Falls | 6-4 | 11 | 23 |
Dropped Out: #20 Albion
Also Receiving Votes: Albion 7, Birmingham-Southern 7, Utica 5, UW-Oshkosh 4, Washington & Jefferson 4, Salisbury 3, George Fox 2, Washington U 2, Baldwin Wallace 1, Trinity (CT) 1
Voters: 02 Warhawk, Captainred81, desertcat1, FCGG, HOPEful, MRMIKESMITH, NCF, and smedindy
For the record:
1. North Central
2. Linfield
3. Mt. Union
4. Trinity
5. St. John's
6. UW - LaCrosse
7. UMHB
8. Hardin - Simmons
9. Ithaca
10. UW - Whitewater
11. Del Val
12. Wheaton
13. Bethel
14. Randolph Macon
15. Susquehanna
16. Cortland
17. Wartburg
18. Carnegie Mellon
19. Johns Hopkins
20. Huntingdon
21. John Carroll
22. Endicott
23. MSJ
24. Alma
25. Albion
Time to wake up from your hibernation. We're less than a week from the opening kickoff.
If you're interested in being part of the Fan Poll this year just send me a PM. I'll also be messaging those who participated last season. Ballots are due on Monday nights. If you need extra time or know you won't be able to get a ballot in that particular week please let me know as soon as you can. The earlier you submit a ballot the more time I'll have to check it and make sure you didn't make any errors or forget a team (and there's usually one every couple weeks that needs revised). Also, please make sure it's clear what team you're selecting... don't use too generic of an abbreviation or something random because I may not know who you're referring to.
No preseason poll so the first poll will be after week 1.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on August 25, 2023, 12:41:52 PM
Time to wake up from your hibernation. We're less than a week from the opening kickoff.
If you're interested in being part of the Fan Poll this year just send me a PM. I'll also be messaging those who participated last season. Ballots are due on Monday nights. If you need extra time or know you won't be able to get a ballot in that particular week please let me know as soon as you can. The earlier you submit a ballot the more time I'll have to check it and make sure you didn't make any errors or forget a team (and there's usually one every couple weeks that needs revised). Also, please make sure it's clear what team you're selecting... don't use too generic of an abbreviation or something random because I may not know who you're referring to.
No preseason poll so the first poll will be after week 1.
So nothing like #1 SU?
I've only received 4 ballots so far. Please try to get your ballots in today.
some polls :-* ;D set up a deadline for entry's ? ::)
Hopefully we'll have a few more ballots next week.
2023 WEEK 1 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | W-L | Points |
1) | North Central (4) | 1-0 | 100 |
2) | Mount Union | 1-0 | 92 |
3) | Wartburg | 1-0 | 91 |
4) | UW-River Falls | 1-0 | 84 |
5) | St John's | 1-0 | 83 |
6) | Trinity (TX) | 0-1 | 77 |
7) | UW-Whitewater | 1-0 | 75 |
8) | Linfield | 0-0 | 71 |
9) | Hardin-Simmons | 1-0 | 67 |
10) | Cortland | 1-0 | 65 |
11) | Johns Hopkins | 1-0 | 57 |
12) | Wheaton | 0-0 | 53 |
T13) | Bethel | 0-0 | 48 |
T13) | Mary Hardin-Baylor | 0-1 | 48 |
15) | UW-La Crosse | 1-0 | 45 |
16) | UW-Oshkosh | 1-0 | 38 |
17) | Randolph-Macon | 1-0 | 37 |
18) | John Carroll | 0-1 | 35 |
T19) | Alma | 1-0 | 24 |
T19) | Carnegie Mellon | 1-0 | 24 |
21) | Aurora | 1-0 | 23 |
22) | Susquehanna | 1-0 | 18 |
23) | Ithaca | 0-1 | 17 |
24) | UW-Platteville | 1-0 | 10 |
25) | Wash & Jeff | 1-0 | 5 |
Also Receiving Votes: Salisbury 4, Delaware Valley 2, Mount St Joseph 2, Widener 2, Grove City 1, Howard Payne 1, Whitworth 1
Voters: desertcat1, FCGG, NCF, and smedindy
1) North Central 100 ( 1, 1, 1, 1)
2) Mount Union 92 ( 2, 2, 4, 4)
3) Wartburg 91 ( 2, 3, 3, 5)
4) UW-River Falls 84 ( 2, 4, 5, 9)
5) St John's 83 ( 3, 4, 7, 7)
6) Trinity (TX) 77 ( 5, 6, 8, 8)
7) UW-Whitewater 75 ( 3, 8, 9, 9)
8) Linfield 71 ( 5, 7, 8, 13)
9) Hardin-Simmons 67 ( 6, 6, 7, 18)
10) Cortland 65 ( 9, 10, 10, 10)
11) Johns Hopkins 57 (10, 11, 13, 13)
12) Wheaton 53 (11, 12, 13, 15)
T13) Bethel 48 (12, 14, 14, 16)
T13) Mary Hardin-Baylor 48 (11, 14, 15, 16)
15) UW-La Crosse 45 (11, 12, 17, 19)
16) UW-Oshkosh 38 (12, 17, 18, 19)
17) Randolph-Macon 37 (14, 15, 16, 22)
18) John Carroll 35 ( 6, 19, 21, 23)
T19) Alma 24 (15, 19, 23, 23)
T19) Carnegie Mellon 24 (17, 17, 20, --)
21) Aurora 23 (20, 20, 20, 21)
22) Susquehanna 18 (18, 22, 22, 24)
23) Ithaca 17 (18, 21, 22, --)
24) UW-Platteville 10 (16, --, --, --)
25) Wash & Jeff 5 (21, --, --, --)
26) Salisbury 4 (23, 25)
T27) Delaware Valley 2 (24)
T27) Mount St Joseph 2 (24)
T27) Widener 2 (24)
T30) Grove City 1 (25)
T30) Howard Payne 1 (25)
T30) Whitworth 1 (25)
Is that a typo ? With John Carroll @ 6 ??? ::) :P
Quote from: desertcat1 on September 07, 2023, 08:52:13 PM
Is that a typo ? With John Carroll @ 6 ??? ::) :P
Nope. I had Whitewater at 3 and John Carroll at 6. JCU was less than a minute from winning that game and led the majority of the way. They're going to be closely linked for me like St John's and Trinity will.
I also have 5 WIAC teams in the top 17.
I've received 6 ballots so far which is much better than last week. If you're interested in participating let me know and/or send me a ballot in the next 24 hours. Otherwise I'll post the poll tomorrow night.
I would have posted this yesterday but the forum was down. We're up to a much healthier 7 ballots now.
2023 WEEK 2 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | W-L | Points | Prev |
1) | North Central (6) | 1-0 | 174 | 1 |
2) | Mount Union | 1-0 | 164 | 2 |
3) | UW-Whitewater (1) | 2-0 | 160 | 7 |
4) | Wartburg | 2-0 | 156 | 3 |
5) | UW-River Falls | 2-0 | 144 | 4 |
6) | Hardin-Simmons | 2-0 | 134 | 9 |
7) | Trinity (TX) | 1-1 | 125 | 6 |
8) | Wheaton | 1-0 | 119 | 12 |
9) | Cortland | 2-0 | 113 | 10 |
10) | Linfield | 1-0 | 107 | 8 |
11) | St John's | 1-1 | 105 | 5 |
12) | John Carroll | 0-1 | 93 | 18 |
13) | Johns Hopkins | 2-0 | 87 | 11 |
14) | UW-La Crosse | 1-1 | 79 | 15 |
15) | Randolph-Macon | 2-0 | 74 | 17 |
16) | Aurora | 2-0 | 67 | 21 |
17) | Carnegie Mellon | 2-0 | 59 | T19 |
18) | UW-Oshkosh | 1-1 | 57 | 16 |
19) | Alma | 2-0 | 52 | T19 |
20) | Bethel | 0-1 | 48 | T13 |
21) | Susquehanna | 2-0 | 37 | 22 |
22) | Ithaca | 1-1 | 30 | 23 |
23) | Mary Hardin-Baylor | 0-2 | 29 | T13 |
24) | Muhlenberg | 2-0 | 16 | NR |
25) | UW-Platteville | 2-0 | 11 | 24 |
Also Receiving Votes: Mount St Joseph 6, Wash & Jeff 6, Widener 6, Whitworth 5, Berry 4, Central 4, Delaware Valley 3, Howard Payne 1
Voters: bluestreak66, Captainred81, desertcat1, FCGG, MRMIKESMITH, NCF, and smedindy
1) North Central 174 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2)
2) Mount Union 164 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4)
3) UW-Whitewater 160 ( 1, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5)
4) Wartburg 156 ( 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5)
5) UW-River Falls 144 ( 3, 4, 4, 6, 6, 7, 8)
6) Hardin-Simmons 134 ( 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 9, 9)
7) Trinity (TX) 125 ( 5, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 11)
8) Wheaton 119 ( 5, 8, 9, 10, 10, 10, 11)
9) Cortland 113 ( 7, 7, 9, 9, 10, 13, 14)
10) Linfield 107 ( 5, 7, 8, 8, 13, 17, 17)
11) St John's 105 ( 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 12, 19)
12) John Carroll 93 ( 6, 8, 11, 13, 15, 16, 20)
13) Johns Hopkins 87 (10, 11, 12, 12, 14, 18, 18)
14) UW-La Crosse 79 (11, 11, 12, 12, 15, 19, 23)
15) Randolph-Macon 74 (12, 13, 13, 13, 15, 21, 21)
16) Aurora 67 (14, 15, 15, 16, 17, 17, 21)
17) Carnegie Mellon 59 (10, 13, 14, 16, 19, 25, --)
18) UW-Oshkosh 57 (14, 15, 17, 18, 18, 21, 22)
19) Alma 52 (14, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22)
20) Bethel 48 (16, 17, 18, 19, 19, 20, 25)
21) Susquehanna 37 (16, 18, 20, 21, 23, 23, 24)
22) Ithaca 30 (14, 17, 22, 22, 25, --, --)
23) Mary Hardin-Baylor 29 (16, 19, 20, 23, 24, 25, --)
24) Muhlenberg 16 (22, 22, 22, 24, 24, --, --)
25) UW-Platteville 11 (15, --, --, --, --, --, --)
T26) Mount St Joseph 6 (23, 24, 25)
T26) Wash & Jeff 6 (20)
T26) Widener 6 (20)
29) Whitworth 5 (21)
T30) Berry 4 (23, 25)
T30) Central 4 (24, 24)
32) Delaware Valley 3 (23)
33) Howard Payne 1 (25)
One voter on vacation and one voter I've been unable to send messages to.
2023 WEEK 3 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | W-L | Points | Prev |
1) | North Central (5) | 2-0 | 125 | 1 |
2) | UW-Whitewater | 3-0 | 116 | 3 |
3) | Mount Union | 2-0 | 113 | 2 |
4) | Wartburg | 3-0 | 111 | 4 |
5) | UW-River Falls | 3-0 | 108 | 5 |
6) | Hardin-Simmons | 2-0 | 95 | 6 |
7) | Wheaton | 2-0 | 92 | 8 |
8) | Trinity (TX) | 2-1 | 83 | 7 |
9) | Johns Hopkins | 3-0 | 80 | 13 |
10) | John Carroll | 1-1 | 76 | 12 |
11) | St John's | 1-1 | 73 | 11 |
12) | Linfield | 2-0 | 70 | 10 |
13) | Susquehanna | 3-0 | 64 | 21 |
14) | Randolph-Macon | 3-0 | 56 | 15 |
15) | UW-La Crosse | 2-1 | 54 | 14 |
16) | UW-Oshkosh | 2-1 | 47 | 18 |
17) | Aurora | 3-0 | 42 | 16 |
18) | Alma | 3-0 | 41 | 19 |
19) | Cortland | 2-1 | 39 | 9 |
T20) | Bethel | 1-1 | 31 | 20 |
T20) | Carnegie Mellon | 3-0 | 31 | 17 |
22) | Muhlenberg | 3-0 | 16 | 24 |
23) | Ithaca | 2-1 | 15 | 22 |
24) | Mary Hardin-Baylor | 0-3 | 12 | 23 |
25) | Wash & Jeff | 3-0 | 11 | NR |
Dropped Out: #25 UW-Platteville
Also Receiving Votes: UW-Platteville 7, Widener 6, Berry 3, Whitworth 3, Coe 2, Mount St Joseph 2, Howard Payne 1
Voters: bluestreak66, Captainred81, desertcat1, FCGG, MRMIKESMITH, NCF, and smedindy
1) North Central 125 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2) UW-Whitewater 116 ( 2, 2, 2, 4, 4)
3) Mount Union 113 ( 2, 3, 3, 4, 5)
4) Wartburg 111 ( 2, 3, 4, 5, 5)
5) UW-River Falls 108 ( 3, 3, 4, 6, 6)
6) Hardin-Simmons 95 ( 6, 6, 7, 8, 8)
7) Wheaton 92 ( 5, 7, 7, 9, 10)
8) Trinity (TX) 83 ( 7, 9, 9, 10, 12)
9) Johns Hopkins 80 ( 8, 9, 11, 11, 11)
10) John Carroll 76 ( 6, 8, 12, 14, 14)
11) St John's 73 ( 7, 9, 10, 12, 19)
12) Linfield 70 ( 5, 8, 13, 14, 20)
13) Susquehanna 64 (12, 13, 13, 13, 15)
14) Randolph-Macon 56 (10, 12, 14, 16, 22)
15) UW-La Crosse 54 (10, 11, 15, 18, 22)
16) UW-Oshkosh 47 (14, 15, 15, 18, 21)
17) Aurora 42 (15, 16, 17, 19, 21)
18) Alma 41 (16, 16, 17, 17, 23)
19) Cortland 39 (13, 18, 19, 20, 21)
T20) Bethel 31 (17, 17, 20, 21, 24)
T20) Carnegie Mellon 31 (11, 18, 19, 25, --)
22) Muhlenberg 16 (20, 22, 23, 23, --)
23) Ithaca 15 (16, 22, 25, --, --)
24) Mary Hardin-Baylor 12 (18, 23, 25, --, --)
25) Wash & Jeff 11 (21, 22, 24, --, --)
26) UW-Platteville 7 (19)
27) Widener 6 (20)
T28) Berry 3 (24, 25)
T28) Whitworth 3 (23)
T30) Coe 2 (24)
T30) Mount St Joseph 2 (24)
32) Howard Payne 1 (25)
A few teams moved significantly in my ballot this week. I moved Susquehanna up 10 spots and moved Cortland down 11. I was honestly very impressed with how Susquehanna pulled off that win, because I was a little skeptical of them prior to that.
I'm also the low voter on Linfield. While they are obviously the favorite to win the NWC, I feel like they've looked a little lackluster so far in their first two games.
My ballot will look quite a bit different this week. Mostly with Linfield, I do think that have elite talent in the past, but I think they are not there right now. The 28-14 against Denison is looking less and less like Denison is good and more like Linfield needs some help. I'm feeling the pain for John Carroll, because I think they'll need to beat Mount to get in, but they could have beat WW and they are beating the other OAC teams handily. I think they are on the fringe of the top 10. I feel like I need a little more info on the teams ranked 11-16.
2023 WEEK 4 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | W-L | Points | Prev |
1) | North Central (7) | 3-0 | 175 | 1 |
2) | Mount Union | 3-0 | 162 | 3 |
3) | UW-Whitewater | 3-0 | 159 | 2 |
4) | Wartburg | 4-0 | 157 | 4 |
5) | UW-River Falls | 3-0 | 149 | 5 |
6) | Trinity (TX) | 3-1 | 126 | 8 |
7) | Wheaton | 3-0 | 122 | 7 |
8) | St John's | 2-1 | 121 | 11 |
9) | Johns Hopkins | 3-0 | 118 | 9 |
10) | John Carroll | 2-1 | 107 | 10 |
11) | Susquehanna | 4-0 | 97 | 13 |
12) | Randolph-Macon | 3-0 | 88 | 14 |
13) | Linfield | 2-0 | 84 | 12 |
14) | Aurora | 3-0 | 79 | 17 |
15) | Cortland | 2-1 | 76 | 19 |
16) | Alma | 4-0 | 74 | 18 |
17) | UW-Oshkosh | 2-1 | 73 | 16 |
18) | Ithaca | 2-1 | 68 | 23 |
19) | UW-La Crosse | 2-1 | 47 | 15 |
20) | Endicott | 3-1 | 46 | NR |
T21) | Hardin-Simmons | 2-1 | 29 | 6 |
T21) | Muhlenberg | 3-0 | 29 | 22 |
23) | Wash & Jeff | 4-0 | 17 | 25 |
24) | Mary Hardin-Baylor | 1-3 | 15 | 24 |
25) | Whitworth | 2-0 | 10 | NR |
Dropped Out: #T20 Bethel and #T20 Carnegie Mellon
Also Receiving Votes: Berry 9, UW-Platteville 8, Delaware Valley 5, Bethel 4, DePauw 4, Albion 3, Coe 3, Redlands 3, Carnegie Mellon 2, Denison 2, Grove City 2, Howard Payne 2
Voters: bluestreak66, Captainred81, desertcat1, FCGG, MRMIKESMITH, NCF, and smedindy
1) North Central 175 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2) Mount Union 162 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 5)
3) UW-Whitewater 159 ( 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4)
4) Wartburg 157 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5, 5)
5) UW-River Falls 149 ( 3, 3, 4, 5, 6, 6, 6)
6) Trinity (TX) 126 ( 5, 7, 7, 8, 9, 9, 11)
7) Wheaton 122 ( 6, 7, 8, 8, 9, 10, 12)
8) St John's 121 ( 5, 6, 7, 8, 8, 10, 17)
9) Johns Hopkins 118 ( 6, 7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 16)
10) John Carroll 107 ( 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15)
11) Susquehanna 97 ( 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 13, 17)
12) Randolph-Macon 88 (10, 10, 11, 11, 14, 18, 20)
13) Linfield 84 ( 5, 7, 8, 13, 20, 21, 24)
14) Aurora 79 (12, 13, 13, 14, 16, 16, 19)
15) Cortland 76 (11, 12, 13, 14, 17, 19, 20)
16) Alma 74 (12, 14, 15, 15, 15, 17, 20)
17) UW-Oshkosh 73 (14, 14, 15, 15, 16, 16, 19)
18) Ithaca 68 (11, 12, 13, 17, 18, 20, 23)
19) UW-La Crosse 47 (10, 17, 18, 18, 20, --, --)
20) Endicott 46 (15, 16, 18, 18, 19, 24, --)
T21) Hardin-Simmons 29 (17, 19, 21, 21, 24, 25, --)
T21) Muhlenberg 29 (19, 20, 21, 22, 22, 23, --)
23) Wash & Jeff 17 (19, 21, 23, 24, --, --, --)
24) Mary Hardin-Baylor 15 (21, 21, 23, 25, 25, --, --)
25) Whitworth 10 (16, --, --, --, --, --, --)
26) Berry 9 (22, 22, 25)
27) UW-Platteville 8 (18)
28) Delaware Valley 5 (22, 25)
T29) Bethel 4 (22)
T29) DePauw 4 (22)
T31) Albion 3 (23)
T31) Coe 3 (23)
33) Redlands 3 (23)
T34) Carnegie Mellon 2 (24)
T34) Denison 2 (24)
T34) Grove City 2 (25, 25)
T34) Howard Payne 2 (24)
I'm the only one on Bethel, Coe, and Howard Payne and I had one of the Del Val votes.
I do think there's a lot of "hmmmm" teams around that haven't been kicked to the curb yet. And I really can't see anyone in the league of North Central, yet. Of course, Wheaton's coming up for them.
Smed, those votes are not unreasonable after Week 4.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 27, 2023, 10:45:24 PM
1) North Central 175 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2) Mount Union 162 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 5)
3) UW-Whitewater 159 ( 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4)
4) Wartburg 157 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5, 5)
5) UW-River Falls 149 ( 3, 3, 4, 5, 6, 6, 6)
6) Trinity (TX) 126 ( 5, 7, 7, 8, 9, 9, 11)
7) Wheaton 122 ( 6, 7, 8, 8, 9, 10, 12)
8) St John's 121 ( 5, 6, 7, 8, 8, 10, 17)
9) Johns Hopkins 118 ( 6, 7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 16)
10) John Carroll 107 ( 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15)
11) Susquehanna 97 ( 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 13, 17)
12) Randolph-Macon 88 (10, 10, 11, 11, 14, 18, 20)
13) Linfield 84 ( 5, 7, 8, 13, 20, 21, 24)
14) Aurora 79 (12, 13, 13, 14, 16, 16, 19)
15) Cortland 76 (11, 12, 13, 14, 17, 19, 20)
16) Alma 74 (12, 14, 15, 15, 15, 17, 20)
17) UW-Oshkosh 73 (14, 14, 15, 15, 16, 16, 19)
18) Ithaca 68 (11, 12, 13, 17, 18, 20, 23)
19) UW-La Crosse 47 (10, 17, 18, 18, 20, --, --)
20) Endicott 46 (15, 16, 18, 18, 19, 24, --)
T21) Hardin-Simmons 29 (17, 19, 21, 21, 24, 25, --)
T21) Muhlenberg 29 (19, 20, 21, 22, 22, 23, --)
23) Wash & Jeff 17 (19, 21, 23, 24, --, --, --)
24) Mary Hardin-Baylor 15 (21, 21, 23, 25, 25, --, --)
25) Whitworth 10 (16, --, --, --, --, --, --)
26) Berry 9 (22, 22, 25)
27) UW-Platteville 8 (18)
28) Delaware Valley 5 (22, 25)
T29) Bethel 4 (22)
T29) DePauw 4 (22)
T31) Albion 3 (23)
T31) Coe 3 (23)
33) Redlands 3 (23)
T34) Carnegie Mellon 2 (24)
T34) Denison 2 (24)
T34) Grove City 2 (25, 25)
T34) Howard Payne 2 (24)
You guys do a very nice job here. Let me know if you ever need another contributor. I can't say I'd be on point as I am still working to extend my reach to as much of the D3 football world as I can. Again, nice job fellas.
Proposal:
Every week, take the one team that has the biggest disparity in rankings, and as the two pollsters to (respectfully) discuss it.
As someone who is very interested in the national polls, I'd love to hear more about why people see Linfield 19 spots different, or the person who has UWL at 10 and the person who has them unranked. Not to argue or prove each other wrong, but in a "Do you see what I see?" type of discourse
I like this proposal!
I like it too.. Justify your decisions!
As a non-voter, yes. Please do this.
Thanks & +1!
2023 WEEK 5 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | W-L | Points | Prev |
1) | North Central (6) | 4-0 | 150 | 1 |
2) | UW-Whitewater | 4-0 | 139 | 3 |
T3) | Mount Union | 4-0 | 134 | 2 |
T3) | Wartburg | 5-0 | 134 | 4 |
5) | UW-River Falls | 4-0 | 130 | 5 |
6) | Trinity (TX) | 4-1 | 112 | 6 |
7) | Johns Hopkins | 4-0 | 104 | 9 |
8) | St John's | 3-1 | 103 | 8 |
9) | John Carroll | 3-1 | 95 | 10 |
10) | Susquehanna | 5-0 | 91 | 11 |
11) | Randolph-Macon | 4-0 | 86 | 12 |
12) | Linfield | 3-0 | 84 | 13 |
13) | Aurora | 4-0 | 77 | 14 |
14) | Cortland | 3-1 | 71 | 15 |
15) | Alma | 5-0 | 66 | 16 |
16) | Wheaton | 3-1 | 65 | 7 |
17) | Ithaca | 3-1 | 58 | 18 |
18) | Endicott | 4-1 | 44 | 20 |
19) | UW-La Crosse | 3-1 | 42 | 19 |
20) | Hardin-Simmons | 3-1 | 39 | T21 |
21) | Muhlenberg | 4-0 | 28 | T21 |
22) | UW-Oshkosh | 2-2 | 22 | 17 |
T23) | Grove City | 5-0 | 18 | NR |
T23) | Mary Hardin-Baylor | 1-3 | 18 | 24 |
25) | Whitworth | 3-0 | 13 | 25 |
Dropped Out: #23 Washington & Jefferson
Also Receiving Votes: Delaware Valley 7, Berry 5, Augsburg 4, Bethel 3, Coe 2, Union 2, Wash & Jeff 2, DePauw 1, Washington U 1
Voters: bluestreak66, Captainred81, desertcat1, FCGG, MRMIKESMITH, NCF, and smedindy
1) North Central 150 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2) UW-Whitewater 139 ( 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4)
T3) Mount Union 134 ( 2, 2, 4, 4, 5, 5)
T3) Wartburg 134 ( 2, 3, 3, 4, 5, 5)
5) UW-River Falls 130 ( 3, 3, 3, 4, 6, 7)
6) Trinity (TX) 112 ( 5, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8)
7) Johns Hopkins 104 ( 6, 7, 9, 9, 9, 12)
8) St John's 103 ( 6, 7, 7, 7, 9, 17)
9) John Carroll 95 ( 6, 6, 9, 11, 14, 15)
10) Susquehanna 91 ( 6, 10, 11, 12, 12, 14)
11) Randolph-Macon 86 (10, 10, 11, 11, 11, 17)
12) Linfield 84 ( 5, 8, 8, 12, 19, 20)
13) Aurora 77 ( 9, 13, 14, 14, 14, 15)
14) Cortland 71 (10, 11, 12, 15, 18, 19)
15) Alma 66 (12, 13, 13, 14, 18, 20)
16) Wheaton 65 (10, 13, 15, 15, 16, 22)
17) Ithaca 58 (13, 15, 16, 17, 17, 20)
18) Endicott 44 (16, 16, 17, 19, 21, 23)
19) UW-La Crosse 42 (10, 16, 19, 20, 23, --)
20) Hardin-Simmons 39 (17, 18, 18, 21, 21, 22)
21) Muhlenberg 28 (18, 20, 21, 21, 22, --)
22) UW-Oshkosh 22 (18, 19, 19, --, --, --)
T23) Grove City 18 (16, 22, 23, 25, --, --)
T23) Mary Hardin-Baylor 18 (20, 21, 22, 23, --, --)
25) Whitworth 13 (13, --, --, --, --, --)
26) Delaware Valley 7 (23, 24, 24)
27) Berry 5 (24, 24, 25)
28) Augsburg 4 (22)
29) Bethel 3 (23)
T30) Coe 2 (24)
T30) Union 2 (25, 25)
T30) Wash & Jeff 2 (24)
T33) DePauw 1 (25)
T33) Washington U 1 (25)
there are a few teams that I was way higher or lower than average on:
Wheaton- I had them at 10. Last, week, they were 6th on my ballot, and based on the result against North Central, I did feel they deserved to drop a little. But In my opinion, I think North Central would have had that result or better against 98% of the division, so I didn't think they deserved to drop too far based off of one game just because they are unfortunate enough to play in the same conference as the team that is, in my opinion, the favorite to win the championship this year. Especially given their solid wins over UW-Oshkosh (a very solid team from the clear cut best conference), and a much improved Augustana team. To me, they still seem like a very likely 9-1 team with a shot to host at least one playoff game.
Alma- I had them at 12. I feel like because they are in the MIAA and haven't played the toughest schedule yet, a lot of people are skeptical of ranking them too high. But I rewarded them for beating everyone they've played handily, and also their mutual result against ONU as Mount Union
Linfield-I had them at 19, and this is the only team I ranked way lower than their place in the poll. It comes down to the fact that I can't really look past their close games vs. Redlands and Denison. While I acknowledge both those teams are in fact decent opponents (although Dension's loss to Wittenburg vs. Wittenburg's sound loss to Alma definitely tarnishes that result further), I feel like the teams I ranked above Linfeild would have had better results against those two teams.
I gave votes to Augsburg and Bethel. I left off LaCrosse, UMHB, and Whitworth. I was also high on Oshkosh. I can't get a handle on the WIAC besides Whitewater and River Falls. But who can, really, until we get deeper in conference season.
I also have Linfield down pretty far. I'm not sure they are playing like a top 10 team right now. In fact, I question how competitive they would be against anyone in the top 15. I have them at 20.
I still have UMHB ranked 22 because I believe they will beat Hardin Simmons and Howard Payne and make the playoffs as the only team out of the ASC. I would not like to have them as my first round match. They most likely will travel to west for the first round, or Trinity I suppose, either way I would not like to play last years Semi finalist and only 2 years removed from a Stagg bowl win in the first round .
I brought in Grove City at 23 Berry at 24.
I need to post because I am unable to send a message to one of our voters. First time I've had an issue messaging someone.
User 'MRMIKESMITH' has blocked your personal message.
I believe you've forgotten to include Trinity (TX) on your ballot.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 09, 2023, 06:54:24 AM
I need to post because I am unable to send a message to one of our voters. First time I've had an issue messaging someone.
User 'MRMIKESMITH' has blocked your personal message.
I believe you've forgotten to include Trinity (TX) on your ballot.
Updated. Thanks!
2023 WEEK 6 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | W-L | Points | Prev |
1) | North Central (7) | 5-0 | 175 | 1 |
2) | Mount Union | 5-0 | 162 | T3 |
3) | Wartburg | 6-0 | 161 | T3 |
4) | UW-River Falls | 5-0 | 150 | 5 |
5) | Trinity (TX) | 5-1 | 144 | 6 |
6) | Johns Hopkins | 5-0 | 128 | 7 |
7) | UW-Whitewater | 4-1 | 122 | 2 |
8) | UW-La Crosse | 4-1 | 117 | 19 |
9) | St John's | 4-1 | 109 | 8 |
10) | Randolph-Macon | 5-0 | 98 | 11 |
11) | Susquehanna | 6-0 | 95 | 10 |
12) | Linfield | 4-0 | 93 | 12 |
13) | Wheaton | 4-1 | 88 | 16 |
14) | John Carroll | 4-1 | 84 | 9 |
15) | Alma | 5-0 | 83 | 15 |
16) | Aurora | 5-0 | 82 | 13 |
17) | Cortland | 4-1 | 78 | 14 |
18) | Ithaca | 4-1 | 76 | 17 |
19) | Endicott | 4-1 | 57 | 18 |
20) | Muhlenberg | 5-0 | 39 | 21 |
21) | Hardin-Simmons | 4-1 | 37 | 20 |
22) | Grove City | 6-0 | 26 | T23 |
23) | Mary Hardin-Baylor | 2-3 | 19 | T23 |
24) | Berry | 4-1 | 13 | NR |
25) | Whitworth | 4-0 | 11 | 25 |
Dropped Out: #22 UW-Oshkosh
Also Receiving Votes: DePauw 6, Delaware Valley 5, Augsburg 4, Bethel 4, Union 3, Belhaven 2, Coe 2, Howard Payne 1, Marietta 1
Voters: bluestreak66, Captainred81, desertcat1, FCGG, MRMIKESMITH, NCF, and smedindy
1) North Central 175 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2) Mount Union 162 ( 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4)
3) Wartburg 161 ( 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4)
4) UW-River Falls 150 ( 2, 2, 3, 3, 5, 6, 11)
5) Trinity (TX) 144 ( 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 9)
6) Johns Hopkins 128 ( 4, 6, 7, 8, 8, 10, 11)
7) UW-Whitewater 122 ( 6, 6, 7, 8, 8, 10, 15)
8) UW-La Crosse 117 ( 5, 6, 7, 7, 11, 14, 15)
9) St John's 109 ( 5, 8, 10, 11, 11, 12, 16)
10) Randolph-Macon 98 ( 9, 9, 11, 12, 12, 13, 18)
11) Susquehanna 95 ( 9, 9, 12, 12, 13, 15, 17)
12) Linfield 93 ( 5, 7, 9, 12, 16, 20, 20)
13) Wheaton 88 ( 6, 8, 13, 16, 16, 17, 18)
14) John Carroll 84 ( 7, 10, 11, 12, 15, 20, 23)
15) Alma 83 (10, 13, 13, 14, 14, 15, 20)
16) Aurora 82 ( 8, 14, 14, 14, 15, 16, 19)
17) Cortland 78 (10, 10, 13, 16, 18, 18, 19)
18) Ithaca 76 ( 7, 13, 14, 17, 17, 18, 20)
19) Endicott 57 ( 9, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 25)
20) Muhlenberg 39 (19, 19, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23)
21) Hardin-Simmons 37 (17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 25)
22) Grove City 26 (17, 20, 22, 23, 24, 25, 25)
23) Mary Hardin-Baylor 19 (21, 21, 21, 22, --, --, --)
24) Berry 13 (21, 22, 24, 24, --, --, --)
25) Whitworth 11 (15, --, --, --, --, --, --)
26) DePauw 6 (22, 24)
27) Delaware Valley 5 (23, 24)
T28) Augsburg 4 (22)
T28) Bethel 4 (23, 25)
30) Union 3 (23)
T31) Belhaven 2 (24)
T31) Coe 2 (24)
T33) Howard Payne 1 (25)
T33) Marietta 1 (25)
I was the high voter on all 3 WIAC teams this week (3 in the top 6). This is just about as good as we've seen the division's best conference, and I truly believe they are worthy of having three teams that high.
Based on that logic, I was the one vote for Marietta this week (#25 in the ORV list). In my opinion, they are indirectly tied to Whitewater via John Carroll, who lost to Whitewater by 3 but beat Marietta by 3. That, coupled with their relatively competitive result against Mount Union, actually made me bump them in to the bottom of the 25.
Not that I disagree much, but a couple curious things pop out. UWL beats UWW at Whitewater, but is ranked below them. St John's beat Trinity (in OT for sure, at SJU) but is ranked 4 spots below Trinity. Again, I don't necessarily disagree with that, it's just curious.
Retagent ,
My votes,
Sju. Trinity's. Uww. Uwla
Wk5.( Monkey ) 17. 8. 4. 16
Wk 6. 15. 4. 8. 7
Dc1 . :-*
Quote from: retagent on October 12, 2023, 09:44:15 AM
Not that I disagree much, but a couple curious things pop out. UWL beats UWW at Whitewater, but is ranked below them. St John's beat Trinity (in OT for sure, at SJU) but is ranked 4 spots below Trinity. Again, I don't necessarily disagree with that, it's just curious.
Other results factor into the rankings. H2H is never truly absolute.
Quote from: smedindy on October 12, 2023, 05:27:15 PM
Quote from: retagent on October 12, 2023, 09:44:15 AM
Not that I disagree much, but a couple curious things pop out. UWL beats UWW at Whitewater, but is ranked below them. St John's beat Trinity (in OT for sure, at SJU) but is ranked 4 spots below Trinity. Again, I don't necessarily disagree with that, it's just curious.
Other results factor into the rankings. H2H is never truly absolute.
Thank you Captain Obvious. As I tried to make clear, I don't necessarily disagree with the way they are ranked.
You posed the question.
Not to belabor, but there is no question (mark) in my original post.
I've had to have my gallbladder removed today so the poll will be delayed for a bit.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 16, 2023, 08:04:37 PM
I've had to have my gallbladder removed today so the poll will be delayed for a bit.
Here's to a quick, full recovery. That's what's important now.
The poll can wait. Rest and recover.
You need help compiling?
Update. Just got released from hospital this afternoon. Still going to be recovering for a little while more but making slow progress.
I miss all my fellow d3 lunatics :-*
Get well .
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 18, 2023, 05:58:18 PM
Update. Just got released from hospital this afternoon. Still going to be recovering for a little while more but making slow progress.
I miss all my fellow d3 lunatics :-*
Your karma was at 666. I gave it a boost.
Quote from: Gray Fox on October 19, 2023, 10:56:56 AM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 18, 2023, 05:58:18 PM
Update. Just got released from hospital this afternoon. Still going to be recovering for a little while more but making slow progress.
I miss all my fellow d3 lunatics :-*
Your karma was at 666. I gave it a boost.
The first pain I had was on Friday the 13th :o
We will do a poll this week. I should be able to manage it. I'll tally up the previous one in the next couple days.
Here's last week's results. All ballots but mine were in. There was one issue which I normally would have caught where one ballot forgot St John's.
Rank | Team |
| Points |
1) | North Central |
| 150 |
2) | Mount Union | | 142 |
3) | Wartburg |
| 140 |
4) | Trinity (TX) |
| 121 |
5) | UW-Whitewater |
| 115 |
6) | UW-La Crosse |
| 114 |
7) | Johns Hopkins |
| 105 |
8) | UW-River Falls |
| 99 |
9) | Randolph-Macon |
| 93 |
10) | St John's |
| 86 |
11) | Wheaton |
| 79 |
T12) | Linfield |
| 78 |
T12) | Susquehanna |
| 78 |
14) | John Carroll |
| 74 |
15) | Alma |
| 73 |
16) | Aurora |
| 71 |
17) | Ithaca |
| 70 |
18) | Cortland |
| 63 |
19) | Endicott |
| 50 |
T20) | Hardin-Simmons |
| 31 |
T20) | Muhlenberg |
| 31 |
22) | Mary Hardin-Baylor |
| 20 |
23) | Grove City |
| 16 |
24) | Berry |
| 15 |
25) | Whitworth |
| 12 |
26) | Brockport |
| 6 |
26) | Delaware Valley |
| 6 |
28) | Bethel |
| 4 |
29) | Coe |
| 3 |
30) | Marietta |
| 2 |
31) | Augustana |
| 1 |
31) | DePauw |
| 1 |
31) | Howard Payne |
| 1 |
I missed this week. I've been avalanched with work all week and had an all day Power BI training session yesterday...
2023 WEEK 8 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | W-L | Points | Prev |
1) | North Central (5) | 7-0 | 125 | 1 |
2) | Mount Union | 7-0 | 119 | 2 |
3) | Wartburg | 8-0 | 116 | 3 |
4) | UW-Whitewater | 6-1 | 105 | 5 |
5) | UW-La Crosse | 6-1 | 103 | 6 |
6) | Trinity (TX) | 6-1 | 99 | 4 |
7) | UW-River Falls | 6-1 | 90 | 8 |
8) | Johns Hopkins | 7-0 | 87 | 7 |
9) | Susquehanna | 8-0 | 77 | T12 |
10) | Randolph-Macon | 7-0 | 72 | 9 |
11) | John Carroll | 6-1 | 70 | 14 |
12) | Linfield | 6-0 | 65 | T12 |
13) | Cortland | 6-1 | 64 | 18 |
14) | Wheaton | 6-1 | 63 | 11 |
15) | Alma | 7-0 | 60 | 15 |
16) | Aurora | 7-0 | 57 | 16 |
17) | Ithaca | 6-1 | 53 | 17 |
18) | Endicott | 6-1 | 37 | 19 |
19) | Muhlenberg | 7-0 | 29 | T20 |
20) | Hardin-Simmons | 6-1 | 28 | T20 |
21) | St John's | 5-2 | 23 | 10 |
22) | Mary Hardin-Baylor | 4-3 | 22 | 22 |
23) | Grove City | 8-0 | 21 | 23 |
24) | Whitworth | 6-0 | 13 | 25 |
25) | Berry | 6-1 | 9 | 24 |
Dropped Out: None
Also Receiving Votes: DePauw 6, Belhaven 4, Coe 3, Delaware Valley 3, Marietta 3, Augustana 1
Voters: bluestreak66, Captainred81, desertcat1, FCGG, MRMIKESMITH, NCF, and smedindy
1) North Central 125 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2) Mount Union 119 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3) Wartburg 116 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4) UW-Whitewater 105 ( 4, 5, 5, 5, 6)
5) UW-La Crosse 103 ( 4, 4, 4, 5, 10)
6) Trinity (TX) 99 ( 4, 5, 6, 7, 9)
7) UW-River Falls 90 ( 6, 6, 6, 7, 15)
8) Johns Hopkins 87 ( 7, 8, 9, 9, 10)
9) Susquehanna 77 ( 9, 9, 11, 11, 13)
10) Randolph-Macon 72 ( 8, 10, 11, 12, 17)
11) John Carroll 70 ( 7, 10, 10, 14, 19)
12) Linfield 65 ( 7, 8, 12, 19, 19)
13) Cortland 64 ( 8, 11, 12, 17, 18)
14) Wheaton 63 ( 8, 12, 15, 15, 17)
15) Alma 60 (11, 13, 13, 14, 19)
16) Aurora 57 (13, 13, 14, 15, 18)
17) Ithaca 53 (12, 14, 16, 16, 19)
18) Endicott 37 (15, 16, 17, 21, 24)
19) Muhlenberg 29 (18, 18, 21, 22, 22)
20) Hardin-Simmons 28 (16, 17, 20, 23, --)
21) St John's 23 (18, 21, 21, 22, 25)
22) Mary Hardin-Baylor 22 (20, 20, 20, 22, --)
23) Grove City 21 (16, 22, 23, 23, 25)
24) Whitworth 13 (14, 25, --, --, --)
25) Berry 9 (21, 24, 24, --, --)
26) DePauw 6 (20)
27) Belhaven 4 (22)
T28) Coe 3 (23)
T28) Delaware Valley 3 (23)
T28) Marietta 3 (24, 25)
31) Augustana 1 (25)
Attention MRMIKESMITH. Since you're still blocking PMs I will send it here. I believe you forgot UW-River Falls on your ballot this week.
2023 WEEK 9 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | W-L | Points | Prev |
1) | North Central (7) | 8-0 | 175 | 1 |
2) | Mount Union | 8-0 | 166 | 2 |
3) | Wartburg | 9-0 | 162 | 3 |
T4) | Trinity (TX) | 7-1 | 142 | 6 |
T4) | UW-Whitewater | 7-1 | 142 | 4 |
6) | UW-La Crosse | 7-1 | 141 | 5 |
T7) | Johns Hopkins | 8-0 | 123 | 8 |
T7) | UW-River Falls | 7-1 | 123 | 7 |
9) | Susquehanna | 9-0 | 101 | 9 |
T10) | John Carroll | 7-1 | 96 | 11 |
T10) | Randolph-Macon | 8-0 | 96 | 10 |
12) | Linfield | 7-0 | 95 | 12 |
13) | Wheaton | 7-1 | 93 | 14 |
14) | Aurora | 8-0 | 87 | 16 |
15) | Cortland | 7-1 | 81 | 13 |
16) | Alma | 8-0 | 78 | 15 |
17) | Ithaca | 7-1 | 71 | 17 |
18) | Hardin-Simmons | 7-1 | 63 | 20 |
19) | Endicott | 7-1 | 54 | 18 |
20) | Muhlenberg | 7-1 | 43 | 19 |
21) | St John's | 6-2 | 36 | 21 |
22) | Grove City | 9-0 | 32 | 23 |
23) | Berry | 7-1 | 21 | 25 |
24) | Whitworth | 7-0 | 13 | 24 |
25) | Delaware Valley | 7-1 | 12 | NR |
Dropped Out: #22 Mary Hardin-Baylor
Also Receiving Votes: Augustana 9, DePauw 7, Coe 5, Bethel 4, Brockport 2, Marietta 2
Voters: bluestreak66, Captainred81, desertcat1, FCGG, MRMIKESMITH, NCF, and smedindy
1) North Central 175 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2) Mount Union 166 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3)
3) Wartburg 162 ( 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
T4) Trinity (TX) 142 ( 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 7, 9)
T4) UW-Whitewater 142 ( 3, 5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 9)
6) UW-La Crosse 141 ( 4, 4, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10)
T7) Johns Hopkins 123 ( 4, 7, 8, 9, 9, 10, 12)
T7) UW-River Falls 123 ( 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 12, 15)
9) Susquehanna 101 ( 9, 9, 11, 11, 12, 14, 15)
T10) John Carroll 96 ( 8, 10, 10, 11, 14, 14, 19)
T10) Randolph-Macon 96 ( 8, 9, 10, 10, 13, 17, 19)
12) Linfield 95 ( 5, 8, 8, 12, 13, 20, 21)
13) Wheaton 93 ( 6, 7, 12, 15, 15, 17, 17)
14) Aurora 87 (11, 11, 13, 13, 14, 15, 18)
15) Cortland 81 ( 8, 11, 12, 16, 16, 18, 20)
16) Alma 78 (12, 13, 13, 13, 14, 19, 20)
17) Ithaca 71 (11, 15, 16, 16, 17, 18, 18)
18) Hardin-Simmons 63 ( 7, 16, 17, 17, 19, 20, 23)
19) Endicott 54 (15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22)
20) Muhlenberg 43 (10, 20, 20, 21, 21, 23, 24)
21) St John's 36 (14, 18, 19, 22, 24, 24, 25)
22) Grove City 32 (16, 21, 21, 22, 22, 23, 25)
23) Berry 21 (20, 22, 22, 23, 23, 25, --)
24) Whitworth 13 (14, 25, --, --, --, --, --)
25) Delaware Valley 12 (21, 23, 24, 25, 25, --, --)
26) Augustana 9 (18, 25)
27) DePauw 7 (19)
28) Coe 5 (23, 24)
29) Bethel 4 (22)
T30) Brockport 2 (24)
T30) Marietta 2 (24)
2023 WEEK 10 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | W-L | Points | Prev |
1) | North Central (7) | 9-0 | 175 | 1 |
2) | Mount Union | 9-0 | 167 | 2 |
3) | Wartburg | 10-0 | 161 | 3 |
4) | UW-La Crosse | 8-1 | 146 | 6 |
5) | Trinity (TX) | 8-1 | 144 | T4 |
6) | UW-Whitewater | 8-1 | 142 | T4 |
7) | Johns Hopkins | 9-0 | 124 | T7 |
T8) | Linfield | 8-0 | 109 | 12 |
T8) | Susquehanna | 9-0 | 109 | 9 |
10) | Randolph-Macon | 9-0 | 103 | T10 |
11) | UW-River Falls | 7-2 | 100 | T7 |
12) | Aurora | 9-0 | 95 | 14 |
13) | Wheaton | 8-1 | 91 | 13 |
14) | Cortland | 8-1 | 88 | 15 |
15) | Alma | 9-0 | 77 | 16 |
16) | Ithaca | 8-1 | 67 | 17 |
17) | Hardin-Simmons | 8-1 | 64 | 18 |
18) | Endicott | 8-1 | 55 | 19 |
19) | John Carroll | 7-2 | 53 | T10 |
20) | St John's | 7-2 | 41 | 21 |
21) | Muhlenberg | 8-1 | 40 | 20 |
22) | Grove City | 9-0 | 39 | 22 |
23) | Berry | 8-1 | 24 | 23 |
24) | Delaware Valley | 8-1 | 15 | 25 |
25) | Whitworth | 8-0 | 14 | 24 |
Dropped Out: None
Also Receiving Votes: Augustana 10, DePauw 8, Marietta 6, Bethel 4, Coe 3, Union 1
Voters: bluestreak66, Captainred81, desertcat1, FCGG, MRMIKESMITH, NCF, and smedindy
.1) North Central 175 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2) Mount Union 167 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3) Wartburg 161 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4) UW-La Crosse 146 ( 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 8)
5) Trinity (TX) 144 ( 4, 4, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7)
6) UW-Whitewater 142 ( 3, 5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 9)
7) Johns Hopkins 124 ( 4, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 11)
T8) Linfield 109 ( 5, 7, 8, 10, 12, 12, 19)
T8) Susquehanna 109 ( 7, 9, 10, 11, 11, 12, 13)
10) Randolph-Macon 103 ( 7, 8, 10, 10, 10, 15, 19)
11) UW-River Falls 100 ( 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 15, 23)
12) Aurora 95 (11, 11, 12, 12, 13, 13, 15)
13) Wheaton 91 ( 6, 8, 12, 15, 16, 17, 17)
14) Cortland 88 ( 8, 9, 11, 13, 14, 18, 21)
15) Alma 77 (11, 13, 13, 13, 16, 19, 20)
16) Ithaca 67 (14, 16, 16, 16, 17, 18, 18)
17) Hardin-Simmons 64 ( 7, 15, 17, 18, 20, 20, 21)
18) Endicott 55 (15, 16, 18, 19, 19, 20, 20)
19) John Carroll 53 (14, 14, 16, 17, 18, 24, --)
20) St John's 41 (14, 15, 17, 22, 24, 24, 25)
21) Muhlenberg 40 (10, 20, 21, 22, 23, 23, 23)
22) Grove City 39 (14, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25)
23) Berry 24 (19, 21, 22, 22, 23, 25, --)
24) Delaware Valley 15 (21, 21, 24, 24, 25, --, --)
25) Whitworth 14 (14, 24, --, --, --, --, --)
26) Augustana 10 (17, 25)
27) DePauw 8 (19, 25)
28) Marietta 6 (22, 24)
29) Bethel 4 (22)
30) Coe 3 (23)
31) Union 1 (25)
2023 WEEK 11 TOP 25 FAN POLLRank | Team | W-L | Points | Prev |
1) | North Central (6) | 10-0 | 150 | 1 |
2) | Mount Union | 10-0 | 143 | 2 |
3) | Wartburg | 10-0 | 138 | 3 |
4) | UW-La Crosse | 9-1 | 129 | 4 |
5) | UW-Whitewater | 9-1 | 126 | 6 |
6) | Trinity (TX) | 9-1 | 123 | 5 |
7) | Johns Hopkins | 10-0 | 105 | 7 |
8) | Randolph-Macon | 10-0 | 103 | 10 |
9) | Susquehanna | 10-0 | 99 | T8 |
10) | Cortland | 9-1 | 92 | 14 |
11) | Aurora | 10-0 | 86 | 12 |
12) | Alma | 10-0 | 85 | 15 |
13) | Wheaton | 9-1 | 76 | 13 |
14) | Hardin-Simmons | 9-1 | 61 | 17 |
15) | Whitworth | 9-0 | 59 | 25 |
16) | Endicott | 9-1 | 57 | 18 |
17) | St John's | 8-2 | 46 | 20 |
18) | John Carroll | 8-2 | 42 | 19 |
19) | Grove City | 10-0 | 40 | 22 |
20) | UW-River Falls | 7-3 | 37 | 11 |
21) | Muhlenberg | 9-1 | 34 | 21 |
22) | Linfield | 8-1 | 30 | T8 |
23) | Ithaca | 8-2 | 26 | 16 |
24) | Berry | 9-1 | 24 | 23 |
25) | Delaware Valley | 9-1 | 19 | 24 |
Dropped Out: None
Also Receiving Votes: Bethel 4, DePauw 4, Marietta 4, Augustana 3, Coe 3, Union 1, UW-Oshkosh 1
Voters: bluestreak66, Captainred81, desertcat1, FCGG, MRMIKESMITH, NCF, and smedindy
1) North Central 150 ( 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2) Mount Union 143 ( 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3) Wartburg 138 ( 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4) UW-La Crosse 129 ( 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5)
5) UW-Whitewater 126 ( 3, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6)
6) Trinity (TX) 123 ( 4, 4, 6, 6, 6, 7)
7) Johns Hopkins 105 ( 8, 8, 8, 8, 9, 10)
8) Randolph-Macon 103 ( 6, 7, 9, 9, 9, 13)
9) Susquehanna 99 ( 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12)
10) Cortland 92 ( 7, 8, 10, 10, 13, 16)
11) Aurora 86 (10, 10, 11, 12, 12, 15)
12) Alma 85 ( 9, 11, 11, 11, 12, 17)
13) Wheaton 76 ( 7, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17)
14) Hardin-Simmons 61 (13, 13, 15, 17, 18, 19)
15) Whitworth 59 (12, 14, 14, 14, 20, 23)
16) Endicott 57 (14, 16, 16, 17, 18, 18)
17) St John's 46 (13, 15, 16, 20, 22, 24)
18) John Carroll 42 (13, 16, 18, 19, 22, --)
19) Grove City 40 (12, 18, 19, 21, 21, 25)
20) UW-River Falls 37 ( 7, 15, 20, 25, --, --)
21) Muhlenberg 34 (17, 18, 21, 21, 22, 23)
22) Linfield 30 (14, 15, 21, 24, --, --)
23) Ithaca 26 (17, 19, 20, 23, 25, --)
24) Berry 24 (19, 20, 21, 23, 23, --)
25) Delaware Valley 19 (19, 20, 24, 24, 24, --)
T26) Bethel 4 (22)
T26) DePauw 4 (22)
T26) Marietta 4 (22)
T29) Augustana 3 (23)
T29) Coe 3 (24, 25)
T31) Union 1 (25)
T31) UW-Oshkosh 1 (25)
I would like to bring this back, any one interested?
Quote from: Captainred81 on September 18, 2024, 10:10:46 AMI would like to bring this back, any one interested?
I might be interested if there are enough others.
For those interested send me a message with your poll, and I'll tally it up on Fridays. This is a good way to compare and see how the polls varies, if it at from the pros...
I only got one other poll. I think we have about 10, to get a decent perspective
My perspective on the HSU-McMurry game.
Congrats to HSU.
HSU defeated two top 25 opponents then had to go across town for the rivalry game vs. McMurry. The HSU game was the big one on the schedule for a McMurry season. The Cowboys did what they needed to do.