Here's Week 1 of our new North Region Fan Poll. Here's hoping this goes for a long, long time. I'm still looking for one or two more who are willing to participate while taking it seriously, willing to send a ballot every week, and wouldn't vote their favorite team #1 or #2 every week. Here's the poll.
1. Mount Union 40pts (1,1,1,1)
2. Wheaton 33pts (2, 3, 3, 3)
2. Witt 31pts (2, 2, 4, 5)
4. North Central 27pts (2, 4, 4, 7)
5. Ohio Northern 26pts (3, 4, 5, 6)
6. Wabash 19pts (5, 6, 7, 7)
7. Franklin 13pts (7, 8, 8, 8)
8. Baldwin Wallace 11pts (6, 6, 10, -)
9. Trine 12pts (5, 8, 9, 10)
10.Illinois Wesleyan 6pts (9, 9, 9, -)
RV Chicago 1pt (10, -, -, -)
RV CWRU 1pt (10, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by ADL70, Wes Anderson, Mr. Ypsi, and wally_wabash.
I'll do it!
I can do it too
Probably a bit late noticing this, but 8 and 9 are switched in the week 1 poll. Trine should be ahead of Baldwin Wallace
Week 2 North Region Fan Poll:
1. Mt Union 60 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Wheaton 48 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3. North Central 45 pts (2, 3, 4, 4, 4, 6)
4. ONU 41 pts (3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 6)
5. Wittenberg 38 pts (3, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7)
6. Wabash 31 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7)
7. Trine 23 pts (5, 5, 8, 8, 8, 9)
8. Balwin-Wallace 17 pts (7, 7, 7, 7, 10, -)
9. Franklin 14 pts (8, 9, 9, 9, 8, 9)
10. IWU 6 pts (8, 9, 10, -, -, -)
RV Adrian 4 pts (10, 10, 10, 10, -, -)
Corrections and math-checking are appreciated.
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Wes Anderson, wally_wabash, Mr. Ypsi, ADL70, smedindy, & FCGrizzliesGrad.
I'll also add a comment... I'm a little surprised that our group thinks that North Central, ONU, and Witt are essentially interchangeable. I'm not sure I'm on board with that.
I just think we've got different opinions on how to handle North Central's result in California. I'm a "results matter" guy, so I have them a little lower. If they keep hanging 70-burgers on people, they'll move back up pretty quickly.
Hey, Wes, is it too late to jump in on this, too?
Quote from: Li'l Giant on September 15, 2011, 06:09:05 PM
Hey, Wes, is it too late to jump in on this, too?
Yeah, I'll go to 7 voters. I think that's as high as I can go, though. I have enough trouble getting the math right with 6. Send me one on Sat night/Sunday and I'll start tabulating you next week.
As far as NCC goes, it's the old argument of whether losing to a good team makes you better or worse than teams beating bad teams. I still like NCC. I'm one of the voters with them at 4. Maybe too early to tell on the Polar Bears. Maybe too early on Witt, considering OWU played them better than 38-13. I don't know. I like Witt. I think they're the 3rd best team in this region and I probably won't change my mind unless they lose in Crawfordsville. I highly doubt they lose before then, but we still don't know much about where exactly Allegheny is. Same goes with Huntingdon, although that may be a darn tough trip.
I think NC is better than Witt. I think NC lost because of the trip and it was just 'one of those things'. Heck, Mt. Union lost once in the regular season at some point in the somewhat recent past. At least I can remember it....
I think NCC is better than Witt too. But they lost and the rankings should reflect that. The last time Mount Union lost, Wabash earned the top seed in the region. They lost to an awesome Capital team and missed the chance to host the Raiders. That would have been fun. Anyway, the point is that if NCC is as good as we think, they'll be there when it matters...either playing at UMU or UWW for a shot in the final four or the Stagg. But as far as rankings right now, I think that result has to matter.
Quote from: Wes Anderson on September 15, 2011, 03:35:39 PM
Week 2 North Region Fan Poll:
1. Mt Union 60 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Wheaton 48 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3. North Central 45 pts (2, 3, 4, 4, 4, 6)
4. ONU 41 pts (3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 6)
5. Wittenberg 38 pts (3, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7)
6. Wabash 31 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7)
7. Trine 23 pts (5, 5, 8, 8, 8, 9)
8. Balwin-Wallace 17 pts (7, 7, 7, 7, 10, -)
9. Franklin 14 pts (8, 9, 9, 9, 8, 9)
10. IWU 6 pts (8, 9, 10, -, -, -)
RV Adrian 4 pts (10, 10, 10, 10, -, -)
Corrections and math-checking are appreciated.
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Wes Anderson, wally_wabash, Mr. Ypsi, ADL70, smedindy, & FCGrizzliesGrad.
The math degree in me can't help but correct your point totals :P
Wheaton 53
North Central 43
Wally,
If it wasn't a 'first game of the year road trip to the west coast', I can see your point. But those are some mitigating factors, so I'm giving NCC a slight pass.
I am awful at math. I can assure you that you will correct me many times in the future.
As an outside observer, the SCIAC is a quality conference. IMHO, its top level teams are better than the top level teams in the North Region of the other conferences with the exception of the OAC and the CCIW.
Sorry for the delay on this, team. I'm gonna do better on this. I promise.
Week 3 North Region Fan Poll
1. Mount Union 60 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Wheaton 53 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3. North Central 48 pts (2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4. Ohio Northern 39 pts (3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6)
5. Wittenberg 35 pts (4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 7)
6. Wabash 32 pts (4, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7)
7. Trine 23 pts (5, 6, 7, 8, 8, 9)
8. Baldwin Wallace 17 pts (7, 7, 7, 8, 10, 10)
9. Franklin 12 pts (8, 8, 9, 9, -)
10. Illinois Wesleyan 8 pts (8, 9, 10, 10, 10, -)
RV Adrian 5 pts (9, 9, 10, -, -, -)
Corrections appreciated. The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Wes Anderson, wally_wabash, Mr. Ypsi, ADL70, smedindy, & FCGrizzliesGrad.
Quote from: Wes Anderson on September 23, 2011, 01:42:09 PM
Sorry for the delay on this, team. I'm gonna do better on this. I promise.
Week 3 North Region Fan Poll
1. Mount Union 60 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Wheaton 53 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3. North Central 48 pts (2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4. Ohio Northern 39 pts (3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6)
5. Wittenberg 35 pts (4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 7)
6. Wabash 32 pts (4, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7)
7. Trine 23 pts (5, 6, 7, 8, 8, 9)
8. Baldwin Wallace 17 pts (7, 7, 7, 8, 10, 10)
9. Franklin 12 pts (8, 8, 9, 9, -)
10. Illinois Wesleyan 8 pts (8, 9, 10, 10, 10, -)
RV Adrian 5 pts (9, 9, 10, -, -, -)
Corrections appreciated. The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Wes Anderson, wally_wabash, Mr. Ypsi, ADL70, smedindy, & FCGrizzliesGrad.
Franklin only has 10 points
Getting better at this I think... only 1 team is messed up this week ;)
FCGG, he only listed 5 voters for Franklin - perhaps they had 2-8s and 3-9s?
Plus the NR, which I confess was me - sorry! I had them at #8 the first two weeks (despite not scoring on UWW; games against UWW or UMU pretty much get a pass in my book), but when a horrible Bluffton team scored 26 on them, I decided I was letting them still ride on recent years too much.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 23, 2011, 08:28:48 PM
FCGG, he only listed 5 voters for Franklin - perhaps they had 2-8s and 3-9s?
All the 9th place votes are accounted for (1 on Trine, 2 Franklin, 1 IWU, 2 Adrian) but there's only 5 unranked "votes", 1 on Franklin, 1 on IWU, and 3 on Adrian so one is missing and I assume it's the missing "vote" on Franklin
No worries, Wes. We all gots other stuff to do. Well, except Ypsi, but he's always been 'special'. ;)
Here's your correct ballot. My fault. Still bad at math:
Week 3 North Region Fan Poll
1. Mount Union 60 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Wheaton 53 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3. North Central 48 pts (2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4. Ohio Northern 39 pts (3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6)
5. Wittenberg 35 pts (4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 7)
6. Wabash 32 pts (4, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7)
7. Trine 23 pts (5, 6, 7, 8, 8, 9)
8. Baldwin Wallace 17 pts (7, 7, 7, 8, 10, 10)
9. Franklin 12 pts (8, 8, 9, 9, 9, -)
10. Illinois Wesleyan 8 pts (8, 9, 10, 10, 10, -)
RV Adrian 3 pts (9, 10, -, -, -, -)
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 23, 2011, 09:31:27 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 23, 2011, 08:28:48 PM
FCGG, he only listed 5 voters for Franklin - perhaps they had 2-8s and 3-9s?
All the 9th place votes are accounted for (1 on Trine, 2 Franklin, 1 IWU, 2 Adrian) but there's only 5 unranked "votes", 1 on Franklin, 1 on IWU, and 3 on Adrian so one is missing and I assume it's the missing "vote" on Franklin
Good call. I used to peruse the votes that carefully to identify errors, but I've gotten lazy in retirement! (I'll have to pick up my game once I resume running the national d3 basketball fan poll in January. :P)
Ten points it is for the Griz.
Update: Wes has now changed a #9 for Adrian to a #9 for Franklin. Back to 12!
Had it correct on my cheat sheet, just did not enter the data correctly. Went through and counted all the votes on my sheet, but it doesn't do any good if I don't enter it right.
I thought I'd come up with a list of all the teams that are in the poll and the teams not in the poll but are unbeaten still:
CCIW
2. Wheaton 2-0
3. North Central 2-1
10. Illinois Wesleyan 3-0
Carthage 3-0
North Park 2-0
HCAC
9. Franklin 2-1
Mt. St. Joseph 2-0
MIAA
7. Trine 3-0
11 Adrian 3-0
NATHC
Concordia (Ill.) 1-0*
NCAC
5. Wittenberg 3-0
6. Wabash 2-0
OAC
1. Mount Union 2-0
4. Ohio Northern 2-0
8. Baldwin Wallace 2-0
Muskingum 2-0
UAA
None
UMAC
Westminster (Mo.) 3-0 (north region... St. Scholastica also unbeaten but in the west)
Good luck ranking 10 this week, fellas. Rough Saturday for the North Region's upper crust.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 24, 2011, 06:04:51 PM
Good luck ranking 10 this week, fellas. Rough Saturday for the North Region's upper crust.
I had been thinking the same thing, Wally. Though in my case it won't be too hard. I had only entered Bald Wally into #10 last week anyway, so they're gone and probably Franklin is back in. ONU plummets, but probably doesn't fall out completely. On the other hand, I may replace them with undefeated Muskingum or undefeated North Park! 8-)
I don't think the OAC wants two entrants in the post-season this year.
Quote from: smedindy on September 24, 2011, 09:37:29 PM
I don't think the OAC wants two entrants in the post-season this year.
As I jokingly (maybe?) posted on the OAC board, the only way they get a second team is if the fish run the table and beat UMU in New Concord on November 12. ;D
Which perennial doormat finishes with more wins: 3-0 Muskingum or 3-0 North Park? I'll go with the Muskies because they have an easier conference schedule this year! :P
Week 4 North Region Fan Poll
1. Mount Union 60 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Wheaton 53 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3. North Central 49 pts (2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4. Wabash 39 pts (4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5)
5. Wittenberg 37 pts (4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6)
6. Trine 30 pts (4, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7)
7. Franklin 20 pts (6, 7, 8, 8, 8, 9)
8. Illinois Wesleyan 16 pts (7, 7, 8, 9, 9, 10)
9. Muskingum 10 pts (7, 9, 9, 10, 10, -)
10. Adrian 7 pts (8, 9, 10, 10, - ,-)
RV Baldwin-Wallace 5 pts (6, -, -, -, -, -)
RV Ohio Northern 4 pts (8, 10, -, -, -, -)
Corrections appreciated. The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Wes Anderson, wally_wabash, Mr. Ypsi, ADL70, smedindy, & FCGrizzliesGrad.
Congrats on tallying all the points correctly ;D
Someone has BW at 6th? I can see maybe having them 9th or 10th but 6th seems quite high. Of course I'm the one with ONU at 8th which will probably drop this week so I can't say too much
I'm giving B-W the benefit of the doubt against Capital. I didn't drop them from my top 25, so I won't here.
But they're on a short short leash.
I think there are some teams (well, two really) that you get a pass for losing to. Capital is not on that short list. Losing to Capital at home is definitely not on that list. The disconnect I see is that Capital only lost to Witt (not sure how high on your list Witt is, but they are obviously on the list) and beat B-W. B-W has beaten nobody on the list and lost at home to Capital...doesn't Capital have to ahead of B-W if you're ranking any of them? I can certainly understand these polls are rankings and not standings so there is definitely some subjectivity allowed, but h2h results have to matter. I have the same beef with Redlands being below North Central in polling as well.
No, they don't Wally. They don't have to go above them.
If A beats B and B beats C and C beats A, who gets ranked ahead of who?
B-W is a better team than Capital. But the better team doesn't always win, and I rank based on who the better team is. On that particular day, Capital beat B-W. Maybe there were exigent circumstances? I didn't see the game film, but the turnovers could have been total flukes (Football Outsiders has data that shows that fumble recoveries are luck - not forced fumbles of course, but the recoveries are just random really), bad bounces, bad breaks, bad karma. It's obvious B-W didn't get it done, that day. Another day, they get it done, and I feel 3 times out of 4, they get it done against Capital.
I'm sure that any North Central - Redlands rematch would go to NC 3 times out of 4, maybe 4 out of 5.
I guess that's where we differ, which is perfectly fine. We don't play football games in best of 5 series. I don't disagree that North Central would beat Redlands three or four times out of five, but they didn't play five times. They played one time and Redlands won. Same with Capital and B-W. I just think that the results that actually happen should carry more weight than the hypothetical results that we might ponder.
There aren't a lot of data points to consider. If those games happened later, then it may be different because there's just a lot more of a body of work to consider.
Capital could end the year 7-3, and B-W 8-2. Redlands could be undefeated and North Central just one loss. But if Capital struggles against John Carroll and the 'Berg, and B-W doesn't really impress then I will re-evaluate. Remember, Capital lost to a Witt team that may be 'special'. (Wow, I really typed that...)
Time will tell. I just want more data.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 29, 2011, 01:46:06 PM
B-W has beaten nobody on the list and lost at home to Capital...doesn't Capital have to ahead of B-W if you're ranking any of them? I can certainly understand these polls are rankings and not standings so there is definitely some subjectivity allowed, but h2h results have to matter.
Agreed! This is the same philosophy that Andy Staples, SI.com writer, espouses when ranking his Top 25. If two teams have relatively equal accomplishments, and one has beaten the other, that team should be ranked higher.
The two teams have equal records.
Capital's loss is to a highly ranked team (Witt) on the road.
B-W's loss is
TO CAPITAL at home.
Therefore, Capital deserves to be ranked ahead of B-W.
smeds, I see your general argument - that the "best" team doesn't always win a single game - and I respect that. As the season goes on, you can make corrections as the results continue to roll in. If B-W wins their next five games, and Capital loses 1 or 2, then eventually we'll reach a point where B-W's overall body of work outshines Capital's regardless of the H2H result. But, for now, with an equal body of work thus far, the H2H result should trump your opinion that "B-W is a better team than Capital" IMHO.
*I know this is all in good fun, so don't anyone get their dobber up. I'm glad you guys are voting on a fan poll. Just expressing my opinion that, all other things being equal, H2H results should matter more than hypotheticals.
Quote from: smedindy on September 29, 2011, 06:49:48 PM
There aren't a lot of data points to consider.
Capital could end the year 7-3, and B-W 8-2...
Sorry, smeds, you posted while I was posting the previous reply.
I think the fact that "there aren't a lot of data points to consider" is exactly why H2H matters
more in early-season rankings than in late-season rankings.
If Capital ends 7-3 and B-W ends 8-2, yes, then you should probably rank B-W ahead of Capital. But...right now the teams have equal records, and you can't exactly point to Capital's loss as being "bad" (this would be a different argument if Capital had lost to Marietta or Heidelberg, but their loss was a competitive game on the road vs. a consensus Top-15 team).
Consider the following fictional scenario:
Suppose Wabash plays Mount Union in Week 1 and loses, then wins 8 straight.
Suppose Wittenberg opens 9-0, and the teams meet in Week 10 for NCAC glory.
Wabash defeats Witt.
Both teams are now 9-1 and Wabash has a H2H victory.
Who are you ranking higher?
No, it doesn't. It means head-to-head results could be more due to random chance than anything.
And in your scenario, it all depends on the other results, where people played home / road, and other factors. It's not that simple.
Which is why I like the process! It's harder than it looks to generate votes each week!
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 29, 2011, 07:18:33 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 29, 2011, 06:49:48 PM
There aren't a lot of data points to consider.
Capital could end the year 7-3, and B-W 8-2...
Sorry, smeds, you posted while I was posting the previous reply.
I think the fact that "there aren't a lot of data points to consider" is exactly why H2H matters more in early-season rankings than in late-season rankings.
If Capital ends 7-3 and B-W ends 8-2, yes, then you should probably rank B-W ahead of Capital. But...right now the teams have equal records, and you can't exactly point to Capital's loss as being "bad" (this would be a different argument if Capital had lost to Marietta or Heidelberg, but their loss was a competitive game on the road vs. a consensus Top-15 team).
Consider the following fictional scenario:
Suppose Wabash plays Mount Union in Week 1 and loses, then wins 8 straight.
Suppose Wittenberg opens 9-0, and the teams meet in Week 10 for NCAC glory.
Wabash defeats Witt.
Both teams are now 9-1 and Wabash has a H2H victory.
Who are you ranking higher?
In that scenario, I'll have to take DePauw, for getting screwed out of the Monon Bell game! ;D
If you had stuck with 7-1, 8-0, you might have had me (though Wabash/UMU in game one is probably never to be ::)), but 'bash/Witt is game 9, not 10!
Week 5 North Region Fan Poll. First, a big thank you to Dr. Acula who created a freakin sweet spreadsheet for me that makes my life way easier in adding this up. I wish I thought of stuff like that myself. Now, here's the thing with the thing:
1. Mount Union 60 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 54 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3. Wabash 46 pts (3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4)
T4. Wittenberg 39 pts (3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6)
T4. Illinois Wesleyan 39 pts (3, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5)
6. Wheaton 31 pts (4, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7)
7. Adrian 19 pts (7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 9)
8. Franklin 18 pts (7, 7, 7, 8, 9, 10)
9. Muskingum 14 pts (6, 8, 9, 9, 9, -)
10. Ohio Northern 7 pts (9, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10)
RV Trine 3 pts (8, -, -, -, -, -)
Corrections Appreciated. The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Wes Anderson, wally_wabash, Mr. Ypsi, ADL70, smedindy, & FCGrizzliesGrad.
I know that we just went through this charade last week...but what's the logic for someone with ONU ranked #10 and Muskingum unranked?
Musky defeated ONU 27-7, and it wasn't exactly a "fluky" win (if anything, ONU benefited from the odd breaks of the game, as their only TD came off a Musky fumble in the first five minutes). That said, Musky was at home, and you expect the home team to hold serve in contests between equal opponents. Fine. Still, it is a decisive head-to-head win, so, in order to rank ONU ahead of Musky, presumably they should have some other meritorious accomplishment.
I even understand giving ONU some credit for a close loss to Mount...I generally don't count close losses to the purple powers when doling out rankings as a real "loss." Let's consider that a push with Musky's H2H win over ONU for the time being.
ONU opened with a 38-20 home win over a 1-3 N.C. Wesleyan team and needed overtime to survive Otterbein at home. Otterbein isn't exactly a dominant team - with a one-point victory over Gallaudet, a blowout loss to Heidelberg, and a double-OT loss to John Carroll, I'm not sure I'd count that as a real "quality" win for ONU.
Besides the 14-6 loss to UMU in a mudpit, what has ONU done to deserve a ranking over Musky? I'm asking for some rationale other than "I think ONU would win if they played again."
*Edited to add: Obviously, this whole post will look dumb if Musky goes out and loses to Heidelberg this week, but I've always thought that your poll should reflect the teams' on-field accomplishments/power to this point in the season, not a projection of what will happen in the future.
We are in agreement, ETP. I think what makes it hard is that we get accustomed to the names that we usually see toward the top of these polls and when a result like like Muskingum 27, ONU 7 happens, some voters can't believe it. Is Muskingum better than Ohio Northern? I don't know. I know they were on the day when they were keeping score and until Muskingum shows through further play this season that that day was a one-off, I can't vote ONU ahead of Muskingum.
And since I'm talking ONU here, I'll also note that I went back and forth between ONU and Heidelberg as to who to vote #10. I guess I'm a little guilty of maybe paying too much attention to that result against UMU. If the Princes beat Musky this week, they'll jump over both Musky and ONU for sure on my ballot. I'm also watching the other 3-1's from the CCIW. That stuff will sort itself out as we go along though.
I think it's telling that the six of us voting in this thing only found 11 teams to vote for in a top 10 poll. The North Region has really been cannibalizing itself this year.
I'm fine with leaving ONU at #10, as long as Musky is ranked ahead of them (and the majority of the voters did do this in this admittedly just-for-fun fan poll). I do think ONU deserves a little credit for the close loss to UMU...just not so much that someone should rank them ahead of an undefeated Musky team that beat them head-to-head. And if Musky goes 9-1 with a loss to UMU, I will stand by that, even if UMU beats Musky by 50. If Musky drops 2-3 games, then it becomes a conversation.
I see your point that it's hard to divorce yourself from prior beliefs, i.e. ONU as a perennial contender and Musky as a perennial doormat. This is even worse in Division I - a lot of times the traditional powerhouses start out ranked and subsequently STAY ranked a lot higher than they ought to be, even after losses (ex. Notre Dame inexplicably starting the season ranked every year en route to another 6-6 season)
To tell the truth, I've seen (and heard) of a lot more egregious/ridiculous votes occurring in the Division I polls from coaches that are either a) seriously biased or b) completely unaware of results on the other side of the country.
http://tucsoncitizen.com/wildcatreport/2009/12/07/those-wacky-college-football-coaches-and-their-poll-voting/
(admittedly, this article focuses on Arizona b/c it's a Tucson paper, but I've heard plenty of similar stores elsewhere)
I also agree, wally, that it's surprising how strong the consensus is about who belongs (only 11 teams even receiving votes) with it still "relatively" early in the season...but you guys are right, it's hard to pick out another deserving team. Possibilites such as Heidelberg, Capital, and Baldwin-Wallace have a weird score triangle, but we'll know more about them in a week or two since Heidelberg plays Musky and Capital plays ONU this week. Like you said, the 3-1's from CCIW all have a chance to establish themselves over the next few weeks.
Personally, I went to put ONU in at 10 and then realized I didn't have the fish in. Had to go back and rebuild to get Muskingum at 9 and ONU AT 10.
Quote from: Wes Anderson on October 05, 2011, 03:16:19 PM
Personally, I went to put ONU in at 10 and then realized I didn't have the fish in. Had to go back and rebuild to get Muskingum at 9 and ONU AT 10.
So you originally had a team ranked at least 9th (ahead of ONU at 10th) then to get Muskingum in you put them in 9th and dropped the other team below ONU and out of the poll?
I think what this shows is that even for this reindeer game it's not an easy process.
Quote from: smedindy on October 05, 2011, 07:04:19 PM
I think what this shows is that even for this reindeer game it's not an easy process.
That's it! Make the voters' ballots public! We need accountability with the millions of BCS dollars at stake...oh, whoops, it's only the Division III fan poll.
Seriously, guys, I appreciate it...arguing over Division I rankings is just so played out, I need something better to do.
I did drop a team from my poll, but it was Trine. I had forgotten they lost, so that was a fairly easy fix. Although, had I not remembered the fish, I probably would have left Trine in there.
Now that the Muskies have lost to the Student Princes (17-7), I freely confess that I was the voter who left them out (I had them 11th). They almost certainly deserved a ranking based on this season alone, but I just couldn't quite get over that they were still Musky! ;)
I do feel good that I finally moved Witt below the LGs, immediately before Witt laid a big egg. You see, I'm psychic - I vote based on NEXT week's results! ;D (Though somehow my powers totally disappear when it comes to Pickems. >:()
If only this were a top 15 then I would be fine filling out my ballot... 8-15 were all close for me. I'm sure at least one team I picked I'll probably be the only one to pick.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 08, 2011, 06:14:51 PM
Now that the Muskies have lost to the Student Princes (17-7), I freely confess that I was the voter who left them out (I had them 11th). They almost certainly deserved a ranking based on this season alone, but I just couldn't quite get over that they were still Musky! ;)
You see, I'm psychic - I vote based on NEXT week's results!
Ah-ha! That's it!
I understand what you're saying above; it's a philosophical difference in the way we all look at rankings. I try (as much as possible) to rank teams solely based on THIS season's on-field happenings, rather than on prior beliefs, and I try to avoid projecting potential future results into the rankings.
There's nothing wrong with a little future projection; I just don't believe in that, myself...I'd rather wait to change the rankings until after that actually happens.
Week 6 North Region Fan Poll, also known as 5 fellers who think completely different on the 9th & 10th best teams in this region:
1. Mount Union 60 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 54 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3. Illinois Wesleyan 45 pts (3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4)
4. Wabash 44 pts (3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5)
5. Wheaton 37 pts (4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5)
T6. Adrian 27 pts (6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7)
T6. Franklin 27 pts (6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7)
8. Wittenberg 14 pts (8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 10)
9. Heidelberg 9 pts (8, 9, 9, 9, -, -)
10. Ohio Northern 5 pts (8, 10, 10, -, -, -)
RV Trine 3 pts (8, -, -, -, -, -)
RV Baldwin Wallace 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -)
RV CWRU 2 pts (10, 10, -, -, -, -)
RV Carthage 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -)
Corrections Appreciated. The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Wes Anderson, wally_wabash, Mr. Ypsi, ADL70, smedindy, & FCGrizzliesGrad.
Quote from: Wes Anderson on October 11, 2011, 04:46:45 PM
Week 6 North Region Fan Poll, also known as 5 fellers who think completely different on the 9th & 10th best teams in this region:
So which one of us 6 doesn't count as a fella? :P
First time there's been some variety like this I think. Only one of the 15 teams I was considering that didn't get a vote was Muskingum
Interesting that ONU hangs on. I moved ONU out this week because I had to move Musky out and I don't think that ONU can be ahead of Musky just yet. I figured we'd get some variety at the bottom of this week's poll. You can cover teams 8-13 or so with a dime. Very difficult to differentiate down there.
How can you still have Ohio Northern at no.# 10 at (3-2), and B.W. (4-1) not ranked and they beat Heidelberg.
Quote from: B.W. jacket on October 11, 2011, 08:56:30 PM
How can you still have Ohio Northern at no.# 10 at (3-2), and B.W. (4-1) not ranked and they beat Heidelberg.
Not only did 2 people put them at 10th, but someone had them 8th. It wasn't me. It'll be sorted out this week anyways when they play each other.
My ballot was:
1 Mount Union (like everyone)
2 North Central (like everyone)
3 Illinois Wesleyan
4 Wheaton (highest for Wheaton)
5 Wabash (lowest for Wabash)
6 Franklin
7 Adrian
8 Heidelberg (highest for Heidelberg)
9 Wittenberg
10 Case Western Reserve (figured I'd be the only one here... guess not)
Below that I had another 5 teams... they were all in the 8-15 group that I felt were really close...
Baldwin-Wallace
Carthage
Muskingum
Ohio Northern
Trine
I'M the other CWRU. I went back and forth between Case & BW a few times. Reckoned Case has the better shot of staying in my poll from now on.
Problem is I want nothing to do with Muskingum any more. ONU left my poll due to no fault of their own last week.
I'm surprised that you guys were so quick to jump the Musky bandwagon. They're still 4-1, and their only loss is a ten-point loss to another 4-1 opponent.
I know you've got to solve a weird series of scores between the OAC grouping of Musky/Baldwin-Wallace/Heidelberg, but I still think that Musky's overall body of work looks better than a few teams, and I'm surprised they didn't get a single vote.
CWRU is 4-1 with a terrible home loss to 1-3 Rochester and a few pretty nondescript wins; their best win is the season opener against John Carroll, which (IMHO) doesn't hold a candle to Musky's 20-point win over ONU.
FWIW, I'm a UAA alum that generally fights tooth-and-nail to defend the quality of UAA teams, but I think you're overrating CWRU here. I see your point, Wes, that CWRU has a better shot of "staying in" because they are likely to keep winning (their next few opponents are pretty lightweight), but I don't rank teams that way myself.
Carthage, for instance, is off to a very nice start (four wins, all against teams with a respectable record) but with Wheaton and Illinois Wesleyan yet to come, you can see a loss on the horizon...does that mean you shouldn't rank them now, just because CWRU has an easier schedule ahead?
I'd say the fact that I still think of Muskingum as THAT Muskingum probably had a negative influence on me. Honestly, I think I reserve the right to do that. I'm not on the selection committee and I don't have to adhere to the selection criteria. I'm trying to order these teams in such a way that I think 1 would beat 2 who would beat 3 and so on. We proved on Saturday that Heidelberg > Muskingum, so I put them in. ONU has 2 losses, so I'm not really that interested in them. The CWRU results haven't been eye popping, but they're still going to be there because they don't play anybody the rest of the way, unless you consider Wash U a somebody.
I did wonder why a few voters elevated IWU over Wabash despite both schools beating similarily bad teams by similar margins.
EDIT: Maybe there's a place for a ONU/BW winner on my ballot after this week. I just don't know. Carthage goes to Wheaton next week. I guess I'm just confused about what I'm trying to do. Am I trying to assemble the list of playoff teams? Am I trying to put the best teams in? I just dunno yet. I should get that figured out.
I added Carthage this week and I wasn't super thrilled about it. At the time it made more sense than trying to sort through the Musky/ONU/B-W quagmire. There were about 7 teams that you could look at for those 9th and 10th spots this week and there are reasonable cases to be made for any of them. We'll need another couple of weeks to shave that list back down to just 11 or 12 teams getting votes.
Quote from: Wes Anderson on October 12, 2011, 01:31:29 PM
The CWRU results haven't been eye popping, but they're still going to be there because they don't play anybody the rest of the way, unless you consider Wash U a somebody.
That's my point - I don't think that looking ahead and saying "CWRU has an easy schedule the rest of the way, I should rank them because they're going to keep winning" is an appropriate justification for ranking a team. Sure, it will look good as Case wins the next two weeks and goes to 6-1, but do you really believe (based on the results thus far) that CWRU would beat a few of the teams you have unranked?
As you said yourself - "I'm trying to order these teams in such a way that I think 1 would beat 2 who would beat 3 and so on." - so by ranking CWRU at 10, you're implying that CWRU would presumptively beat the teams you're leaving unranked. Even as a UAA homer, I can't say that I have ANY confidence that CWRU could beat ONU, Heidelberg, Muskingum, or Carthage...
I will say that of those 7-8 teams that are in the conversation for spots 9 and 10 on this list, The one at the very bottom for me is ONU. ONU lost to Musky so I think Musky has to stay ahead of them (at least until Muskingum has lost another game or two). Also, ONU has given up a ton of points. Their low point total this year was against UMU of all things (weather aided, obviously). Outside of that, the PBs are giving up 25 ppg. Is that a team that I should rank? Right now, I'm still saying no to that question.
I have Heidelberg in. I think CWRU beats the Muskies and I can't take ONU seriously until they beat BW. I'll take Carthage seriously if they at least keep it within a stone's throw of Wheaton. I honestly shrugged it off without thinking about them much. "Well, Carthage is going to lose, so I'm not putting them in just to take them back out next week." Maybe that's wrong, and I'll accept some flack for that.
I do realize it's different for OAC teams like BW and ONU. One of your losses is always to Mount Union. But the rest of the results, for ONU in particular, aren't really exciting. Therefore, Muskingum beating them isn't that exciting to me anyway, especially after they lost this week.
Based on the Top 25 Fan Poll there's only 9 North teams that received votes and 11 in the d3football poll...
Team North Fan 25 D3F 25
Mount Union 1st 2nd 2nd
North Central 2nd 6th 6th
Illinois Wesleyan 3rd 14th 16th
Wabash 4th 10th 12th
Wheaton 5th 16th 17th
Adrian T6th 25th 32nd
Franklin T6th 23rd 22nd
Wittenberg 8th 28th 28th
Heidelberg 9th ---- ----
Ohio Northern 10th 36th 34th
Trine 11th ---- 39th
Baldwin Wallace T12th ---- 43rd
CWRU T12th ---- ----
Carthage 14th ---- ----
Thanks for putting that together, FCGrizzliesGrad.
Looks like the North Region voters are (essentially) in agreement with the Top 25 polls. Notably, the Top 25's both have Wabash ranked ahead of IWU, while the North Region voters have IWU in front. I'd probably put IWU ahead of 'Bash myself.
Some useful results today out of the OAC that help sort all of that out. Musky loses to JCU, B-W beat ONU, Heidelberg takes their whoopin' from UMU.
CWRU cruised past Hiram.
Trine shut out Alma.
Carthage still to come vs. North Park tonight.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 15, 2011, 05:27:28 PM
Some useful results today out of the OAC that help sort all of that out. Musky loses to JCU, B-W beat ONU, Heidelberg takes their whoopin' from UMU.
CWRU cruised past Hiram.
Trine shut out Alma.
Carthage still to come vs. North Park tonight.
Actually, Carthage is at Augie tonite, but since the WestVikings may be worse than the EastVikings this year, the error is understandable! ;D
I just looked that up and saw that it was Augustana. For some reason my mind wouldn't believe my eyes. :)
Augie's having a year like none other. And not in a good way. :(
As long as Carthage defeats Augie tonite (otherwise, I may have to reconsider), I'm planning to include NPU @ Augie in my MIAA Pickems slate. What an historic feat it would be if NPU could break their conference losing streak (no wins this millenium) AT the school which in the 1980s did something that even the two purple monsters have yet to accomplish - FOUR consecutive Stagg Bowl wins. :o ;D
Carthage happens to be down 19-10 to Augie starting the 4th quarter. I'm not sure what to do with that.
I've already sent mine in since Carthage was under CWRU in my 'for your consideration' pile. And I think I was right.
Yep. Carthage loses 19-13 to Augustana. We can go ahead and cross them off.
Oh, man - Augie over Carthage makes TWO of my intended MIAA Pickems slate games a whole lot less attractive for getting split results! 5-1 Wheaton at 5-1 Carthage and 3-3 NPU at 0-6 Augie would get diversity; now I fear they would be 90%+ Wheaton and Augie (I don't do spreads; just try for 'toss-up' games). I need at least one replacement to go with 7-0 St. Thomas AT 5-1 Bethel, 6-0 NCC AT 6-0 IWU, 4-2 JCU AT 3-3 ONU, and 5-1 SJF AT 4-2 Springfield. Any suggestions? (Especially since all three MIAA conference games are likely to be 90%+ one way; the national games are to balance the conference one-sided games that I can't control!)
The ODAC always has some good teams knocking heads.
Quote from: smedindy on October 15, 2011, 10:29:13 PM
The ODAC always has some good teams knocking heads.
Thanks. E&H @ Catholic is the winner. 8-)
Not sure it is 'good teams knocking heads', but 4-3 (losing to good teams) at 4-2 (beating who exactly?) does seem a pretty good 'toss-up'!
Hopefully B.W. will get a little love this week in the poll.
Quote from: B.W. jacket on October 19, 2011, 03:36:11 PM
Hopefully B.W. will get a little love this week in the poll.
They should get more than last week... with Carthage, Ohio Northern, and Heidelberg (as well as Muskingum even though no one had them in the top 10) losing there's probably only 11-12 teams that people will be deciding between
Spoiler alert...B-W is IN my top 10 this week. :)
It'll be interesting to see the poll when Wes posts it.
It'll be REALLY interesting to see the fallout from the North Central / Illinois Wesleyan game. I think Ill. Wesleyan has proven itself this season. So I bet they stay close to NC and then I think they won't fall much if they lose.
Week 7 North Region Fan Poll
1. Mount Union 60 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 54 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3. Illinois Wesleyan 46 pts (3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4)
4. Wabash 43 pts (3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5)
5. Wheaton 37 pts (4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5)
6. Adrian 28 pts (6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7)
7. Franklin 24 pts (6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 9)
T8. Baldwin-Wallace 15 pts (8, 8, 8, 8, 9, 10)
T9. Wittenberg 15 pts (7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9)
T10. CWRU 4 pts (10, 10, 10, 10, -, -)
T10 Trine 4 pt (8, 10, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Wes Anderson, wally_wabash, smedindy, ADL70, Mr. Ypsi, and FCGrizzliesGrad.
Not as wild and wooly as it was just a couple of weeks ago.
Wes, you need to re-check the numbers, as I had Trine 8th and Bald Wally 10th - neither vote is listed. (Perhaps you flip-flopped those two votes?)
Quote from: smedindy on October 20, 2011, 12:25:30 PM
It'll be REALLY interesting to see the fallout from the North Central / Illinois Wesleyan game. I think Ill. Wesleyan has proven itself this season. So I bet they stay close to NC and then I think they won't fall much if they lose.
I agree; if NCC wins, what happens in the NCC-IWU-Wheaton triangle?
And, the logical follow-up, which of them makes the strongest Pool C candidate?
I've fixed the poll. Considerably more cluttered at the bottom now that I've entered everything correctly.
I need to do something about this spreadsheet. It works great, except for the fact that Google Docs crashes all the time. I can never be exactly sure where it saved before it crashes. We don't keep Excel on our work computers. But, I'm going to try another way next week.
Quote from: Wes Anderson on October 20, 2011, 02:28:55 PM
We don't keep Excel on our work computers.
How do you survive? Sweet jeebus...I need Excel at work in the same way I need oxygen.
I was told that news media doesn't need spreadsheets.
I've got some crappy clone of Excel that doesn't open .xls files correctly and a Word clone that doesn't open .doc files correctly. Awesome, right? Makes it impossible to deal with the outside world.
If I could just get Google Docs to quit crashing, I'd be perfectly fine.
Quote from: Wes Anderson on October 20, 2011, 03:29:49 PM
I've got some crappy clone of Excel that doesn't open .xls files correctly and a Word clone that doesn't open .doc files correctly. Awesome, right? Makes it impossible to deal with the outside world.
I use http://www.openoffice.org/ (http://www.openoffice.org/) for my spreadsheet and document based needs. It's basically like the MS suite of programs. There can be small quirks (like colors) when opening something you did in OOo in a MS version, but any .doc or .xls should open fine in it and you can save files in that format too. I used it when I was in college and doing my homework at home (I commuted) and then doing stuff on school computers and vice versa. Worked great. I can't say much about the other programs since I don't use them much but it's basically got anything Microsoft Office has.
Quote from: Wes Anderson on October 20, 2011, 03:29:49 PM
I was told that news media doesn't need spreadsheets.
I've got some crappy clone of Excel that doesn't open .xls files correctly and a Word clone that doesn't open .doc files correctly. Awesome, right? Makes it impossible to deal with the outside world.
If I could just get Google Docs to quit crashing, I'd be perfectly fine.
Sounds like MS Works - yuck.
I thought I'd compile this again this week... last week is in parethesis
Team North Fan 25 D3F 25
Mount Union 1st (1) 2nd (2) 2nd (2)
North Central 2nd (2) 6th (6) 6th (6)
Illinois Wesleyan 3rd (3) 13th (14) 15th (16)
Wabash 4th (4) 10th (10) 11th (12)
Wheaton 5th (5) 14th (16) 16th (17)
Adrian 6th (T6) 23rd (25) 29th (32)
Franklin 7th (T6) 21st (23) 22nd (22)
Wittenberg T8th (9) 29th (28) 26th (28)
Baldwin Wallace T8th (T12) 39th (--) T35th (43)
Trine T10th (11) ---- (--) 33rd (39)
CWRU T10th (T12) ---- (--) ---- (--)
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 20, 2011, 04:59:34 PM
I use http://www.openoffice.org/ (http://www.openoffice.org/) for my spreadsheet and document based needs.
I'll try this! Thanks a lot!
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 20, 2011, 02:21:31 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 20, 2011, 12:25:30 PM
It'll be REALLY interesting to see the fallout from the North Central / Illinois Wesleyan game. I think Ill. Wesleyan has proven itself this season. So I bet they stay close to NC and then I think they won't fall much if they lose.
I agree; if NCC wins, what happens in the NCC-IWU-Wheaton triangle?
And, the logical follow-up, which of them makes the strongest Pool C candidate?
Made even more cloudy if NCC beats IWU this weekend and Wheaton beats NCC on Nov. 5th. Barring any crazy upsets in other conference games that would leave NCC, Wheaton and IWU all at 6-1 in conference. NCC would be 8-2 over all and both Wheaton and IWU would be 9-1.
However it is possible NCC would be the AQ in that case based on point differential between the 3 teams. That would likely give IWU the nod for the best chance at Pool C given they beat Wheaton head-to-head and both teams were 9-1.
Not sure how likely this case is in reality, but it represents a possible scenario where a 9-1 CCIW team fails to make the playoffs.
You could also see the first time 3 CCIW teams make the playoffs. If Wheaton finishes 9-1 it would be hard to leave them out of pool C consideration given their SOS numbers and will have beaten at least 1 RRO. Of course this would require IWU to be taken pretty early in the Pool C process but that's for another thread.
CCIW is so tough...Wheaton beat Wabash by 30 points in the pre-season scrimmage yet is still ranked behind them. Most other D3 conference champs would be a 3-4 team in the CCIW, OAC, WIAC
My official take: scrimmage, shmimmage.
Quote from: lakeshore on October 21, 2011, 11:12:33 AM
CCIW is so tough...Wheaton beat Wabash by 30 points in the pre-season scrimmage yet is still ranked behind them. Most other D3 conference champs would be a 3-4 team in the CCIW, OAC, WIAC
I wouldn't use the results of a scrimmage to weigh comparitive strength of opponents. Some Wheaton/Wabash scrimmages (particularly when Coach Creighton was at Wabash) were even scripted to see how each team would react to specific situations. Not sure the scrimmages go to that level of "openness" anymore.
Scrimmages include 2nd team vs. 2nd team, 3rd team vs. 3rd team, sometimes 1st team vs 2nd team get mixed in. I didn't see the results of this year's scrimmage, but what if it was 10-7 during the 1st team session, while the 2nd team of Wheaton outscored Wabash's by 20+ points. Does that mean Wheaton is 30 points better than Wabash?
I'd also like to point out that in 2008, Wabash actually "beat" Wheaton in the pre-season scrimmage, which had the Wabash faithful very hopeful for the 2008 season. Yet Wheaton beat Wabash in the playoff game 59-28.
Clearly there is some disparity in the strength of conferences, where as you point out a conference champ of one conference may not even be the 3rd or 4th best team in another conference. But I would not use the result of a scrimmage as a measuring stick.
Agreed w/Pat and Mugsy. Can't use a preseason scrimmage as conclusive evidence that one team is better than the other, for a number of reasons. That said...
"Most other D3 conference champs would be a 3-4 team in the CCIW, OAC, WIAC."
This, I agree with.
Relevant results today....CWRU and Witt have close wins, but they are wins. Trine loses at home to Hope, so their time in this poll and as a subject in any Pool C conversation is done. I put JCU on my watch list last week, but they lost to ONU today, so that's done. North Central blanked IWU...IWU will drop, but certainly not out. B-W hung a 70-burger on Wilmington today. Wow.
Might we get a consensus 10 this week??
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 22, 2011, 06:10:45 PM
Might we get a consensus 10 this week??
Consensus? In a poll? Inconceivable!
If Carthage can upset Wheaton then we'll be sure not to have consensus
I kept the same teams, but rethought my 6-7-8 and dropped Illinois Wesleyan down.
I haven't submitted yet because I like to sleep on it first, but at the moment I have a couple changes from last week (not counting IWU losing) as well.
Should be interesting to see how far everyone drops the Titans.
North Region Fan Poll Week 8:
1. Mount Union 60 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 54 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3. Wabash 45 pts (3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5)
4. Wheaton 43 pts (3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5)
5. Illinois Wesleyan 34 pts (4, 4, 5, 6, 6, 7)
6. Adrian 32 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6)
7. Baldwin-Wallace 22 pts (7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8)
8. Franklin 21 pts (5, 7, 8, 8, 8, 9)
9. Wittenberg 12 pts (8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 10)
10. Heidelberg 4 pts (9, 10, 10, -, -, -)
RV CWRU 3 pts (10, 10, 10, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Wes Anderson, wally_wabash, smedindy, Mr. Ypsi, ADL70, & FCGrizzliesGrad.
Just had a derp! moment...didn't IWU beat Wheaton h2h? I blew it...I wasn't the only one. I'll get that corrected next week.
All but one of us put Wheaton ahead of IWU, actually. I intended to do that. That was a close game in Bloomington. If two teams are of a similar caliber, then I think the home team ought to win that game close, which is what happened. To me, I can't automatically assume IWU > Wheaton because of that one close result at IWU's place a month ago.
I'm sure there's a degree of "what have you done for me lately" involved in that, too.
Just about as close to a consensus 10 as you can get. Top 8 basically the same in everybody's poll, Witt at #9 in almost-everybody's poll, and Berg/CWRU at 10. I think that Heidelberg deserves to be ranked ahead of CWRU at the moment, but they'll have to beat JCU and ONU to stay there.
Supposing that they do, does anyone see Heidelberg as a darkhorse Pool C candidate as the possible OAC #2 (if B-W gets upset by John Carroll)? I don't - I certainly would have them behind the CCIW's runner-up(s), UW-Oshkosh, and a few South teams - just fishing for different opinions.
I didn't derp IWU / Wheaton. I think Wheaton is slightly better even though they lost to IWU in Bloomington. But its very close from my 3 to 5 (Wabash / Wheaton / IWU) and I really thought about it.
See, that's the part that I just can't get. I don't see the logic in knowing that A beat B but then talking oneself out of the fact that B ought to ranked higher when A and B have the same record against comparable schedules. I don't think it's fair to have that result on the record and then just ignore it.
I don't ignore it, it's not the be-all and end-all. There are nuances to everything, not black and white. And looking at the stats, those teams were even except on the scoreboard (which of course is the main factor).
If IWU beat Wheaton 24-19 at Wheaton, then it's a different tune.
If IWU beat Wheaton 31-19, then it's a different tune.
But I can't equivocally say that 3 times out of 5 IWU beats Wheaton. I do think Wheaton beats IWU 3 out of 5.
We're not just ranking A beat B so A must be ranked higher. If that was the case we wouldn't need to vote in polls, we'd just have one big standings list. We're ordering them based on who we think are the best teams. And just because A beat B doesn't mean A is better.
Same situation in the Top 25 poll, I put Lycoming in at 25th and not Widener even though both have 1 loss and Widener won the H2H because I believe Lycoming is the better team.
Early in the season when there's little info then H2H can be a useful factor, but as we get this late in the season it becomes less important to me.
One of us (me) really laid the hammer to IWU in the poll this week. In hindsight, I probably shouldn't have dropped them as far as I did, but I felt like making them pay for a loss by dropping them below all the teams that don't have one. Maybe I was just cranky, I dunno.
However, I'll probably move them back above Adrian next week, because I guess I'm not sold that Adrian is better than the Titans. I'll admit to a mistake there.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 25, 2011, 08:31:39 PM
And just because A beat B doesn't mean A is better.
The whole competitive sports universe just blew up.
Quote from: BashDad on October 28, 2011, 12:52:19 AM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 25, 2011, 08:31:39 PM
And just because A beat B doesn't mean A is better.
The whole competitive sports universe just blew up.
or
"Why I Learned to Love the Bomb" ;D
Quote from: BashDad on October 28, 2011, 12:52:19 AM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 25, 2011, 08:31:39 PM
And just because A beat B doesn't mean A is better.
The whole competitive sports universe just blew up.
For example, Kean lost to Brockport St... Brockport was 0-5 (now 2-5) at the time and Kean was 5-0 (now 6-1) and ranked #10... I would certainly argue that Kean still is the better team even though they lost that particular day.
One out, one in for me. Now we haz consensus, or will Adrian still get some votes?
I dropped Adrian from 6 to 10, but thought they were still better than whoever I would have put at 11.
I threw in the 'Berg instead of Adrian. Not without some reservation, but it's close.
I was debating between 3 teams for 10th spot... does Adrian stay in the poll, or does CWRU or Albion come in off my watch list (and I did have Albion on my watch list coming into this week)
For comparison's sake, here are the regional rankings. Will be interesting to see where we place them when Wes compiles.
1 Mount Union 7-0 8-0
2 Franklin 6-0 7-1
2 Wabash 7-0 8-0
4 North Central (Ill.) 6-1 7-1
5 Case Western Reserve 7-0 7-1
6 Illinois Wesleyan 7-1 7-1
7 Wheaton (Ill.) 7-1 7-1
8 Baldwin-Wallace 7-1 7-1
9 Wittenberg 5-1 7-1
10 Albion 5-1 5-3
smed, I've seen you post this a couple places (so I didn't know exactly where to respond), but I too am appalled at how high CWRU is ranked. I know we've got the wonderful emphasis on in-region results and all that good stuff, so their loss to Rochy doesn't really count, but even with their seven in-region results I don't see how anyone comes to a logical conclusion that they are better than Illinois Wesleyan and Wheaton. I think it would be an absolute shamockery if Wesley takes the B bid, CWRU gets a Pool C, and two superior CCIW teams are left at the altar. I could even live with it if CWRU was undefeated, as I'm a strong proponent that any undefeated team should be in the playoffs. But this just seems a little silly.
I've posted elsewhere, quite strongly, that I don't feel too bad for any AQ-conference team in Pool C (with the possible exception of OAC and WIAC teams, for obvious reasons) because they had their chance to take a Pool A bid...and I still believe that to be true.
One thing is that if Case wins out, their case gets better because their SOS will increase playing their UAA brethren instead of the poor ol' NCAC (yeah, we're stinkin' this year except for TWO of the W's).
The sad thing is that Rochester isn't a horrible trip for Case. Cripes, they're in the same conference for practically everything but football And it's not regional, but North Central vs. Redlands is? Wabash vs. Wash U. isn't regional (though they've played each other in many sports for years) but Witt vs. Huntingdon is?
My brain hurts at times. I know you gotta draw the line somewhere, but...
Week 9 North Region Fan Poll. This don't look nothing like the region rankings.
1. Mount Union 60 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 54 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3. Wabash 47 pts (3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4. Wheaton 41 pts (3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5)
5. Illinois Wesleyan 37 pts (4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6)
T6. Franklin 26 pts (5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8)
T6. Baldwin-Wallace 26 pts (6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 9)
8. Wittenberg 16 pts (7, 8, 8, 8, 8, -)
9. Heidelberg 8 pts (9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 10)
10. CWRU 6 pts (9, 9, 9, -, -, -)
RV Albion 5 pts (7, 10, -, -, -, -)
RV Adrian 4 pts (8, 10, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Wes Anderson, wally_wabash, Mr. Ypsi, smedindy, ADL70, & FCGrizzliesGrad.
I wondered if you were ever going to post them Wes ;) Here's a handy comparison chart of different rankings
Team North Fan Region Rank 25 Fan d3 Top 25
Mount Union 1st (1) 1st 2nd (2) 2nd (2)
North Central 2nd (2) 4th 6th (6) 6th (6)
Wabash 3rd (3) T2nd 8th (8) 10th (9)
Wheaton 4th (4) 7th 11th (13) 13th (13)
Illinois Wesleyan 5th (5) 6th 17th (17) 21st (24)
Franklin T6th (8) T2nd 22nd (21) 22nd (22)
Baldwin-Wallace T6th (7) 8th T32nd (T33) 29th (31)
Wittenberg 8th (9) 9th 28th (28) 27th (28)
Heidelberg 9th (10) --- ---- (--) ---- (--)
CWRU 10th (11) 5th ---- (--) ---- (--)
Albion 11th (-) 10th ---- (--) ---- (--)
Adrian 12th (6) --- ---- (20) 35th (27)
There's a lot of stuff with the region rankings that I guess I understand, but I sure wouldn't do it that way. My ballot is evidence enough of that.
I've got a real problem with the #6 team in the country being the 4th best team in the region. Franklin doesn't deserve a 2 in my mind. I would have done a spit take had I been in that athletic office on Wednesday afternoon. Keep winning and you're home until the round of 8, in theory.
I suppose it's not new, though. The committee shows yet again they value a team with 0 losses regardless of who you play. Franklin and Case are examples of that. Wabash is a little different because I think they're good enough to deserve that 2 ranking. I've seen a lot of these teams play, which I guess is why I get so upset. There is no eye test in the selection criteria. That's how you end up with Franklin > North Central & CWRU > Wheaton.
Yeah, I was shocked when Franklin was that high. I've been expecting the Grizzlies to be probably a 6-7 seed most of the year even if they went 9-1. When I first looked at the standings I looked for them first and skipped over the top few spots to find them so I originally thought they weren't even in the top 10 then looked up and was shocked :o
Quote from: smedindy on November 02, 2011, 09:38:05 PM
The sad thing is that Rochester isn't a horrible trip for Case. Cripes, they're in the same conference for practically everything but football And it's not regional, but North Central vs. Redlands is? Wabash vs. Wash U. isn't regional (though they've played each other in many sports for years) but Witt vs. Huntingdon is?
I've been b*tching for some time now about the absurdity of depending on "regional" results when there is no way to have geographically logical "regions" in Division III.
With that said, here are some comments from ATN and K-Mack:
"The criteria was created to keep D-III teams playing each other, and to keep them from being forced to crisscross the country on limited travel budgets to play the games that will get them into the playoffs."
"The emphasis on in-region games I always interpreted for football to mean that a team doesn't have to blow its travel budget searching far and wide for games. D-III doesn't want to get in a situation where teams feel compelled to spend more than they have to get the wins that impress the committee. Play the good teams that are close to you and win and you'll get in."
Put that way, I can understand the motivation for emphasizing "regional" results, but admittedly I still REALLY dislike throwing away results (especially with only 10 games to consider, and now we're supposed to just disregard the one result that probably tells us more about the team than any other?).
The other thing that bothers me is how it seems like the criteria aren't applied the same way in different regions:
Team A: 7-1, 6-0 region. 176th SOS with a .463 OWP
Team B: 8-0, 7-0 region. 171st SOS with a .455 OWP
Team A is Franklin, the 2nd ranked team in the North region rankings, ahead of NCC, Wheaton, IWU, etc.
Team B is Thomas More, the 8th ranked team in the South region rankings, behind McMurry & La Coll, both with a region loss.
Yes, McM & La Coll both lost to UMHB, but whoopdey do. Do we really agree that the South is just THAT much better? I'm cherry picking here, but Wesley has a lower SOS than Wheaton with an otherwise similar resume. Wesley > TMC but Wheaton < Franklin? Same goes for North Central in the North & McMurry in the South. NCC has a MUCH higher SOS than McMurry. McMurry > TMC but NCC < Franklin? What's the difference? The losses by Wesley and McMurry are better than the losses by Wheaton & NCC? That's not in the criteria.
Honestly, it's basically the same thing that happened last year when Wabash was left out and Montclair was put in. The criteria was applied differently for different teams. Here's what I said that day:
Quote from: Wes Anderson on November 14, 2010, 04:51:05 PM
Was speaking with wally on twitter and he made an excellent point. If you're going to reward DePauw for SOS and penalize Witt & ONU for SOS, then Wabash probably has to get in on its SOS numbers. I think that's a rather unfortunate illustration of using the criteria for one purpose and then ignoring it for another.
All this and the CCIW crown could be determined by point differential. Could the "A" from the CCIW be ranked lower regionally than their "C" candidate? I really haven't thought all of the scenarios through but that could be a possibility.
I am fairly certain that if St. Thomas, UMHB, Mt. Union and UW-W win out then those are your four top seeds, and then you plan accordingly elsewhere.
Quote from: smedindy on November 02, 2011, 09:38:05 PM
The sad thing is that Rochester isn't a horrible trip for Case. Cripes, they're in the same conference for practically everything but football And it's not regional, but North Central vs. Redlands is? Wabash vs. Wash U. isn't regional (though they've played each other in many sports for years) but Witt vs. Huntingdon is?
My brain hurts at times. I know you gotta draw the line somewhere, but...
Preaching to the choir here, Smeds. I've been raging about the absurdity of in-region bias and the in-region concept for at least three years.
Can I get an "AMEN?"
What no one has been able to give me is a rationale for drawing lines at all. What started out fairly reasonable got skewed when the Administrative Regions were added to the criteria. That's what gives you Witt v Huntingdon as in region. The ad absurdum argument gives you UP of Michigan and Puerto Rico in same region.
When it started, the rationale (is there a plural for rationale?) seemed reasonable. They are evaluation regions, so giving greater weight to games which would be more likely to involve common opponents or at least teams that the committee would be familiar with made sense.
If I understand correctly, this didn't work well for the Texas, So Cal, and NW "islands,'" as it didn't provide enough teams that were in-region. And the teams in the same Administrative Region were designated as "in-region" for evaluation purposes as well.
To me a better solution would have been to increase the 200 mile criterion to 400 or perhaps 500 miles or to give each school a radius which would provide them access to one-fourth of DIII teams (one-eighth for sports with eight regions). Admittedly the second alternative might be difficult to administer, but either would return the in-region criterion closer to the original concept.
Quote from: ADL70 on November 05, 2011, 10:28:59 AM
Quote from: smedindy on November 02, 2011, 09:38:05 PM
The sad thing is that Rochester isn't a horrible trip for Case. Cripes, they're in the same conference for practically everything but football And it's not regional, but North Central vs. Redlands is? Wabash vs. Wash U. isn't regional (though they've played each other in many sports for years) but Witt vs. Huntingdon is?
My brain hurts at times. I know you gotta draw the line somewhere, but...
Preaching to the choir here, Smeds. I've been raging about the absurdity of in-region bias and the in-region concept for at least three years.
Can I get an "AMEN?"
What no one has been able to give me is a rationale for drawing lines at all. What started out fairly reasonable got skewed when the Administrative Regions were added to the criteria. That's what gives you Witt v Huntingdon as in region. The ad absurdum argument gives you UP of Michigan and Puerto Rico in same region.
When it started, the rationale (is there a plural for rationale?) seemed reasonable. They are evaluation regions, so giving greater weight to games which would be more likely to involve common opponents or at least teams that the committee would be familiar with made sense.
If I understand correctly, this didn't work well for the Texas, So Cal, and NW "islands,'" as it didn't provide enough teams that were in-region. And the teams in the same Administrative Region were designated as "in-region" for evaluation purposes as well.
To me a better solution would have been to increase the 200 mile criterion to 400 or perhaps 500 miles or to give each school a radius which would provide them access to one-fourth of DIII teams (one-eighth for sports with eight regions). Admittedly the second alternative might be difficult to administer, but either would return the in-region criterion closer to the original concept.
The radius doesn't work because school A might have school B in its closest 60 football schools but the reverse might not be true. Picture Case and someone such as McDaniel -- there are so many more schools to the East of McDaniel that Case would almost certainly not be among the 60 closest.
The administrative regions are huge, to be sure, but they do basically encompass one-fourth of Division III. Anything that expands in-region competition is a benefit to Division III, I think. The Division III philosophy, agreed upon by its member schools, mandates a focus on regional play, so there has to be some manifestation of it somewhere.
I think Wabash and NC made some big bold statements...to say the least.
And Adrian? WTF?
I didn't add any teams to my Top 10, just some movement. Wheaton and Witt still are amongst the Top 10 teams in the North.
I can see Wabash leaping over Franklin in the regional rankings, but whither North Central? If Franklin falls to 4 in the North, they may get a rematch with the Whitewater shade of Purple.
I'm having the opposite problem of what we've had all year... normally it's who do we leave out... now it's who do we put in. I could do with a couple less spots right now. I feel solid about my top 8... then it's a matter of who gets in just because I have to have two more teams.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 03, 2011, 05:11:34 AM
I wondered if you were ever going to post them Wes ;) Here's a handy comparison chart of different rankings
Team North Fan Region Rank 25 Fan d3 Top 25
Mount Union 1st (1) 1st 2nd (2) 2nd (2)
North Central 2nd (2) 4th 6th (6) 6th (6)
Wabash 3rd (3) T2nd 8th (8) 10th (9)
Wheaton 4th (4) 7th 11th (13) 13th (13)
Illinois Wesleyan 5th (5) 6th 17th (17) 21st (24)
Franklin T6th (8) T2nd 22nd (21) 22nd (22)
Baldwin-Wallace T6th (7) 8th T32nd (T33) 29th (31)
Wittenberg 8th (9) 9th 28th (28) 27th (28)
Heidelberg 9th (10) --- ---- (--) ---- (--)
CWRU 10th (11) 5th ---- (--) ---- (--)
Albion 11th (-) 10th ---- (--) ---- (--)
Adrian 12th (6) --- ---- (20) 35th (27)
And the ATN top 50 (before yesterday's games)
2-Mt Union
8-North Central
14-Illinois Wesleyan
19-Wabash
23-Wheaton
37-Wittenberg
38-Franklin
43-Baldwin-Wallace
44-CWRU
48-Heidelberg
50-Adrian
Week 10 North Region Fan Poll:
1. Mount Union 60 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 54 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3. Wabash 48 pts (3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4. Illinois Wesleyan 41 pts (4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5)
5. Baldwin-Wallace 32 pts (5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 8)
6. Franklin 30 pts (4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7)
7. Wheaton 28 pts (6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7)
8. CWRU 15 pts (7, 8, 8, 8, 9, -)
9. Heidelberg 13 pts (8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10)
10. Wittenberg 7 pts (9, 9, 10, 10, 10, -)
RV Adrian 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -)
RV Ohio Northern 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Wes Anderson, wally_wabash, smedindy, Mr. Ypsi, ADL70, and FCGrizzliesGrad.
That has to be the closest I've been to matching the entire poll... I had the same except for having BW in 8th and everyone else up 1.
I kept Witt in solely because I hated all my other options. Would have stopped at 9 if I could.
Wes, I couldn't think of anyone else. Adrian has fallen flat, and the OAC leftovers are hard to figure out.
Here's the latest comparison list
Team North Fan Region Rank 25 Fan d3 Top 25
Mount Union 1st (1) 1st (1) 2nd (2) 2nd (2)
North Central 2nd (2) 3rd (4) 6th (6) 6th (6)
Wabash 3rd (3) 2nd (T2) 8th (8) 9th (10)
Illinois Wesleyan 4th (5) 6th (6) 17th (17) 17th (21)
Baldwin-Wallace 5th (T6) 8th (8) 24nd (T32) 24th (29)
Franklin 6th (T6) 4th (T2) 20nd (22) 18th (22)
Wheaton 7th (4) 7th (7) 15th (11) 19th (13)
CWRU 8th (10) 5th (5) ---- (--) T42nd (--)
Heidelberg 9th (9) 9th (--) ---- (--) 40th (--)
Wittenberg 10th (8) 10th (9) 34th (28) 36th (27)
Adrian T11th (12) --- (--) ---- (--) 37th (35)
Ohio Northern T11th (--) --- (--) ---- (--) ---- (--)
Albion --- (11) --- (10) ---- (--) ---- (--)
Anyone have any guesses as to the potential bracket?
Right now I'm thinking...
1 Mount/UWW vs 8 Albion
2 NCC/Wabash vs 7 Benedictine
3 NCC/Wabash vs 6 CWRU
4 Franklin/IWU vs 5 Franklin/IWU
I think it all depends on:
1. Del Val / Widener.
2. Huntingdon / Wesley.
3. What the committee wants to do with Linfield / St. Thomas.
Monmouth could come over here. IWU could go west. There's a plethora of possibilities.
But I think Wabash will be 2 when they beat DPU. NCC will be three and Franklin 4.
And it will be Albion rather than Adrian. Benedictine and Albion could be flipped - probably doesn't matter much.
Quote from: smedindy on November 11, 2011, 03:29:24 PM
I think it all depends on:
1. Del Val / Widener.
2. Huntingdon / Wesley.
3. What the committee wants to do with Linfield / St. Thomas.
Monmouth could come over here. IWU could go west. There's a plethora of possibilities.
But I think Wabash will be 2 when they beat DPU. NCC will be three and Franklin 4.
I think that if anyone were to head west it'd probably be Benedictine since the West already has a number of good teams.
Quote from: wabashcpa on November 11, 2011, 04:03:20 PM
And it will be Albion rather than Adrian. Benedictine and Albion could be flipped - probably doesn't matter much.
I keep getting those two mixed up... their names are just too similar. I'll just refer to them both as that A school in Michigan :P I at least think I can differentiate Alma from those two
North Region Fan Poll Week 11. Next to last poll here. We'll have one more after the Stagg. Not many drastic changes by our group this week, but a few that are certainly discussion worthy.
1. Mount Union 60 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 53 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3. Wabash 49 pts (2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4. Illinois Wesleyan 41 pts (4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5)
5. Baldwin-Wallace 31 pts (5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 8)
6. Franklin 30 pts (4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7)
7. Wheaton 29 pts (5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7)
8. CWRU 15 pts (7, 8, 8, 8, 10, 10)
9. Heidelberg 13 pts (8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10)
10. Wittenberg 9 pts (9, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Wes Anderson, wally_wabash, smedindy, Mr. Ypsi, ADL70, and FCGrizzliesGrad.
Consensus!
I didn't change a thing from my ballot last week. Just to put it out there, my final regular season ballot was:
1- Mount Union
2- North Central
3- Wabash
4- IWU
5- B-W
6- Wheaton
7- Franklin
8- CWRU
9- Heidelberg
10- Witt
After week 10, I struggled with whether or not I would put those good 2-loss teams ahead of Franklin and CWRU. Ultimately (obviously), I decided to do it.
Looking ahead, I'm not sure how much the rest of this is going to change between now and the Stagg Bowl. UMU/NCC/Wabash can be sorted and shuffled depending on how that little mini-tournament sorts itself out. I don't think I'll move those teams from the top 3 unless somebody loses in the first round or IWU goes off and wins a region. Franklin could win a couple of games and bump up over the 2-loss teams as well. Other than that, I think my ten teams are probably pretty much set.
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 17, 2011, 01:44:34 PM
Consensus!
I didn't change a thing from my ballot last week. Just to put it out there, my final regular season ballot was:
1- Mount Union
2- North Central
3- Wabash
4- IWU
5- B-W
6- Wheaton
7- Franklin
8- CWRU
9- Heidelberg
10- Witt
After week 10, I struggled with whether or not I would put those good 2-loss teams ahead of Franklin and CWRU. Ultimately (obviously), I decided to do it.
Looking ahead, I'm not sure how much the rest of this is going to change between now and the Stagg Bowl. UMU/NCC/Wabash can be sorted and shuffled depending on how that little mini-tournament sorts itself out. I don't think I'll move those teams from the top 3 unless somebody loses in the first round or IWU goes off and wins a region. Franklin could win a couple of games and bump up over the 2-loss teams as well. Other than that, I think my ten teams are probably pretty much set.
If Franklin wins a COUPLE of games you will need to bump them up a bit more than that! ;)
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 17, 2011, 01:44:34 PM
Consensus!
Basically, it's hard to find an unranked North Region team that one could adequately justify ranking ahead of Heidelberg/Witt/CWRU.
ONU got blown out by Heidelberg in their season finale and finished 6-4.
Adrian won to finish 8-2, but lost to Albion/Hope and finished third in the MIAA.
Albion is in the playoffs, but went 0-4 in OOC games and lost to a mediocre DePauw team.
Benedictine is in the playoffs, but they lost to Wisconsin Lutheran in Week 10.
Quote from: ncc_fan on November 17, 2011, 01:55:44 PM
If Franklin wins a COUPLE of games you will need to bump them up a bit more than that! ;)
Yeah, I realized what was going on right after I posted. Wreckless posting on my part. :)
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 17, 2011, 02:02:05 PM
Quote from: ncc_fan on November 17, 2011, 01:55:44 PM
If Franklin wins a COUPLE of games you will need to bump them up a bit more than that! ;)
Yeah, I realized what was going on right after I posted. Wreckless posting on my part. :)
Hey, we're the NORTH region - beating UWW doesn't necessarily move you above 7th! :P 8-)
Here's the final North Region Fan Poll for 2011. Thanks to everybody for making this a ton of fun to do.
1. Mount Union 60 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Wabash 53 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3. North Central 49 pts (2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4. Illinois Wesleyan 38 pts (4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6)
5. Franklin 34 pts (4, 4, 5, 5, 7, 7)
6. Baldwin-Wallace 30 pts (4, 5, 6, 6, 7, 8)
7. Wheaton 29 pts (5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7)
8. CWRU 14 pts (7, 8, 8, 8, 10, -)
9. Heidelberg 13 pts (8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10)
10. Wittenberg 9 pts (9, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10)
RV Ohio Northern 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Wes Anderson, wally_wabash, smedindy, Mr. Ypsi, ADL70, and FCGrizzliesGrad.
Quote from: Wes Anderson on December 09, 2011, 10:02:01 AM
Here's the final North Region Fan Poll for 2011. Thanks to everybody for making this a ton of fun to do.
1. Mount Union 60 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Wabash 53 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3. North Central 49 pts (2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4. Illinois Wesleyan 38 pts (4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6)
5. Franklin 34 pts (4, 4, 5, 5, 7, 7)
6. Baldwin-Wallace 30 pts (4, 5, 6, 6, 7, 8)
7. Wheaton 29 pts (5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7)
8. CWRU 14 pts (7, 8, 8, 8, 10, -)
9. Heidelberg 13 pts (8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10)
10. Wittenberg 9 pts (9, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10)
RV Ohio Northern 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Wes Anderson, wally_wabash, smedindy, Mr. Ypsi, ADL70, and FCGrizzliesGrad.
So...really?
Hey, at least it's a better ballot than Craig James' (Boise State 23rd?)
I'd sure like to have a lot more consensus on the fourth best team in the region by the time everybody played 11 games, many of those against each other.
I can see the issues though. B-W gets credit for the OAC and almost beating Mt. Union, Franklin gets credit for their schedule and their effort against a Purple (and thwacking T-More) and IWU gets credit for the CCIW. But they all have significant minuses (B-W's is Cap, Franklin is the HCAC and IWU is Monmouth...)
wally, there was a pretty good discussion on the D3 Top 25 Fan Poll board about that very issue, including the exact logic of why that particular voter did that. Not saying it's right or wrong, but it's over there.
Yeah, I leafed through that. It's difficult to have an objective conversation about it when one of the teams involved is so clearly being supported by people trying to debate the issue which is why doesn't h2h matter. Arguments for get dismissed as somebody just trying to stick up for their team which they think is getting screwed or disrespected or whatever. I don't want to spark that fire again, but would just like to chime in that I think if we're going to be so easily dismissive of a h2h result, then any poll after the preseason poll isn't worth it. If people have already made up their mind which team is better than which team, actual on-field results be damned, then the polling becomes pretty pointless. I'd say this no matter which teams were involved. When IWU lost to North Central, I bumped them down below Wheaton because your instinct tells you that when you lose, you're going to get knocked down. I didn't pay enough attention to previous results, found my mistake and corrected it the next week moving IWU back in front of Wheaton where they belonged.
Basically, if two teams have similar or identical records and one team beat the other, then the h2h has to matter. In the absence of compelling evidence to the contrary (i.e. "bad" losses to other teams, one team beat the other when the losing team had key players missing, etc.), the h2h has to trump whatever it is that you think you know about the teams you're voting on.
I think a fun hypothetical here would be to ask people who vote for North Central ahead of Wabash what they would have done if Wabash had beaten Mount Union last weekend. I'm confident that 100% of voters would have made Wabash #1 in the region (and would have placed Wabash ahead of both North Central and Mount Union in national polling) if that happened. So how does it make sense that Wabash is better than North Central if they beat Mount Union, but not if they beat North Central?
In any case, people are going to have different voting philosophies, which is fine. And just to be a good sport, here's my final top 10 for people to pick at. :)
1- Mount Union
2- Wabash
3- North Central
4- Illinois Wesleyan
5- Baldwin Wallace
6- Wheaton
7- Franklin
8- CWRU
9- Heidelberg
10- Wittenberg
This was fun...looking forward to doing it again next year! Thanks to Wes for compiling each week!
Well, it doesn't have to trump it, because it could be just one bad game. Unfortunately in football there's not a lot of room for error.
I bet 95 times out of 100 North Central beats Redlands after seeing the entire body of work...and I bet Wabash doesn't need the crazy-go-nuts comeback if Belton was in control (nothing against Burke, but the Mt. Union game showed me, at least, Belton > Burke) so I feel confident that the Wabash / NC game was less of a fluke than it looked.
I ended up voting Wabash over North Central... but as I said when I submitted my ballot they were 2a and 2b. I have absolutely no problem with someone having it the other way because they were pretty much even in my eyes.
Wabash beat NCC by a single point at home, which to me means the H2H result is a wash in deciding who I would rank higher. Honestly if I could go back and vote again I think I might have them flipped.
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 09, 2011, 01:59:07 PM
I think a fun hypothetical here would be to ask people who vote for North Central ahead of Wabash what they would have done if Wabash had beaten Mount Union last weekend. I'm confident that 100% of voters would have made Wabash #1 in the region (and would have placed Wabash ahead of both North Central and Mount Union in national polling) if that happened. So how does it make sense that Wabash is better than North Central if they beat Mount Union, but not if they beat North Central?
Your confidence is misplaced I'm afraid. Now if Wabash beat Mount Union by double digits then I probably would have Wabash #1... but if Wabash beat Mount the same way they did North Central I'd still have them #2 at least for the week until I saw how they did in the semifinals because overall Mount would still have the more impressive resume.
But that's the fun of polls, you get an average of many opinions with many points of view. Just as long as you don't use them for anything serious... I mean, who would be stupid enough to do a thing like that? *cough*
BCS*cough*
Thought I'd compare the difference between the final regular season poll and this last poll. Unless people made opposite changes, the playoffs didn't make much difference. Only changes I see are 4 people moving Wabash ahead of North Central, 1 moving Franklin ahead of IWU, 1 moving Franklin ahead of IWU and BW, 1 moving BW ahead of IWU, 1 moving Franklin ahead of BW, and 1 moving Ohio Northern into the poll for CWRU
Sorry, I was out of town this weekend, so late to the discussion.
I'm the one who had NCC over Wabash. I am an IWU supporter, not NCC (though I admit to being a CCIW partisan). I explained my reasoning on the Top 25 board.
If one gives ANY credence to home-field advantage (usually pegged at anywhere from 2-4 points; larger if a long trip involved), how can a ONE-point win at home be compelling evidence of superiority (due to a h-to-h win)?! I do not wish to diss Wabash in any way (they won; they deserved to win and advance), but I thought NCC was better going in, and the game was insufficient evidence to change my mind. (Again, note the anguish of the intended LG receiver on the conversion, sure his missed reception had cost the game.)
I fully realized I would probably be the only such voter, but there it is. Next time win by more than a 'fluke' 2-point conversion, or do it in Naperville - either way, you have my vote! ;D
BTW, wally, I already addressed your hypothetical about Wabash beating UMU (on the other board). If they had, I would have voted the North as 1. Wabash 2. NCC 3. UMU (even if it was a one-point LG win over UMU).
The difference? The game was in Alliance.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 12, 2011, 06:47:45 PM
BTW, wally, I already addressed your hypothetical about Wabash beating UMU (on the other board). If they had, I would have voted the North as 1. Wabash 2. NCC 3. UMU (even if it was a one-point LG win over UMU).
The difference? The game was in Alliance.
I can't follow this logic at all. Wabash doesn't get credit for beating North Central until they validate by beating, oh I don't know, let's saaaaay Mount Union...that's some 12 labors of Hercules nonsense.
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 13, 2011, 10:31:34 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 12, 2011, 06:47:45 PM
BTW, wally, I already addressed your hypothetical about Wabash beating UMU (on the other board). If they had, I would have voted the North as 1. Wabash 2. NCC 3. UMU (even if it was a one-point LG win over UMU).
The difference? The game was in Alliance.
I can't follow this logic at all. Wabash doesn't get credit for beating North Central until they validate by beating, oh I don't know, let's saaaaay Mount Union...that's some 12 labors of Hercules nonsense.
Personally, I'd rank Wabash over NCC, but I think you guys are doing the thought that Mr. Ypsi put into this a disservice. Didn't you even read his discussion above? He does have SOME logic to support his position. It's not the same choice that I'd make, but I can at least acknowledge how he arrived at his final position.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on December 13, 2011, 11:56:52 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 13, 2011, 10:31:34 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 12, 2011, 06:47:45 PM
BTW, wally, I already addressed your hypothetical about Wabash beating UMU (on the other board). If they had, I would have voted the North as 1. Wabash 2. NCC 3. UMU (even if it was a one-point LG win over UMU).
The difference? The game was in Alliance.
I can't follow this logic at all. Wabash doesn't get credit for beating North Central until they validate by beating, oh I don't know, let's saaaaay Mount Union...that's some 12 labors of Hercules nonsense.
Personally, I'd rank Wabash over NCC, but I think you guys are doing the thought that Mr. Ypsi put into this a disservice. Didn't you even read his discussion above? He does have SOME logic to support his position. It's not the same choice that I'd make, but I can at least acknowledge how he arrived at his final position.
I think we can debate how legitimate a poll vote is based on the reaction of a wide receiver. If that's the thing that's deciding poll positions, then it's probably being overthought. I think we can also debate this 2-4 points that don't count because it's a home game. How many points does a team get for having the starting quarterback unavailable for the game? If you watched the game, it was not a David/Goliath situation. North Central was not demonstrably bigger or faster or in any other way in a different league than Wabash. Wabash didn't win that game with Ollie tossing underhanded free throws.
I don't want to turn this into a Wabash vs. everyone else thing. The issue that I have is that it's been decided ahead of time that one team is better than another, basically because of what league those teams come out of. When we're doing these polls, some of it, especially early on, is based on what we think about different teams. By the time we get through 10 or 12 games, what we think ought be getting replaced by what we know. And what we know is who beat who. To dismiss what you know in favor of what you think isn't logic that makes sense to me.
But who beat you doesn't ALWAYS work. Otherwise you'd rank Kean ahead of Wesley and Redlands ahead of North Central. The body of work shows that those weren't true indicators of the teams actual strength.
I would rank Redlands ahead of North Central. Kean has the Brockport State result plus Wesley's romp through the UMHB quadrant is enough compelling evidence to tell me that Wesley needs to be ranked ahead of Kean. Before the Brockport State result, not so much. In the Wabash/North Central case, I don't see where there is enough evidence to talk oneself out of rewarding the h2h result...I don't think "the CCIW is better" or James Krause was unhappy because he didn't catch the two point pass are good enough reasons to ignore the final score of the game.
I would not put Redlands ahead of North Central.
NC is #8 in Massey (non-NESCAC filtered)
Redlands is #19 in Massey (non-NESCAC filtered)
Redlands had a few games where they hung on for dear life. I think a team that's better than North Central should have easily beaten Oxy, Chapman, CMS and Whitworth.
H2H is just one factor in deciding who I'd rank ahead. When the H2H is a 1 point game, that is pretty even to me and isn't compelling enough evidence to simply vote Wabash ahead of NCC. Had Wabash won more convincingly then they probably would be unanimously ahead of NCC. So you have to look at the rest of the body of work.
The best teams Wabash beat were NCC, Illinois College, and Witt... they had a weak schedule (and being a Franklin fan I understand about conference play causing a weak schedule). I don't know if there's particular reasons for their non-conference games of @Chicago, Kenyon, Washington, and @Depauw (obviously Depauw is a rivalry) but it didn't help them out any.
North Central lost 1st week of the season by 6 @ Redlands. They beat Dubuque, Wheaton, @ IWU, and NAIA Bethel. A much more difficult schedule. Their non-conference was @Redlands, NAIA Bethel, and Olivet.
If everyone had the same opinion there'd be no point in the poll, we'd simply have a single person list the order
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on December 13, 2011, 02:40:25 PM
H2H is just one factor in deciding who I'd rank ahead. When the H2H is a 1 point game, that is pretty even to me and isn't compelling enough evidence to simply vote Wabash ahead of NCC. Had Wabash won more convincingly then they probably would be unanimously ahead of NCC. So you have to look at the rest of the body of work.
The best teams Wabash beat were NCC, Illinois College, and Witt... they had a weak schedule (and being a Franklin fan I understand about conference play causing a weak schedule). I don't know if there's particular reasons for their non-conference games of @Chicago, Kenyon, Washington, and @Depauw (obviously Depauw is a rivalry) but it didn't help them out any.
North Central lost 1st week of the season by 6 @ Redlands. They beat Dubuque, Wheaton, @ IWU, and NAIA Bethel. A much more difficult schedule. Their non-conference was @Redlands, NAIA Bethel, and Olivet.
If everyone had the same opinion there'd be no point in the poll, we'd simply have a single person list the order
Thanks, Griz. As anyone who read the Top 25 discussion would know, I already said if Wabash had won by a bigger margin (or had won in Naperville), the discussion would never have happened.
wally_wabash, I respect you too much to let your 'straw-man' arguments slide - you know damn well that my position was not based solely on 'the CCIW is better' or the anguish of Krause. I have given plenty of credit to Franklin (and previously Trine) whose conferences are probably even weaker than the NCAC (and reluctantly gave credit to Monmouth, who ousted my Titans, even though the MWC is probably weaker yet). I credit Wabash with the win; I just happen to think that if they played ten times, NCC wins 6+ of them.
bashbro, I have already said I thought that was a
hugely gutsy call to go for two. Can YOU take off your scarlet-tinted glasses long enough to admit that a deflected pass reception is one helluva lucky break to win the game? :P
"If everyone had the same opinion there'd be no point in the poll, we'd simply have a single person list the order."
Agreed. If the biggest problem is that a single voter in this poll elected to keep NCC ahead of Wabash when the game was a) at Wabash, b) decided by a single point, and c) required a substantial comeback...then I think we're doing OK. Much better than the circus in Division I coaches' poll (when some votes have CLEARLY self-serving motives, like Nick Saban mysteriously ranking Oklahoma State FIFTH on his ballot).
Yes, IMHO, I would still rank Wabash ahead because I place a high value on head-to-head results. But I don't think it's a great travesty that some voters kept NCC ahead, especially with the logic that's used here. A one-point win at home that required a 21-point comeback and a (whether you guys will admit it or not) fluky two-point conversion isn't exactly CONCLUSIVE evidence that Wabash is a better team than NCC.
Does that take away from Wabash's accomplishment? Not at all! It's just a friggin' fan poll.
ExTartanPlayer:
Indeed, that is not surprising at all as Nick Saban has always been self-centered his entire career. He is "mode operendi" - what's best for Nick Saban comes first. ;D :P ;)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 14, 2011, 12:49:34 AM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on December 13, 2011, 02:40:25 PM
H2H is just one factor in deciding who I'd rank ahead. When the H2H is a 1 point game, that is pretty even to me and isn't compelling enough evidence to simply vote Wabash ahead of NCC. Had Wabash won more convincingly then they probably would be unanimously ahead of NCC. So you have to look at the rest of the body of work.
The best teams Wabash beat were NCC, Illinois College, and Witt... they had a weak schedule (and being a Franklin fan I understand about conference play causing a weak schedule). I don't know if there's particular reasons for their non-conference games of @Chicago, Kenyon, Washington, and @Depauw (obviously Depauw is a rivalry) but it didn't help them out any.
North Central lost 1st week of the season by 6 @ Redlands. They beat Dubuque, Wheaton, @ IWU, and NAIA Bethel. A much more difficult schedule. Their non-conference was @Redlands, NAIA Bethel, and Olivet.
If everyone had the same opinion there'd be no point in the poll, we'd simply have a single person list the order
Thanks, Griz. As anyone who read the Top 25 discussion would know, I already said if Wabash had won by a bigger margin (or had won in Naperville), the discussion would never have happened.
wally_wabash, I respect you too much to let your 'straw-man' arguments slide - you know damn well that my position was not based solely on 'the CCIW is better' or the anguish of Krause. I have given plenty of credit to Franklin (and previously Trine) whose conferences are probably even weaker than the NCAC (and reluctantly gave credit to Monmouth, who ousted my Titans, even though the MWC is probably weaker yet). I credit Wabash with the win; I just happen to think that if they played ten times, NCC wins 6+ of them.
The ol' "body of work" clause. If you're going to say "body of work" then you can't ignore the losses. Are they not part of that "body of work"? I've read every if this and but that about those results against Redlands and Wabash...at the end of the day they lost and that has to matter. Maybe North Central underachieved (or maybe that's just what North Central really was this year), but the losses have to matter, fellas. They just have to.
I just can't understand how you can rationalize away two losses, one of which is a h2h loss to the team they are being directly compared to. Where did North Central build up all of this benefit of the doubt capital that they get a free pass for losing to the two best teams they played this year?
Wally, they DO matter. But you look at Redlands, and that loss doesn't happen in week 5. NC was much more impressive than Redlands after that game.
So why don't you just do rankings as standings, then?
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 14, 2011, 11:43:13 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 14, 2011, 12:49:34 AM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on December 13, 2011, 02:40:25 PM
H2H is just one factor in deciding who I'd rank ahead. When the H2H is a 1 point game, that is pretty even to me and isn't compelling enough evidence to simply vote Wabash ahead of NCC. Had Wabash won more convincingly then they probably would be unanimously ahead of NCC. So you have to look at the rest of the body of work.
The best teams Wabash beat were NCC, Illinois College, and Witt... they had a weak schedule (and being a Franklin fan I understand about conference play causing a weak schedule). I don't know if there's particular reasons for their non-conference games of @Chicago, Kenyon, Washington, and @Depauw (obviously Depauw is a rivalry) but it didn't help them out any.
North Central lost 1st week of the season by 6 @ Redlands. They beat Dubuque, Wheaton, @ IWU, and NAIA Bethel. A much more difficult schedule. Their non-conference was @Redlands, NAIA Bethel, and Olivet.
If everyone had the same opinion there'd be no point in the poll, we'd simply have a single person list the order
Thanks, Griz. As anyone who read the Top 25 discussion would know, I already said if Wabash had won by a bigger margin (or had won in Naperville), the discussion would never have happened.
wally_wabash, I respect you too much to let your 'straw-man' arguments slide - you know damn well that my position was not based solely on 'the CCIW is better' or the anguish of Krause. I have given plenty of credit to Franklin (and previously Trine) whose conferences are probably even weaker than the NCAC (and reluctantly gave credit to Monmouth, who ousted my Titans, even though the MWC is probably weaker yet). I credit Wabash with the win; I just happen to think that if they played ten times, NCC wins 6+ of them.
The ol' "body of work" clause. If you're going to say "body of work" then you can't ignore the losses. Are they not part of that "body of work"? I've read every if this and but that about those results against Redlands and Wabash...at the end of the day they lost and that has to matter. Maybe North Central underachieved (or maybe that's just what North Central really was this year), but the losses have to matter, fellas. They just have to.
I just can't understand how you can rationalize away two losses, one of which is a h2h loss to the team they are being directly compared to. Where did North Central build up all of this benefit of the doubt capital that they get a free pass for losing to the two best teams they played this year?
I have to agree with you in regards to standings and counting h2h losses does matter. As far as rankings, anyone can rank teams. Where teams rank today, I see it from 1-10 like this:
T1 UW-W
T1 MUC
3 Wesley
4 UMHB
5 Wabash
T6 St. Thomas
T6 Salisbury
8 Linfield
9 North Central (Ill.)
10 Kean
Again, this is
MY opinion of the rankings.
So Wally would you rank Iowa State ahead of Oklahoma State? Losses matter, you know! ;)
Quote from: smedindy on December 14, 2011, 12:00:00 PM
Wally, they DO matter. But you look at Redlands, and that loss doesn't happen in week 5. NC was much more impressive than Redlands after that game.
How do you know Redlands wouldn't beat North Central in week 5 or week 8 or whenever? You're just guessing. We know, with absolute certainty, that when North Central and Redlands played, Redlands won. No ifs, no buts. Redlands won.
Quote from: smedindy on December 14, 2011, 12:19:04 PM
So Wally would you rank Iowa State ahead of Oklahoma State? Losses matter, you know! ;)
Of course not. That's a silly proposition. You're talking about a 6-6 team compared with an 11-1 team. There really is no comparison. 6-6 did beat 11-1, but there is plenty of evidence available that tells you Iowa State need not be ranked anywhere near Oklahoma State. In this case, we're talking about a 12-1 team against a 10-2 team where 12-1 bet 10-2. Where is the hard evidence that says 10-2 should be ranked higher than the 12-1 team that they lost to? It just isn't there. There aren't bad losses by the 12-1 team. There really aren't a dearth of good/great wins or even one ginormous win by the 10-2 team that trumps not only the h2h loss, but the second loss as well.
We know Redlands won, yes. But you're also just guessing that it proves Redlands is the better team hands down. It does not. There were many factors involved - week 1 on the road on a long road trip being the keys.
I take that game into consideration, but I take other factors into consideration.
Quote from: smedindy on December 14, 2011, 01:11:20 PM
We know Redlands won, yes. But you're also just guessing that it proves Redlands is the better team hands down. It does not. There were many factors involved - week 1 on the road on a long road trip being the keys.
I take that game into consideration, but I take other factors into consideration.
I guess I just don't understand the excuse making for North Central which has been going on, literally, all season. It was a long road trip. It was a lucky deflection. When does it stop and when is North Central accountable for not taking care of their business? This team was annointed as the team that was going to crash the purple party based on three good quarters agasnst Whitewater...last year. I'm not sure what that has to do with 2011 rankings and why, no matter who they lose to or how many times they lose, it's just accepted that North Central is #2. The pieces just don't fit.
I think you're getting way too defensive. I'm not talking about the Wabash game. I have Wabash over NC. I am saying that even though Redlands beat NC - NC to me is the better team. Period. The factors are my logical reasons on why I don't make the head-to-head the be all and end all. That is not an excuse.
Besides, you open yourself up to the A beat B who beat C who beat A by rigidly and blindly going HTH.
Quote from: smedindy on December 14, 2011, 01:49:08 PM
I think you're getting way too defensive. I'm not talking about the Wabash game. I have Wabash over NC. I am saying that even though Redlands beat NC - NC to me is the better team. Period. The factors are my logical reasons on why I don't make the head-to-head the be all and end all. That is not an excuse.
Besides, you open yourself up to the A beat B who beat C who beat A by rigidly and blindly going HTH.
I'm just trying to understand why a h2h result can be traded for a giant sack of subjectivity and speculation. The things that actually happened ought to carry more weight that the things we think should have or would have or could have happened. I happen to think that North Central is really, really, really good. I mean really good. I know that in 2011, Wabash was better. I know because I watched them play and Wabash won. Maybe on a different day, North Central wins. Maybe at home, North Central wins.
Maybe. Wabash has nothing else in their "body of work" that is so awful that it makes sense to ignore that result. Next year we can (and probably will) go right back to just assuming that North Central or whoever the flavor of the month in the CCIW is is just automatically better than the best NCAC team, but for right now in 2011, we know with zero uncertainty who was better.
I don't have an opinion as to who should be ranked higher between NCC and Wabash, but in the game of Horse where one must "call their shot", the two point conversion would not have counted. :)
Does that make Wabash "better" than NCC? Tough call.
Conversely, the NCC coaching staff did not seem to either have an answer for defending the pass or failed to take the threat serious enough to do something about it. The Wabash staff won that battle and maybe they are the "better" that results in the higher ranking.
The H2H result I am questioning is Redlands vs. North Central - given their body of work as a whole after week one. Kean vs. Wesley rather much sorted itself out and I think Redlands vs. North Central did as well after week one.
I happen to think that UWW is better than Mount Union in 2011, and not by a little bit. I don't think that's a minority opinion. If Mount Union wins on Friday, by whatever score or circumstance, everybody is going to vote Mount Union as #1, even if they think UWW would win more than they lose if they played 10 games against each other or whatever. That h2h result will trump whatever else it is that anybody believes about the relative strength of those two teams. So why is it different in the North Central/Wabash case?
wally, one blatantly obvious difference is neutral field vs. home field. 8-)
bashbro, my use of the word 'fluke' was in no way intended to diminish anything Wabash did in the game. I apologize if the word carried those connotations for you.
And I do totally agree that the NCC coaching staff blew it in the second half. Never blitzing was a fatal brain-fart by the coaches.
Quote from: bashbrother on December 14, 2011, 05:42:18 PM
Ypsi - hey I agree it was a lucky break. Show me a big time college football that doesn't have a lucky break in it. Show me a Super bowl, show me any game at a high level, that doesn't have one. Go back and look at the entire game. Was it a fluke that NCC's offense could only score 7 pts in the 2nd half, was it a fluke that North Central's coaching staff could not find their way to blitzing even ONCE in the game, even though they were getting shredded in the final two quarters? If their offense would have been able to get into FG range one time..... then they would have gone to Alliance.
The last point I will ever make on this matter and really the only thing I have ever had an issue with in your posts on this topic, has been the use of the word "Fluke". The use of that word directly devalues the 100+ Wabash players that fought like hell for that very tough victory, maybe the biggest victory in School History. (Which simply by saying that is giving a tremendous amount of credit to a great North Central squad)
Good Day.
I've thought about that "lucky" play quite a bit. As much as it may be reasonable to say the play was lucky, consider this. The intended receiver was Wide Open in the end zone- that wasn't luck. NCC was lucky the wide open reciever didn't catch the ball.
For the record, I counted three NCC blitzes in the (now I can't remember if it was the entire second half or just the 4th quarter). Not enough pressure regardless.
Both teams are excellent as far as I'm concerned.
It's back for the first time! Here's the Week 1 North Region Fan Poll:
1. Mount Union 60 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Wabash 51 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4)
3. North Central 50 pts (2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4. Wheaton 37 pts (3, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6)
5. Franklin 36 pts (4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6)
6. Baldwin-Wallace 29 pts (4, 4, 7, 7, 7, 8)
7. Illinois Wesleyan 28 pts (5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7)
8. Wittenberg 15 pts (5, 8, 8, 9, 10, -)
9. Heidelberg 7 pts (8, 9, 10, 10, -, -)
T10. Adrian 5 pts (8, 9, - ,- ,- ,-)
T10. Case Western Reserve 5 pts (8, 9, -, -, -, -)
Also Receiving Votes:
Ohio Northern 3 pts (10, 10, 10, -, -, -)
Capital 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -)
Albion 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Wes Anderson, wally_wabash, smedindy, ADL70, Mr. Ypsi, and FCGrizzlesGrad.
At the risk of re-igniting the debate from December (NOT my intention!), I 'confess' to being one of those with NCC 2 and Wabash 3. I also had IWU 6 and Bald Wally 7 (I MAY have a touch of 'homer' in me ;D). I was also the NV for Witt (I'm agnostic for the first couple of games), though they would have been 11th or 12th (undecided between them and Albion). In slight variation from the consensus, I had Adrian 8, Case 9, and Heidi 10.
(Had it gone that far, I also was torn between Cap and ONU for 13 and 14 - we seem to have a pretty clear top tier so far.)
No worries, Ypsi. It's a new season so your guess is as good as anybody's at this point. :)
Only six people in the fan poll?
Quote from: newcardfan on August 26, 2012, 08:05:56 PM
Only six people in the fan poll?
YOU could make it 7! ;)
I didn't know it was open, but it would seem like more people would want to be in a regional poll.And maybe I'll join next week!
Nah, cardfan, it's a lot more fun to NOT be in the poll and then yell/scream about the idiots who ARE in the poll.
8-)
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on August 27, 2012, 04:53:19 PM
Nah, cardfan, it's a lot more fun to NOT be in the poll and then yell/scream about the idiots who ARE in the poll.
8-)
Hmmmmm:):)
Quote from: newcardfan on August 27, 2012, 08:10:46 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on August 27, 2012, 04:53:19 PM
Nah, cardfan, it's a lot more fun to NOT be in the poll and then yell/scream about the idiots who ARE in the poll.
8-)
Hmmmmm:):)
Of course, you can be a voter and still yell/scream about the OTHER idiots in the poll!
(Alas, my ballot fit in quite nicely with the total results. Maybe next week! :P)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on August 27, 2012, 08:19:31 PM
Quote from: newcardfan on August 27, 2012, 08:10:46 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on August 27, 2012, 04:53:19 PM
Nah, cardfan, it's a lot more fun to NOT be in the poll and then yell/scream about the idiots who ARE in the poll.
8-)
Hmmmmm:):)
Of course, you can be a voter and still yell/scream about the OTHER idiots in the poll!
(Alas, my ballot fit in quite nicely with the total results. Maybe next week! :P)
Decisions, decisions ;D ;D ;D ;D
I have six because five people responded to my request for volunteers at this time last year. I don't need 15 people to participate in a regional fan poll. I don't have the time or the patience to calculate that many ballots anyway.
If you'd like to participate newcardfan, send me a message with your 10 team ballot on Sunday after the first week of games.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on August 27, 2012, 08:19:31 PM
Quote from: newcardfan on August 27, 2012, 08:10:46 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on August 27, 2012, 04:53:19 PM
Nah, cardfan, it's a lot more fun to NOT be in the poll and then yell/scream about the idiots who ARE in the poll.
8-)
Hmmmmm:):)
Of course, you can be a voter and still yell/scream about the OTHER idiots in the poll!
(Alas, my ballot fit in quite nicely with the total results. Maybe next week! :P)
Wes, hurry up with this week's poll, so I know whether or not to "yell/scream about the OTHER idiot voters"! ;D
Sorry for the delay here friends. One of our voters chose to take vacation during football season. *cough* wally wabash *cough* Here's the Week 2 North Region Fan Poll. We're adding a new voter this week. Please welcome short to the poll. I'd love to get one more just for an even 8. Again, newcardfan, if you're truly interested, I need a ballot. This week is 70 pts possible instead of 60.
1. Mount Union 70 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Wabash 62 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3. Wheaton 50 pts (2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5)
4. North Central 43 pts (3, 4, 4, 4, 6, 6, 7)
5. IWU 34 pts (5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8)
6. Franklin 33 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 8)
7. Baldwin-Wallace 29 pts (4, 5, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9)
8. Wittenberg 26 pts (3, 4, 7, 8, 8, 10, -)
9. Heidelberg 15 pts (4, 8, 9, 10, 10, 10, -)
10. Albion 14 pts (7, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, -)
ARV:
Elmhurst 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Carthage 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Case Western Reserve 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Wes Anderson, wally_wabash, smedindy, ADL70, Mr. Ypsi, FCGrizzlesGrad, and short.
Now for some analysis. One of our voters thinks that Wittenberg is better than Wheaton, Franklin, North Central, and IWU. Can't say I agree. Another voter thinks Heidelberg is better than Franklin, North Central, and IWU. Can't say I agree there either.
The difference in opinion on Wittenberg really puzzles me. One has them 3rd and another has them out entirely. I'm in the middle somewhere. I can understand the confusion with North Central. It's hard to tell exactly how to drop a national power after one game. I agree with most of you that I don't really know what to do with IWU, Franklin, and BW. It's interchangeable to me right now. Same with the bottom 3 or 4 in the poll. Maybe it's Albion, maybe it's Heidi, maybe it's CWRU, and maybe it's somebody else entirely.
Quote from: Wes Anderson on September 06, 2012, 10:21:16 AM
One of our voters thinks that Wittenberg is better than Wheaton, Franklin, North Central, and IWU.
Another voter thinks Heidelberg is better than Franklin, North Central, and IWU. Can't say I agree there either.
And we run into the age-old question of polls (which I'm just PRESENTING, not giving a strong opinion about): do you rank the teams strictly based "who would win on a neutral field" or do you rank them based on "which team has the best achievement to date"? Remember our mud-slinging last year after Muskingum beat Ohio Northern and several voters kept a 2-2 ONU team ranked while leaving 4-0 Muskingum out of the poll, using the "I still think Ohio Northern is better" argument (which was borne out by the results by the END of the season, but not by the results at that point in time).
That may explain some of the discrepancies you listed above. Wittenberg opened the season with a 44-17 road thrashing of a Capital team that's generally a mid-to-upper echelon OAC team. That's arguably a "better" game than what the others mentioned posted in Week 1. Franklin and North Central both lost (admittedly to top-notch competition), Wheaton and IWU both won against opposition somewhat less distinguished than Capital.
Now, admittedly, I'm playing devil's advocate here, and there are fine arguments going the opposite direction. Wheaton and IWU did manhandle their NATHC opponents, Franklin opened with a Purple Power, and I'd probably agree with you that they still belong above Witt in the rankings. With that said, I can see a voter arguing that Wittenberg deserves to be up there based on a strong Week 1 showing on the road against a traditionally-strong OAC opponent.
I moved North Central down to #6 this week. North Central lost, at home, to a team that did not receive a single top 25 vote before Sunday. There's a poll penalty to pay for that. The good news for NCC is that they have games on their schedule that, if they really are the first or second best team in the region, will compensate for that UW-L result.
Of course, losing to a unranked WIAC team isn't like losing to an unranked MIAA team, Wally. I think a team like LAX could definitely be 'in the mix' in most every conference in D-3
Quote from: smedindy on September 06, 2012, 09:47:11 PM
Of course, losing to a unranked WIAC team isn't like losing to an unranked MIAA team, Wally. I think a team like LAX could definitely be 'in the mix' in most every conference in D-3
Oh sure. And if UW-L keeps on winning and exceeds expectations, then that result on 9/1 will hurt NCC less and less. But I don't think it's fair to project UW-L's season arc at this point. As we get more and more pieces to the puzzle and the picture gets more complete and clear.
Well, no 'yelling/screaming' from me again this week - my ballot exactly matched the poll, with the minor exceptions of flipping BW/Witt and Heidi/Albion. ;)
Somewhat surprised that no one took a flyer on JCU at the bottom of their ballot - that was one impressive first win! On the other hand, I do realize it has been several years since their last winning record. If we went more than 10, I might have had to flip a coin between them and Case for 11th.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 06, 2012, 10:39:59 PM
Well, no 'yelling/screaming' from me again this week - my ballot exactly matched the poll, with the minor exceptions of flipping BW/Witt and Heidi/Albion. ;)
My ballot was very similar to the poll as well. Flipped Wheaton/Wabash and had Elmhurst instead of Albion. Case would have been my 11th team.
Here's the Week 3 North Region Fan Poll. Almost every voter said either "I moved a bunch of stuff around" or "This was really hard." Be advised this is out of 80 possible, as newcardfan will be our 8th voter from here on out.
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Wabash 71 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3. North Central 57 pts (2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 7)
4. IWU 47 pts (3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 6, 8, 8)
5. Albion 43 pts (4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6)
6. Wheaton 37 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8)
7. Baldwin-Wallace 33 pts (3, 5, 7, 7, 7, 8, 9, 9)
8. Franklin 25 pts (4, 5, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, -)
9. Wittenberg 24 pts (3, 7, 7, 8, 9, 9, 10, -)
10. Heidelberg 16 pts (3, 8, 9, 10, 10, 10, -)
ARV:
Case Western Reserve 2 pts (10, 10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Elmhurst 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Carthage 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Wes Anderson, wally_wabash, smedindy, ADL70, Mr. Ypsi, FCGrizzlesGrad, short, and newcardfan.
This thing is weird, man. Here's my thoughts:
I'm the 3rd place vote for IWU, just because I refuse to put a 1 loss team there in Week 3. I don't see what the problem is with IWU compared to Wheaton, Albion, or BW, who some voters have ranked above them. But, the fact that 5 teams get a 3rd place vote says enough about what we think as a group.
Franklin is a weird team to place, too. 0-2, but it's to Mount Union and Butler. Not sure what I should do. I hate dropping them. But I can't just ignore it, you know?
Quote from: Wes Anderson on September 11, 2012, 01:41:08 PM
This thing is weird, man. Here's my thoughts:
I'm the 3rd place vote for IWU, just because I refuse to put a 1 loss team there in Week 3. I don't see what the problem is with IWU compared to Wheaton, Albion, or BW, who some voters have ranked above them. But, the fact that 5 teams get a 3rd place vote says enough about what we think as a group.
Franklin is a weird team to place, too. 0-2, but it's to Mount Union and Butler. Not sure what I should do. I hate dropping them. But I can't just ignore it, you know?
This was a hard week and no I'm not the #2 vote for NC, but I did think about it for awhile. I couldn't put IWU at #3 yet as they haven't had a tough game. I did have a problem with Wheaton, but 6th(for this week at least) seemed right. In a few weeks things will begin to clear up a little, unless the CCIW has a wild and crazy season. Thanks for letting me join.
We are all over the place on this thing! Witt 3rd or out? IWU 3rd or 8th? Franklin 4th or out? B-W 3rd or 9th? Heidelberg 3rd or out? Yikes. We're all shaking different 8 balls.
I'm the high man on B-W and Albion (3 and 4, respectively). B-W is a bit of a question mark and is admittedly getting some benefit of the doubt from me. I think we'll find out a little bit about how good B-W is this weekend. I have Albion ahead of NCC, IWU, and Wheaton (obviously) for now but that can and probably will change as the season goes along. Unless Albion mauls everybody by 5 TDs every week, the quality of the results from the top level CCIW teams will eventually push them ahead of the Britons.
You guys have a tough job this early.
Albion beating Wheaton definitely mucks things up quite a bit, as does North Central's loss. It will be very hard to sort of the CCIW triangle until they actually play one another.
Franklin will also be hard to place until the playoffs, frankly. Even if they run the table in the HCAC, without many games against common opponents, how can you really figure out where they belong?
If B-W and Heidelberg both hold serve throughout the OAC season, their matchup in the last week of the regular season will be fascinating...but it also means it might be tough to place them in these rankings for a while unless somebody drops one along the way.
Probably not going to figure out exactly where Witt belongs until 9/29 (CWRU) and 10/6 (Wabash), but those two results will help sort things out a bit.
I'll confess to having a couple of the interesting spots. I put North Central (2) ahead of Wabash (3) because I'm more impressed with results from NC compared to Wabash so far. Of course once we get some more games in then I may swap them.
I also kept Wheaton (5) ahead of Albion (6). They're really close as well but a 1 point come from behind win at home isn't quite enough to jump them when I had them 12th last week.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 11, 2012, 02:27:42 PM
I also kept Wheaton (5) ahead of Albion (6). They're really close as well but a 1 point come from behind win at home isn't quite enough to jump them when I had them 12th last week.
This fascinates me. Reverse the roles...if Wheaton had come from behind and scored late to win by one point, would we have even considered placing Albion ahead of Wheaton? Of course we wouldn't have. But why not? How can we so easily talk ourselves out of believing what actually happened?
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 11, 2012, 03:32:07 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 11, 2012, 02:27:42 PM
I also kept Wheaton (5) ahead of Albion (6). They're really close as well but a 1 point come from behind win at home isn't quite enough to jump them when I had them 12th last week.
This fascinates me. Reverse the roles...if Wheaton had come from behind and scored late to win by one point, would we have even considered placing Albion ahead of Wheaton? Of course we wouldn't have. But why not? How can we so easily talk ourselves out of believing what actually happened?
Probably because he believes Wheaton is the better team. He is entitled to his opinion however even if everyone else on the boards were to disagree with him.
Quote from: newcardfan on September 11, 2012, 03:36:05 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 11, 2012, 03:32:07 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 11, 2012, 02:27:42 PM
I also kept Wheaton (5) ahead of Albion (6). They're really close as well but a 1 point come from behind win at home isn't quite enough to jump them when I had them 12th last week.
This fascinates me. Reverse the roles...if Wheaton had come from behind and scored late to win by one point, would we have even considered placing Albion ahead of Wheaton? Of course we wouldn't have. But why not? How can we so easily talk ourselves out of believing what actually happened?
Probably because he believes Wheaton is the better team. He is entitled to his opinion however even if everyone else on the boards were to disagree with him.
Just trying to understand the thought process. Albion was better than Wheaton by pretty much every measure. Better offense, better on 3rd down, way better on defense (Albion 8 sacks, Wheaton zero...that is significant), dominated the clock, and oh by the way, scored more points. The only thing, as far as I can tell, that Albion wasn't better at than Wheaton on Saturday was reputation. CCIW>MIAA. Is it that simple? Again, not criticizing, just trying to understand different philosophies.
wally, I think it's one of those philosophical beliefs about rankings. Some people stick strictly to on-field results, others are more comfortable trying to project the "future" and/or the "theoretical" (i.e. what if these teams played on a neutral field tomorrow?).
I've seen the "come from behind win at home" logic before, and I'll admit that home-field advantage is a legitimate consideration. I presume, FCGrizzlies, that you're saying that if either a) Albion had won by a greater margin or b) Albion had won on a neutral field or at Wheaton then you would have ranked Albion higher. I can dig that. Howefer, wally makes some interesting points that Albion dominated the game statistically, which (in my mind) should also count for something.
Wally, I know you adhere very strictly to "If Team X scored more points than Team Y on Day Z, all other things being equal, then Team X should be ranked higher." That's fine (and is generally the camp that I fall into as well) but I'm also fine with people who want to consider things like home-field advantage, ease of victory, and injuries as part of the ranking process. Different strokes for different folks.
With all the chaos, I'm amazed that my ballot was as close to matching the final poll is is possible! (I had Witt 7 and BW 8; I initially had Franklin 9 and Heidi 10, but just before I sent it I decided I just couldn't include an 0-2 team [with both losses by large margins] regardless of the opponents - I dropped Franklin and moved Heidi to 9, with Case at 10. I have little doubt that Franklin will soon return to my ballot, but 0-2 is 0-2!)
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 11, 2012, 03:49:40 PM
Quote from: newcardfan on September 11, 2012, 03:36:05 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 11, 2012, 03:32:07 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 11, 2012, 02:27:42 PM
I also kept Wheaton (5) ahead of Albion (6). They're really close as well but a 1 point come from behind win at home isn't quite enough to jump them when I had them 12th last week.
This fascinates me. Reverse the roles...if Wheaton had come from behind and scored late to win by one point, would we have even considered placing Albion ahead of Wheaton? Of course we wouldn't have. But why not? How can we so easily talk ourselves out of believing what actually happened?
Probably because he believes Wheaton is the better team. He is entitled to his opinion however even if everyone else on the boards were to disagree with him.
Just trying to understand the thought process. Albion was better than Wheaton by pretty much every measure. Better offense, better on 3rd down, way better on defense (Albion 8 sacks, Wheaton zero...that is significant), dominated the clock, and oh by the way, scored more points. The only thing, as far as I can tell, that Albion wasn't better at than Wheaton on Saturday was reputation. CCIW>MIAA. Is it that simple? Again, not criticizing, just trying to understand different philosophies.
I must be looking at different stats than you. I would say Albion was just slightly better, but not by much. Albion had 28 yards more offense... converted two 3rd downs more on 2 more attempts... I will admit to not seeing the number of sacks before, but I will counter that they missed 2 extra points including one that was blocked.
I wouldn't pick UL-Monroe ahead of Arkansas either even though ULM beat them and were far superior to Arkansas stats-wise compared to Albion over Wheaton.
We haven't had much to yell at this season in this poll... glad to finally get things stirred up ;)
I am the one that still has Witt #3. Their win over Cap made me a semi-believer. Of course, things will settle out. I gave Franklin a pass thus far but a lackluster performance or two will give me pause. The muddle of the OAC and CCIW will resolve itself so my rankings are darts (and I was the one who pegged Carthage at #10, because, well, who knows).
I may be of the thought that Carnegie Mellon could be the best UAA team and not Case.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 11, 2012, 02:16:58 PM
You guys have a tough job this early.
Albion beating Wheaton definitely mucks things up quite a bit, as does North Central's loss. It will be very hard to sort of the CCIW triangle until they actually play one another.
Franklin will also be hard to place until the playoffs, frankly. Even if they run the table in the HCAC, without many games against common opponents, how can you really figure out where they belong?
If B-W and Heidelberg both hold serve throughout the OAC season, their matchup in the last week of the regular season will be fascinating...but it also means it might be tough to place them in these rankings for a while unless somebody drops one along the way.
Probably not going to figure out exactly where Witt belongs until 9/29 (CWRU) and 10/6 (Wabash), but those two results will help sort things out a bit.
I think that "fascinating" may be an understatement, because for this scenario to come about both teams would have to beat Mt. Union. Maybe (very heavy emphasis on maybe) one of them will, but I don't see both of them doing it. Just an outsider's two cents.
He may be considering losing to Mount Union as holding serve, as few people expect Mount Union to lose an OAC game.
I have Heidelberg 3rd. I truly think they are the 3rd best team in the North. They return 18 starts off a team that has gotten better every year since Mike Halletts got there. In 2011 they beat a team (Capital) 55-3 that BW lost to (14-11). BW returns just 2 starts off last years Defense. Heidelberg in my opinon is a Top 10 team in all of D3. After that it gets really hard. I might have IWU low at 8, might have Franklin high at 4. However, I am not sure how others would have done vs Butler and MU. The Middle is the Middle (Albion, NC, Wheaton, IWU) and I had BW at 9th but I don't think they should be that high. Time has all the answers! But, I have one answers... Heidelberg is really really GOOD!
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 11, 2012, 06:11:57 PM
He may be considering losing to Mount Union as holding serve, as few people expect Mount Union to lose an OAC game.
Good point ... I hadn't thought of it that way.
Think about it this way, this board is way more fun than the South Region fan poll which has 1-4 the same with all voters and almost no commentary. Which would you rather? Have fun discussing and defending, or be pretty much homogeneous with no interest?
short-
Others are probably thinking similarly, but for me Heidelberg would have a lot more inertia if Woods was still there. They definitely showed well against Alma, which means about as much or as little as anybody wants it to. The 'Berg can get some serious traction on my ballot if they do well in Ada on Saturday.
I'll go a step further here...I've got Franklin 9 and Heidelberg 10 at the moment. If Heidelberg handles ONU on the road, they'll definitely shimmy in front of Franklin on my ballot next week and maybe Wittenberg depending on what they do with DePauw. B-W would also be a team that is ripe for a major readjustment from me if they don't show well on Saturday. Needless to say, my ballot is pretty fluid at the moment. :)
if you look at the D3F Top 25 poll... here's what they say... I think I spotted all the north teams
1) Mount Union
2) Wabash
3) North Central
4) Baldwin-Wallace
5) Illinois Wesleyan
6) Wheaton
7) Franklin
8) Albion
9) Heidelberg
10) John Carroll
11) Carthage
12) Elmhurst
13) Wittenberg
Honestly, at this point in the year, I'm kind of over the "starters returning" stuff. I'm all eye test at this point. That said, beating down a bad team doesn't do much for me right now. IWU beat Alma by basically the same score as Heidi on the road. I'd argue that IWU and Heidi at least need to be a in a similar place, if not flipped entirely as a few voters have them. I'd say IWU's conference helps them some long term. What the heck are NCC or Wheaton right now? How are IWU not the favorites in the CCIW as we sit on 9/12? Plus, I give credit to past history at this point in the year. I think everybody has to a little bit. By the time every team plays somebody, I'll be able to adjust as necessary.
Maybe the Princes will be better. I'm willing to be wrong. But, honestly, I'm not convinced right now Heidelberg is better than Franklin, among others. As wally said, this Saturday in Ada tells us an awful lot.
EDIT: I did have to fix the poll due to me not adding the votes correctly. It's adjusted now. Witt is NOT T7 with Bally Wally, they are 9th.
Quote from: HSCTiger74 on September 11, 2012, 08:10:37 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 11, 2012, 06:11:57 PM
He may be considering losing to Mount Union as holding serve, as few people expect Mount Union to lose an OAC game.
Good point ... I hadn't thought of it that way.
To be clear, yes, this is what I meant. I was referring to the possibility of 8-1 Heidelberg vs. 8-1 Baldwin-Wallace (both with losses to Mount) playing with a likely Pool C berth on the line.
I am standing by the berg. Maybe I will be wrong, but I really don't think I am at this point.
In a blowout I think it is important to see how the blow out happened. What was the score at the half. Did one team score late in the 4th and so on. Heidleberg DRILLED Alma 45-0 AT THE HALF! while IWU was up 10-7 at the Half vs the same team one week later. That is HUGE for me! IWU's starting QB was still passing for TD's in the 4th. IWU as a team passed for 3 TD's in the 4th. The finial scores are very similer but the games were not similer at all!
That game was over after the first quarter when Berg was up 28-0. They blew Alma's doors off from the opening kick.
p.s. While I enjoy reading this stuff I don't envy you guys at all! So tough to slot some of these teams, especially this early. It's basically Mount, Wabash and a mess. Haha. But we do appreciate it!
Quote from: short on September 12, 2012, 10:38:20 AM
In a blowout I think it is important to see how the blow out happened. What was the score at the half. Did one team score late in the 4th and so on. Heidleberg DRILLED Alma 45-0 AT THE HALF! while IWU was up 10-7 at the Half vs the same team one week later. That is HUGE for me! IWU's starting QB was still passing for TD's in the 4th. IWU as a team passed for 3 TD's in the 4th. The finial scores are very similer but the games were not similer at all!
Fair observation, but to be honest I don't put a whole lot of stock in things like this, ESPECIALLY in wins against mediocre-or-worse teams.
Alma was 2-8 last year, including a 1-5 record in one of the lesser conferences in the North Region (no offense, MIAA fans, but it is true). It's nice to see your team show up and blow the doors off a team like that, sure, but it's not something that's going to sway my opinion about where a team belongs in the regional rankings. The old A-beat-B-in-more-impressive-fashion-than-C logic doesn't really do it for me unless it's a high-quality opponent.
Anecdotal evidence: when I was a high school senior, one of the programs "on the rise" in our conference brought a whole bunch of guys back from a 7-3 playoff team and was tabbed as a contender to unseat my high school, which had a years-long strangehold on the league title. Over the season's first few weeks, they blew teams out by huge margins (33-6, 42-7, 49-0, etc) while we won a string of ugly games (6-3, 28-0, 14-7, etc) against common or similar opponents. The newspaper made a big deal of how impressively they were dominating games while we were "struggling" to stay undefeated. We beat them 17-0 in exactly the same "ugly" fashion we'd beaten everyone else. Their pretty string of blowouts didn't mean a whole lot against a veteran team with a good defense that didn't bat an eyelash at their big scores.
I do think Heidelberg could be very good this year, yes. Their turnaround from the mid-2000's to now has been quite impressive, and no doubt they will be heard from this season. However, IWU has been a consistent winner for five years now, and I'm prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt over Heidelberg UNTIL the 'Berg has more than one game under its belt this year. If 'Berg is for real, and puts a hurtin' on Ohio Northern this week, and strings together solid wins through the meat of the OAC schedule, they'll get their due.
Also, your "IWU passed for touchdowns in the fourth quarter to make the score look better!" logic is a little overblown. IWU's starting quarterback threw a touchdown pass on the first play of the fourth quarter to make it 39-7, capping a stretch of 15:09 game time in which IWU took control of the game (29 unanswered points in the third quarter & first play of the fourth). The JV's tacked on two more TD's in the last 12 minutes. It's not like they were frantically passing their way downfield with five minutes left to run up the score and make it look more impressive.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 12, 2012, 10:59:31 AM
That game was over after the first quarter when Berg was up 28-0. They blew Alma's doors off from the opening kick.
p.s. While I enjoy reading this stuff I don't envy you guys at all! So tough to slot some of these teams, especially this early. It's basically Mount, Wabash and a mess. Haha. But we do appreciate it!
Are you sure its not just Mount and then a mess?
Quote from: PurpleSuit on September 12, 2012, 11:32:03 AM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 12, 2012, 10:59:31 AM
That game was over after the first quarter when Berg was up 28-0. They blew Alma's doors off from the opening kick.
p.s. While I enjoy reading this stuff I don't envy you guys at all! So tough to slot some of these teams, especially this early. It's basically Mount, Wabash and a mess. Haha. But we do appreciate it!
Are you sure its not just Mount and then a mess?
I am in agreement with the above. If I was participating in the poll, I would struggle to state that Wabash is a given at #2, if nothing else based on their performance vs Hanover in comparison to IC. Witt has shown a hell of lot more in their two wins. Of course that is the fun part of fan polls - they aren't science, just fun.
Did I miss a Wittenberg game last week?
Expecting to see a great game from Mount this sat. night. Must get ready for the UWW in 3 months.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 12, 2012, 12:04:35 PM
Did I miss a Wittenberg game last week?
Wally - good catch on the inaccurate statement. Should have said their one game this year.
Quote from: Wabash Hokie on September 12, 2012, 08:03:59 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 12, 2012, 12:04:35 PM
Did I miss a Wittenberg game last week?
Wally - good catch on the inaccurate statement. Should have said their one game this year.
No worries. Witt did look good in week 1, but Capital isn't
Capital anymore. There are no Hauslers ball hawking and there is no Pentello running the offense. It was encouraging for Wittenberg to see Florence have a strong passing game (3 INTs in 30 attempts notwithstanding). Witt's next four are DePauw, @Wooster, @CWRU, Wabash. That's the entirety of their season, really. We'll know everything there is to know about Wittenberg by sundown on 10/6.
I think I just became sold on Heidelberg for reals.
Me too. Per the deal I made with the Berg earlier in the week, they will be moving up on my ballot this week. They more than held up their end.
Hmm...Benedictine has used a safety and a Borsellino free kick return for a TD to go up on Albion 32-28 in the 4th quarter. This might be a good week to blow up the ballot and start from scratch.
Albion also has some weird striping on the back of their jerseys which may be used as secondary criteria this week.
Wheaton 48, Benedictine 7
Albion 22, Wheaton 21
Benedictine 32, Albion 28
...and Bob's your uncle. Good luck this week, fellas.
I'm more inclined to think Wheaton had a bad week against Albion now than Albion has broken into the same level as the CCIW and the OAC second tier.
I'm having a terrible time trying to figure things out at the bottom this week... can we have a Top 8 poll instead? :-\ Going to have to sleep on it a day or two
Quote from: smedindy on September 15, 2012, 10:57:41 PM
I'm more inclined to think Wheaton had a bad week against Albion now than Albion has broken into the same level as the CCIW and the OAC second tier.
Reportedly, Albion has NO even halfway competent #2 qb. I let them stay #9 (down from #5) on my ballot this week, but if their first guy doesn't return, it looks like they are toast.
Two weeks from now is make-or-break for two undefeated (but untested) teams who would be 11th and 12th on my ballot: Elmhurst vs. NCC and CMU vs. Wabash.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 17, 2012, 12:16:28 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 15, 2012, 10:57:41 PM
I'm more inclined to think Wheaton had a bad week against Albion now than Albion has broken into the same level as the CCIW and the OAC second tier.
Reportedly, Albion has NO even halfway competent #2 qb. I let them stay #9 (down from #5) on my ballot this week, but if their first guy doesn't return, it looks like they are toast.
Two weeks from now is make-or-break for two undefeated (but untested) teams who would be 11th and 12th on my ballot: Elmhurst vs. NCC and CMU vs. Wabash.
I believe CMU is South Region.
Quote from: ADL70 on September 17, 2012, 07:47:42 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 17, 2012, 12:16:28 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 15, 2012, 10:57:41 PM
I'm more inclined to think Wheaton had a bad week against Albion now than Albion has broken into the same level as the CCIW and the OAC second tier.
Reportedly, Albion has NO even halfway competent #2 qb. I let them stay #9 (down from #5) on my ballot this week, but if their first guy doesn't return, it looks like they are toast.
Two weeks from now is make-or-break for two undefeated (but untested) teams who would be 11th and 12th on my ballot: Elmhurst vs. NCC and CMU vs. Wabash.
I believe CMU is South Region.
Yes, CMU is in the South Region, although I guess we can make our own rules for the Regional Fan polls, right? :)
It's kinda tough to figure out where CMU would fit in the South Region poll these days because we don't play many games vs. South teams any more. We used to, but since the NCAC agreement, we play more North teams, so I spend a lot more time reading this board than the South boards.
An unrelated hypothetical question to pose for our voters (wally, I suspect you'll have an interesting opinion here): what do you do with UWW and Buffalo State if you're a top 25 voter? Obviously the D3football poll is already up and their voters have spoken. I'm just curious for your thoughts.
On one hand, Buff State is 2-1 with a head to head win AT Wisconsin-Whitewater (who is currently 1-1). Strictly by letter of this season's accomplishments, Buff State should be ranked higher, no?
This follows wally's theory of "not ignoring results that have actually happened on the field" (especially considering that Buff State DID really outplay UWW defensively, it wasn't a fluky win thanks to seven turnovers or two special-teams TD's or something like that).
On the other hand...UWW is a Purple Power with seven straight title-game appearances and three straight titles. Buff State is a 5-5 team moving from the NJAC to the Empire 8 that's already lost to a decent-but-not-great Brockport State team. How do we reconcile this?
I understand that this is a virtually unprecedented situation and it's hard to imagine ranking UWW anywhere below the top 10, much as it's difficult to rank a Buffalo State team with virtually ZERO history of winning anywhere above the bottom half of the poll.
Discuss.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 17, 2012, 09:42:24 AM
An unrelated hypothetical question to pose for our voters (wally, I suspect you'll have an interesting opinion here): what do you do with UWW and Buffalo State if you're a top 25 voter? Obviously the D3football poll is already up and their voters have spoken. I'm just curious for your thoughts.
On one hand, Buff State is 2-1 with a head to head win AT Wisconsin-Whitewater (who is currently 1-1). Strictly by letter of this season's accomplishments, Buff State should be ranked higher, no?
This follows wally's theory of "not ignoring results that have actually happened on the field" (especially considering that Buff State DID really outplay UWW defensively, it wasn't a fluky win thanks to seven turnovers or two special-teams TD's or something like that).
On the other hand...UWW is a Purple Power with seven straight title-game appearances and three straight titles. Buff State is a 5-5 team moving from the NJAC to the Empire 8 that's already lost to a decent-but-not-great Brockport State team. How do we reconcile this?
I understand that this is a virtually unprecedented situation and it's hard to imagine ranking UWW anywhere below the top 10, much as it's difficult to rank a Buffalo State team with virtually ZERO history of winning anywhere above the bottom half of the poll.
Discuss.
The situation is virtually unprecedented here. The last time a #1 team lost in the regular season was Mount Union in 2005. And that was to a league rival (ONU) who was a known quantity and had a good team (ONU was preseason #5 in 2005, and was #20 at the time of that win...side note: ONU did not make the playoffs that year...probably should have. The top of the OAC was nasty that year...back to the post). This Buffalo State situation is different. Buffalo State has been down for a lot of years now. They had to bus 11 hours to the game. They don't have familiarity with Whitewater. And then they blew up everything we thought we knew about Buffalo State and UW-Whitewater.
The real question here is how much of this does a voter pawn off as a fluke (a stance that you all know I abhor), and how much of this does a voter view as Whitewater being a team that lost a ton of star players and not near the juggernaut that they have been through the Beaver/Coppage/Blanchard years, Buffalo State being better than you thought, and then how do you mesh the two. Clearly, the voters aren't buying Buffalo State. If Whitewater can lose at home to an unranked, unvoted for team and only fall down to #7, then Buffalo State deserves to be a lot higher than they are. Personally, I absolutely would rank Buffalo State ahead of Whitewater (which I realize brings Brockport into a tertiary converstion, but that just goes to show how entangled these ballots can get).
Today, Buffalo State > UWW. That's real. That result will get some more flesh and context as these two teams play through their demanding conference schedules. Whitewater may not be close to the team that they have been. If so, we'll see it in WIAC play and then maybe the Buff State results makes a little more sense. Or maybe Buff State runs wild through the E8 and the result makes more sense that way. Or maybe UWW tramples the WIAC and Buff State goes 4-3 in the E8 and we'll wind up just shrugging off that result. Basically, we need more data to adequately process that result. Like I said, I would rank Buffalo State ahead of Whitewater today. But this is such an odd occurrance in the d3football.com top 25 polling era that there probably isn't a right or wrong way to handle it. As much as going 45-0 in 2009-2011 shouldn't matter in a 2012 season poll, I'm not sure voters can just ignore that, which, more than anything else, is why I think UWW didn't get crushed in the poll.
OOPS! I initially knew CMU was not North Region, because I used the North Region team list in first setting up my 'watch list'. But they are continually playing NR teams (between the NCAC agreement and the rest of the UAA), and I just eventually added them when they got to 3-0!
I have now scratched them back off the list! :P
I have replaced CMU with OWU and Millikin, two teams who have been too weak lately to originally bother with, but who are both 2-0 but still untested.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 17, 2012, 05:17:33 PM
OOPS! I initially knew CMU was not North Region, because I used the North Region team list in first setting up my 'watch list'. But they are continually playing NR teams (between the NCAC agreement and the rest of the UAA), and I just eventually added them when they got to 3-0!
I have now scratched them back off the list! :P
Maybe the powers-that-be will handle CMU like they did Salisbury and switch their regions now that their scheduling has changed. I do know that for a time, after joining the E8 but before they were switched, the Gulls were getting votes in the fan polls for both the South and East Regions.
Extartan, I was wondering the same thing on another site, not much talk, so I will come over here since it seems that some might chime in. My wondering was how does the UWW loss compare to the Wesley loss as far as the polls go. UWW ends up 4 and Wesley ends up 6, a 3 position drop for both. I am fine with Wesley dropping to wherever as long as they remain ahead of Salisbury who they defeated. I think it is obvious that it would be hard to jump Buff St. ahead of UWW just from sheer prior positions, but should UWW remain that high if it is about this year? In the end I agree, it will play out in the next couple of weeks. I also agree that Brockport has to enter the discussion as a team that should be ranked higher since they dominated the game with Buff St. Brockport will get its due or disappear in the next couple of weeks as they play Kean and Rowan on the road. Win both and they have to be top 10.
Quote from: HSCTiger74 on September 17, 2012, 05:27:54 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 17, 2012, 05:17:33 PM
OOPS! I initially knew CMU was not North Region, because I used the North Region team list in first setting up my 'watch list'. But they are continually playing NR teams (between the NCAC agreement and the rest of the UAA), and I just eventually added them when they got to 3-0!
I have now scratched them back off the list! :P
Maybe the powers-that-be will handle CMU like they did Salisbury and switch their regions now that their scheduling has changed. I do know that for a time, after joining the E8 but before they were switched, the Gulls were getting votes in the fan polls for both the South and East Regions.
This is the last year of the NCAC-UAA agreement. I suspect next year you will see more games against South teams. Then in 2014 the will be playing in a South conference, the PAC.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 17, 2012, 11:25:00 AM
The situation is virtually unprecedented here. The last time a #1 team lost in the regular season was Mount Union in 2005. And that was to a league rival (ONU) who was a known quantity and had a good team (ONU was preseason #5 in 2005, and was #20 at the time of that win...side note: ONU did not make the playoffs that year...probably should have. The top of the OAC was nasty that year...back to the post).
Agreed - I was only a sophomore that year, but followed the national Division III scene and I knew that Ohio Northern was a solid program and was very tough that year. It was shocking that they beat Mount Union, but in my mind this is FAR more surprising.
Re: the top of the OAC that season - although they do only play one nonconference game each, it's worth noting that the OAC lost a total of one nonconference game that year (then-bottom-dweller Heidelberg, who went 0-10) - every other team, top to bottom, won every nonconference game they played. Their second playoff entry, Capital, won two playoff games before falling 34-31 in a rematch with Mount Union. Wow.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 17, 2012, 11:25:00 AM
This Buffalo State situation is different. Buffalo State has been down for a lot of years now. They had to bus 11 hours to the game. They don't have familiarity with Whitewater. And then they blew up everything we thought we knew about Buffalo State and UW-Whitewater.
Agreed again.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 17, 2012, 11:25:00 AM
Personally, I absolutely would rank Buffalo State ahead of Whitewater (which I realize brings Brockport into a tertiary converstion, but that just goes to show how entangled these ballots can get).
Today, Buffalo State > UWW. That's real. That result will get some more flesh and context as these two teams play through their demanding conference schedules.
Bingo. In my mind, today Buff State has to be ranked ahead of UWW. Whether you rank them #5 and #6 or #22 and #23, they just have to be FOR NOW. As you enumerate later in your post, if UWW runs over their next few WIAC opponents, they'll have their chance to climb back up in the polls. Same applies to Buff State in the opposite direction - if they lose a couple of E8 games, they'll fall behind UWW because we'll have some data to show that the results may have been a fluke. It will all come out right in the end.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 18, 2012, 10:20:38 AM
Re: the top of the OAC that season - although they do only play one nonconference game each, it's worth noting that the OAC lost a total of one nonconference game that year (then-bottom-dweller Heidelberg, who went 0-10) - every other team, top to bottom, won every nonconference game they played. Their second playoff entry, Capital, won two playoff games before falling 34-31 in a rematch with Mount Union. Wow.
We needn't talk about Capital and the 2005 playoffs any further. Thanks. :)
I disagree with the knee-jerk reaction to a potential fluke result, but the data will wash in the end. I just want to see it before I adjust my notions.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 18, 2012, 10:35:01 AM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 18, 2012, 10:20:38 AM
Re: the top of the OAC that season - although they do only play one nonconference game each, it's worth noting that the OAC lost a total of one nonconference game that year (then-bottom-dweller Heidelberg, who went 0-10) - every other team, top to bottom, won every nonconference game they played. Their second playoff entry, Capital, won two playoff games before falling 34-31 in a rematch with Mount Union. Wow.
We needn't talk about Capital and the 2005 playoffs any further. Thanks. :)
For once I concur with Wally.
I'm really excited to see what we did with this this week. On the edge of my seat here.
Quote from: smedindy on September 15, 2011, 09:37:30 PM
I think NC is better than Witt. I think NC lost because of the trip and it was just 'one of those things'. Heck, Mt. Union lost once in the regular season at some point in the somewhat recent past. At least I can remember it....
Smedindy,
Mount Union lost to Ohio Northern 21-14 in 2005 and has not lost a regular season game since! :)
Wow, you dug that way out of the archives!
Come on... hurry up and post the poll. I'm impatient and ready to be yelled at for who I put 10th :D
I had a bunch of teams all bunched together for 9th and 10th on my ballot and honestly I probably could have drawn names out of a hat and come up with equally good choices. Probably going to have teams move in and out from week to week until things settle out.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 19, 2012, 12:09:37 AM
Come on... hurry up and post the poll. I'm impatient and ready to be yelled at for who I put 10th :D
Mount Union? You maniac! :)
I'm giving Wes a pass. It's been a tough week.
Just a heads-up: the poll MAY be a voter short the next two weeks. I'll be in the Black Hills and not at all sure I'll get enough computer access to know whats going on. (Of course, many will say I NEVER know whats going on! :P)
I'll go ahead and post my ten here for this week just for fun. It's been a rough week for our old pal Wes.
1- Mount Union
2- Wabash
This has been the case on my ballot all season so far. I think these are the two premiere defenses in the region and that matters a lot. No, Wabash doesn't have any sexy results so far, so there is some leap of faith/benefit of the doubt going on there, but that's the case on pretty much any other ballot where Wabash is #2.
3- Wittenberg
4- Heidelberg
These two teams moved way up for me this week (from 7 and 10, respectively). I had previously said that H'berg was in position to move a lot if they showed well at ONU and they did. So why did they jump the other teams in front of them? Here's a quick highlight reel of these two teams' seasons so far:
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.tumblr.com%2Ftumblr_m3mv6mdi4W1qcqv5n.gif&hash=68d5c13bdedcd0d280d5ae4e7977fd68948f5779)
5- IWU
6- NCC
These teams are in the same spot as last week for me, just reversed. I slid NCC back one spot here because their previous opponents are not doing them favors. UW-L has lost twice since beating NCC (yes, to good teams I know) and Redlands went back to SoCal and got beat up by PLU.
7- Baldwin Wallace
Kind of the one team that didn't really fit into a group for me this week. They were dead to rights at John Carroll on Saturday night when the Streaks, protecting a 3 point lead with under two minutes to play, gambled with the Cover Zero defense and gave up an 80-some yard TD pass. Whoops.
8- Albion
9- Wheaton
10 - Benedictine
These are basically t-8th in my mind, but I had to put them in some kind of order because those are the rules. I know the easy thing is to say Wheaton had a bad day at Albion, but I can't be sure if Wheaton had the bad day or if Albion had the bad day last weekend or if Benedictine had the bad day in Week 1. So these teams will get lumped together this week. Albion has a "prove it" game on Saturday, so there will be some movement amongst this group next week.
Franklin dropped out after a bit of a ho-hummer against Manchester to make room for Benedictine. As long as Franklin keeps winning (they should), they'll be back in my 10 before too long. Elmhurst is also knocking on the door here and we'll know if they need to be on this list in a couple of weeks. Also on my radar are OWU (who probably can't move into the ten next week if they beat CWRU on Saturday, but could probably get queued up for an appearance as their schedule is favorable for the next few weeks) and Concordia-Chicago. I'll freely admit to not having paid much attention to the NathCon teams for this exercise before, but after they pasted the MIAA in those crossover games last weekend, I think I need to keep an eyeball on what's going on over there.
here was the ballot I sent to Wes...
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 16, 2012, 09:43:13 PM
The top 8 wasn't too bad... after that it would have been easier to draw out of a hat.
1) Mount Union
2) North Central
3) Wabash
4) Illinois Wesleyan
5) Wheaton
6) Wittenberg
7) Heidelberg
8) Baldwin-Wallace
9) Elmhurst
10) Concordia-Chicago (I can already hear the board being befuddled)
In the group for 9th and 10th: Albion, Millikin, Franklin
Here was my Top 10
1. MUC
2. Wabash
3. Heidelberg
4. NC
5. Wheaton
6. IWU
7. Franklin
8. Elmhust
9. BW
10. Witt
I'll get this up in the morning. Sorry guys.
Without any further delay, here is this week's North Region Fan Poll. Messy at the bottom.
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Wabash 71 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3. North Central 58 pts (2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 7)
T4. Illinois Wesleyan 43 pts (3, 4, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 8)
T4. Wheaton 43 pts (4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 7, 9)
6. Heidelberg 41 pts (3, 4, 5, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8)
7. Wittenberg 35 pts (3, 3, 6, 6, 7, 9, 9, 10)
8. Baldwin-Wallace 33 pts (4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8, 9, 9)
9. Franklin 18 pts (6, 6, 7, 8, 10, -, -, -)
10. Elmhurst 9 pts (8, 9, 9, 10, 10, -, -, -)
ARV
Albion 6 pts (8, 9, 10, -, -, -, -, -)
John Carroll 1pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Concordia (Ill.) 1pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Benedectine 1pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Wes Anderson, wally_wabash, smedindy, ADL70, Mr. Ypsi, FCGrizzlesGrad, newcardfan, and short.
Interesting variance in opinions on Wittenberg. Two blowout wins over traditionally-decent programs (that are admittedly not looking so hot this year) look pretty good to me. I know everyone has them ranked, but I'm mildly surprised that they're not in everyone's top 8.
Everything posted looks like it can be justified one way or another, though. Shaping up to be a fascinating season.
The win over DePauw was enough for one of our voters. Witt only had 1 3rd place vote a week ago.
If Reed Florence keeps playing quarterback the way he has through the first two games, then Witt is really, really good. When Florence doesn't hand off, Wittenberg is gaining almost 11 yards per snap. That's insane. That cat can ball.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 20, 2012, 07:38:40 PM
These two teams moved way up for me this week (from 7 and 10, respectively). I had previously said that H'berg was in position to move a lot if they showed well at ONU and they did. So why did they jump the other teams in front of them? Here's a quick highlight reel of these two teams' seasons so far:
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.tumblr.com%2Ftumblr_m3mv6mdi4W1qcqv5n.gif&hash=68d5c13bdedcd0d280d5ae4e7977fd68948f5779)
HAHAHA now that's funny!
14 teams from 6 conferences got votes: 4 OAC, 4 CCIW, 2 NCAC, 2 NAthC, 1 MIAA, 1 HCAC
When's the last time 1 team from the NAthC got a vote let alone 2?
The poll basically mirrors my opinion... the top 8 are solid in whatever order you want to put them, then the next two are anyone's guess based on how you want to look at comparing strength of schedule, W/L, and history
I think the NATHC getting votes shows how shaky the middle of the 'power' conferences are, how no one trusts Case far enough to throw them, and how unreliable the middle of the MIAA, HCAC and NCAC are.
Personally, I'm higher on Franklin than others because I felt they kind of went, "Welp, it's Manchester" after opening with a Purple and Butler. But another game of meh by Franklin could force my hand.
If Franklin has a "meh" game tomorrow, would we be able to tell? That's not going to be pretty tomorrow.
For me this week, Benedictine slipped into the ten because I felt compelled to group them with Wheaton and Albion. More results will break up that cluster, probably this week. If I'm peering into the crystal ball, I believe that Franklin will get back into my top ten through sheer inertia (they almost can't lose until maybe week 11, and other teams on the list certainly will lose), Wheaton will probably creep up as their results going forward are going to be more impressive than what Benedictine or Concordia-Chicago will do by virtue of the schedule, and Elmhurst is in a position to gain by being competitive with the top of their league, even if they drop a game or two. This will start to shake out a little easier when league play really cranks up and we get some more head to heads to help order things.
Franklin has to score less than Fitty...
I think the debate has become a bit more muddled regarding 'upsets' and 'rankings'. Kean beat Brockport and Alfred is beating Buffalo State.
Quote from: smedindy on September 21, 2012, 09:11:09 PM
Franklin has to score less than Fitty...
We'll they have 70 in the 3rd, but gave up a score to Earlham.
Quote from: smedindy on September 22, 2012, 02:50:21 PM
I think the debate has become a bit more muddled regarding 'upsets' and 'rankings'. Kean beat Brockport and Alfred is beating Buffalo State.
I think this season will be a wild and crazy ride and the national champion could very well be a one (or two?) loss team. Anything can happen.
All we really need to make this thing complete chaos this week is for Wooster to beat Witt tonight.
I think I may just blow up my ballot and start over. Can I submit a ballot with a #1 and leave the rest blank? ;D
I hit reset, kinda, both here and the Top 25.
Here's the North Region Fan Poll for this week. Lot of justifiable confusion here. So much so that I had one voter move a team out because of a crummy win and another voter move that team near the top of their poll because they keep winning.
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 65 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 5)
3. Heidelberg 55 pts (2, 2, 2, 4, 5, 5, 5, 8)
4. Illinois Wesleyan 52 pts (2, 3, 4, 4, 4, 6, 6, 7)
T5. Wittenberg 43 pts (3, 3, 4, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10)
T5. Wheaton 43 pts (3, 3, 4, 6, 6, 6, 8, 9)
7. Wabash 35 pts (5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8, 10)
8. Baldwin-Wallace 24 pts (3, 5, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10, -)
9. Franklin 18 pts (7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 10, -, -)
10. Albion 11 pts (6, 7, 9, -, -, -, -, -)
ARV:
Elmhurst 9 pts (9, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, -, -)
Allegheny 4 pts (7, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Ohio Wesleyan 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Looking at the schedules, there may not be much clarity afforded this week (unless the UAA upsets the NCAC against Wabash and Witt). I can't see anyone like Kalamazoo, Bluffton, Concordia - Chicago or Benedictine breaking through with wins.
The one game to watch is Elmhurst against North Central. If the Blue Jays are close they could justify their votes.
Remember when the Augie / Wheaton game was something?
Quote from: smedindy on September 27, 2012, 10:41:36 AM
Looking at the schedules, there may not be much clarity afforded this week (unless the UAA upsets the NCAC against Wabash and Witt). I can't see anyone like Kalamazoo, Bluffton, Concordia - Chicago or Benedictine breaking through with wins.
The one game to watch is Elmhurst against North Central. If the Blue Jays are close they could justify their votes.
Remember when the Augie / Wheaton game was something?
It most likely will take a couple of weeks for things to sort themselves out.
My initial ballot had Mount Union 1 and 2 and the rest blank... apparently that one wasn't acceptable :D
1) Mount Union (obvious)
2) North Central (has a loss but against a tough schedule)
3) Wheaton (possibly a bit high here at the moment, plenty of tough games to come)
4) Wittenberg (unbeaten against a so-so schedule)
5) Baldwin-Wallace (same as above)
6) Illinois Wesleyan (unbeaten unlike conference foes above but against a weak schedule so not a surprise)
7) Albion (kind of a Jekyll and Hyde so far... not the toughest schedule left)
8) Heidelberg (haven't played anyone yet... but if they can keep winning they will work their way up)
9) Elmhurst (huge game this week)
10) Wabash (weak schedule and a loss... we'll see how they fare the next 2 games)
My next 3 teams I'd have put would be Concordia (IL), Millikin, and Otterbein... none of which received any votes. Maybe it's me following them the closest and being harsh, but Franklin isn't even in my top 13.
I moved Albion up to 6 and Allegheny into my top ten at 7. Call me old fashioned, but winning big games against good teams carries weight. I pushed Wabash all the way down to 8 because, well, they lost to Allegheny and that's kind of how that has to go. Wabash can make big gains on the ballot in the next two weeks.
Moved H'berg to 2, Witt to 3 (Princes jumped the Tigers for me this week), still have IWU and North Central at 4 and 5. Wheaton and B-W made up my 9 and 10. Unfortunately, Benedictine had to fall out to make room Allegheny. It hurt me to do it, but there it is.
Also on the cusp are Elmhurst (they can earn a spot in the 10 this week), Franklin (they'll just have to wait for people to lose or for B-W to keep being average, but they'll get in before this is done), OWU (very likely will be in before the heavy back end of their schedule hits), and Concordia-Chicago.
I'm apparently the President of the Illinois Wesleyan Fan Club.
Quote from: Wes Anderson on September 27, 2012, 11:19:02 AM
I'm apparently the President of the Illinois Wesleyan Fan Club.
Now that they can't feast at the dessert table every week,(their non-conf. opponents have a combined record of 2-9) we'll see what they're really made of before I jump on their bandwagon. ;)
Of course, IWU's opponent's opponents include Heidelberg, UW-Oshkosh, undefeated Concordia-Chicago, and Millikin. ;)
Quote from: newcardfan on September 27, 2012, 01:00:32 PM
Quote from: Wes Anderson on September 27, 2012, 11:19:02 AM
I'm apparently the President of the Illinois Wesleyan Fan Club.
Now that they can't feast at the dessert table every week,(their non-conf. opponents have a combined record of 2-9) we'll see what they're really made of before I jump on their bandwagon. ;)
I've got no beef with a high ranking for IWU, even with a weak slate thus far. Ranking them #2 seems kinda high, but the CCIW is consistently tough and someone from that league is going to be high in the rankings. Plus, at this point there's kind of a vacuum behind Mount - several of the "usual suspects" that would normally fill those 2-3-4 spots (North Central, Wheaton, and Wabash) have losses, some of which came against good-but-not-great competition. Benedictine got slaughtered by Wheaton, so even their win over Albion doesn't give them enough juice for a real high ranking. Wittenberg has the same wart as IWU: three wins against so-so competition thus far. Ditto Heidelberg. Again, ranking them #2 does seem really high, but with a closer look I'm just not seeing how any of the alternatives are clearly BETTER than Illinois Wesleyan. An argument can be made either way for many of these teams.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 27, 2012, 03:10:53 PM
Quote from: newcardfan on September 27, 2012, 01:00:32 PM
Quote from: Wes Anderson on September 27, 2012, 11:19:02 AM
I'm apparently the President of the Illinois Wesleyan Fan Club.
Now that they can't feast at the dessert table every week,(their non-conf. opponents have a combined record of 2-9) we'll see what they're really made of before I jump on their bandwagon. ;)
I've got no beef with a high ranking for IWU, even with a weak slate thus far. Ranking them #2 seems kinda high, but the CCIW is consistently tough and someone from that league is going to be high in the rankings. Plus, at this point there's kind of a vacuum behind Mount - several of the "usual suspects" that would normally fill those 2-3-4 spots (North Central, Wheaton, and Wabash) have losses, some of which came against good-but-not-great competition. Benedictine got slaughtered by Wheaton, so even their win over Albion doesn't give them enough juice for a real high ranking. Wittenberg has the same wart as IWU: three wins against so-so competition thus far. Ditto Heidelberg. Again, ranking them #2 does seem really high, but with a closer look I'm just not seeing how any of the alternatives are clearly BETTER than Illinois Wesleyan. An argument can be made either way for many of these teams.
We'll see how they do against Millikin. I just talked to a friend who has a son at Millikin and while he would agree that Millikin may not be "top tier" in the conference, they are much improved over last year. A few more weeks into the season should help sort things out(I hope).
It could be a season that sorts itself out once its over... ;)
Quote from: smedindy on September 27, 2012, 03:33:45 PM
It could be a season that sorts itself out once its over... ;)
The way it's been going so far-you may be right :)
I've kind of stumbled in to it. I had them at 5 to start the year, I think. Then NCC, Wheaton, and Wabash all lost. I keep moving them up. I can't penalize them for taking care of the business that we expect them to take care of. Those other 3 teams haven't done that. I can't in good conscience rank them below NCC, because NCC should have beaten UW-LaCrosse, but didn't.
Quote from: Wes Anderson on September 27, 2012, 04:09:16 PM
I've kind of stumbled in to it. I had them at 5 to start the year, I think. Then NCC, Wheaton, and Wabash all lost. I keep moving them up. I can't penalize them for taking care of the business that we expect them to take care of. Those other 3 teams haven't done that. I can't in good conscience rank them below NCC, because NCC should have beaten UW-LaCrosse, but didn't.
That's kinda what I figured. This happens in the D1 polls, too - the undefeated teams keep moving up as teams in front of them fall. IWU at #5 to start the year made perfect sense. Then all three teams in front of them lost (to opponents that are not CLEARLY superior to IWU - maybe it would be different if they'd lost to a Purple Power, UMHB, or Wesley) and you really had to penalize those teams for doing so. NCC and Wheaton will have their chance to prove they ought to be above IWU eventually.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 27, 2012, 04:12:40 PM
Quote from: Wes Anderson on September 27, 2012, 04:09:16 PM
I've kind of stumbled in to it. I had them at 5 to start the year, I think. Then NCC, Wheaton, and Wabash all lost. I keep moving them up. I can't penalize them for taking care of the business that we expect them to take care of. Those other 3 teams haven't done that. I can't in good conscience rank them below NCC, because NCC should have beaten UW-LaCrosse, but didn't.
That's kinda what I figured. This happens in the D1 polls, too - the undefeated teams keep moving up as teams in front of them fall. IWU at #5 to start the year made perfect sense. Then all three teams in front of them lost (to opponents that are not CLEARLY superior to IWU - maybe it would be different if they'd lost to a Purple Power, UMHB, or Wesley) and you really had to penalize those teams for doing so. NCC and Wheaton will have their chance to prove they ought to be above IWU eventually.
When IWU beats NCC or Wheaton, then I will move them ahead.
BTW, I also have IWU behind North Central and Wheaton. But after Mt. Union it's too close for comfort.
Quote from: newcardfan on September 27, 2012, 07:35:51 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 27, 2012, 04:12:40 PM
Quote from: Wes Anderson on September 27, 2012, 04:09:16 PM
I've kind of stumbled in to it. I had them at 5 to start the year, I think. Then NCC, Wheaton, and Wabash all lost. I keep moving them up. I can't penalize them for taking care of the business that we expect them to take care of. Those other 3 teams haven't done that. I can't in good conscience rank them below NCC, because NCC should have beaten UW-LaCrosse, but didn't.
That's kinda what I figured. This happens in the D1 polls, too - the undefeated teams keep moving up as teams in front of them fall. IWU at #5 to start the year made perfect sense. Then all three teams in front of them lost (to opponents that are not CLEARLY superior to IWU - maybe it would be different if they'd lost to a Purple Power, UMHB, or Wesley) and you really had to penalize those teams for doing so. NCC and Wheaton will have their chance to prove they ought to be above IWU eventually.
When IWU beats NCC or Wheaton, then I will move them ahead.
I can understand that logic with respect to NCC, but IWU beat Wheaton last year. Why is IWU automatically behind Wheaton this year?
Quote from: TitanPride on September 27, 2012, 09:54:50 PM
Quote from: newcardfan on September 27, 2012, 07:35:51 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 27, 2012, 04:12:40 PM
Quote from: Wes Anderson on September 27, 2012, 04:09:16 PM
I've kind of stumbled in to it. I had them at 5 to start the year, I think. Then NCC, Wheaton, and Wabash all lost. I keep moving them up. I can't penalize them for taking care of the business that we expect them to take care of. Those other 3 teams haven't done that. I can't in good conscience rank them below NCC, because NCC should have beaten UW-LaCrosse, but didn't.
That's kinda what I figured. This happens in the D1 polls, too - the undefeated teams keep moving up as teams in front of them fall. IWU at #5 to start the year made perfect sense. Then all three teams in front of them lost (to opponents that are not CLEARLY superior to IWU - maybe it would be different if they'd lost to a Purple Power, UMHB, or Wesley) and you really had to penalize those teams for doing so. NCC and Wheaton will have their chance to prove they ought to be above IWU eventually.
When IWU beats NCC or Wheaton, then I will move them ahead.
I can understand that logic with respect to NCC, but IWU beat Wheaton last year. Why is IWU automatically behind Wheaton this year?
I went back to 1999(that's as far back as I could get on the IWU website) to see the Wheaton vs IWU series. In the last 13 games, IWU has only won five times. However, since IWU's 2004 loss to Wheaton, the two teams have alternated victories. IWU wins in the odd numbered years and Wheaton the even. If that pattern continues, it is IWU's year to lose.
Quote from: newcardfan on September 27, 2012, 03:26:01 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 27, 2012, 03:10:53 PM
Quote from: newcardfan on September 27, 2012, 01:00:32 PM
Quote from: Wes Anderson on September 27, 2012, 11:19:02 AM
I'm apparently the President of the Illinois Wesleyan Fan Club.
Now that they can't feast at the dessert table every week,(their non-conf. opponents have a combined record of 2-9) we'll see what they're really made of before I jump on their bandwagon. ;)
I've got no beef with a high ranking for IWU, even with a weak slate thus far. Ranking them #2 seems kinda high, but the CCIW is consistently tough and someone from that league is going to be high in the rankings. Plus, at this point there's kind of a vacuum behind Mount - several of the "usual suspects" that would normally fill those 2-3-4 spots (North Central, Wheaton, and Wabash) have losses, some of which came against good-but-not-great competition. Benedictine got slaughtered by Wheaton, so even their win over Albion doesn't give them enough juice for a real high ranking. Wittenberg has the same wart as IWU: three wins against so-so competition thus far. Ditto Heidelberg. Again, ranking them #2 does seem really high, but with a closer look I'm just not seeing how any of the alternatives are clearly BETTER than Illinois Wesleyan. An argument can be made either way for many of these teams.
We'll see how they do against Millikin. I just talked to a friend who has a son at Millikin and while he would agree that Millikin may not be "top tier" in the conference, they are much improved over last year. A few more weeks into the season should help sort things out(I hope).
Remember also that Millikin vs. IWU is somewhat of a rivalry game due to their proximity. These games often are far closer than they really should be on paper.
Case in point Millikin nearly upset IWU last year (and probably should have). IWU squeaked out a 28-25 win, requiring a last minute defensive stand with Millikin in FG range.
Quote from: newcardfan on September 28, 2012, 08:35:43 AM
I went back to 1999(that's as far back as I could get on the IWU website) to see the Wheaton vs IWU series. In the last 13 games, IWU has only won five times. However, since IWU's 2004 loss to Wheaton, the two teams have alternated victories. IWU wins in the odd numbered years and Wheaton the even. If that pattern continues, it is IWU's year to lose.
I can't put any stock in that, personally. Those things aren't even relevant to both head coaches. While, Eash has been there for 25 years, Thorne wasn't even there in 1999. If you have a sophomore who plays, he was 8 when you started your sample.
Quote from: Wes Anderson on September 28, 2012, 09:35:36 AM
Quote from: newcardfan on September 28, 2012, 08:35:43 AM
I went back to 1999(that's as far back as I could get on the IWU website) to see the Wheaton vs IWU series. In the last 13 games, IWU has only won five times. However, since IWU's 2004 loss to Wheaton, the two teams have alternated victories. IWU wins in the odd numbered years and Wheaton the even. If that pattern continues, it is IWU's year to lose.
I can't put any stock in that, personally. Those things aren't even relevant to both head coaches. While, Eash has been there for 25 years, Thorne wasn't even there in 1999. If you have a sophomore who plays, he was 8 when you started your sample.
Thorne is NC's coach, Swider is Wheaton's. I just thought it was an interesting trend.
I was thinking about IWU, sorry. Wrong team. Right church, wrong pew.
Looks like North Central is giving Elmhurst the Cee-Lo treatment ("F--- You....")
Hey now.
Some other finals of interest around the region...
Otterbein 38, B-W 17 (we've really just been waiting for this kind of result with B-W, yes?)
Wheaton 49, Augustana 7
Wabash 54, Carnegie Mellon 28 (nice bounce back for Wabash)
Witt 14, CWRU 10 (Witt has either put their offense into neutral, or they aren't who we thought they were)
Allegheny 15, Oberlin 3 (understandable exhale game for the Gators...also goes to show the week to week variability teams can have)
Concordia (Wis) 6, Benedictine 0 (6 BU turnovers)
Concordia-Chicago 48, Rockford 10
Adrian 24, Hope 0
OWU and North Central are doing work. Illinois Wesleyan, however, currently chasing a couple of scores against Millikin. Tracking....
IWU survives Millikin in OT 34-33.
It looks like a clear path for the 'Berg to be the OAC "C" contender.
Quote from: smedindy on September 29, 2012, 08:11:21 PM
Looks like North Central is giving Elmhurst the Cee-Lo treatment ("F--- You....")
hahahaha, +K. Big game at Witt next week. outlook anyone?
Juries out on if Witt had been sandbagging or their offensive prowess was hyper-inflated by DPU's ineptitude. It'll be a great game, though.
Submitted my poll. Just saw the Top 25. Voters are going for the flavor of the week in the OAC.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 28, 2012, 09:35:36 AM
Quote from: newcardfan on September 28, 2012, 08:35:43 AM
I went back to 1999(that's as far back as I could get on the IWU website) to see the Wheaton vs IWU series. In the last 13 games, IWU has only won five times. However, since IWU's 2004 loss to Wheaton, the two teams have alternated victories. IWU wins in the odd numbered years and Wheaton the even. If that pattern continues, it is IWU's year to lose.
I can't put any stock in that, personally. Those things aren't even relevant to both head coaches. While, Eash has been there for 25 years, Thorne wasn't even there in 1999. If you have a sophomore who plays, he was 8 when you started your sample.
It might help to point out this trend happened to coincide with the home team winning every time. ??? That's a slightly more reliable trend.
Quote from: USee on September 30, 2012, 07:02:32 PM
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 28, 2012, 09:35:36 AM
Quote from: newcardfan on September 28, 2012, 08:35:43 AM
I went back to 1999(that's as far back as I could get on the IWU website) to see the Wheaton vs IWU series. In the last 13 games, IWU has only won five times. However, since IWU's 2004 loss to Wheaton, the two teams have alternated victories. IWU wins in the odd numbered years and Wheaton the even. If that pattern continues, it is IWU's year to lose.
I can't put any stock in that, personally. Those things aren't even relevant to both head coaches. While, Eash has been there for 25 years, Thorne wasn't even there in 1999. If you have a sophomore who plays, he was 8 when you started your sample.
It might help to point out this trend happened to coincide with the home team winning every time. ??? That's a slightly more reliable trend.
When I started to look I was just checking to see how many times IWU had beaten Wheaton in the past few years and stumbled on the alt. W/L thing and thought it was kind of interesting.
Quote from: smedindy on September 30, 2012, 06:33:03 PM
Submitted my poll. Just saw the Top 25. Voters are going for the flavor of the week in the OAC.
I know Keith and you already talked about this on Twitter but he pointed out the reason why I'm not voting for Heidelberg, yet. The teams they've played so far have a pretty poor record at the moment.
Maybe we need to start giving Franklin more credit for scoring once against Mount Union. Sweet jeebus that group is stingy.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 01, 2012, 10:42:39 AM
Maybe we need to start giving Franklin more credit for scoring once against Mount Union. Sweet jeebus that group is stingy.
The bad thing is with Wilmington this week followed by Cap and their putrid offense there's a decent chance of 2 more shutouts coming the next 2 weeks.
Will Wilmington move past the 50?
Quote from: smedindy on October 01, 2012, 11:21:51 AM
Will Wilmington move past the 50?
ONU only did once...with 90 sec left when some frosh DB got mixed up with the coverage and let a WR get behind him. So sadly, that's a fair question I suppose. Plus they have a new HC now. Man, this is depressing...
Here's the North Region Fan Poll. We're a voter short this week because Mr. Ypsi is somewhere in the North Dakota wilderness. One small note, one voter did cast a 9th and a 10th place vote for teams not in the North Region. Neither team made the poll, so I chose to omit them entirely.
1. Mount Union 70 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 57 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 5)
3. Heidelberg 48 pts (2, 2, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8)
4. Illinois Wesleyan 44 pts (2, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 7)
5. Wheaton 40 pts (3, 3, 4, 6, 6, 6, 9)
6. Wittenberg 34 pts (3, 3, 5, 5, 8, 8, -)
7. Wabash 31 pts (4, 4, 4, 7, 7, 8, 9)
8. Franklin 16 pts (7, 7, 8, 8, 9, -, -)
9. Otterbein 14 pts (5, 7, 8, 10, -, -, -)
10. Albion 13 pts (6, 6, 9, 10, -, -, -)
ARV
Allegheny 8 pts (7, 9, 10, 10, -, -, -)
Baldwin-Wallace 3 pts (9, 10, -, -, -, -, -)
Concordia (Ill.) 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Wes Anderson, wally_wabash, smedindy, ADL70, FCGrizzlesGrad, newcardfan, and short.
I think you may have omitted the wrong team. There's a 9th place vote missing rather than a 10th place vote and I'm thinking you probably meant to omit Carnegie Mellon's 10th place vote.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 04, 2012, 09:45:42 AM
I think you may have omitted the wrong team. There's a 9th place vote missing rather than a 10th place vote and I'm thinking you probably meant to omit Carnegie Mellon's 10th place vote.
We're both right. The 10 was for Coe. The 9 was for Carnegie Mellon. I took them both out. I forgot CMU wasn't in the North. I was sure Coe wasn't. Problem solved.
I only made one change this week. B-W out of my #10 spot, Otterbein in. Barring a win against Mount Union down the road, I think I'm probably done with Baldwin-Wallace.
There was some opportunity to shuffle things around. Do I hit Wittenberg (#3) because they didn't lay waste to CWRU? Do I flip IWU (#4) and NCC (#5) because of their MOV's this week? Do I ding Allegheny (#7) for a ho-hummer against Oberlin? Do I bump Wabash (#8) for a stellar game against CMU?
Ultimately, I decided to let things sit for a week. Witt's playing a non-league road game the week before their biggest game of the year. Close game excused. NCC closed the gap on IWU for me, but they've still got that pesky loss hanging around. IWU gets a reprieve and we should get a good comparison for these two with NCC playing at Millikin this weekend. Allegheny was almost guaranteed to have an exhale game (almost exhaled a bit too much though...39 scoreless minutes against Oberlin is not so good). Wabash made a good case to move up, but for right now I think they still have to be behind Allegheny.
My radar teams are basically the same as last week. Franklin and OWU are just waiting for enough teams to lose (although they both did get leaped by Otterbein for me...Otterbein has the better result). I'm also still watching Concordia-Chicago and Elmhurst and Millikin.
Through five weeks, I've pretty much stuck to the eye test and h2h results where appropriate. After this week, everybody will be halfway through the season and I'll start taking a closer look at some other things like schedule strength and results against common opponents and factoring those things in as well. Might cause a bit of a shakeup in my ballot next week.
Fear not - I have escaped North Dakota! And just in time ... after two glorious weeks in the Black Hills and Teddy Roosevelt NP (sunny and 70s and 80s every day), we left Medora ND Tuesday morning; Wednesday night they got heavy snow!
I know the scores from last week, but little else. I'll try to catch up this weekend, and WILL submit a ballot. (Don't put too much stock in IWU's narrow escape from Millikin - that game is usually weird. In 2009, IWU beat both NCC and Wheaton, plus Wabash in the tourney, but lost their only regular-season game, AT HOME, to 3-4 Millikin. To underscore the weirdness, Millikin played NCC, IWU, and Wheaton in consecutive games - they lost to NCC and Wheaton by a combined 99-7! :P)
I've submitted my ballot... it was quite difficult after the top 3.
I still don't see where all this Heidelberg love is coming from. I did move them up a spot to 7th this week but only because of two teams losing. Their opponents are a combined 3-23 this season.
Also Franklin is almost back on my ballot. I've got them up to 11th.
Here's the North Region Fan Poll for this week. We're not getting any closer to a consensus. 5 different teams get a 2nd place vote. We had a 9th place vote for a team not in the North. It has been omitted.
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 60 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 6)
T3. Illinois Wesleyan 54 pts (2, 3, 3, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6)
T3. Wheaton 54 pts (3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 6, 8)
5. Heidelberg 49 pts (2, 2, 4, 5, 5, 7, 7, 7)
6. Wabash 48 pts (4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6)
7. Otterbein 34 pts (2, 4, 6, 8, 8, 8, 8, 10)
8. Franklin 22 pts (5, 7, 7, 8, 9, 9, 10, -)
9. Wittenberg 20 pts (7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, -, -)
10. Concordia (Ill.) 6 pts (9, 9, 10, 10, -, -, -, -)
ARV
Baldwin-Wallace 3 pts (9, 10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Elmhurst 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Ohio Wesleyan 2 pts (10, 10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Albion 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Wes Anderson, wally_wabash, smedindy, ADL70, Mr. Ypsi, FCGrizzlesGrad, newcardfan, and short.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on October 11, 2012, 09:39:14 AM
Here's the North Region Fan Poll for this week. We're not getting any closer to a consensus. 5 different teams get a 2nd place vote. We had a 9th place vote for a team not in the North. It has been omitted.
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 60 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 6)
T3. Illinois Wesleyan 54 pts (2, 3, 3, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6)
T3. Wheaton 54 pts (3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 6, 8)
5. Heidelberg 49 pts (2, 2, 4, 5, 5, 7, 7, 7)
6. Wabash 48 pts (4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6)
7. Otterbein 34 pts (2, 4, 6, 8, 8, 8, 8, 10)
8. Franklin 22 pts (5, 7, 7, 8, 9, 9, 10, -)
9. Wittenberg 20 pts (7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, -, -)
10. Concordia (Ill.) 6 pts (9, 9, 10, 10, -, -, -, -)
ARV
Baldwin-Wallace 3 pts (9, 10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Elmhurst 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Ohio Wesleyan 2 pts (10, 10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Albion 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Wes Anderson, wally_wabash, smedindy, ADL70, Mr. Ypsi, FCGrizzlesGrad, newcardfan, and short.
The CCIW begins to shape up next week when the three front runners finally begin play.
Quote from: newcardfan on October 11, 2012, 10:00:19 AM
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on October 11, 2012, 09:39:14 AM
Here's the North Region Fan Poll for this week. We're not getting any closer to a consensus. 5 different teams get a 2nd place vote. We had a 9th place vote for a team not in the North. It has been omitted.
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 60 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 6)
T3. Illinois Wesleyan 54 pts (2, 3, 3, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6)
T3. Wheaton 54 pts (3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 6, 8)
5. Heidelberg 49 pts (2, 2, 4, 5, 5, 7, 7, 7)
6. Wabash 48 pts (4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6)
7. Otterbein 34 pts (2, 4, 6, 8, 8, 8, 8, 10)
8. Franklin 22 pts (5, 7, 7, 8, 9, 9, 10, -)
9. Wittenberg 20 pts (7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, -, -)
10. Concordia (Ill.) 6 pts (9, 9, 10, 10, -, -, -, -)
ARV
Baldwin-Wallace 3 pts (9, 10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Elmhurst 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Ohio Wesleyan 2 pts (10, 10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Albion 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Wes Anderson, wally_wabash, smedindy, ADL70, Mr. Ypsi, FCGrizzlesGrad, newcardfan, and short.
The CCIW begins to shape up next week when the three front runners finally begin play.
And you'll get some OAC clarity this week with Ott playing at Berg.
As promised, I started to take into account some additional factors like strength of schedule now that we're halfway through and those things have teeth. I'm also looking a little more closely at quality wins since we're getting to a point where almost everybody has lost...we've seen that everybody can lose so I'm increasingly intererested in who you've actually beaten. The lens change made a difference in my ballot this week.
Mount Union is the exception to all of those principles. I've been conditioned to believe that the win against Franklin is a quality win, but we won't really know until November. UMU's SOS is also awful. But they've won their games by a total score of 800-7 (unofficial) which is overwhelming evidence that they can be at the top of the rankings. After UMU is where things shook up for me.
Otterbein jumped from 10 to 2 this week. They are undefeated and they have played a better schedule than the other undefeateds, namely Heidelberg who was #2 for me last week. IWU slides up to 3, Heidelberg down to 4. I feel compelled to keep these undefeated teams from good leagues ahead of teams that have lost (and Concordia...sorry Cougs).
Next we get into the 1-loss teams. I have Wabash at 5, North Central at 6, Witt at 7, Wheaton at 8. Wabash has a better win than North Central does and has played a slightly better schedule, per the math. Neither Wheaton or Witt has a quality win, but Witt has a slightly better schedule so is ahead there for now.
Then I went ahead and put Concordia-Chicago in at 9. They have a really good SOS metric, and they now have a win of some note, having beat the team that just knocked off the favorite in the MWC.
Franklin has re-entered at #10 for me. It's tenuous. Franklin needs to keep mashing people to stay in here because the math isn't favorable for them down the road.
Just off the list and on the radar: B-W, OWU, Elmhurst, and Adrian. Albion and Allegheny have drifted far away from the top 10.
Agreed re: CCIW and OAC clarity coming up soon.
I'm surprised Baldwin-Wallace is still getting any votes, to be honest; they lost badly to the only really good team they played and have three one-score wins against teams in the bottom half of the OAC (although all were road games). Although, now that I look at it, they'll probably float back up with a few winnable games in a row before ending with UMU and Heidelberg, and furthermore, it's hard for me to justify some of the ORV candidates as better than B-W:
Concordia-Chicago has a nice opening win over 5-1 Lake Forest, but other than that hasn't played anyone (and really won't for a while because the NATHC isn't that strong, Benedictine's win over Albion notwithstanding...while we're on that subject, who is still voting for 2-loss Albion at the bottom of the poll? Albion has one quality win, but losses to 2-3 Benedictine and 4-2 Trine, neither of whom play in a particularly tough conference).
We'll figure out if Ohio Wesleyan belongs here on 10/20 and 10/27, respectively. If they can win one of those games and show well in the other, they'll probably earn a lower-rung spot in the poll.
Also, just because I'm curious, is the hanging 9th place vote for CMU? Even if we were in the North, I'm not sure we're THAT good, but I could see the confusion because we've played virtually all North teams this season.
All that stuff said, good stuff guys, thanks for providing discussion fodder!
My ballot for this week (I wouldn't do this if I were running the poll, but I seriously doubt I will contaminate anyone's ballot! :P).
1. UMU (DUH!!)
2. NCC (to me, also duh!, but some disagree. since the opening game hiccup, they have destroyed everyone, and, until proven otherwise, are still THE team in the CCIW)
3. IWU (since I bleed green, I have no issue with the voter who has them #2. ;D I would have an issue with anyone who votes them less than #3 or 4 this week!)
4. Heidi (a shutout of Ott clinches the spot)
5. Wabash (would they beat Heidi? quite possibly, but Heidi is undefeated)
6. Witt (hard to separate them from Wabash)
7. Elmhurst (takes a big jump with defeat of Wheaton; ONLY loss is AT NCC)
8. Wheaton (my gut says they are top 5; the scoreboard says if they lose to IWU, they are history)
9. Franklin (lost the only two games that could have moved them way up)
10 OWU (STILL undefeated; STILL untested)
I REALLY wanted to include Adrian and CUC, but ran out of room. And they (and Franklin) have nobody on their schedule to prove their worth, so only losses by others can move them up.
I'll wait til the poll is posted, but I do believe he results from this weekend provide quite a bit of clarity.
How about Heidelberg? When I was playing, in the not-too-distant past, they didn't win a game for several seasons running. Now a top 25 team and (probably) the best OAC team whose name doesn't begin with Mount. Wow.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 14, 2012, 08:11:59 AM
I'll wait til the poll is posted, but I do believe he results from this weekend provide quite a bit of clarity.
How about Heidelberg? When I was playing, in the not-too-distant past, they didn't win a game for several seasons running. Now a top 25 team and (probably) the best OAC team whose name doesn't begin with Mount. Wow.
Agree on some clarity, we'll see what happens with a 2 loss Wheaton (I wouldn't have thought would happen before the played NC and IWU). Next week's game against IWU will be the one to watch.
I finally turned my ballot in. I always do my top 25 before the north and I was completely redoing my top 25. Only the top 4 north teams made my top 25.
Heidelberg is slowly creeping up... mostly because teams ahead keep losing. Until I see how they do their final 3 games I'm still a bit leery of jumping on the bandwagon. They have finally cracked my top 5 though.
I've finally slipped my Grizzlies back in at 10th but it was a mess trying to fill out the last 2 spots. Franklin, Ohio Wesleyan, Otterbein, and Wheaton were all in the discussion.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 17, 2012, 03:59:56 AM
I finally turned my ballot in. I always do my top 25 before the north and I was completely redoing my top 25. Only the top 4 north teams made my top 25.
Heidelberg is slowly creeping up... mostly because teams ahead keep losing. Until I see how they do their final 3 games I'm still a bit leery of jumping on the bandwagon. They have finally cracked my top 5 though.
I've finally slipped my Grizzlies back in at 10th but it was a mess trying to fill out the last 2 spots. Franklin, Ohio Wesleyan, Otterbein, and Wheaton were all in the discussion.
The way this season is going, that could happen for a couple of weeks yet.
Here's this week's North Region Fan Poll. Sorry for the delay, folks. It's usually Thursday before I can catch my breath long enough to get this done. Getting more tightly bunched at the top, but certainly no closer to agreeing on who is the #2 team.
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 66 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 5)
3. Heidelberg 61 pts (2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5)
4. Illinois Wesleyan 60 pts (2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5)
5. Wasbash 53 pts (3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5)
6. Elmhurst 30 pts (6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 9)
7. Wittenberg 29 pts (6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 9, -)
8. Franklin 23 pts (6, 6, 7, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10)
9. Otterbein 16 pts (6, 7, 8, 9, 9, -, -, -)
10. Concordia (Ill) 9 pts (8, 8, 10, 10, 10, -, -, -)
ARV
Wheaton 6 pts (8, 9, 10, -, -, -, -, -)
Ohio Wesleyan 5 pts (8, 10, 10, -, -, -, -, -)
Baldwin-Wallace 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -,- -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Wes Anderson, wally_wabash, smedindy, ADL70, Mr. Ypsi, FCGrizzlesGrad, newcardfan, and short.
Time for the weekly journey through my thought process...
Mount Union remains, by a LONG ways, at the top of my list. I know their schedule stinks so far, but seriously. 7 points all season long. Good grief.
One week after launching Otterbein all the way up to #2, they go and get bageled by Heidelberg so...so much for that. With Otterbein losing, I've moved IWU up one spot to #2 and Heidelberg up one to #3. You could probably push Heidelberg in front of IWU if you wanted because Heidelberg has a good win so far, IWU is just getting into the meaty part of their schedule. I'm giving IWU the nod for the moment...to be confirmed or proven outright wrong this weekend.
Now we get to teams that have lost. Wabash goes up one spot to #4 for me, North Central up one to #5, and finally Otterbein slides in at #6. Wabash and North Central are an interesting case. They both lost games, at home, to heavy underdogs. It's a wash there for me (is UW-L "better" than Allegheny? Maybe, I don't know. I don't think either is particularly "good", so we'd just be arguing degrees of mediocre). Wabash, however, has a road win at Witt which is better than anything North Central has done so far (Elmhurst helped the Cardinals out last week though). Otterbein grades out better than the next team in my line, #7 Wittenberg.
Next up I have Concordia-Chicago at #8. They grade out well on schedule strength, and Lake Forest just keeps on helping the Cougs out. My #9 is Elmhurst, who I feel like I'm undervaluing a bit here, but this is where I put them. My #10 is Franklin. Apologies to OWU this week, who got leaped by Elmhurst who just had a solid result that was far superior to any win on OWU's schedule. Beat CMU this weekend, and OWU will get in and Franklin will be gone. Also lingering just outside the 10 for me (in order) are B-W, Adrian, and Wheaton.
LAX is rated a lot higher on Massey than Allegheny. Part of that is the WIAC and the other part is the close game they played with Oshkosh along with their North Central win. But still it's meh vs. meh.
This week's North Region Fan Poll.
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 68 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4)
3. Heidelberg 65 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4)
4. Wabash 58 pts (3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5)
5. Elmhurst 39 pts (4, 5, 5, 5, 7, 7, 8, 8)
6. Illinois Wesleyan 34 pts (5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8, 8)
7. Wittenberg 29 pts (5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 9, 9, -)
8. Franklin 22 pts (5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 10, 10 ,10)
9. Wheaton 19 pts (5, 6, 7, 8, 9, -, -, -,)
10. Ohio Wesleyan 15 pts (7, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 10, -)
ARV:
Concordia (Ill.) 10 pts (7, 8, 10, 10, 10, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Wes Anderson, wally_wabash, smedindy, ADL70, Mr. Ypsi, FCGrizzlesGrad, newcardfan, and short.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on October 25, 2012, 10:34:44 AM
This week's North Region Fan Poll.
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 68 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4)
3. Heidelberg 65 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4)
4. Wabash 58 pts (3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5)
5. Elmhurst 39 pts (4, 5, 5, 5, 7, 7, 8, 8)
6. Illinois Wesleyan 34 pts (5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8, 8)
7. Wittenberg 29 pts (5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 9, 9, -)
8. Franklin 22 pts (5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 10, 10 ,10)
9. Wheaton 19 pts (5, 6, 7, 8, 9, -, -, -,)
10. Ohio Wesleyan 15 pts (7, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 10, -)
ARV:
Concordia (Ill.) 10 pts (7, 8, 10, 10, 10, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Wes Anderson, wally_wabash, smedindy, ADL70, Mr. Ypsi, FCGrizzlesGrad, newcardfan, and short.
Looks like we are finally starting to see some consensus.
Just a couple of major moves for me this week...
- Otterbein out, OWU in. Is it fair to penalize Otterbein for losing to Mount Union? Probably not, but I think this is less a punishment for Otterbein as it is a recognition of Ohio Wesleyan. The Bishops won a good road game and showed some real grit coming from behind (twice) to do it. It's time for these guys to be on this list.
- I felt like I had undervalued Elmhurst last week, and the IWU/Wheaton result made it really easy and logical to adjust that. I bumped Elmhurst up to 5, IWU down to 7, which makes sense given results against common opponents.
Other than that, everybody just below IWU last week shimmied up one spot. Relatively calm week on my ballot this time around.
Quote from: newcardfan on October 25, 2012, 10:42:29 AM
Looks like we are finally starting to see some consensus.
Consensus? I must disagree with you on that :D We can't be having consensus around here... am I going to have to throw Hanover on my ballot next week to shake things up? ???
My ballot went similar to Wally's... IWU fell from 4th to 8th which moved Heidelberg up 1, Elmhurst up 2 because they leaped Witt, and Concordia up 1. Then Otterbein fell out from 9th but Wheaton leaped both OWU and Franklin to replace them leaving Franklin and OWU in 10th and 11th just like last week.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 25, 2012, 11:13:59 AM
Quote from: newcardfan on October 25, 2012, 10:42:29 AM
Looks like we are finally starting to see some consensus.
Consensus? I must disagree with you on that :D We can't be having consensus around here... am I going to have to throw Hanover on my ballot next week to shake things up? ???
My ballot went similar to Wally's... IWU fell from 4th to 8th which moved Heidelberg up 1, Elmhurst up 2 because they leaped Witt, and Concordia up 1. Then Otterbein fell out from 9th but Wheaton leaped both OWU and Franklin to replace them leaving Franklin and OWU in 10th and 11th just like last week.
This almost sounds like the scarecrow telling the Tin Man what the winged monkeys did , "They tore my legs off and threw them over there. Then they took my chest out and threw it over there"...... ;D ;D ;D that's the poll, all over the place, and a different place every week ;D ;D ;D
I'm just glad to see it relatively similar from one week to the next. IWU's loss hurt them, but that's just about the only major change.
Tough week to be the guy who votes IWU #2 every week...
Here's the North Region Fan Poll:
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 70 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3)
3. Wabash 60 pts (2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5)
4 Heidelberg 59 pts (2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 6)
5. Elmhurst 47 pts (4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6)
6. Wittenberg 36 pts (5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 8)
7. Franklin 29 pts (5, 6, 6, 7, 8, 9, 9, 10)
8. Concordia (Ill.) 23 pts (7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9, 10)
9. Wheaton 22 pts (5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 10, )
10. Ohio Wesleyan 12 pts (8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 10, -, -)
ARV:
Baldwin-Wallace 3 pts (10, 10, 10, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Wes Anderson, wally_wabash, smedindy, ADL70, Mr. Ypsi, FCGrizzlesGrad, newcardfan, and short.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on November 01, 2012, 09:39:40 AM
Here's the North Region Fan Poll:
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 70 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3)
3. Wabash 60 pts (2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5)
4 Heidelberg 59 pts (2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 6)
5. Elmhurst 47 pts (4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6)
6. Wittenberg 36 pts (5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 8)
7. Franklin 29 pts (5, 6, 6, 7, 8, 9, 9, 10)
8. Concordia (Ill.) 23 pts (7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9, 10)
9. Wheaton 22 pts (5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 10, )
10. Ohio Wesleyan 12 pts (8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 10, -, -)
ARV:
Baldwin-Wallace 3 pts (10, 10, 10, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Wes Anderson, wally_wabash, smedindy, ADL70, Mr. Ypsi, FCGrizzlesGrad, newcardfan, and short.
Definitely starting to shape up.
Not a ton of change on my ballot this week.
- I didn't crush Heidelberg for the Mount Union loss. Moved them down to #4 which slides Wabash and North Central up to 2 and 3, respectively. I had to move Heidelberg below those two because they just don't have any quality wins there.
- Elmhurst and Wittenberg remained locked in at 5 and 6 for me.
- Last week's #7, IWU, has fallen out. Feel bad for the Titans, but the last five quarters of football have been just brutal for them. Sliding up to take their spot in 7th is CUC for me. Hey, they are undefeated and they have a win over another probable league champion...which nobody else on this list can say (Wabash may wind up with two such wins).
- Franklin is up to 8. I actually moved OWU up one spot to 9 this week. Don't let the final score from the Wabash game fool you...OWU is a very good team. I'll echo a sentiment from the NCAC forum that I think they could beat Wittenberg right now. But on the poll here, the common result vs. Wabash (both at home, both were homecomings) compels me to keep OWU behind Witt.
- And then I've placed Wheaton back in at #10. Maybe temporarily...so Adrian and B-W, you're on deck.
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 01, 2012, 11:09:53 AM
Not a ton of change on my ballot this week.
No, me either. Although, this is first week in a few that nothing ridiculous happened. That helps.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on November 01, 2012, 11:43:48 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 01, 2012, 11:09:53 AM
Not a ton of change on my ballot this week.
No, me either. Although, this is first week in a few that nothing ridiculous happened. That helps.
We still have two weeks to go-let's hope it stays that way :D
Quote from: newcardfan on November 02, 2012, 07:53:47 AM
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on November 01, 2012, 11:43:48 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 01, 2012, 11:09:53 AM
Not a ton of change on my ballot this week.
No, me either. Although, this is first week in a few that nothing ridiculous happened. That helps.
We still have two weeks to go-let's hope it stays that way :D
Way to jinx your own team, newcardfan! NCC dominated (at home) by Wheaton; meanwhile, Wabash is dominated (at home) by Oberlin (Oberlin!) - what a mess to vote on this week! :P
How to sort the CCIW cluster? Wheaton dominated NCC, NCC destroyed Elmhurst, Elmhurst barely beat Wheaton, but is the only one with only one loss! ::)
And what about the NCAC? Wabash beat both OWU and Witt on the road, but OWU beat both Allegheny and Oberlin, while Witt beat Allegheny and will probably beat Oberlin next week (and OWU and Witt don't meet this year)! ::)
Right now I'm leaning towards the OAC duo on top, then the CCIW triplets (in whatever order), followed by the NCAC trio (in whatever order), with Franklin and CUC (perhaps even Adrian) sprinkled in somewhere, but a lot of head-scratching before I submit my ballot (which has usually been in by now). :-\
Quote from: newcardfan on November 02, 2012, 07:53:47 AM
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on November 01, 2012, 11:43:48 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 01, 2012, 11:09:53 AM
Not a ton of change on my ballot this week.
No, me either. Although, this is first week in a few that nothing ridiculous happened. That helps.
We still have two weeks to go-let's hope it stays that way :D
spoke too soon
Can we just put Mount Union for all the slots? I wonder if I could get away with putting Anderson, Hiram, Olivet and Marietta on my ballot. They have about the same chance of losing as anyone else we'll put on ;D
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 03, 2012, 08:51:49 PM
Quote from: newcardfan on November 02, 2012, 07:53:47 AM
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on November 01, 2012, 11:43:48 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 01, 2012, 11:09:53 AM
Not a ton of change on my ballot this week.
No, me either. Although, this is first week in a few that nothing ridiculous happened. That helps.
We still have two weeks to go-let's hope it stays that way :D
Way to jinx your own team, newcardfan! NCC dominated (at home) by Wheaton; meanwhile, Wabash is dominated (at home) by Oberlin (Oberlin!) - what a mess to vote on this week! :P
How to sort the CCIW cluster? Wheaton dominated NCC, NCC destroyed Elmhurst, Elmhurst barely beat Wheaton, but is the only one with only one loss! ::)
And what about the NCAC? Wabash beat both OWU and Witt on the road, but OWU beat both Allegheny and Oberlin, while Witt beat Allegheny and will probably beat Oberlin next week (and OWU and Witt don't meet this year)! ::)
Right now I'm leaning towards the OAC duo on top, then the CCIW triplets (in whatever order), followed by the NCAC trio (in whatever order), with Franklin and CUC (perhaps even Adrian) sprinkled in somewhere, but a lot of head-scratching before I submit my ballot (which has usually been in by now). :-\
I didn't jinx them, they just played like $&*# today. And who would have thought Wabash would lose?
Quote from: newcardfan on November 03, 2012, 09:02:53 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 03, 2012, 08:51:49 PM
Quote from: newcardfan on November 02, 2012, 07:53:47 AM
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on November 01, 2012, 11:43:48 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 01, 2012, 11:09:53 AM
Not a ton of change on my ballot this week.
No, me either. Although, this is first week in a few that nothing ridiculous happened. That helps.
We still have two weeks to go-let's hope it stays that way :D
Way to jinx your own team, newcardfan! NCC dominated (at home) by Wheaton; meanwhile, Wabash is dominated (at home) by Oberlin (Oberlin!) - what a mess to vote on this week! :P
How to sort the CCIW cluster? Wheaton dominated NCC, NCC destroyed Elmhurst, Elmhurst barely beat Wheaton, but is the only one with only one loss! ::)
And what about the NCAC? Wabash beat both OWU and Witt on the road, but OWU beat both Allegheny and Oberlin, while Witt beat Allegheny and will probably beat Oberlin next week (and OWU and Witt don't meet this year)! ::)
Right now I'm leaning towards the OAC duo on top, then the CCIW triplets (in whatever order), followed by the NCAC trio (in whatever order), with Franklin and CUC (perhaps even Adrian) sprinkled in somewhere, but a lot of head-scratching before I submit my ballot (which has usually been in by now). :-\
I didn't jinx them, they just played like $&*# today. And who would have thought Wabash would lose?
Oberlin's coaches and players sure did. They played and executed a great game. All the credit in the world goes to Oberlin for that win on Saturday.
I've finally put together my ballot... was it too much to ask for 2 straight calm weeks? Only Mount Union stayed the same and just 1 other moved only 1 spot, plus two new teams also made my ballot.
I wonder how much consensus we'll see this week.
Here it is in all it's glory - the North Region Fan Poll. We'll do one more next week after the playoff draw and then we'll do one after the Stagg.
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Heidelberg 69 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 5)
3. Elmhurst 61 pts (2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 5, 5)
4. North Central 53 pts (3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 7)
5. Wheaton 48 pts (4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 7)
6. Wittenberg 34 pts (3, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8)
7. Franklin 30 pts (4, 6, 6, 6, 8, 9, 10, 10)
8. Wabash 25 pts (6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, -, -)
9. Concordia (Ill.) 23 pts (4, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10)
10. Ohio Wesleyan 13 pts (7, 9, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, -)
ARV:
Baldwin-Wallace 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Otterbein 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Adrian 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Wes Anderson, wally_wabash, smedindy, ADL70, Mr. Ypsi, FCGrizzlesGrad, newcardfan, and short.
EDIT: I made a mistake in regards to Concordia & OWU. I have now fixed that.
It seems like there's a lot of agreement this week... and then there's my ballot with outliers left and right. :-\
1 Mount, 2 Elmhurst, 3 Witt, 4 Concordia, 5 Heidelberg, 6 Wheaton, 7 N Central, 8 Franklin, 9 Otterbein, 10 Adrian
The end results look good to me so maybe your "outlier" ways are the straw that stirs the drink!
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 08, 2012, 10:15:19 AM
It seems like there's a lot of agreement this week... and then there's my ballot with outliers left and right. :-\
1 Mount, 2 Elmhurst, 3 Witt, 4 Concordia, 5 Heidelberg, 6 Wheaton, 7 N Central, 8 Franklin, 9 Otterbein, 10 Adrian
is sandbag one word or should it be hypenated FC Grad?
One word.
I guess the question I'd ask, GrizzliesGrad, is why you did what you did with Heidelberg. They are a one loss team in a good conference with the only loss being to Mount. Heidi played them better than anybody else has all year.
Witt feels high, but I guess I can understand that. That's a big drop for NCC, who did beat Elmhurst soundly. I'm still higher than you on Franklin. They've done everything that could be reasonably be asked of them. They weren't going to beat Mount and they weren't going to beat Butler. The schedule is the schedule, but they've done what a lot of other teams in this poll couldn't. They beat who they were supposed to beat.
Heidelberg, in my eyes, has only had one hiccup this year when they faced Muskingum in the ultimate trap (after Otterbein and before Mt. Union) and ONLY won 28-14. Otherwise, they've performed like a team that is only behind Mt. Union in the region.
The NCAC and CCIW messes may obscure how good some of those teams really are.
Quote from: smedindy on November 08, 2012, 11:23:16 AM
Heidelberg, in my eyes, has only had one hiccup this year when they faced Muskingum in the ultimate trap (after Otterbein and before Mt. Union) and ONLY won 28-14. Otherwise, they've performed like a team that is only behind Mt. Union in the region.
The NCAC and CCIW messes may obscure how good some of those teams really are.
I don't think that Musky win is
quite as bad as it looks for the reason you mentioned and also because I think Musky's better than their record. If you dig into Musky's schedule they're obviously 2-7 which stinks, but they also played BW, Otterbein, ONU and Waynesburg tough. Lost to BW in OT. Lost by 1 to ONU on a last second TD. They're definitely not good, but they're good enough to hang with some pretty good teams. Now if Berg had only beaten Wilm 28-14 I'd be concerned.
Quote from: smedindy on November 08, 2012, 11:23:16 AM
Heidelberg, in my eyes, has only had one hiccup this year when they faced Muskingum in the ultimate trap (after Otterbein and before Mt. Union) and ONLY won 28-14. Otherwise, they've performed like a team that is only behind Mt. Union in the region.
The NCAC and CCIW messes may obscure how good some of those teams really are.
I agree. If seeding is done based on body of work Heidelberg is a 2 or a 3 at worst. IMO. SOS is partially a math exercise that feeds on itself. Mount is Mount and Berg played them tougher than anyone else (FC saw what Mount was all about). They also beat every team (so far) they should beat. BW may throw a curve this SAT though.
I've just never been high on Heidelberg all year (as evidenced by me usually being the lowest vote for them). Honestly I see little difference between them and Wittenberg while everyone else apparently has a significant gap.
If I could, I'd vote:
1 Mount Union
5a Elmhurst, 5b Witt, 5c Concordia, 5d Heidelberg
6a Wheaton, 6b N Central, 6c Franklin
9 Ott
10 Adrian
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 08, 2012, 09:50:50 PM
I've just never been high on Heidelberg all year (as evidenced by me usually being the lowest vote for them). Honestly I see little difference between them and Wittenberg while everyone else apparently has a significant gap.
If I could, I'd vote:
1 Mount Union
5a Elmhurst, 5b Witt, 5c Concordia, 5d Heidelberg
6a Wheaton, 6b N Central, 6c Franklin
9 Ott
10 Adrian
Or how about MOUNT-everyone else is just along for the ride ;D
FC Grad - Whats your deal with The Berg? The Berg's D would shut Witt's O down! The game wouldn't even be close.
Watch what you wish for, as the saying goes.
Did we not have a poll this week?
Here was my ballot... not too many changes, I flipped Heidelberg-Concordia as well as Otterbein-Adrian
1) Mount Union
2) Elmhurst
3) Wittenberg
4) Heidelberg
5) Concordia-Chicago
6) Wheaton
7) North Central
8) Franklin
9) Adrian
10) Otterbein
Here was my ballot this week. I re-arranged the CCIW trio (there is still no real way to distinguish among them, so I went more with 'gut'), flipped Wabash and Witt, and subbed Adrian for OWU at #10 (sorry Bishops, but the Bulldog win at Huntingdon was damned impressive!):
1. UMU
2. Heidi
3. NCC
4. Wheaton
5. Elmhurst
6. Wabash
7. Witt
8. CUC
9. Franklin
10 Adrian
Quote from: TheBerg40 on November 09, 2012, 11:22:13 PM
FC Grad - Whats your deal with The Berg? The Berg's D would shut Witt's O down! The game wouldn't even be close.
Well, that settles that I guess. I didn't catch any of the game so I don't know if there were a bunch of turnovers or injuries to explain it.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 17, 2012, 03:08:38 PM
Quote from: TheBerg40 on November 09, 2012, 11:22:13 PM
FC Grad - Whats your deal with The Berg? The Berg's D would shut Witt's O down! The game wouldn't even be close.
Well, that settles that I guess. I didn't catch any of the game so I don't know if there were a bunch of turnovers or injuries to explain it.
Turnovers and then Florence became insane after it was 31-13.
Quote from: TheBerg40 on November 09, 2012, 11:22:13 PM
FC Grad - Whats your deal with The Berg? The Berg's D would shut Witt's O down! The game wouldn't even be close.
Sorry berg40, Spoke a little to soon. Berg had a great season though and I hope they have continued success next year.
Quote from: smedindy on November 17, 2012, 03:16:15 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 17, 2012, 03:08:38 PM
Quote from: TheBerg40 on November 09, 2012, 11:22:13 PM
FC Grad - Whats your deal with The Berg? The Berg's D would shut Witt's O down! The game wouldn't even be close.
Well, that settles that I guess. I didn't catch any of the game so I don't know if there were a bunch of turnovers or injuries to explain it.
Turnovers and then Florence became insane after it was 31-13.
I watched/listened to it and to me it boiled down to 2 things, one specific and one broad. Specifically the back-to-back fumbles KILLED them. You give up the tying TD then muff the kick, give up another TD and fumble the very 1st play AGAIN and give up ANOTHER short field TD? Killer. You go from tied to down 14 in what seemed like 30 seconds because you can't hold onto the ball.
But the bigger issue was they couldn't stop Witt. Berg looked not so good against BW (not an offensive juggernaut) the week before. And even in the 1st half when they were up they were giving up yards and first downs. It was pretty clear they weren't going to keep Witt off the board consistently unless something changed. It didn't. Like I said on the OAC board, their offense is still ahead of their defense. They scored a lot of points on Witt and that was without their best player by far so clearly they can score. They just have work to do on the other side of the ball if they want to make a deep run. They're very young. They'll be back and better next year.
We're back and almost the same as we ever were! Here's the Pre-season North Region Fan Poll! Welcome Li'l Giant to the poll, who will vote in short's place. We'll have 7 voters eventually, but this poll only has 6 because Mr. Ypsi is on vacation.
1. Mount Union 60 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 52 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3)
3. Wittenberg 43 pts (2, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5)
4. Franklin 37 pts (2, 3, 6, 6, 6, 6)
5. Heidelberg 35 pts (4, 4, 4, 6, 6, 7)
6. Wheaton 34 pts (3, 3, 5, 7, 7, 7)
7. Wabash 31 ots (4, 5, 5, 5, 8, 8)
8. Ohio Wesleyan 14 pts (8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 10)
9. Baldwin-Wallace 11 pts (7, 8, 9, 9, -, -)
10. Illinois Wesleyan 6 pts (9, 10, 10, 10, 10, -)
Adrian 4 pts (7, -, -, -, -, -)
Elmhurst 2 pt (9, -, -, -, -, -)
Otterbein 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Wes Anderson, wally_wabash, FCGrizzliesGrad, smedindy, NCF, and Li'l Giant.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on August 11, 2013, 03:52:33 PM
We're back and almost the same as we ever were!
Yep, same as ever... I'm the outlier of the group ::) At least no one can accuse me of having Heidelberg too low this year ;)
1. Mount Union 60 pts (
1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 52 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3,
3)
3. Wittenberg 43 pts (
2, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5)
4. Franklin 37 pts (2, 3, 6, 6, 6,
6)
5. Heidelberg 35 pts (
4, 4, 4, 6, 6, 7)
6. Wheaton 34 pts (3, 3,
5, 7, 7, 7)
7. Wabash 31 ots (4, 5, 5, 5, 8,
8)
8. Ohio Wesleyan 14 pts (8, 8, 8, 9, 9,
10)
9. Baldwin-Wallace 11 pts (7, 8, 9, 9, -,
-)
10. Illinois Wesleyan 6 pts (9, 10, 10, 10, 10,
-)
Adrian 4 pts (
7, -, -, -, -, -)
Elmhurst 2 pt (
9, -, -, -, -, -)
Otterbein 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -)
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on August 11, 2013, 03:52:33 PM
We're back and almost the same as we ever were! Here's the Pre-season North Region Fan Poll! Welcome Li'l Giant to the poll, who will vote in short's place. We'll have 7 voters eventually, but this poll only has 6 because Mr. Ypsi is on vacation.
1. Mount Union 60 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 52 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3)
3. Wittenberg 43 pts (2, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5)
4. Franklin 37 pts (2, 3, 6, 6, 6, 6)
5. Heidelberg 35 pts (4, 4, 4, 6, 6, 7)
6. Wheaton 34 pts (3, 3, 5, 7, 7, 7)
7. Wabash 31 ots (4, 5, 5, 5, 8, 8)
8. Ohio Wesleyan 14 pts (8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 10)
9. Baldwin-Wallace 11 pts (7, 8, 9, 9, -, -)
10. Illinois Wesleyan 6 pts (9, 10, 10, 10, 10, -)
Adrian 4 pts (7, -, -, -, -, -)
Elmhurst 2 pt (9, -, -, -, -, -)
Otterbein 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Wes Anderson, wally_wabash, FCGrizzliesGrad, smedindy, NCF, and Li'l Giant.
Not too bad for a pre-season poll. Surprised at Wheaton so low (I had them at 3) but after a few weeks, things will sort themselves out.
I thought I was being generous to Wheaton at 7. Hard to overlook the whole no Hiben thing.
Quote from: wally_wabash on August 12, 2013, 10:06:27 AM
I thought I was being generous to Wheaton at 7. Hard to overlook the whole no Hiben thing.
They have two 6'6 and one 6'3 WR's waiting to step up. This could be another three team battle for the top as NC, Wheaton and IWU have large senior classes. Could be an exciting yedr in the CCIW.
Quote from: NCF on August 12, 2013, 10:33:58 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on August 12, 2013, 10:06:27 AM
I thought I was being generous to Wheaton at 7. Hard to overlook the whole no Hiben thing.
They have two 6'6 and one 6'3 WR's waiting to step up. This could be another three team battle for the top as NC, Wheaton and IWU have large senior classes. Could be an exciting yedr in the CCIW.
Being tall does not automatically make one a worthwhile WR. Hiben is a manbeast. This much we know. These other guys might be awesome also, but we'll have to wait and see.
Agree with you on the CCIW...that's going to be a fun race to watch this fall.
Just back from Maine - great as always! (Rather chilly at the lake, but two weeks of 'fall' in Maine is still batter than two weeks of 'summer' almost anywhere else!)
Poll looks highly reasonable to me (though without Kickoff or roster study, I'm not ready yet to vote on several teams). Only thing that would have definitely differed if I'd voted is IWU would have gotten a vote of somewhere between 4 and 7. Last year they were 6-0 and ranked #12 in the country when (added to the usual injury problems) they got the one injury they could NOT survive - the QB. #2 had quit preseason; the new #2 was a freshman who looks promising for the future, but was NOT CCIW-ready; they finished 6-4. If Rob Gallik stays healthy this year, I predict a top 4 regional finish, and a top 10 national finish.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on August 14, 2013, 11:40:19 PM
Just back from Maine - great as always! (Rather chilly at the lake, but two weeks of 'fall' in Maine is still batter than two weeks of 'summer' almost anywhere else!)
It was 80 degrees at 8:00 a.m. here in South Texas. I'd trade for that Maine chill in a heartbeat.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on August 11, 2013, 03:52:33 PM
We're back and almost the same as we ever were! Here's the Pre-season North Region Fan Poll! Welcome Li'l Giant to the poll, who will vote in short's place. We'll have 7 voters eventually, but this poll only has 6 because Mr. Ypsi is on vacation.
1. Mount Union 60 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 52 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3)
3. Wittenberg 43 pts (2, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5)
4. Franklin 37 pts (2, 3, 6, 6, 6, 6)
5. Heidelberg 35 pts (4, 4, 4, 6, 6, 7)
6. Wheaton 34 pts (3, 3, 5, 7, 7, 7)
7. Wabash 31 ots (4, 5, 5, 5, 8, 8)
8. Ohio Wesleyan 14 pts (8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 10)
9. Baldwin-Wallace 11 pts (7, 8, 9, 9, -, -)
10. Illinois Wesleyan 6 pts (9, 10, 10, 10, 10, -)
Adrian 4 pts (7, -, -, -, -, -)
Elmhurst 2 pt (9, -, -, -, -, -)
Otterbein 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Wes Anderson, wally_wabash, FCGrizzliesGrad, smedindy, NCF, and Li'l Giant.
I'm a little surprised Mount Union got all the 1st place votes, especially since they have a new coach and very few starters returning.
It's not as if Mount Union has never reloaded before. And Larry Kehres didn't go far. One North Region team has beaten Mount Union in the past 18 seasons. All pretty good reasons to give them the benefit of the doubt in August 2013.
Quote from: TheBerg40 on August 15, 2013, 01:19:41 PM
I'm a little surprised Mount Union got all the 1st place votes, especially since they have a new coach and very few starters returning.
Who would you vote for? Heidelberg? Their best would-be player transferred. To Mount Union. North Central? For all of their hype, they've never been able to get to a game against the Raiders let alone show that they could win such a game. Franklin will get their shot but we have a recent result to suggest that they have a ways to go to be in Mount Union's territory. Wittenberg doesn't have a defense that could hold Mount Union down. Wabash has some other stuff to clean up before we can have a serious Mount Union conversation with them. There's really not a viable alternative to Mount Union that I can see.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on August 14, 2013, 11:40:19 PM
Just back from Maine - great as always! (Rather chilly at the lake, but two weeks of 'fall' in Maine is still batter than two weeks of 'summer' almost anywhere else!)
Poll looks highly reasonable to me (though without Kickoff or roster study, I'm not ready yet to vote on several teams). Only thing that would have definitely differed if I'd voted is IWU would have gotten a vote of somewhere between 4 and 7. Last year they were 6-0 and ranked #12 in the country when (added to the usual injury problems) they got the one injury they could NOT survive - the QB. #2 had quit preseason; the new #2 was a freshman who looks promising for the future, but was NOT CCIW-ready; they finished 6-4. If Rob Gallik stays healthy this year, I predict a top 4 regional finish, and a top 10 national finish.
Yes, they were 6-0, but none of the teams they played had a winning record last season. Same thing in 2011, undefeated until a one loss North Central came into town for Homecoming (one of my favorite games ;)) and shut out the Titans 24-0.I do think, however, that IWU just might be the sleeper team in the CCIW this season, IF they can stay healthy. They get both Wheaton and North Central at home, back-to-back. Those two weeks, plus the Wheaton/NC game could determine the conference champion(s) and possible play-off contenders.
Quote from: wally_wabash on August 15, 2013, 02:36:37 PM
Quote from: TheBerg40 on August 15, 2013, 01:19:41 PM
I'm a little surprised Mount Union got all the 1st place votes, especially since they have a new coach and very few starters returning.
Who would you vote for? Heidelberg? Their best would-be player transferred. To Mount Union. North Central? For all of their hype, they've never been able to get to a game against the Raiders let alone show that they could win such a game. Franklin will get their shot but we have a recent result to suggest that they have a ways to go to be in Mount Union's territory. Wittenberg doesn't have a defense that could hold Mount Union down. Wabash has some other stuff to clean up before we can have a serious Mount Union conversation with them. There's really not a viable alternative to Mount Union that I can see.
Completely agree with all your points, even the painfully obvious one in NC. Ouch-but unfortunately true :(
Quote from: wally_wabash on August 15, 2013, 02:36:37 PM
Quote from: TheBerg40 on August 15, 2013, 01:19:41 PM
I'm a little surprised Mount Union got all the 1st place votes, especially since they have a new coach and very few starters returning.
Who would you vote for? Heidelberg? Their best would-be player transferred. To Mount Union. North Central? For all of their hype, they've never been able to get to a game against the Raiders let alone show that they could win such a game. Franklin will get their shot but we have a recent result to suggest that they have a ways to go to be in Mount Union's territory. Wittenberg doesn't have a defense that could hold Mount Union down. Wabash has some other stuff to clean up before we can have a serious Mount Union conversation with them. There's really not a viable alternative to Mount Union that I can see.
Regarding Germany Woods, Heidelberg did alright last year without him. Cartel Brooks clearly is no slouch.
If someone beats Mt. Union before the playoffs. Otherwise, they're pretty much engraved at #1.
I admit that I paused momentarily before putting Mount Union at the top. It was rather short because I didn't find a better option. I'm very interested to see how Franklin does against them. Franklin is going to be good. I did not vote Franklin 2 or 3, but, in hindsight, I wish I would have.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on August 15, 2013, 01:29:54 PM
It's not as if Mount Union has never reloaded before. And Larry Kehres didn't go far. One North Region team has beaten Mount Union in the past 18 seasons. All pretty good reasons to give them the benefit of the doubt in August 2013.
However, over the last 5 years or so, they really have only played a few North teams out of conference. However, going to the championship game, over the last decade or so is still a good enough reason.
Quote from: smedindy on August 15, 2013, 03:51:09 PM
If someone beats Mt. Union before the playoffs. Otherwise, they're pretty much engraved at #1.
Over the last recent years, I would agree 100%, but with the turnover of the team and the retirement of Kehres, I have reduced my assessment to 75%.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on August 15, 2013, 01:29:54 PM
It's not as if Mount Union has never reloaded before. And Larry Kehres didn't go far. One North Region team has beaten Mount Union in the past 18 seasons. All pretty good reasons to give them the benefit of the doubt in August 2013.
This was my thought process regarding my vote for Mount Union as #1. No telling if they'll be garnering a #1 vote in the final fan poll of the season but there is no real compelling reason to put anyone else at #1.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on August 15, 2013, 03:57:37 PMI'm very interested to see how Franklin does against them. Franklin is going to be good. I did not vote Franklin 2 or 3, but, in hindsight, I wish I would have.
I'm interested to see Franklin too. It would not surprise me for them to end up being the 2nd or 3rd best team in the region.
They may be, but how much love* will they get for rolling through the HCAC? It all depends on how the look against Mt. Union and even Butler - which you can semi compare-and-contrast Witt and Franklin on how they handle the Bulldogs.
Franklin's problem with polling* will be the same, to a lesser extent, as anyone from the MIAA or the NACC where the conferences are shallow. I know we've said the same about the NCAC before, but the middle tier has improved at least.
But if they do well (or well enough) against their first two games, then start to put beat downs on the HCAC dregs with no mercy (until the starters are pulled), they probably will get pollster* respect.
*Naturally, I'm talking nationally because I think we're plugged in enough here to know.
**Thank goodness for playoffs!
Quote from: wally_wabash on August 15, 2013, 02:36:37 PM
Quote from: TheBerg40 on August 15, 2013, 01:19:41 PM
I'm a little surprised Mount Union got all the 1st place votes, especially since they have a new coach and very few starters returning.
Who would you vote for? Heidelberg? Their best would-be player transferred. To Mount Union. North Central? For all of their hype, they've never been able to get to a game against the Raiders let alone show that they could win such a game. Franklin will get their shot but we have a recent result to suggest that they have a ways to go to be in Mount Union's territory. Wittenberg doesn't have a defense that could hold Mount Union down. Wabash has some other stuff to clean up before we can have a serious Mount Union conversation with them. There's really not a viable alternative to Mount Union that I can see.
Of course I would vote Heidelberg #1. Of all the North Region teams, they probably have the most experience and skill returning. But as we all know, talk is cheap. Heidelberg will have to prove it on the football field; thank goodness the start of the season is just around the corner. ;D
Oh and.... whoever picked them 7th should be ashamed of themselves.
Why should I be ashamed of myself? You've got six teams, after Mt. Union, that at this point could be random number generated between 2 and 7. I put North Central, Wheaton, Franklin, Wabash and Witt ahead of them. I may have sold them a bit short, but there's a wafer-thin mint of difference right now between those squads. We'll know more as players report and practice, and definitely even more when its game time. But right now, they're the 7th best team in my eyes, even though they're closer in value to the #2 squad than the #9 team is to them.
This isn't a poll for homers.
I'll second smedindy's point. This isn't a poll for homers. As previously noted, Mount Union has reloaded before and certainly earned the benefit of the doubt.
TheBerg, it's far more laughable to suggest that Heidelberg be ranked #1 than it is to suggest they be ranked #7. Coach Hallett has done a MARVELOUS job building that program and deserves hosannas and accolades all around. However, with that said...they were bounced in the FIRST round of the playoffs last season by a Wittenberg team that was summarily dismissed in the following round. So why should one ranking them #7 in this year's preseason poll be "ashamed" of anything? That's about where they would have been last year, and we have much more recent history in favor of North Central, Wheaton, Franklin, Wittenberg (you know, the team that bounced you guys last year), and Wabash (who beat Wittenberg) than we do Heidelberg.
I'm never a fan of bringing up the long past, but Heidelberg is not far removed from a string of 4-6 seasons (which followed a series of 0-10 seasons). While those losing seasons are irrelevant now, it IS worth pointing out that plenty of teams have arisen from mediocrity to post a couple of very good seasons and then dropped back into mediocrity while Mount Union churns out titles and finalists year after year after year. I think Heidelberg is a very promising team this year and would love to see them emerge as an OAC threat to Mount Union. But we've been down this road before, and the fact is Mount still has yet to be dropped from that perch.
My thought on Heidi is that everybody around them might be a lot better. I don't think they'll regress, I just think the rest of the region is leaps and bounds better than they were a year ago. I already spoke on Franklin. Witt will be better. I like Wheaton a lot. Their offense is insane. I could say the same about Wabash. New QB, but they've got weapons. I like NCC better than any of those teams right now. There's just not a lot of room at the top for Heidi in my poll right now. It can and probably will change as we move forward.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on August 17, 2013, 08:21:26 PM
There's just not a lot of room at the top for Heidi in my poll right now. It can and probably will change as we move forward.
True statement. It's likely that teams #2-7 will be juggled throughout the season as each team has the inevitable peaks and valleys (even if they're all winning, someone will survive a close shave with a bottom-dweller while another blows out a decent team and we'll flip them in the poll...until the same thing happens in reverse).
Maybe that's true for #2 through #10.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on August 17, 2013, 02:49:33 PM
I'll second smedindy's point. This isn't a poll for homers. As previously noted, Mount Union has reloaded before and certainly earned the benefit of the doubt.
TheBerg, it's far more laughable to suggest that Heidelberg be ranked #1 than it is to suggest they be ranked #7. Coach Hallett has done a MARVELOUS job building that program and deserves hosannas and accolades all around. However, with that said...they were bounced in the FIRST round of the playoffs last season by a Wittenberg team that was summarily dismissed in the following round. So why should one ranking them #7 in this year's preseason poll be "ashamed" of anything? That's about where they would have been last year, and we have much more recent history in favor of North Central, Wheaton, Franklin, Wittenberg (you know, the team that bounced you guys last year), and Wabash (who beat Wittenberg) than we do Heidelberg.
I'm never a fan of bringing up the long past, but Heidelberg is not far removed from a string of 4-6 seasons (which followed a series of 0-10 seasons). While those losing seasons are irrelevant now, it IS worth pointing out that plenty of teams have arisen from mediocrity to post a couple of very good seasons and then dropped back into mediocrity while Mount Union churns out titles and finalists year after year after year. I think Heidelberg is a very promising team this year and would love to see them emerge as an OAC threat to Mount Union. But we've been down this road before, and the fact is Mount still has yet to be dropped from that perch.
Oh I'm sorry, I thought this was a 2013 preseason poll, I didn't realize it was a 2012 postseason poll. It's too bad Heidelberg is being judged on how they did 7 seasons ago.
Hay there's still room on the Heidelberg Express... Hop on board! It's going to be a fun year! ;)
Quote from: TheBerg40 on August 18, 2013, 04:03:39 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on August 17, 2013, 02:49:33 PM
I'll second smedindy's point. This isn't a poll for homers. As previously noted, Mount Union has reloaded before and certainly earned the benefit of the doubt.
TheBerg, it's far more laughable to suggest that Heidelberg be ranked #1 than it is to suggest they be ranked #7. Coach Hallett has done a MARVELOUS job building that program and deserves hosannas and accolades all around. However, with that said...they were bounced in the FIRST round of the playoffs last season by a Wittenberg team that was summarily dismissed in the following round. So why should one ranking them #7 in this year's preseason poll be "ashamed" of anything? That's about where they would have been last year, and we have much more recent history in favor of North Central, Wheaton, Franklin, Wittenberg (you know, the team that bounced you guys last year), and Wabash (who beat Wittenberg) than we do Heidelberg.
I'm never a fan of bringing up the long past, but Heidelberg is not far removed from a string of 4-6 seasons (which followed a series of 0-10 seasons). While those losing seasons are irrelevant now, it IS worth pointing out that plenty of teams have arisen from mediocrity to post a couple of very good seasons and then dropped back into mediocrity while Mount Union churns out titles and finalists year after year after year. I think Heidelberg is a very promising team this year and would love to see them emerge as an OAC threat to Mount Union. But we've been down this road before, and the fact is Mount still has yet to be dropped from that perch.
Oh I'm sorry, I thought this was a 2013 preseason poll, I didn't realize it was a 2012 postseason poll. It's too bad Heidelberg is being judged on how they did 7 seasons ago.
Hay there's still room on the Heidelberg Express... Hop on board! It's going to be a fun year! ;)
Love your enthusiasm, but unlike the investment prospectuses (where "past results are no guarantee of future performance"), in sports past results ARE a very good starting point (barring COMPELLING evidence to the contrary). Last year it would appear that we all hopped a bit TOO strongly on the Heidelberg Express. (Before the playoff game, you chastised FCGrizzlies for his vote, saying Heidi would shut down the Witt offense and the game wouldn't even be close. Most of us, alas, had the Student Princes ranked ABOVE Witt.)
I didn't vote in the preseason poll as I was in Maine and didn't feel I was yet prepared, but probably would have slated Heidelberg somewhere between 5th and 8th. Very simple: they win, they rise; they lose, they fall. But #1 at the moment: ludicrous.
Ypsi says it well.
Berg, you kinda missed my point. It's not that Heidi's awful 2003-2005 means anything to the players today - it's that many teams have arisen from mediocrity to post a few "good" seasons in the 8-9 win range. VERY FEW of those teams have gone one step further and become consistent playoff threats. Right now Heidelberg is no different than any one of a dozen teams from the past decade that enjoyed two straight "good" seasons (without a playoff victory to show for it, I'll point out). To play the card of "disrespect" for being ranked #7 in the region based on that is absurd. Frankly, being ranked at ALL is a compliment and a testament to how far the program has apparently come, but you sound kind of like the naive parent from a high school that made the playoffs for the first time in 20 years and thinks his son's team is now the favorite to win a state title.
Not a big Football Guy but I am just happy that OWU made the list. Hope they earn it on the field. While I highly respect the voters opinions and they are clearly well informed and have valid opinions. Pre season polls are that, opinions. Educated opinions? Yes. I think the poll is pretty spot on, but it doesn't mean a lot, because no games have been played.
Bottom line this is just conversation, by well informed people. Win it on the field and all this will mean nothing. Don,t sweat it.
Quote from: TheBerg40 on August 18, 2013, 04:03:39 PM
Oh I'm sorry, I thought this was a 2013 preseason poll, I didn't realize it was a 2012 postseason poll. It's too bad Heidelberg is being judged on how they did 7 seasons ago.
If this were true, they wouldn't have been in my poll. There's no "you're good now but you weren't a while ago so I'm skeptical" about it. I mean this in the nicest possible way, but y'all need to beat somebody. Seriously. Beat somebody good. Heidi had their chance with Wittenberg and they got a 50 burger dropped on them. Witt scored 50 only one other time last year. They haven't beat Mount. They beat Bally Wally last year, which is nice, but that's not exactly the '85 Bears. They also had a nice win over Muskingum 2 years ago, but the same analogy applies. Earn it. Schedule somebody good and beat them. Quit playing Alma. Win a playoff game. Do something to merit that consideration other than YOU think they're better than we do.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on August 19, 2013, 09:04:06 AM
Quote from: TheBerg40 on August 18, 2013, 04:03:39 PM
Oh I'm sorry, I thought this was a 2013 preseason poll, I didn't realize it was a 2012 postseason poll. It's too bad Heidelberg is being judged on how they did 7 seasons ago.
If this were true, they wouldn't have been in my poll. There's no "you're good now but you weren't a while ago so I'm skeptical" about it. I mean this in the nicest possible way, but y'all need to beat somebody. Seriously. Beat somebody good. Heidi had their chance with Wittenberg and they got a 50 burger dropped on them. Witt scored 50 only one other time last year. They haven't beat Mount. They beat Bally Wally last year, which is nice, but that's not exactly the '85 Bears. They also had a nice win over Muskingum 2 years ago, but the same analogy applies. Earn it. Schedule somebody good and beat them. Quit playing Alma. Win a playoff game. Do something to merit that consideration other than YOU think they're better than we do.
I want Berg to be really good. I honestly do because I'm an OAC homer and a lot of us take pride in a 2nd team making deep playoff runs. Heck, people still bring up when JCU got thrown in the east and won it only to lost to Mount again in the semis. Watching that Witt game pained me. But I said it before and I'll say it again, Berg's offense is way ahead of their defense. I think we (OAC fans) fall in love with the shiny offense and lose sight of something very important...at probably the two most crucial areas for playoff wins, QB and defense, they aren't there yet.
Look at the 3 games you mentioned (the games against the 3 best teams they played). They got just a hair under 50% completion percentage and 6 INT (2 in each) from the QB position. They gave up 5+ TD in each and 1,469 yards of offense with the lowest being the 474 from Witt. And it's not one way or the other. Florence torched them through the air. BW ran for almost 300 yards on them. Mount was predictably efficient both running and passing.
Berg was young last year. Perhaps those kids are ready to take the next step this year. But I don't blame the voters for not just rewarding them because they're another year older. They haven't earned the benefit of the doubt yet. Take care of business this year. Win a playoff game or two and it'll come.
A lot to respond to...let's get to it.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on August 15, 2013, 02:57:33 PM
Regarding Germany Woods, Heidelberg did alright last year without him. Cartel Brooks clearly is no slouch.
Brooks is awesome, no doubt. I think my point was that Germany Woods could have transferred to literally any other school and it wouldn't have been germaine to the Heidelberg/Mount Union North region polling conversation. Not only does Heidelberg not have Woods, but now he's running against them on the team that wears the crown. It's a double whammy.
Quote from: TheBerg40 on August 16, 2013, 03:51:23 PM
Of course I would vote Heidelberg #1. Of all the North Region teams, they probably have the most experience and skill returning. But as we all know, talk is cheap. Heidelberg will have to prove it on the football field; thank goodness the start of the season is just around the corner. ;D
Oh and.... whoever picked them 7th should be ashamed of themselves.
Do they though? Wabash has nearly everybody returning. Ohio Wesleyan has a ton returning. Wheaton has a ton returning. Franklin has a ton returning. And maybe most important to this particular discussion, Wittenberg has most of last year's team returning. I don't know what the overly compelling reason is to rank Heidelberg higher than these other teams, let alone #1. Which isn't to say that I would harumph at anybody who wanted to put Heidelberg #2. A lot of great points have been made that these teams 2-6 or 7 are all pretty equal; right now, any order that somebody wants to put Heidelberg, Franklin, Wabash, Witt, OWU, Wheaton, North Central is justifiable. It really is.
ALRIGHT! Alright, alright, alright! I GET IT!
Man, I can't wait for the season to start!
HeHe ;)
For comparison purposes...Kickoff's ranking of North Region teams:
1) Mount Union (#1 overall)
2) North Central (#6)
3) Wittenberg (#10)
4) Heidelberg (#14)
5) Wheaton (#15)
6) Franklin (#19)
7) Elmhurst (#22)
8) Baldwin-Wallace (#23)
9) Wabash (#25)
10) Illinois Wesleyan (#28)
The Elmhurst ranking seems to be something forced upon the Kickoff crew by the pollsters, since the CCIW preview guy has them pegged to finish 5-5. With only 10 starters returning, I kind of agree that seems a tad ambitious for them to be ranked. Other than that, it seems that Kickoff rankings are pretty close to what's been churned out here in the fan poll.
Also worth noting is that, while Heidelberg is picked ahead of Baldwin-Wallace by the Top 25 voters, Kickoff actually predicts B-W to beat Heidelberg and finished 2nd in the OAC, likely leaving Heidelberg on the outside looking in come playoff time. Not saying this will happen for sure, but interesting. That'll be a game to see.
From there it's a big drop to the next North team (Adrian at #51, John Carroll at #53, Augustana at #55). Ohio Wesleyan is ranked 70th, #14 among North teams, which might sound unduly low but I'm OK with it, that sounds about right until we see that OWU this year is just as good as OWU last year.
As we're alluding to in the Heidl conversation, I think recent history has to be considered in projections because there's relatively little information to go on, and OWU has only one good season to their credit. Another 9-win season is certainly possible, but so is a bit of regression to the mean. OWU finished 9-1, but they only beat three teams that finished the year with a winning record (and none of those - Case, CMU, Kenyon - is going to be confused with the '85 Bears). OWU was 4-0 in one-score games last year and that some of those came against mediocre competition; they could be a very similar team this year and end up 6-4 or 7-3 (although I think they will be clearly favored against everyone but Wabash and Witt). Winning 8 games seems likely; winning 9 will require a team not only "equal" to last year's team, but most likely, a BETTER team.
Oh, and anyone that hasn't bought Kickoff yet....GET IT. It's a treasure trove of information about every team.
Indeed, we are bound by the collective will of the Top 25 voters for the first 25 spots. Otherwise you would expect to see a ranking of Elmhurst more in line with their predicted finish.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on August 28, 2013, 07:35:44 AM
From there it's a big drop to the next North team (Adrian at #51, John Carroll at #53, Augustana at #55). Ohio Wesleyan is ranked 70th, #14 among North teams, which might sound unduly low but I'm OK with it, that sounds about right until we see that OWU this year is just as good as OWU last year.
As we're alluding to in the Heidl conversation, I think recent history has to be considered in projections because there's relatively little information to go on, and OWU has only one good season to their credit. Another 9-win season is certainly possible, but so is a bit of regression to the mean. OWU finished 9-1, but they only beat three teams that finished the year with a winning record (and none of those - Case, CMU, Kenyon - is going to be confused with the '85 Bears). OWU was 4-0 in one-score games last year and that some of those came against mediocre competition; they could be a very similar team this year and end up 6-4 or 7-3 (although I think they will be clearly favored against everyone but Wabash and Witt). Winning 8 games seems likely; winning 9 will require a team not only "equal" to last year's team, but most likely, a BETTER team.
Oh, and anyone that hasn't bought Kickoff yet....GET IT. It's a treasure trove of information about every team.
Some OWU reaction...
- There are not 69 teams better than Ohio Wesleyan. I know things get really blurry and you're trying to numerically order a lot of sameness after the first 40 or so, but I really think OWU is good enough to win a playoff game should they qualify (which obviously requires beating Wabash or Witt or both...and assumes the requisite confidence boost that would come from said results).
- OWU did play some lesser teams close early on last year, but I think we need to keep in mind where they were coming from...many years of really poor results. Crawl, walk, then run as my man Clay Davis says. Last year, especially early on, was about just learning how to close out games with a lead. They did that. Then they showed that they could get down, not panic, and come back and win if they needed to (CMU...that was an impressive 4th quarter there for a lot of reasons). They managed to get to 9-1 all while still trying to figure it all out. Pretty heady stuff.
- It's probably time for a little season-after truth serum on their game against Wabash last year, which was the marquee game for them. Yes, they got shut out. They also moved the ball up and down the field pretty much at will. They hadn't figured out the red zone yet and it bit them last year. Three times into the red zone and they got nothing, including getting stuffed on 4th and G on the 1 on the opening drive of the game. How different is that game if OWU marches down 80 yards like it was 7 on 7 and scores right off the bat? Probably a lot. Conversely, Wabash scored all 4 TDs from outside the red zone, three of those were 65+ yard plays. So if there was ever a 28-0 result that maybe wasn't all that representative of how far apart two teams were, it was that one.
- I think OWU is going to lose their games at Wabash and Witt, but they are going to be great games, especially that game against Witt (I don't think either defense is going to fare well that day). I think they are going to hammer the rest of their schedule. That offense is going to be a nightmare to handle for NCAC teams.
I guess we'll see -- those are the things we were looking at, which you describe. Close wins against not-impressive teams, did not play Wittenberg, shut out by Wabash. They were 9-1 because of their schedule and if they'd played Wittenberg instead of any of their non-conference games they'd have been 8-2. But I think we all know all of that.
That was the biggest thing we missed out on last year in the unbalanced schedule was an OWU/Witt game. I think you would have favored Witt there certainly, but I think the Bishops could have scored 3-4 TDs on Witt's defense. OWU's defense was good last year...whether they could have won I think depends on if they had gone up against first half Witt which had offense in fits and starts or second half Witt which really got into a groove on offense. Would have been a fascinating game. I think we'll get a lot of points out that game this year. It's my second-most anticpiated NCAC game this year after Wabash/Witt.
Quote from: wally_wabash on August 28, 2013, 09:18:25 AM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on August 28, 2013, 07:35:44 AM
From there it's a big drop to the next North team (Adrian at #51, John Carroll at #53, Augustana at #55). Ohio Wesleyan is ranked 70th, #14 among North teams, which might sound unduly low but I'm OK with it, that sounds about right until we see that OWU this year is just as good as OWU last year.
As we're alluding to in the Heidl conversation, I think recent history has to be considered in projections because there's relatively little information to go on, and OWU has only one good season to their credit. Another 9-win season is certainly possible, but so is a bit of regression to the mean. OWU finished 9-1, but they only beat three teams that finished the year with a winning record (and none of those - Case, CMU, Kenyon - is going to be confused with the '85 Bears). OWU was 4-0 in one-score games last year and that some of those came against mediocre competition; they could be a very similar team this year and end up 6-4 or 7-3 (although I think they will be clearly favored against everyone but Wabash and Witt). Winning 8 games seems likely; winning 9 will require a team not only "equal" to last year's team, but most likely, a BETTER team.
Oh, and anyone that hasn't bought Kickoff yet....GET IT. It's a treasure trove of information about every team.
Some OWU reaction...
- There are not 69 teams better than Ohio Wesleyan. I know things get really blurry and you're trying to numerically order a lot of sameness after the first 40 or so, but I really think OWU is good enough to win a playoff game should they qualify (which obviously requires beating Wabash or Witt or both...and assumes the requisite confidence boost that would come from said results).
- OWU did play some lesser teams close early on last year, but I think we need to keep in mind where they were coming from...many years of really poor results. Crawl, walk, then run as my man Clay Davis says. Last year, especially early on, was about just learning how to close out games with a lead. They did that. Then they showed that they could get down, not panic, and come back and win if they needed to (CMU...that was an impressive 4th quarter there for a lot of reasons). They managed to get to 9-1 all while still trying to figure it all out. Pretty heady stuff.
- It's probably time for a little season-after truth serum on their game against Wabash last year, which was the marquee game for them. Yes, they got shut out. They also moved the ball up and down the field pretty much at will. They hadn't figured out the red zone yet and it bit them last year. Three times into the red zone and they got nothing, including getting stuffed on 4th and G on the 1 on the opening drive of the game. How different is that game if OWU marches down 80 yards like it was 7 on 7 and scores right off the bat? Probably a lot. Conversely, Wabash scored all 4 TDs from outside the red zone, three of those were 65+ yard plays. So if there was ever a 28-0 result that maybe wasn't all that representative of how far apart two teams were, it was that one.
- I think OWU is going to lose their games at Wabash and Witt, but they are going to be great games, especially that game against Witt (I don't think either defense is going to fare well that day). I think they are going to hammer the rest of their schedule. That offense is going to be a nightmare to handle for NCAC teams.
Great and well thought out post Wally +1. I appreciate the props to OWU. As much as I would have liked them ranked higher than 70 I do not have a problem with it especially for Pre-Season. OWU has a large class this year, and hopefully will progress. Do I think they will beat Wabash or Witt? No. Do I think they can beat Wabash and Witt? Yes. Theseason will play out and we will see. They may be a better team this year but it may not show up in the record.
wally,
I do think it's possible OWU is better than the 70th-best team in Division III, but I'm okay with ranking them at #70 in Kickoff. It's fair to make the counterargument that they were learning to win early last season and arguably played their best ball down the stretch...but I still think ranking them in the top 50 to start the season just feels like it'd be a big overreaction to one good season.
To be honest, I'm even more miffed by CMU's #132 preseason ranking. I concede that the UAA was fairly middling last season and that we faded a bit, but that still seems low for a quality team returning an excellent fourth-year starter at QB, two good deep threats at WR, and an experienced offensive line.
With all of that said...a broad point is our general tendency to overrate teams that we're familiar with or use a few results from a narrow perspective (for example, the case that OWU might be a legitimate threat to Wittenberg/Wabash, so they should be ranked closer to Wittenberg/Wabash than they are), forgetting that there are similar teams from other regions that we just don't know as much about.
For another good example, look no further than #71 Waynesburg, who also went 9-1 last year but lost to a slightly bigger fish from their conference. The PAC is a similarly middling conference to the NCAC.
I think OWU is better than Waynesburg, yes. But my point is that it's easy to think OWU should be ranked right behind Wabash and Witt, but the gap in between is filled with a bunch of similarly promising teams, some of whom were better than OWU in recent history and might be primed for a rebound, others of which are "on the rise" - who knows.
I think OWU's position in the ORV category in the preseason top 25 is probably a more fair assessment of where they fit in the big picture. Ultimately, we won't know unless OWU wins the league and sets off into the tests of the playoffs. Certainly, you don't get to have just one good year and have everybody leap onto the bandwagon with both feet. In the polling and ranking business, you earn your spot with year-over-year consistency.
More OWU talk because I can't get enough...I'm pretty sure 2013's Wabash and Wittenberg are better than their 2012 teams. I'm not sure I know the same thing about OWU. I think OWU's offense will be better...well, mostly just the same but probably a little faster. They're going to club most teams on their schedule with tempo. Where I don't think OWU is as good or better is on defense. They really, really got after the passer last year and they did it because Huddleston was a man mover on that line. I don't know if they have a replacement...and as we know, if you can harass QBs by DL rush alone, your defense gets really really good. There is a Mount Union transfer there now on that DL, but we'll have to see how that goes. For every Tony Sutton/Brett Elliott type of transfer from higher divisions (or in this case the uppermost crust of D3), there are dozens and dozens and dozens that get your interest on the preseason roster and wind up being just another guy or you never hear their name again after the chatter about where this new guy came from. So we'll see.
I am not going to worry about where OWU is ranked pre season Nationally. There first step is to play up to Witt and Wabash. When they start taking back the "ye old Skull" and beating Wabash, National rank means little in the pre-season, except for us to have something to talk about. That is what I want to see first. If they can start beating those teams, the National picture will take care of itself.
I think the OWU defense might be better than has been speculated here. It's true that they graduated an all-conference defensive end. It's also true that Valentine, the other end, actually (barely) led the team in sacks. That can happen when the focus is elsewhere, but he is still an all-conference possibility at d-end. The OWU linebackers will will be strong, and three defensive backs return.
Whether this all means anything v. Wabash and Witt, of course, we will have to see. Still, I believe their defense will be a force all year.
The point about how Wabash scored at OWU last year has been made, as has the point about how OWU fizzzled in the red zone in that game. I really thought the teams were closer to equal than the score indicated--but, hey, TDs are TDs and being shut out is being shut out. In the end, Wabash beat them on their Homecoming, and it wasn't close on the scoreboard.
I'm really interested in how the league, particularly some of the better teams, play OWU this year now that they have seen the offense. (I know you can argue the other side: OWU has been in the offense for a year, so they should run it even better.) Of course, with many teams it won't matter, but with Wabash, Witt, and maybe one or two more it might. I believe that to win at Wabash and at Witt they need a more balanced approach.
Do any of us think, though, that they will not be better in the red zone this year, assuming they continue to get as many opportunities? Having the top FG kicker in the NCAA is both a blessing and a curse.
Got my ballot in this week. Really interested to see what the group does with the week 1 results. Lot of different ways to interpret what went down on Saturday.
There was movement, and I had to boot Otterbein out. I ALMOST threw in Kenyon...
Quote from: sigma one on September 01, 2013, 10:38:55 PM
I think the OWU defense might be better than has been speculated here. It's true that they graduated an all-conference defensive end. It's also true that Valentine, the other end, actually (barely) led the team in sacks. That can happen when the focus is elsewhere, but he is still an all-conference possibility at d-end. The OWU linebackers will will be strong, and three defensive backs return.
Whether this all means anything v. Wabash and Witt, of course, we will have to see. Still, I believe their defense will be a force all year.
The point about how Wabash scored at OWU last year has been made, as has the point about how OWU fizzzled in the red zone in that game. I really thought the teams were closer to equal than the score indicated--but, hey, TDs are TDs and being shut out is being shut out. In the end, Wabash beat them on their Homecoming, and it wasn't close on the scoreboard.
I'm really interested in how the league, particularly some of the better teams, play OWU this year now that they have seen the offense. (I know you can argue the other side: OWU has been in the offense for a year, so they should run it even better.) Of course, with many teams it won't matter, but with Wabash, Witt, and maybe one or two more it might. I believe that to win at Wabash and at Witt they need a more balanced approach.
Do any of us think, though, that they will not be better in the red zone this year, assuming they continue to get as many opportunities? Having the top FG kicker in the NCAA is both a blessing and a curse.
Valentine stats from Saturday.
5 Solo takles, 1 Asst, 3.5 tackles for a loss of 23 yards, 3 sacks for 21 yards.
Quote from: smedindy on September 09, 2013, 02:38:00 PM
There was movement, and I had to boot Otterbein out.
I did the same. But they were the only team that fell out of my ballot completely. The rest was just rearranging slots.
Ott was outside of my 10 but on my watch list last week...obviously they didn't make my 10 this week. Adrian was also on my watch list and it is hard to see a circumstance where they get back there. You can't get rolled up at home by Pacific. Pacific that traveled 2500 miles to get there. I don't think there's anything left on their schedule that could get them back into top 10 consideration for me.
No poll this week??
I got my ballot in. (Pretty easy, since I also voted in the national poll, and had 9 North teams in my 25; just had to choose a 10th. ;))
Here's the poll. Sorry for the delay. If I don't have all the ballots by Sunday night, it's usually tough for me to get them done before Thursday.
1. Mount Union 70 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 60 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3)
3. Franklin 56 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 6)
4. Wittenberg 42 pts (3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 7)
T5. Wabash 35 pts (4, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8)
T5. Heidelberg 35 pts (4, 4, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9)
7. Wheaton 33 pts (4, 5, 5, 7, 7, 7, 9)
8. Baldwin-Wallace 20 pts (5, 5, 8, 9, 9, 10, -)
9. Illinois Wesleyan 17 pts (6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 10, 10)
10. Ohio Wesleyan 12 pts (8, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10, -, -)
ARV: Elmhurst 4 pts (8, 10, -, -, -, -)
Yayyyy for the poll! Time to play armchair quarterback as a non-voter...not really much to go on yet, though. Pretty obvious that everyone considers the CCIW, OAC, and NCAC as the power conferences since they account for 10 of the 11 teams receiving votes. Purely for discussion fodder, I'll kick a few thoughts out there (some of which I don't entirely believe, just fun to banter). I generally view poll rankings as something that should be done as a combination of the teams' respective accomplishments to date AND their potential over the remainder of the season (with heavier emphasis on "accomplishments" and less on "potential" as the season goes), which will make the following statements seem somewhat confusing.
1) I support keeping Mount Union at #1 for now. As the defending national champions, with a returning QB that may be the nation's best, and opening the season with a victory over a ranked team that they almost turned into a rout in the first half...I just don't see how you drop them from the top slot after winning against a fellow ranked team.
2) If one takes the view that accomplishments matter more than future projections, then a strong argument can be made for putting Franklin #2. They took some haymakers from the #1 team on the road and came back to take a 27-23 lead in the fourth quarter. Very impressive. In fact, I don't see how anyone but Franklin can be ranked second under this premis: if that close of a loss to the top team isn't worth a #2 ranking, what is?
3) HOWEVER: I have a hunch that the gap between Franklin and Mount Union will widen as the season progresses. I have previously argued against the use of "hunches" over actual on-field results (as I said, this stream of thoughts is really just for discussion fodder), but somehow I'm okay with ranking Franklin #4 or 5 instead of #2. Unfortunately we won't be able to tell much about Franklin for a little while because they're likely to take it on the chin against Butler this week (although perhaps a more competitive loss than Wittenberg would give them some steam, but ranking an 0-2 team second would feel a little weird, even knowing the context of the two losses).
Anyone else have some fun thoughts to kick around?
I moved a lot of things around this week. My objective wasn't to move teams that didn't play down, but that's kinda what happened. I thought some of the teams that played well really deserved a bump. Franklin is a big mover in my ballot for obvious reasons. But, I've always voted Franklin high in this poll. I did that all year last year, too.
So I took my preseason ballot and did absolutely nothing with it. Zero changes. Cop out? Probably. Brilliant? Definitely. :)
But on the serious note, I had Franklin #2 prior to week 1 and just left them there. I see I'm not the only voter on the Franklin wagon. They probably won't move from there after this weekend's games either because I already set a precedent of not penalizing Witt for getting steamrolled by Butler.
After that, I think you can order teams 3-7 in any way you want...really hard to separate them. I've got North Central 3, Wabash 4, Witt 5, Heidelberg 6, Wheaton 7. I don't think wailing away on Alma scores you points here nor do I think getting pounded by Butler should really affect your standing. Wheaton is the one team that I might have made an adjustment with but they were already at the bottom of this cluster and I really don't think that Benedictine game was as close as even that final score makes it seem.
I think my last three are B-W, OWU, and IWU in that order (I don't have my ballot in front of me to be sure) but they were all as they were last week. Again, I don't think OWU or IWU did anything against teams to warrant upward or downward movement. B-W gets a game with Bluffton this week so we'll get some common opponent results to play with in a couple of days.
Interesting that after only one game, we've only got 11 teams getting recognized here. We're either all geniuses or the North Region is fairly shallow right now.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 12, 2013, 12:02:47 PM
So I took my preseason ballot and did absolutely nothing with it. Zero changes. Cop out? Probably. Brilliant? Definitely. :)
But on the serious note, I had Franklin #2 prior to week 1 and just left them there. I see I'm not the only voter on the Franklin wagon. They probably won't move from there after this weekend's games either because I already set a precedent of not penalizing Witt for getting steamrolled by Butler.
After that, I think you can order teams 3-7 in any way you want...really hard to separate them. I've got North Central 3, Wabash 4, Witt 5, Heidelberg 6, Wheaton 7. I don't think wailing away on Alma scores you points here nor do I think getting pounded by Butler should really affect your standing. Wheaton is the one team that I might have made an adjustment with but they were already at the bottom of this cluster and I really don't think that Benedictine game was as close as even that final score makes it seem.
I think my last three are B-W, OWU, and IWU in that order (I don't have my ballot in front of me to be sure) but they were all as they were last week. Again, I don't think OWU or IWU did anything against teams to warrant upward or downward movement. B-W gets a game with Bluffton this week so we'll get some common opponent results to play with in a couple of days.
Interesting that after only one game, we've only got 11 teams getting recognized here. We're either all geniuses or the North Region is fairly shallow right now.
No reason it can't be both. ;)
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 12, 2013, 12:02:47 PM
Interesting that after only one game, we've only got 11 teams getting recognized here. We're either all geniuses or the North Region is fairly shallow right now.
I went back and looked up the Kickoff rankings again, extending it to the 14 highest-ranked teams (to include OWU), to figure out if there are any other realistic candidates that are missing here, or if it's just that a consensus top 10-11 teams is what we really have.
1) Mount Union (#1 overall)
2) North Central (#6)
3) Wittenberg (#10)
4) Heidelberg (#14)
5) Wheaton (#15)
6) Franklin (#19)
7) Elmhurst (#22)
8) Baldwin-Wallace (#23)
9) Wabash (#25)
10) Illinois Wesleyan (#28)
11) Adrian (#51)
12) John Carroll (#53)
13) Augustana (#55)
14) Ohio Wesleyan (#70)
Our 11 teams include the top ten teams here plus OWU. The other three: Adrian lost at home to very mediocre Pacific in Week 1, Augustana was 5-5 last year and opened with a nice 20-10 win over a mediocre Mount St. Joseph, and that leaves us with the ONE realistic candidate that may be overlooked here: John Carroll.
The Blue Streaks were 6-4 last year and opened with a 41-0 win over St. Norbert at a neutral site. While the MWC ain't the greatest conference, St. Norbert did go to the playoffs last year (and has been at/near the top of their conference every season since D3football.com came into existence) and a 'road' win over a playoff team is a nice way to start the season...but JCU also beat St. Norbert 40-3 to start last season. They do have a new coach, an excellent QB, and should probably be labeled as a "team to watch" right now...and we'll find out whether they deserve a place in these rankings when they play at B-W on 9/21.
Looking at it another way, from the "conferences" perspective: as I noted, our representatives all come from the CCIW, OAC, NCAC plus Franklin. The other conferences represented in the North Region include the NACC (0-fer in Week 1; defending champion Concordia-Chicago lost 45-3 to Lake Forest, there's no realistic candidate here), HCAC (also put up an 0-fer Week 1, and Franklin is the only realistic candidate), UMAC (four teams; best candidate: Greenville, but beating the CCIW's fifth or sixth-best team by a touchdown is a nice win for them but not exactly ranking material), the UAA (two teams; neither Case nor Chicago is deserving of consideration right now, although Case might nose their way into the conversation in October if they can manage a tight game with Linfield and/or a win over Trinity while holding serve in the games they "should" win, but that's asking an awful lot of a team that wasn't exactly loaded coming into the season) and the MIAA.
The MIAA perhaps is worth a closer look...however, the conference generally hasn't shown well in nonconference play and hasn't won a playoff game since Trine in 2009-2010. Several times in the past decade the conference champion has been winless outside of conference play, which makes it hard to take even the MIAA champ seriously in terms of regional ranking. Five MIAA teams did win in Week 1, so it's possible that one of those teams will emerge as a rankings candidate. Trine could make a case with a win against Elmhurst this weekend. Ditto Albion with a strong showing at Wheaton, maybe even Hope if they blow out Millikin. Notching a few wins agains the CCIW would get some attention.
All that's a long-winded way of saying that if we're missing anyone who will make their way into the rankings later this season, it's probably either John Carroll or (unknown MIAA team that emerges). I'll give Trine a puncher's chance based on past resume (they have the most recent major success of any MIAA program) and a possibly winnable game against Elmhurst this weekend.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 12, 2013, 11:20:34 AM
Yayyyy for the poll! Time to play armchair quarterback as a non-voter...not really much to go on yet, though. Pretty obvious that everyone considers the CCIW, OAC, and NCAC as the power conferences since they account for 10 of the 11 teams receiving votes. Purely for discussion fodder, I'll kick a few thoughts out there (some of which I don't entirely believe, just fun to banter). I generally view poll rankings as something that should be done as a combination of the teams' respective accomplishments to date AND their potential over the remainder of the season (with heavier emphasis on "accomplishments" and less on "potential" as the season goes), which will make the following statements seem somewhat confusing.
1) I support keeping Mount Union at #1 for now. As the defending national champions, with a returning QB that may be the nation's best, and opening the season with a victory over a ranked team that they almost turned into a rout in the first half...I just don't see how you drop them from the top slot after winning against a fellow ranked team.
2) If one takes the view that accomplishments matter more than future projections, then a strong argument can be made for putting Franklin #2. They took some haymakers from the #1 team on the road and came back to take a 27-23 lead in the fourth quarter. Very impressive. In fact, I don't see how anyone but Franklin can be ranked second under this premis: if that close of a loss to the top team isn't worth a #2 ranking, what is?3) HOWEVER: I have a hunch that the gap between Franklin and Mount Union will widen as the season progresses. I have previously argued against the use of "hunches" over actual on-field results (as I said, this stream of thoughts is really just for discussion fodder), but somehow I'm okay with ranking Franklin #4 or 5 instead of #2. Unfortunately we won't be able to tell much about Franklin for a little while because they're likely to take it on the chin against Butler this week (although perhaps a more competitive loss than Wittenberg would give them some steam, but ranking an 0-2 team second would feel a little weird, even knowing the context of the two losses).
Anyone else have some fun thoughts to kick around?
The only reason I didn't move Franklin to #2 was because North Central didn't play last week. However, they could end up being the top ranked team in the North before the regular season ends, if Mount loses along the way.
I'm sure everyone is curious who had Franklin 6th... maybe it's just me being tough because they're my team. I raised them in my top 25 ballot 4 spots but was still the lowest in that poll having them 18th. Now if they go and beat Butler this week (especially after what they did to Witt) they will certainly be higher on next week's ballot
Down at the bottom, with Adrian losing I bumped up Wabash, Elmhurst, and OWU to 7-9 and had to decide on 10th... ended up picking IWU but B-W is right there. Lower down on my watch list are still Adrian and Otterbein for the moment.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 12, 2013, 12:02:47 PM
So I took my preseason ballot and did absolutely nothing with it. Zero changes. Cop out? Probably. Brilliant? Definitely. :)
But on the serious note, I had Franklin #2 prior to week 1 and just left them there. I see I'm not the only voter on the Franklin wagon. They probably won't move from there after this weekend's games either because I already set a precedent of not penalizing Witt for getting steamrolled by Butler.
After that, I think you can order teams 3-7 in any way you want...really hard to separate them. I've got North Central 3, Wabash 4, Witt 5, Heidelberg 6, Wheaton 7. I don't think wailing away on Alma scores you points here nor do I think getting pounded by Butler should really affect your standing. Wheaton is the one team that I might have made an adjustment with but they were already at the bottom of this cluster and I really don't think that Benedictine game was as close as even that final score makes it seem.
I think my last three are B-W, OWU, and IWU in that order (I don't have my ballot in front of me to be sure) but they were all as they were last week. Again, I don't think OWU or IWU did anything against teams to warrant upward or downward movement. B-W gets a game with Bluffton this week so we'll get some common opponent results to play with in a couple of days.
Interesting that after only one game, we've only got 11 teams getting recognized here. We're either all geniuses or the North Region is fairly shallow right now.
So, if Witt does well this weekend and Franklin loses by a similar margin to Butler, do you think that Witt may be deserving of at least a second place tie?
I had Franklin 6th on my first ballot but moved them up to #2. Not entirely fair to North Central given that they didn't play but I had information about FC, whereas at this moment, we have none for NCC.
I switched Heidelberg and Witt, not intending to penalize Witt, even though that's the effect. I did that mainly because I think we learned more about Heidelberg this past week than we did about Witt from those respective games. No, thrashing Alma isn't impressive on it's own, but if you're truly a top 5 regional team, then you should thrash Alma.
The 6-10 on my ballot were Wabash, Wheaton, BW, OWU, and Illinois Wesleyan. I think you could really order those any way and not be "wrong". Once everyone has played a game, and we start getting some common opponents this may end up becoming more precise.
Quote from: D3MAFAN on September 12, 2013, 02:13:21 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 12, 2013, 12:02:47 PM
So I took my preseason ballot and did absolutely nothing with it. Zero changes. Cop out? Probably. Brilliant? Definitely. :)
But on the serious note, I had Franklin #2 prior to week 1 and just left them there. I see I'm not the only voter on the Franklin wagon. They probably won't move from there after this weekend's games either because I already set a precedent of not penalizing Witt for getting steamrolled by Butler.
After that, I think you can order teams 3-7 in any way you want...really hard to separate them. I've got North Central 3, Wabash 4, Witt 5, Heidelberg 6, Wheaton 7. I don't think wailing away on Alma scores you points here nor do I think getting pounded by Butler should really affect your standing. Wheaton is the one team that I might have made an adjustment with but they were already at the bottom of this cluster and I really don't think that Benedictine game was as close as even that final score makes it seem.
I think my last three are B-W, OWU, and IWU in that order (I don't have my ballot in front of me to be sure) but they were all as they were last week. Again, I don't think OWU or IWU did anything against teams to warrant upward or downward movement. B-W gets a game with Bluffton this week so we'll get some common opponent results to play with in a couple of days.
Interesting that after only one game, we've only got 11 teams getting recognized here. We're either all geniuses or the North Region is fairly shallow right now.
So, if Witt does well this weekend and Franklin loses by a similar margin to Butler, do you think that Witt may be deserving of at least a second place tie?
No because I don't think results against Butler mean much of anything. Butler could have picked their score against Witt last weekend. They've just got a team full of guys on a different level than 99% of Division III. All I know is that Witt isn't anywhere near as good as Butler. I think I know the same thing about Franklin. But that doesn't give me any real information about the relative strength of Franklin and Witt. I do know Franklin stared down Mount Union and nearly won. That's a far more relevant piece of data than anything I can get from an out of division game. Now if Franklin beats Butler or takes them to the wire like they did UMU, that's interesting, but really only reinforces what we learned about Franklin last weekend (that they're pretty good).
Quote from: Li'l Giant on September 12, 2013, 02:35:53 PM
I had Franklin 6th on my first ballot but moved them up to #2. Not entirely fair to North Central given that they didn't play but I had information about FC, whereas at this moment, we have none for NCC.
I switched Heidelberg and Witt, not intending to penalize Witt, even though that's the effect. I did that mainly because I think we learned more about Heidelberg this past week than we did about Witt from those respective games. No, thrashing Alma isn't impressive on it's own, but if you're truly a top 5 regional team, then you should thrash Alma.
The 6-10 on my ballot were Wabash, Wheaton, BW, OWU, and Illinois Wesleyan. I think you could really order those any way and not be "wrong". Once everyone has played a game, and we start getting some common opponents this may end up becoming more precise.
Indeed. I don't think anyone is really "wrong" at this point with the teams ordered from #2-10, really, until more games have been played.
I'll make a prediction that Elmhurst will drop out of ORV this week following a mild upset loss to Trine. IMO Elmhurst is just about the most over-ranked team in the country; they were very good last year but graduated a lot. Trine has more back and it hasn't been that long since they were the MIAA's playoff rep.
Agreed. Kickoff writers would not have ranked Elmhurst in the Top 25 but our hands were tied by the Top 25 voters.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 12, 2013, 02:46:58 PM
Agreed. Kickoff writers would not have ranked Elmhurst in the Top 25 but our hands were tied by the Top 25 voters.
Which is totally fine IMO. You've said that before and I understand. I think it's also understandable why they're ranked that high, they won a share of the CCIW title last year and that's a tough league. I just don't see them repeating that performance.
There's always a chance for an OAC team to move in here, and JCU may be the one, but they've been dead solid mediocre of late. Trine may have the jucie, but I'm skeptical of the rest of the MIAA.. CWRU perhaps could move in as well. I wouldn't sleep on Kenyon, if they win out except for all of the big NCAC three, which isn't laughable.
If Augustana beats Central on Saturday, they probably move into the bottom of my ballot. I'm also very curious about JCU. I think I am probably over-ranking Bald-Wally, so also eager to see them actually play a game (though playing Bluffton probably won't tell me much).
I suspect that IWU is being under-ranked, but playing Alma this Saturday won't change any perceptions! ;) IF Gallik stays healthy this season, I believe they will be top 4-5 in the region by the end of the season.
I'd rate Elmhurst @ Trine as a total toss-up. Even though I gave Elmhurst my 10th place nod, I suspect they are highly over-rated.
Quote from: smedindy on September 12, 2013, 07:48:23 PM
I wouldn't sleep on Kenyon, if they win out except for all of the big NCAC three, which isn't laughable.
Or.... ::)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 12, 2013, 09:09:13 PM
If Augustana beats Central on Saturday, they probably move into the bottom of my ballot. I'm also very curious about JCU. I think I am probably over-ranking Bald-Wally, so also eager to see them actually play a game (though playing Bluffton probably won't tell me much).
I suspect that IWU is being under-ranked, but playing Alma this Saturday won't change any perceptions! ;) IF Gallik stays healthy this season, I believe they will be top 4-5 in the region by the end of the season.
I'd rate Elmhurst @ Trine as a total toss-up. Even though I gave Elmhurst my 10th place nod, I suspect they are highly over-rated.
Augie was trounced, 38-13. Elmhurst did indeed fall to Trine, 16-7. For this week I guess that leaves JCU as my #10 team. VERY interested in next week's Bald Wally/JCU game. An MIAA team may yet enter my ballot, but too early to know if it will be Trine, Hope, or Adrian.
Today's IWU @ Alma game was the most "Tale of Two Halves" game in a long while. In the 1st half, Gallik connected with more Scots than Titans (2 completions, 3 interceptions); at the end of the half IWU was 1st and goal from the 2, then 2nd and goal from the 1, and didn't score in four tries - halftime score, Alma 3, IWU 0. Final score was IWU 38, Alma 3. Gallik was as good in the second half as he was bad in the first (11 for 15, 147 yards, 2 TDs), and the defense got even stiffer - Alma had ZERO second half first downs. Something tells me the halftime lockerroom was NOT rated G! ;D
Hmm... what to do what to do... Elmhurst is going to drop out of my list but who should take their spot? Earlham? The Quakers have the best record in the HCAC right now :D
My top 7 are all on my Top 25 ballot so those are set (although 3-6 are all in a row on my ballot and I haven't officially decided who is where yet)... I think my 8-10 is going to be shaken up from last week.
I think John Carroll and Trine are the best candidates not named on last week's ballot to grab some votes. I can see an argument for either at #10 right now.
Week 2 North Region Fan Poll AKA that time we don't agree on Heidelberg.
1. Mount Union 70 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
T2. North Central 58 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4)
T2. Franklin 58 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 5)
4. Wabash 41 pts (3, 4, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7)
T5. Wheaton 37 pts (4, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7)
T5. Heidelberg 37 pts (3, 4, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9)
7. Wittenberg 36 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7)
8. Baldwin-Wallace 21 pts (5, 6, 8, 8, 9, 10, 10)
9. Illinois Wesleyan 15 pts (8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10)
10. Ohio Wesleyan 8 pts (8, 8, 9, 9, 10, -, -)
ARV John Carroll 4 pts (9, 10, 10, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Mr. Ypsi, NCF, Li'l Giant, FCGrizzliesGrad, smedindy, wally_wabash, and myself.
Oh fun. Ok, here's what I did this week...and I did shuffle a little.
I left Mount Union and Franklin alone as my 1-2. Franklin is probably untouchable at this point unless there is a very significant loss to their current personnel. Maybe North Central can jump them if they go on the road to Elmhurst, Wheaton, and IWU and win all of those games by a lot. And I mean a lot. Wabash maybe could jump if they don't let anybody score for the next 7 weeks (not impossible).
I did have Wabash and North Central swap places at numbers 3 and 4, respectively. For all of that offense that North Central laid down, I think defense is the trump card. Great defenses beat great offenses.
I moved Heidelberg up to 5 and Wheaton up to 6 this week. Wheaton was stellar and was probably going to move up anyway. Heidelberg was off so I left them alone. The genesis of this move was my pushing Wittenberg down a couple of places to 7. Given the common Butler data point, I think it's probaby fair to put a not-top-5 grade on Wittenberg (the defense in particular). But Witt will probably creep up from here on out. They shouldn't be challenged until the OWU game on 11/2.
In 8-10, I did swap B-W and OWU at 8 and 9 due to B-W looking a bit better against the common opponent. And I left IWU alone at 10...IWU maybe could have bounced up over these other two, but you really shouldn't trail Alma 3-0 after more than two series of a game let alone 2 quarters. John Carroll and now Trine just missed the cut. A little deeper off on my radar is Hope as they have looked decent in their two games so far.
Wally,
I appreciate your comments. What is the rationale in spread between Wheaton and Wabash? They seemed pretty similar to me when I saw them scrimmage. And why do you think NCC doesn't have a great defense and Wabash does? I follow your other reasons for the teams and you are generally pretty sound in your reasoning. Just seems like a disconnect (that I don't understand) on a couple of these.
Quote from: USee on September 16, 2013, 03:15:22 PM
Wally,
I appreciate your comments. What is the rationale in spread between Wheaton and Wabash? They seemed pretty similar to me when I saw them scrimmage. And why do you think NCC doesn't have a great defense and Wabash does? I follow your other reasons for the teams and you are generally pretty sound in your reasoning. Just seems like a disconnect (that I don't understand) on a couple of these.
There's really not a big spread between Wabash and Wheaton. I think that the teams I have ranked 3-6 are all excellent and could be interchangeable in this poll. You could probably include my #7 Witt in that group also if you really wanted to. The order that I have them is a product of where I put them to start with and I placed Wheaton behind NCC/Wabash/Heidelberg/Witt (initially at least) because I felt that the Hiben loss took a significant piece away from them. Wheaton did move in front of Witt on my ballot this week.
I have no doubt that North Central has a very good defense. I'm not sure it is a great defense. It wasn't great on Saturday. Very good, yes. But not great. Wabash was great on Saturday and it goes back to last year as well. That's 4 shutouts in the last five games for Wabash. Heady stuff. It's hard to lose when the other guys can't score.
But again, a couple of things to keep in mind this week is that 1) most of these teams have played once so there isn't a lot of information available...I'm still guessing and 2) you can order the next five teams after Mount Union and Franklin any way you want and not be out of line.
fair enough, I agree those teams are all pretty close. I am not so sure BW and IWU aren't in the same boat with those teams. I would also say I think most of those teams would have shut out Hanover and Albion and a middle road WIAC team was likely the best opponent of the group. More data will certainly help. thanks again.
Wally and Usee
Some interesting facts for your discussion - according to the NCAA stats for Division III for this week, North Central is number 1 is scoring offense and Wabash is number 1 in total defense.
Quote from: USee on September 16, 2013, 03:47:49 PM
fair enough, I agree those teams are all pretty close. I am not so sure BW and IWU aren't in the same boat with those teams. I would also say I think most of those teams would have shut out Hanover and Albion and a middle road WIAC team was likely the best opponent of the group. More data will certainly help. thanks again.
One thing that I think plays into the way I rank teams that maybe doesn't happen so much with other voters is that I care not one whit what league some team comes from. You don't get juice in my poll by beating a WIAC team. You do get juice by beating a good team that happens to play in the WIAC. Same goes for the OAC or the CCIW or the MIAC or the NWC. Teams aren't good simply because they've got membership in one conference or another. Franklin's league stinks like a foot. Franklin is really, really good. They'd be really good in whatever league they might play in. The CCIW is really good...but Millikin is still a bad team. They'd be bad in any league they might play in. More to the immediate point is that I don't think LaCrosse is very good. I know they beat NCC last year but that was more weird than it was anything else.
And I do agree that every team on this top 10 would handle Hanover. Not all of them would limit Hanover to 45 yards of offense and turn them over 8 times. 2.5 efficiency rating. 1-12 on 3rd down. 5 total first downs. The sort of video game defensive stats that just don't happen too often outside of Alliance.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 16, 2013, 04:00:11 PM
Quote from: USee on September 16, 2013, 03:47:49 PM
fair enough, I agree those teams are all pretty close. I am not so sure BW and IWU aren't in the same boat with those teams. I would also say I think most of those teams would have shut out Hanover and Albion and a middle road WIAC team was likely the best opponent of the group. More data will certainly help. thanks again.
One thing that I think plays into the way I rank teams that maybe doesn't happen so much with other voters is that I care not one whit what league some team comes from. You don't get juice in my poll by beating a WIAC team. You do get juice by beating a good team that happens to play in the WIAC. Same goes for the OAC or the CCIW or the MIAC or the NWC. Teams aren't good simply because they've got membership in one conference or another. Franklin's league stinks like a foot. Franklin is really, really good. They'd be really good in whatever league they might play in. The CCIW is really good...but Millikin is still a bad team. They'd be bad in any league they might play in. More to the immediate point is that I don't think LaCrosse is very good. I know they beat NCC last year but that was more weird than it was anything else.
And I do agree that every team on this top 10 would handle Hanover. Not all of them would limit Hanover to 45 yards of offense and turn them over 8 times. 2.5 efficiency rating. 1-12 on 3rd down. 5 total first downs. The sort of video game defensive stats that just don't happen too often outside of Alliance.
I hear you but you can't honestly think LAX and Hanover are the same type of win? They are not. Benedictine, Hanover, Albion and Alma may all be miserable teams but Lacrosse would beat hem all by multiple TDs don't you think? And I think the IWU and Wheaton defenses were pretty dominant in their games. Did you look at those stats?
Quote from: USee on September 16, 2013, 04:25:44 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 16, 2013, 04:00:11 PM
Quote from: USee on September 16, 2013, 03:47:49 PM
fair enough, I agree those teams are all pretty close. I am not so sure BW and IWU aren't in the same boat with those teams. I would also say I think most of those teams would have shut out Hanover and Albion and a middle road WIAC team was likely the best opponent of the group. More data will certainly help. thanks again.
One thing that I think plays into the way I rank teams that maybe doesn't happen so much with other voters is that I care not one whit what league some team comes from. You don't get juice in my poll by beating a WIAC team. You do get juice by beating a good team that happens to play in the WIAC. Same goes for the OAC or the CCIW or the MIAC or the NWC. Teams aren't good simply because they've got membership in one conference or another. Franklin's league stinks like a foot. Franklin is really, really good. They'd be really good in whatever league they might play in. The CCIW is really good...but Millikin is still a bad team. They'd be bad in any league they might play in. More to the immediate point is that I don't think LaCrosse is very good. I know they beat NCC last year but that was more weird than it was anything else.
And I do agree that every team on this top 10 would handle Hanover. Not all of them would limit Hanover to 45 yards of offense and turn them over 8 times. 2.5 efficiency rating. 1-12 on 3rd down. 5 total first downs. The sort of video game defensive stats that just don't happen too often outside of Alliance.
I hear you but you can't honestly think LAX and Hanover are the same type of win? They are not. Benedictine, Hanover, Albion and Alma may all be miserable teams but Lacrosse would beat hem all by multiple TDs don't you think? And I think the IWU and Wheaton defenses were pretty dominant in their games. Did you look at those stats?
No, they are not. And if NCC beat UW-LaCrosse 69-0 your point would stand.
But Wabash beat Hanover 69-0 and NCC beat UW-LaCrosse 41-24.
This isn't to say Wabash is better than NCC just because they won 69-0, but we're dealing with imperfect data here. Ultimately you have to make a call. The teams played opponents of a different caliber. One team absolutely whacked a pretty bad opponent, the other posted a solid victory over a middle-of-the-road opponent.
1. Mount Union 70 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
T2. North Central 58 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4)
T2. Franklin 58 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 5)
4. Wabash 41 pts (3, 4, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7)
T5. Wheaton 37 pts (4, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7)
T5. Heidelberg 37 pts (3, 4, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9)
7. Wittenberg 36 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7)
8. Baldwin-Wallace 21 pts (5, 6, 8, 8, 9, 10, 10)
9. Illinois Wesleyan 15 pts (8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10)
10. Ohio Wesleyan 8 pts (8, 8, 9, 9, 10, -, -)
ARV John Carroll 4 pts (9, 10, 10, -, -, -, -)
1) I think there's an extra 8 vote listed on Ohio Wesleyan
2) I have Heidi, Wheaton, Franklin, and Witt 12-15 on my Top 25 ballot so they're really close for me... I felt based on the disparity against Butler that Franklin had to be above Witt, but I couldn't quite put Franklin ahead of the other two (had they won one of those they definitely would be at least 3rd) so Witt dropped from 3 to 6.
3) Wabash moved into my Top 25 so the gap between them and the cluster ahead isn't very far.
4) 8-10 right now is just a step ahead of the next pack which includes Hope, Trine, OWU, even ONU. Going to be more shakeups this week for sure with JC vs BW and a potentially interesting matchup between Heidelberg and ONU.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 16, 2013, 04:34:47 PM
Quote from: USee on September 16, 2013, 04:25:44 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 16, 2013, 04:00:11 PM
Quote from: USee on September 16, 2013, 03:47:49 PM
fair enough, I agree those teams are all pretty close. I am not so sure BW and IWU aren't in the same boat with those teams. I would also say I think most of those teams would have shut out Hanover and Albion and a middle road WIAC team was likely the best opponent of the group. More data will certainly help. thanks again.
One thing that I think plays into the way I rank teams that maybe doesn't happen so much with other voters is that I care not one whit what league some team comes from. You don't get juice in my poll by beating a WIAC team. You do get juice by beating a good team that happens to play in the WIAC. Same goes for the OAC or the CCIW or the MIAC or the NWC. Teams aren't good simply because they've got membership in one conference or another. Franklin's league stinks like a foot. Franklin is really, really good. They'd be really good in whatever league they might play in. The CCIW is really good...but Millikin is still a bad team. They'd be bad in any league they might play in. More to the immediate point is that I don't think LaCrosse is very good. I know they beat NCC last year but that was more weird than it was anything else.
And I do agree that every team on this top 10 would handle Hanover. Not all of them would limit Hanover to 45 yards of offense and turn them over 8 times. 2.5 efficiency rating. 1-12 on 3rd down. 5 total first downs. The sort of video game defensive stats that just don't happen too often outside of Alliance.
I hear you but you can't honestly think LAX and Hanover are the same type of win? They are not. Benedictine, Hanover, Albion and Alma may all be miserable teams but Lacrosse would beat hem all by multiple TDs don't you think? And I think the IWU and Wheaton defenses were pretty dominant in their games. Did you look at those stats?
No, they are not. And if NCC beat UW-LaCrosse 69-0 your point would stand.
But Wabash beat Hanover 69-0 and NCC beat UW-LaCrosse 41-24.
This isn't to say Wabash is better than NCC just because they won 69-0, but we're dealing with imperfect data here. Ultimately you have to make a call. The teams played opponents of a different caliber. One team absolutely whacked a pretty bad opponent, the other posted a solid victory over a middle-of-the-road opponent.
I think that's probably right. Just so we all admit we are slight homers for our own teams/conferences...that's a natural bias and understood. for example I am pretty good at justifying how Wheaton is better than NCC on the CCIW board and Wally says 6 teams are all interchangeable but he puts his team first among the 6. :-*
I didn't change a thing.
Quote from: USee on September 16, 2013, 06:35:03 PM
I think that's probably right. Just so we all admit we are slight homers for our own teams/conferences...that's a natural bias and understood. for example I am pretty good at justifying how Wheaton is better than NCC on the CCIW board and Wally says 6 teams are all interchangeable but he puts his team first among the 6. :-*
To be fair, I didn't start with Wabash in front of the rest of that pack. I was persuaded to rethink those positions after seeing how good Wabash's defense played. It was some next level stuff there.
Do I think LaCrosse is better than Hanover? I do. Do I think North Central could hang 69 on Hanover if they really wanted to? I do. Do I think North Central could hold Hanover to 45 yards, one snap beyond the 50 yard line, and turn them over 8 times? I do not. And that's the difference this week. It may change next week.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 16, 2013, 06:58:14 PM
Quote from: USee on September 16, 2013, 06:35:03 PM
I think that's probably right. Just so we all admit we are slight homers for our own teams/conferences...that's a natural bias and understood. for example I am pretty good at justifying how Wheaton is better than NCC on the CCIW board and Wally says 6 teams are all interchangeable but he puts his team first among the 6. :-*
To be fair, I didn't start with Wabash in front of the rest of that pack. I was persuaded to rethink those positions after seeing how good Wabash's defense played. It was some next level stuff there.
Do I think LaCrosse is better than Hanover? I do. Do I think North Central could hang 69 on Hanover if they really wanted to? I do. Do I think North Central could hold Hanover to 45 yards, one snap beyond the 50 yard line, and turn them over 8 times? I do not. And that's the difference this week. It may change next week.
Did you watch any of those teams the way you watched your own? You did not. The question I have about Wabash is the offense. They could not score against Wheaton with great field position. I don't think they would put 42 on lacrosse.
Quote from: USee on September 16, 2013, 07:30:47 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 16, 2013, 06:58:14 PM
Quote from: USee on September 16, 2013, 06:35:03 PM
I think that's probably right. Just so we all admit we are slight homers for our own teams/conferences...that's a natural bias and understood. for example I am pretty good at justifying how Wheaton is better than NCC on the CCIW board and Wally says 6 teams are all interchangeable but he puts his team first among the 6. :-*
To be fair, I didn't start with Wabash in front of the rest of that pack. I was persuaded to rethink those positions after seeing how good Wabash's defense played. It was some next level stuff there.
Do I think LaCrosse is better than Hanover? I do. Do I think North Central could hang 69 on Hanover if they really wanted to? I do. Do I think North Central could hold Hanover to 45 yards, one snap beyond the 50 yard line, and turn them over 8 times? I do not. And that's the difference this week. It may change next week.
Did you watch any of those teams the way you watched your own? You did not. The question I have about Wabash is the offense. They could not score against Wheaton with great field position. I don't think they would put 42 on lacrosse.
I would have questions about how relevant a team's performance in a scrimmage after one week of camp is, but we've all got to use our data in our own way.
And you don't need to score 42 when your defense gives up zero. ;)
The points are all correct. I'm not too sure what I've done with the listing of the votes.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 16, 2013, 09:32:03 PM
The points are all correct. I'm not too sure what I've done with the listing of the votes.
You have 8 8th place votes and only 6 9th place votes. I have, obviously, no clue which one is wrong. ;)
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 16, 2013, 07:40:55 PM
Quote from: USee on September 16, 2013, 07:30:47 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 16, 2013, 06:58:14 PM
Quote from: USee on September 16, 2013, 06:35:03 PM
I think that's probably right. Just so we all admit we are slight homers for our own teams/conferences...that's a natural bias and understood. for example I am pretty good at justifying how Wheaton is better than NCC on the CCIW board and Wally says 6 teams are all interchangeable but he puts his team first among the 6. :-*
To be fair, I didn't start with Wabash in front of the rest of that pack. I was persuaded to rethink those positions after seeing how good Wabash's defense played. It was some next level stuff there.
Do I think LaCrosse is better than Hanover? I do. Do I think North Central could hang 69 on Hanover if they really wanted to? I do. Do I think North Central could hold Hanover to 45 yards, one snap beyond the 50 yard line, and turn them over 8 times? I do not. And that's the difference this week. It may change next week.
Did you watch any of those teams the way you watched your own? You did not. The question I have about Wabash is the offense. They could not score against Wheaton with great field position. I don't think they would put 42 on lacrosse.
I would have questions about how relevant a team's performance in a scrimmage after one week of camp is, but we've all got to use our data in our own way.
And you don't need to score 42 when your defense gives up zero. ;)
Of course. Congratulations for shutting down Hanover.
Wally, IWU also yielded only 5 first downs (ZERO in the second half), though the defense did give up 100 yards and 3 points (occurring when the offense gave up a turnover already in FG range). :-[ We'll need to arrange a Wabash/IWU game to settle this (or at least a Hanover/Alma game). ;D (Actually, I did have Wabash 4 slots ahead of IWU, despite my green blood. ;))
Saturday's game was bizarre: anyone watching only the first half would not have IWU in the top 30 of the region; anyone watching only the second half would have them in the top 4! :o (I had them 8th, which was down a slot from last week.)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 16, 2013, 09:37:02 PM
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 16, 2013, 09:32:03 PM
The points are all correct. I'm not too sure what I've done with the listing of the votes.
You have 8 8th place votes and only 6 9th place votes. I have, obviously, no clue which one is wrong. ;)
I count 7 9th place votes. I think there was simply an extra 8th listed for OWU that should have been a blank. John Carroll received votes from 3 people so there should be 3 blanks in the top 10 and there are just two.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 16, 2013, 11:52:43 PM
Wally, IWU also yielded only 5 first downs (ZERO in the second half), though the defense did give up 100 yards and 3 points...
OK. Then refer to the part where IWU had a donut on the scoreboard at halftime while Wabash had 38.
Look, guys, we're working with imperfect data. Trying to make sense of "which team's blowout of a lesser opponent in their only game" merits the highest ranking is tough; you're going to have to make some judgement calls. I'm fine with someone putting Wabash or Wheaton on top of this heap because they absolutely bushwhacked their lesser opponents; I'm also fine with taking NC under the "they beat a half-respectable opponent" clause. That's fine. But you have to take into account ALL the factors; not solely MOV
or quality of opponent. Referring to my earlier point, if one of these factors were equal while the other was clearly favoring one team, then you have a sturdier case. But there's no way to know right now whether a 69-0 win over Hanover is more impressive than a 41-24 win over UW-LaCrosse.
Is LaCrosse the best opponent any of the teams in this discussion played? Certainly. But they also lost 35-24 to Dubuque in Week 1 (and scored a TD with 14 seconds left to close that final margin; it was 21-3 Dubuque at halftime and 35-17 with two minutes to go). Dubuque was a middle of the pack IIAC team last year. So UW-L is probably better than Hanover and Benedictine, but let's not give that too much weight.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 17, 2013, 09:38:07 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 16, 2013, 11:52:43 PM
Wally, IWU also yielded only 5 first downs (ZERO in the second half), though the defense did give up 100 yards and 3 points...
OK. Then refer to the part where IWU had a donut on the scoreboard at halftime while Wabash had 38.
Look, guys, we're working with imperfect data. Trying to make sense of "which team's blowout of a lesser opponent in their only game" merits the highest ranking is tough; you're going to have to make some judgement calls. I'm fine with someone putting Wabash or Wheaton on top of this heap because they absolutely bushwhacked their lesser opponents; I'm also fine with taking NC under the "they beat a half-respectable opponent" clause. That's fine. But you have to take into account ALL the factors; not solely MOV or quality of opponent. Referring to my earlier point, if one of these factors were equal while the other was clearly favoring one team, then you have a sturdier case. But there's no way to know right now whether a 69-0 win over Hanover is more impressive than a 41-24 win over UW-LaCrosse.
Is LaCrosse the best opponent any of the teams in this discussion played? Certainly. But they also lost 35-24 to Dubuque in Week 1 (and scored a TD with 14 seconds left to close that final margin; it was 21-3 Dubuque at halftime and 35-17 with two minutes to go). Dubuque was a middle of the pack IIAC team last year. So UW-L is probably better than Hanover and Benedictine, but let's not give that too much weight.
I agree completely. Imperfect data, low number of data points. My main point was that we at least intellectually admit we are all a little bit homers. Wally says #3-8 are interchangeable and then rationalizes why his team is the top of that heap because their defense dominated a horrific Hanover team. Subsequently dismissing any other data as "just one week of practice". That's inconsistent.
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fblogs.wabash.edu%2Flanelines%2Ffiles%2F2011%2F08%2FIverson.jpg&hash=a58dd1526f651bfbe94b3a19f4d3cc698236ac0e)
This will all sort itself out soon enough...
I would have joined this conversation sooner but I had an 18 hour, 750 mile day yesterday, followed by a 12 hour deadline day today. Finally able to crack open a cold one and catch up.
Anyway, I felt no compelling reason to change anything on my ballot for this week. Thus, I'm higher on Franklin (my #2), Heidelberg (my #4) and Witt (my #5) than the overall poll and lower on Wabash (my #6) and Wheaton (my #7). I had IWU at #10 last week and this.
I was certainly impressed at the Wabash shellacking of Hanover but still not compelled to rearrange the deck chairs just yet.
Like Smed says, it will sort out. I think having Mount #1, then NCC/Franklin 2-3 and then the current 3-10 in any order is defensible at this point.
EDIT:
I just noticed the +/- karma rankings. Kind of interesting. I guess if I have a better +/- than Manu Ginobili in the Finals I'm doing okay. :'(
79 people don't like my well informed opinions? Hogwash.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 18, 2013, 10:49:25 AM
79 people don't like my well informed opinions? Hogwash.
Just for that....MINUS K!
Now
80 people don't like them!
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 18, 2013, 11:11:09 AM
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 18, 2013, 10:49:25 AM
79 people don't like my well informed opinions? Hogwash.
Just for that....MINUS K!
Now 80 people don't like them!
+K for a return to balance.
Quote from: USee on September 18, 2013, 11:22:40 AM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 18, 2013, 11:11:09 AM
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 18, 2013, 10:49:25 AM
79 people don't like my well informed opinions? Hogwash.
Just for that....MINUS K!
Now 80 people don't like them!
+K for a return to balance.
All is well in the world.
USee deserves his 100th +K.
I feel like I'm in a hockey game now.
This is a rare week where I don't have to change much on my ballot. All the top teams did pretty much as expected. I was the only person who had JC ahead of BW so that result isn't too jarring to my ballot. Only things I have to debate is does John Carroll move ahead of idle IWU for 8th and who will replace BW at #10
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 22, 2013, 03:28:30 AM
This is a rare week where I don't have to change much on my ballot. All the top teams did pretty much as expected. I was the only person who had JC ahead of BW so that result isn't too jarring to my ballot. Only things I have to debate is does John Carroll move ahead of idle IWU for 8th and who will replace BW at #10
Might be time for 3-0 Trine to move in. I would go with a 3-0 Hope, but I'll wait a week until after the IWU game.
No update this week? I always enjoy reading the thoughts of this well-informed group.
I'm sure it's coming....our old pal Wes keeps a busy weekday schedule.
It may have been my fault. My ballot was late due to unforseen and unfortunate circumstances. Life...
Hope all is ok now!
Here it is, gang. Sorry again for the delay. The poll goes up Sunday if I get all the ballots Sunday. If not, I can't get to it until Thursday due to having my own football team to attend to. This one is kind of rushed, so there may be another issue with mistallied votes. I believe the points I've listed are correct.
Week 3 North Region Fan Poll
1. Mount Union 70 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 59 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3)
3. Franklin 58 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 5)
4. Wabash 41 pts (4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 7, 7)
5. Wheaton 39 pts (4, 4, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7)
6. Wittenberg 38 pts (4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7)
7. Heidelberg 37 pts (3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8)
8. Illinois Wesleyan 16 pts (7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 10)
9. John Carroll 15 pts (8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10)
10. Ohio Wesleyan 9 pts (8, 8, 9, 10, -, -, -)
ARV
Trine 2 pts (10, 10, -, -, -, -, -)
Hope 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by FCGrizzliesGrad, wally_wabash, Li'l Giant, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, and myself.
I like this device, FCGG...I'm going to borrow it.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 26, 2013, 03:54:49 PM
Here it is, gang. Sorry again for the delay. The poll goes up Sunday if I get all the ballots Sunday. If not, I can't get to it until Thursday due to having my own football team to attend to. This one is kind of rushed, so there may be another issue with mistallied votes. I believe the points I've listed are correct.
Week 3 North Region Fan Poll
1. Mount Union 70 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 59 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3)
3. Franklin 58 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 5)
4. Wabash 41 pts (4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 7, 7)
5. Wheaton 39 pts (4, 4, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7)
6. Wittenberg 38 pts (4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7)
7. Heidelberg 37 pts (3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8)
8. Illinois Wesleyan 16 pts (7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 10)
9. John Carroll 15 pts (8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10)
10. Ohio Wesleyan 9 pts (8, 8, 9, 10, -, -, -)
ARV
Trine 2 pts (10, 10, -, -, -, -, -)
Hope 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by FCGrizzliesGrad, wally_wabash, Li'l Giant, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, and myself.
I made a few moves this week.
- UMU and Franklin stayed 1-2. That's not changing unless either of those teams lose, although after this week I'm not so sure that there is a huge gap between Mount Union and everybody else in 2013. Lots of good teams here. Franklin gets handcuffed to Mount Union on my ballot because they've shown on the field that they are pretty similar.
- I did shuffle Wabash back behind North Central this week...not because of any one thing that either team did in their wins this week, but I think the loss of Tyler Holmes makes a difference.
- 5, 6, and 7 are the same for me this week. Wheaton was a little underwhelming this week, but I'm not going to penalize for not getting fired up for a game against Luther. Sometimes ho-hum matchups produce ho-hum results. Ditto Heidelberg and Wittenberg...nice wins, but not really anything going on there that compels me to make an adjustment.
- Bottom third....I put John Carroll in at 8 this week, replacing B-W after the Streaks' win. I slid OWU down to 10 because 20-13 against Kenyon isn't an inspiring result. I've expected more from Ohio Wesleyan's offense and it hasn't been there through two games this year. And of course, if OWU goes down, somebody has to go up so IWU falls in at #9.
I'm keeping an eye on Trine, Hope, Chicago, and Baldwin-Wallace. Any of these four teams could jump take OWU's spot next week if OWU doesn't step it up a notch. Greenville is doing some nice things and is a little further out on the fringe of my radar. Maybe this year's version of CUC.
I think we all agree that 4-7 are basically interchangeable. I don't know for sure if one is necessarily better than any of the others. I like Wabash better than Heidelberg, and I ranked them as such. But do I think there's a huge void between the two? Absolutely not.
1. Mount Union 70 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 59 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3)
3. Franklin 58 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 5)
4. Wabash 41 pts (4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 7, 7)
5. Wheaton 39 pts (4, 4, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7)
6. Wittenberg 38 pts (4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7)
7. Heidelberg 37 pts (3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8)
8. Illinois Wesleyan 16 pts (7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 10)
9. John Carroll 15 pts (8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10)
10. Ohio Wesleyan 9 pts (8, 8, 9, 10, -, -, -)
ARV
Trine 2 pts (10, 10, -, -, -, -, -)
Hope 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
I ended up with the exact same top 7 as last week. This will be 2 weeks in a row that my #9 and 10 will face each other (JC vs BW last week, IWU vs Hope this week). I wonder who will creep into my ballot next week?
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 27, 2013, 10:56:54 AM
1. Mount Union 70 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 59 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3)
3. Franklin 58 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 5)
4. Wabash 41 pts (4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 7, 7)
5. Wheaton 39 pts (4, 4, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7)
6. Wittenberg 38 pts (4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7)
7. Heidelberg 37 pts (3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8)
8. Illinois Wesleyan 16 pts (7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 10)
9. John Carroll 15 pts (8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10)
10. Ohio Wesleyan 9 pts (8, 8, 9, 10, -, -, -)
ARV
Trine 2 pts (10, 10, -, -, -, -, -)
Hope 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
I ended up with the exact same top 7 as last week. This will be 2 weeks in a row that my #9 and 10 will face each other (JC vs BW last week, IWU vs Hope this week). I wonder who will creep into my ballot next week?
all that Heidelberg love pts the GRIZ in third.
Quote from: GRIZ_BACKER on September 27, 2013, 08:54:32 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 27, 2013, 10:56:54 AM
1. Mount Union 70 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 59 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3)
3. Franklin 58 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 5)
4. Wabash 41 pts (4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 7, 7)
5. Wheaton 39 pts (4, 4, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7)
6. Wittenberg 38 pts (4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7)
7. Heidelberg 37 pts (3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8)
8. Illinois Wesleyan 16 pts (7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 10)
9. John Carroll 15 pts (8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10)
10. Ohio Wesleyan 9 pts (8, 8, 9, 10, -, -, -)
ARV
Trine 2 pts (10, 10, -, -, -, -, -)
Hope 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
I ended up with the exact same top 7 as last week. This will be 2 weeks in a row that my #9 and 10 will face each other (JC vs BW last week, IWU vs Hope this week). I wonder who will creep into my ballot next week?
all that Heidelberg love pts the GRIZ in third.
Last year I was at the other end of the spectrum on Heidelberg (but my rating was justified in the end). And part of it might be that because Franklin is my team that I'm a little tougher on them. I do have them 11th on my top 25 ballot this week though, it just happens that 4 of the 10 ahead of them are in the North as well.
I'm really struggling to choose a 10th team this week... Hope and Trine (who were 10 and 11 last week for me) both lost, OWU and Ott both lost, Chicago and Olivet are unbeaten against fairly easy schedules, B-W and Adrian are just sort of there. I'm sure later in the season they'll all sort themselves out but right now I haven't a clue.
But note that Trine's loss was by 3 to a d2 team (granted, not a very good d2 team, but scholarship none-the-less). Trine is my #10 team again this week.
What's wrong with keeping Hope at 10? They lost a competitive 14-7 game to #8 Illinois Wesleyan. Why do you have to replace them in the poll because they lost?
My point was that no one was really standing out for that spot... everyone on my list was either losing or didn't have the strongest resume. There was every opportunity for someone (Hope, Trine, OWU, etc) to grab a secure hold on the 10th spot but no one took advantage... it feels more like choosing which team is the least worst rather than which is the best right now. There's a significant gap between the top 9 teams and the cluster that is around 10th. I did ultimately decide to put a team from the MIAA at #10 (won't say which one so I don't influence anyone who hasn't voted) but there's 3 or 4 other teams I could see arguments for having at 10th as well. They're just that close at the moment. I either needed a 9 team ballot or a 13 team ballot ;)
FCGG, amen to that! I even considered putting 4-0 Olivet there, just so they could get a vote before reality strikes in a couple of weeks! (If they beat Alma next week - and I think they will - I plan to do it. I have little doubt they will eventually finish 5-5 or 6-4, but I say give 'em a moment in the sun! ;))
I added Trine in for OWU.
I went with Hope at #10 using the same reasoning as ETP. I did not have them at #10 last week. Odd to add a team after a loss, but it's not a bad loss.
Thanks for your quick ballots, friends. I do greatly appreciate it.
Week 4 North Region Fan Poll
1. Mount Union 70 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. NCC 59 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3)
3. Franklin 58 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 5)
4. Wabash 43 pts (4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 7)
T5. Heidelberg 38 pts (3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7)
T5. Wheaton 38 pts (4, 4, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7)
7. Wittenberg 37 pts (4, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7)
8. John Carroll 20 pts (8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9)
9. Illinois Wesleyan 15 pts (8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9)
T10. Trine 3 pts (10, 10, 10, -, -, -, -)
T10. Hope 3 pts (10, 10, 10, -, -, -, -)
ARV
Adrian 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by FCGrizzliesGrad, wally_wabash, Li'l Giant, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, and myself.
Now, obviously I see everybody's ballot, so I know who voted for who, and I won't call anybody out specifically, but I look at some of these ballots and wonder what the logic is for certain teams being ranked above others on the ballot. I know we don't have a lot of head-to-heads or common opponents to look at, but the eye test for some of these teams just seems SO good that I wonder how they end up ranked so low. We can certainly agree to disagree. I wonder how much "I'm not moving somebody down unless they lose" we really get in these polls.
I know I'm to blame for a lot of it since I seem to be the outlier most of the time. It seems like there's a huge gap when say Heidelberg is 3rd and Wabash is 7 but honestly they could be 3a, b, c, d, and e. Every time I think 'ok, maybe this team should be a little lower or this team should be higher' someone does something that makes it difficult to make a change.
1. Mount Union 70 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. NCC 59 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3)
3. Franklin 58 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 5)
4. Wabash 43 pts (4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 7)
T5. Heidelberg 38 pts (3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7)
T5. Wheaton 38 pts (4, 4, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7)
7. Wittenberg 37 pts (4, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7)
8. John Carroll 20 pts (8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9)
9. Illinois Wesleyan 15 pts (8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9)
T10. Trine 3 pts (10, 10, 10, -, -, -, -)
T10. Hope 3 pts (10, 10, 10, -, -, -, -)
ARV
Adrian 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
As to that 10th place conundrum... I feel you could toss a three sided coin to pick it. That Pacific loss doesn't seem nearly as bad as it did at the beginning of the season. With Adrian playing Hope this week, the winner should be 10th on my ballot barring some strange event next week.
Barring huge upsets, the poll should be mostly stable for several weeks. Franklin doesn't play anyone that would move them up. The MIAA teams play only each other. Wabash/Witt is not until the second week of November. Both the CCIW and OAC are totally back-loaded in terms of this year's powerhouses. So unless there are unforeseen events, the next 4-5 weeks should be pretty tame. ;)
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 29, 2013, 09:54:05 PM
Thanks for your quick ballots, friends. I do greatly appreciate it.
Week 4 North Region Fan Poll
1. Mount Union 70 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. NCC 59 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3)
3. Franklin 58 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 5)
4. Wabash 43 pts (4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 7)
T5. Heidelberg 38 pts (3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7)
T5. Wheaton 38 pts (4, 4, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7)
7. Wittenberg 37 pts (4, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7)
8. John Carroll 20 pts (8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9)
9. Illinois Wesleyan 15 pts (8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9)
T10. Trine 3 pts (10, 10, 10, -, -, -, -)
T10. Hope 3 pts (10, 10, 10, -, -, -, -)
ARV
Adrian 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by FCGrizzliesGrad, wally_wabash, Li'l Giant, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, and myself.
Just one change for me this week. OWU out, Hope in. As discussed, it's hard to pick a #10 this week, but that's going to sort itself out next week in Holland.
Gave some thought to swapping North Central and Wabash again this week, but decided to keep things the same there. Wabash can probably move back up to 3 next week if they can hold down Wooster next week. Also thought about moving Wittenberg back up over Wheaton, but held off there as well.
Wes,
It's been a really good year for the top of the region. Also, it's been a lousy year for the bottom of the region. The difference between 2 and 7 is slight. The difference between 9 and 10 huge, really.
I'm beginning to change my opinion on 2 through 7 being interchangeable. I've watched a lot of these teams so far this year, and I'm starting to think that NCC, Franklin, and Wabash may be the haves while Wheaton, Heidi, and Witt may be the have nots. That's just my opinion from the eye test, and it's certainly alright if folks disagree with that. I understand the logic of Franklin being 5 or Wabash being 7, but I just don't see how either of those things can be possible after seeing Franklin play Mount Union and Butler and seeing what Wabash has done defensively, for example.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on October 01, 2013, 09:27:30 AM
I'm beginning to change my opinion on 2 through 7 being interchangeable. I've watched a lot of these teams so far this year, and I'm starting to think that NCC, Franklin, and Wabash may be the haves while Wheaton, Heidi, and Witt may be the have nots. That's just my opinion from the eye test, and it's certainly alright if folks disagree with that. I understand the logic of Franklin being 5 or Wabash being 7, but I just don't see how either of those things can be possible after seeing Franklin play Mount Union and Butler and seeing what Wabash has done defensively, for example.
I posted my ranks here, so it goes without much explanation that I agree 100% with the bolded sentence.
I think this week is the week when I really try to dig in a little more and reassess some things. For instance, I'm wondering if I don't need to be giving John Carroll more consideration amongst the 5-7 group. The Streaks have been really impressive. It's going to be time to really dig into the numbers this week. Everybody will have at least 4 games down after Saturday so the numbers start to paint a pretty good picture.
As annoying as a certain fan was, I don't think Heidelberg has done anything to deserve being dropped from that first category. Sure they've given up a few more yards and points than Wabash, but look at those games closely: most of that has come long after the game was decided (they led Ohio Northern 55-12 and Wilma 66-6, and while neither of those teams are especially good, they are not any worse than the competition Wabash has faced). I understand perhaps knocking Witt into the next tier because of the common data point with Franklin (not just the final result, but how Witt was utterly dismantled while Franklin traded blows on pretty even terms), and maybe Wheaton showed a crack by letting a mediocre Benedictine hang around for a while, but I don't think Heidelberg has shown any significant weakness just yet.
John Carroll does look interesting. I think they'll continue winning for a few weeks yet - what I'll actually be looking for from them is a) continued dominance and b) how B-W and Otterbein do the next few weeks. Last year, B-W and Ott were the 3rd and 4th best OAC teams, and Carroll has beaten both decisively; if the next few weeks provide data that B-W and Ott are both still decent, then JCU probably deserves more consideration, even if their next few wins are against blah competition.
"Have nots" might better be described as "lacking a little something."
Quote from: ADL70 on October 01, 2013, 04:31:53 PM
"Have nots" might better be described as "lacking a little something."
Agreed. That did come off a bit more negative than I intended. I like Heidi. I just don't think they could handle Franklin, NCC, or Wabash right now. That's why those three are 2, 3, and 4 on my ballot respectively.
My #10 revereted back to OWU. Almost pulled the trigger for Olivet, but...
I went with Adrian at #10.
Unranked & dangerous...just where I would
want the Bishops headed into Crawfordsville
My 'real' #10 would be Adrian, but I put Olivet there for a well-earned 'shout-out' - they have already won 2.5 times as many games this year as in their last five seasons total! I still think they will finish 5-5 (or at best 6-4), so this is probably the last chance to honor them.
Quote from: aueagle on October 06, 2013, 01:04:12 PM
Unranked & dangerous...just where I would
want the Bishops headed into Crawfordsville
Just how you planned it.
I think I'm going to have a change or two on my ballot. I'm going back and looking at some teams for my Top 25 and will probably shuffle things around a bit
VOTERS: If Wes's week is the same as previously, he can post the poll tonight or else we will have to wait until Thursday. :(
Get those ballots in NOW!
Mine is in.
In all it's magnificent glory, here's the Week 5 North Region Fan Poll!
1. Mount Union 70 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Franklin 58 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4)
3. North Central 57 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4)
4. Wabash 49 pts (3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 7)
5. Heidelberg 36 pts (3, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8)
6. Wittenberg 35 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7)
7. Wheaton 34 pts (5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8)
8. John Carroll 24 pts (6, 6, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9)
9. Illinois Wesleyan 8 pts (8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9)
T10. Ohio Wesleyan 3 pts (10, 10, 10, -, -, -, -)
T10. Adrian 3 pts (10, 10, 10, -, -, -, -)
ARV Olivet 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by FCGrizzliesGrad, wally_wabash, Li'l Giant, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, and myself.
I'll spell my ballot out a little later, but I'm really shocked at the votes for OWU. They did get beat in their own building by a 4-1 team.
1. Mount Union 70 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Franklin 58 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4)
3. North Central 57 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4)
4. Wabash 49 pts (3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 7)
5. Heidelberg 36 pts (3, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8)
6. Wittenberg 35 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7)
7. Wheaton 34 pts (5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8)
8. John Carroll 24 pts (6, 6, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9)
9. Illinois Wesleyan 8 pts (8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9)
T10. Ohio Wesleyan 3 pts (10, 10, 10, -, -, -, -)
T10. Adrian 3 pts (10, 10, 10, -, -, -, -)
ARV Olivet 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
I only made one change from my ballot last week and that was swapping Franklin and Wheaton at 4/5... I'm still waiting on the middle of the pack to separate but things are just getting closer. On my Top 25 ballot #3-7 here are ranked 9-14. If I could I'd have Wabash at 3e rather than 7. John Carroll also climbed onto my ballot so they're working their way closer to that group as well.
I'm rather surprised at the OWU votes too... while they might be 11th on my list at this point I didn't really think they were close enough to Adrian to garner votes.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 07, 2013, 01:51:29 PM
I'll spell my ballot out a little later, but I'm really shocked at the votes for OWU. They did get beat in their own building by a 4-1 team.
Agreed. You could make an argument that Denison is more deserving than OWU. After all, Denison has the same record and beat them head-to-head (at OWU, as you noted), and Denison's only loss (however decisive) came against one of the higher-ranked teams. If you're penalizing Denison for getting blown out, well, don't you also have to penalize OWU for losing to Denison head-to-head? It's likely to be a moot point since Denison plays Wittenberg this week, and I suspect both OWU and Denison will be gone from rankings consideration by the end of Saturday, but for this week I think Denison had a reasonable claim at #10, and if they play Wittenberg especially tough this week I would still think about it.
I suspect the OWU votes are a bit of a residual effect from their status entering the season as a trendy team to watch, with a dash of people not really knowing who else to put there. Incredibly, if Olivet manages to beat Hope (seems unlikely, but still), I think they'll have a legitimate claim to that 10-spot next week.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on October 07, 2013, 01:45:59 PM
In all it's magnificent glory, here's the Week 5 North Region Fan Poll!
1. Mount Union 70 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Franklin 58 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4)
3. North Central 57 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4)
4. Wabash 49 pts (3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 7)
5. Heidelberg 36 pts (3, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8)
6. Wittenberg 35 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7)
7. Wheaton 34 pts (5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8)
8. John Carroll 24 pts (6, 6, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9)
9. Illinois Wesleyan 8 pts (8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9)
T10. Ohio Wesleyan 3 pts (10, 10, 10, -, -, -, -)
T10. Adrian 3 pts (10, 10, 10, -, -, -, -)
ARV Olivet 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by FCGrizzliesGrad, wally_wabash, Li'l Giant, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, and myself.
Alrighty. Top two are the same again for me. Swapped Wabash and North Central to 3 and 4, respecitvely. I watched a good deal of the NCC/Elmhurst game after the delay and North Central didn't seem quite as complete to me as Wabash does. Also, I think with two full weeks of Mason Zurek as the starting RB at Wabash, my concerns about what happens to Wabash's run game have been alleviated. Zurek is good.
Heidelberg remains fifth for me, although I did give some strong consideration to moving the Blue Streaks all the way up to the 5 spot. It's close, but I'm super, super impressed with what John Carroll is doing this season. The Streaks moved up to 6 from 8 on my ballot this week.
Wittenberg stayed at 7 for me and Wheaton was moved back to 8th (from 6th). I know Wheaton's final score this week wasn't indicative of the whole game, but 24 points? 3 turnovers from Roberts? Red flags all around the Wheaton Thunder.
Illinois Wesleyan stays put at #9 and Adrian won the battle for #10 in Holland on Saturday.
Lurking just behind these 10 are (in no particular order): Greenville, Denison (probably time we get comfortable with the idea that Denison has a pretty good team...probably won't crack the top 10 this year, but they are coming), Olivet, and Chicago. And just beyond that group is OWU who needs a big time result this weekend or on 11/2 to make up for the Denison result.
I think JCU is every bit as good as Berg so far. They have been as good as advertised on offense thanks to Myers, but they have been extremely impressive defensively. You pair probably the most talented QB in the region with a very good D and that's dangerous.
1. Mount Union 70 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Franklin 58 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4)
3. North Central 57 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4)
4. Wabash 49 pts (3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 7)
5. Heidelberg 36 pts (3, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8)
6. Wittenberg 35 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7)
7. Wheaton 34 pts (5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8)
8. John Carroll 24 pts (6, 6, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9)
9. Illinois Wesleyan 8 pts (8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9)
T10. Ohio Wesleyan 3 pts (10, 10, 10, -, -, -, -)
T10. Adrian 3 pts (10, 10, 10, -, -, -, -)
ARV Olivet 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
I also had to switch out NC with Wabash, based on how they have played so far this season. As far as Witt, Wheaton. JCU, this should sort out soon enough. IWU may move up in the next few weeks, if they can knock off NC or Wheaton (or both?) and as far as #10, that could be a revolving door, so I put OWU back in, but I also thought about Adrian or like Mr. Ypsi, giving Olivet a shout out.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on October 07, 2013, 01:45:59 PM
In all it's magnificent glory, here's the Week 5 North Region Fan Poll!
1. Mount Union 70 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Franklin 58 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4)
3. North Central 57 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4)
4. Wabash 49 pts (3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 7)
5. Heidelberg 36 pts (3, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8)
6. Wittenberg 35 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7)
7. Wheaton 34 pts (5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8)
8. John Carroll 24 pts (6, 6, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9)
9. Illinois Wesleyan 8 pts (8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9)
T10. Ohio Wesleyan 3 pts (10, 10, 10, -, -, -, -)
T10. Adrian 3 pts (10, 10, 10, -, -, -, -)
ARV Olivet 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by FCGrizzliesGrad, wally_wabash, Li'l Giant, Mr. Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, and myself.
I moved Wabash up to 4. I thought about moving them up above NCC and just didn't. I'm open to it obviously.
I too am impressed with John Carroll. They can only move up honestly given how they play Heidi and Mount to close the season.
As for #10 I went with Adrian, 4-1 with a lone loss to a 4-0 team. I realize that you can make a similar case for OWU and Olivet is 5-0. I just felt better about Adrian.
Wally brings up an interesting point about Denison. I think they are better than most of us who watch the NCAC thought they'd be. I'm very curious to see how they perform against Witt this week.
1. Mount Union 70 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Franklin 58 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4)
3. North Central 57 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4)
4. Wabash 49 pts (3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 7)
5. Heidelberg 36 pts (3, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8)
6. Wittenberg 35 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7)
7. Wheaton 34 pts (5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8)
8. John Carroll 24 pts (6, 6, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9)
9. Illinois Wesleyan 8 pts (8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9)
T10. Ohio Wesleyan 3 pts (10, 10, 10, -, -, -, -)
T10. Adrian 3 pts (10, 10, 10, -, -, -, -)
ARV Olivet 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
My only change this week was jumping Wabash over bye-week Franklin (and the 'shout-out' vote for Olivet after dropping Trine; as I indicated in an earlier post, my 'real' #10 would be Adrian). Our 2, 3, 4 teams are receiving 20 of the 21 2, 3, 4 votes - pretty good consensus! As to which order: just about might as well draw names from a hat. :P
Barring a really impressive performance from Denison or OWU this Saturday, I suspect my #10 will always be whatever MIAA team currently looks most semi-impressive.
Unless there are pretty major upsets, the poll will likely be pretty boring the next few weeks: Franklin doesn't play anyone that could help them, Witt and Wabash don't play until November, and both the OAC and CCIW are tremendously back-loaded in terms of top clashes. Wake me in November! ;D
You guys are having a nice little tea party in here. I think there is justification for #3-9 in any order. I just don't see much separation in the data between most of those teams. For kicks I did my own top 10 and came up with:
1. Mt Union
2. Franklin
3. tied: Wheaton, Wabash, NCC, Heidi, JCU
8. IWU
9. Witt
10. Adrian
splitting hairs we are, incomplete information we have.
I threw OWU back at #10, even though they lost to Denison. I looked at all the teams and realistically thought it may have been a fluky thing. I basically don't trust any team after the top 9. I'm not sold on any MIAA team - though as Pacific continues to improve I may have to give Adrian another look.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 07, 2013, 11:23:04 PM
Barring a really impressive performance from Denison or OWU this Saturday, I suspect my #10 will always be whatever MIAA team currently looks most semi-impressive.
I didn't do it intentionally but that may explain why I went with Adrian as my #10.
Quote from: USee on October 08, 2013, 12:03:02 PM
You guys are having a nice little tea party in here. I think there is justification for #3-9 in any order. I just don't see much separation in the data between most of those teams. For kicks I did my own top 10 and came up with:
1. Mt Union
2. Franklin
3. tied: Wheaton, Wabash, NCC, Heidi, JCU
8. IWU
9. Witt
10. Adrian
splitting hairs we are, incomplete information we have.
Instead of snarking, as Wes if you can join in!
Quote from: smedindy on October 09, 2013, 12:34:13 PM
Quote from: USee on October 08, 2013, 12:03:02 PM
You guys are having a nice little tea party in here. I think there is justification for #3-9 in any order. I just don't see much separation in the data between most of those teams. For kicks I did my own top 10 and came up with:
1. Mt Union
2. Franklin
3. tied: Wheaton, Wabash, NCC, Heidi, JCU
8. IWU
9. Witt
10. Adrian
splitting hairs we are, incomplete information we have.
Instead of snarking, as Wes if you can join in!
You beat me to the punch :)
It's a good thing we only have to rank 10 because apparently no one wants to be #11. I've got a UMAC team sitting at #12 right now :-\
Finally joined the Adrian train...
Quote from: NCF on October 13, 2013, 07:29:26 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 13, 2013, 07:15:00 PM
Finally joined the Adrian train...
ditto
I joined after they beat Hope (though I put undefeated Olivet there last week to honor going from 0-10 to 5-0). IF they lose at Trine this Saturday, I may have to just leave #10 blank! ::)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 13, 2013, 07:38:07 PM
Quote from: NCF on October 13, 2013, 07:29:26 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 13, 2013, 07:15:00 PM
Finally joined the Adrian train...
ditto
I joined after they beat Hope (though I put undefeated Olivet there last week to honor going from 0-10 to 5-0). IF they lose at Trine this Saturday, I may have to just leave #10 blank! ::)
Uh...I haven't yet. Although Adrian is a good team, Hope could have beat them had Hope's offense not had one of those terrible "off' days. As Trine has lost 2 in a row, I'm not sure how they'll do against Adrian. However, while I've not seen Albion play yet, right now I have this "gut" feeling that they could very well beat Adrian. The MIAA "scrum" (as our posting colleague sac has coined the phrase ;D ;)) is almost always surprising (except for all those Albion string of title years in the mid-late 1990's).
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 13, 2013, 07:38:07 PM
Quote from: NCF on October 13, 2013, 07:29:26 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 13, 2013, 07:15:00 PM
Finally joined the Adrian train...
ditto
I joined after they beat Hope (though I put undefeated Olivet there last week to honor going from 0-10 to 5-0). IF they lose at Trine this Saturday, I may have to just leave #10 blank! ::)
They won't make the playoffs, but I happen to think Denison would be worthy of the 10 spot. I expect the Big Red to run the table from here out, and an 8-2 season may earn then the coveted final slot in the rankings, although I'm also fine with keeping "token MIAA team" in that spot. I almost asked why we're ignoring Illinois College, but I realized they're a West Region team.
I'll try to get the poll up tonight, fellas. I have all the ballots.
Sorry for the delay gang. Let's all welcome USee to the poll. I kinda have a thing for round numbers, so Im glad we're up to 8 participants. Here's this week's North Region Fan Poll:
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Franklin 67 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4)
3. North Central 64 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4)
4. Wabash 55 pts (3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6)
5. Heidelberg 43 pts (3, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7)
6. Wheaton 39 pts (3, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8)
7. Wittenberg 34 pts (5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8, 9)
8. John Carroll 28 pts (6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 9)
9. Illinois Wesleyan 18 pts (8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9)
10. Adrian 8 pts (10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by FCGrizzliesGrad, wally_wabash, Li'l Giant, NCF, smedindy, Mr Ypsi, Usee, and myself.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on October 17, 2013, 10:28:09 AM
Sorry for the delay gang. Let's all welcome USee to the poll. I kinda have a thing for round numbers, so Im glad we're up to 8 participants. Here's this week's North Region Fan Poll:
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Franklin 67 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4)
3. North Central 64 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4)
4. Wabash 55 pts (3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6)
5. Heidelberg 43 pts (3, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7)
6. Wheaton 39 pts (3, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8)
7. Wittenberg 34 pts (5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8, 9)
8. John Carroll 28 pts (6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 9)
9. Illinois Wesleyan 18 pts (8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9)
10. Adrian 8 pts (10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by FCGrizzliesGrad, wally_wabash, Li'l Giant, NCF, smedindy, Mr Ypsi, Usee, and myself.
Consensus 10! No way!
Not really surprising; the pecking order seems pretty well-established and it won't change til we get a few H2H matchups in the CCIW, OAC, and NCAC respectively. Franklin is likely to keep winning and stay where they are, and assuming Adrian continues to win it seems they're likely to occupy the 10 slot. If they lose, perhaps Olivet or Albion will sneak in if they continue to win (and if they're the one who deals Adrian said defeat). I think Denison is the other team poking around the fringes who has no realistic playoff chance but I expect to win out and maybe deserve that final slot by season's end.
Consensus! What do we win??
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on October 17, 2013, 10:28:09 AM
Sorry for the delay gang. Let's all welcome USee to the poll. I kinda have a thing for round numbers, so Im glad we're up to 8 participants. Here's this week's North Region Fan Poll:
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Franklin 67 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4)
3. North Central 64 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4)
4. Wabash 55 pts (3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6)
5. Heidelberg 43 pts (3, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7)
6. Wheaton 39 pts (3, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8)
7. Wittenberg 34 pts (5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8, 9)
8. John Carroll 28 pts (6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 9)
9. Illinois Wesleyan 18 pts (8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9)
10. Adrian 8 pts (10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by FCGrizzliesGrad, wally_wabash, Li'l Giant, NCF, smedindy, Mr Ypsi, Usee, and myself.
I didn't make any changes this week. Franklin made me pause for a second (don't give up so many points, Grizzlies), but ultimately they are anchored to Mount Union and Mount Union is starting to show some separation at the top here.
I'm also really, really starting to get the feeling that John Carroll is going to make us all eat wicked crow by the time this thing is over. They look really, really good. Outside of Mount Union and Franklin (who played virutally even with Mount Union), who has played better than John Carroll for six weeks? I'm calling out my own vote.
Teams still waiting in line to get into the club: Chicago, Greenville, and then a little further out sit Denison, Olivet, and Otterbein. And probably Hope is in that group as well.
We need some big games in the region. Soon.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 17, 2013, 11:15:41 AM
We need some big games in the region. Soon.
Still going to have to wait another week or two. Heidelberg vs. Otterbein will give us a semi-useful data point; while I expect Heidelberg to win, this is the first matchup they'll have against a quality opponent. Just happens that the way the schedule broke this year, with ONU and Capital both down from their usual standards, that Mount/Heidelberg have spent the first half of the OAC season playing teams that clearly appear to be in the bottom half of the conference (to their credit, both have obliterated every OAC team they've played) while John Carroll has beaten - impressively - last year's co-third-placers in Baldwin-Wallace and Otterbein. This is the first common 'quality' opponent for JCU and either Berg/Mount. If Berg blows Otterbein off the field by 50, that'll tell us maybe the gap between Mount/Berg and the rest of the OAC is just that big. If Berg wins 35-7 or something of that ilk, we might have some verrrrry interesting games on our hands when JCU-Berg-Mount start playing. Same with the CCIW triumvirate.
I was very, very close to putting JCU 3rd on my ballot for the same reasons Wally pointed out. They have beaten 3 teams with winning records while only giving up 2 TD's in 5 games. Very impressive resume, albeit incomplete.
After them and the top 2, the rest of the teams haven't played anyone so their relative versions of domination is just noise in my view with no real method of differentiating. NCC is the only team to have played a relatively decent opponent in WSP and I am looking forward to seeing their matchup against Platteville this weekend to see if their 4-1 record is smoke or substnace. Going to be an interesting week 10 and week 11 when we get there.
I shuffled John Carroll up, which knocked Witt and Heidelberg down a peg. Still, it's close in the middle.
I think you guys do a great job with the NRFP and think it makes for great discussion fodder about who we think should fall where. But Keith posted a nice little item today that is worth noting, just to help us keep all "rankings" and "polls" in perspective.
"Why do you want to see your school ranked? Think about that for a second. Do you want an honest assessment of where keen observers think your team stands? Or do you just like to see your team's name in lights? We all like to be appreciated and loved. Nothing wrong with that. But before you toss a subtle or not-so-subtle jab at the pollsters who "aren't giving us any love," ask what it is you want the love for."
In the D3FB facebook post that brought the item to my attention, they had a brief paraphrasing that worked perfectly:
"Would you rather see your team ranked in the Top 25, or would you rather be good enough to be ranked in the Top 25?"
(Obviously "both" is the preference, but the point stands - just being ranked, in and of itself, is meaningless unless you keep backing it up by winning the games that count, so squabbling too much over midseason rankings is a bit silly)
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 24, 2013, 11:40:36 AM
I think you guys do a great job with the NRFP and think it makes for great discussion fodder about who we think should fall where. But Keith posted a nice little item today that is worth noting, just to help us keep all "rankings" and "polls" in perspective.
"Why do you want to see your school ranked? Think about that for a second. Do you want an honest assessment of where keen observers think your team stands? Or do you just like to see your team's name in lights? We all like to be appreciated and loved. Nothing wrong with that. But before you toss a subtle or not-so-subtle jab at the pollsters who "aren't giving us any love," ask what it is you want the love for."
In the D3FB facebook post that brought the item to my attention, they had a brief paraphrasing that worked perfectly:
"Would you rather see your team ranked in the Top 25, or would you rather be good enough to be ranked in the Top 25?"
(Obviously "both" is the preference, but the point stands - just being ranked, in and of itself, is meaningless unless you keep backing it up by winning the games that count, so squabbling too much over midseason rankings is a bit silly)
I don't think being ranked is meaningless. The Division III top 25 is a pretty exclusive club. While being ranked in and of itself doesn't mean diddly as far as getting into the postseason or even winning the postseason tournament, seeing your team's name on that top 25 list is an affirmation of both team success and the respect that program has within the D3 community (SIDs, coaches, media types, etc.). I can remember back in 2002 when Wabash finally cracked a top 25 (not the D3football.com top 25...I don't think that poll existed until 2003). It was awesome to see Wabash on that list.
Maybe the biggest benefit of being in the top 25 is that your team's score is at the top of the composite scoreboard every week so you don't have to sift through the 110-ish games to find your links for stats, video, boxscores, etc. :)
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 24, 2013, 12:21:17 PM
Maybe the biggest benefit of being in the top 25 is that your team's score is at the top of the composite scoreboard every week so you don't have to sift through the 110-ish games to find your links for stats, video, boxscores, etc. :)
I always find the mobil version of the scoreboard is the best for finding scores since it can be quickly sort by conference. The website is quite a bit more difficult for the same information. So yes, as far as the website goes, being ranked does make it easy to find your score!
Only received 7 ballots this week. USee arrived like a bright flash of light, but, sadly, was gone just as quickly. 70 possible points this week. Here's the North Region Fan Poll. Top 10 answers are on the board.
1. Mount Union 70 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Franklin 59 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4)
3. North Central 56 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 4)
4. Wabash 52 pts (3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5)
T5. Wheaton 32 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8)
T5. Wittenberg 32 pts (5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8)
T5. John Carroll 32 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 9)
8. Heidelberg 30 pts (4, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8, 8)
9. Illinois Wesleyan 15 pts (8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9)
10. Adrian 7 pts (10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Mr. Ypsi, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, wally_wabash, NCF, and myself.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on October 24, 2013, 02:03:03 PM
Only received 7 ballots this week. USee arrived like a bright flash of light, but, sadly, was gone just as quickly. 70 possible points this week. Here's the North Region Fan Poll. Top 10 answers are on the board.
1. Mount Union 70 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Franklin 59 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4)
3. North Central 56 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 4)
4. Wabash 52 pts (3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5)
T5. Wheaton 32 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8)
T5. Wittenberg 32 pts (5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8)
T5. John Carroll 32 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 9)
8. Heidelberg 30 pts (4, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8, 8)
9. Illinois Wesleyan 15 pts (8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9)
10. Adrian 7 pts (10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Mr. Ypsi, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, wally_wabash, NCF, and myself.
The truth is getting ready to be told in the next 5 weeks for sure. Only Franklin and Adrian have no head to head matchups in this listing. (Franklin already had their moment of truth in week 1). Certainly will be interesting and fun to follow the OAC, CCIWm and NCAC matchups.
1. Mount Union 70 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Franklin 59 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4)
3. North Central 56 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 4)
4. Wabash 52 pts (3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5)
T5. Wheaton 32 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8)
T5. Wittenberg 32 pts (5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8)
T5. John Carroll 32 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 9)
8. Heidelberg 30 pts (4, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8, 8)
9. Illinois Wesleyan 15 pts (8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9)
10. Adrian 7 pts (10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10)
3-8 on my ballot here are ranked between 9 and 15 on my Top 25 ballot
Right now on my watch list I've got Hope, Greenville, and Chicago... the top of the North region is stacked and then it's just sort of bleh
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on October 24, 2013, 02:03:03 PM
Only received 7 ballots this week. USee arrived like a bright flash of light, but, sadly, was gone just as quickly. 70 possible points this week. Here's the North Region Fan Poll. Top 10 answers are on the board.
1. Mount Union 70 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Franklin 59 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4)
3. North Central 56 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 4)
4. Wabash 52 pts (3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5)
T5. Wheaton 32 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8)
T5. Wittenberg 32 pts (5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8)
T5. John Carroll 32 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 9)
8. Heidelberg 30 pts (4, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8, 8)
9. Illinois Wesleyan 15 pts (8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9)
10. Adrian 7 pts (10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Mr. Ypsi, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, wally_wabash, NCF, and myself.
Just one change for me this week...John Carroll up one to 5, Heidelberg down one to 6. The rest stay the same. John Carroll made it somewhat difficult to move over Heidelberg this week by playing a pretty poor game offensively, but I couldn't ignore how dominant they have been over the course of 6 games now, particularly on the defensive side of the ball.
Can't wait to finally get some h2h's going here. 10 teams...7 are undefeated, another is undefeated in Division III play. Glad we are finally about to get some primary data.
By the way, one thing to think about as we creep closer and closer to regional rankings....as long as Greenville keeps winning, they are going to be ranked. Which one of these 10 teams would get bumped for Greenville?
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 24, 2013, 02:27:36 PM
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on October 24, 2013, 02:03:03 PM
Only received 7 ballots this week. USee arrived like a bright flash of light, but, sadly, was gone just as quickly. 70 possible points this week. Here's the North Region Fan Poll. Top 10 answers are on the board.
1. Mount Union 70 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Franklin 59 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4)
3. North Central 56 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 4)
4. Wabash 52 pts (3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5)
T5. Wheaton 32 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8)
T5. Wittenberg 32 pts (5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8)
T5. John Carroll 32 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 9)
8. Heidelberg 30 pts (4, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8, 8)
9. Illinois Wesleyan 15 pts (8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9)
10. Adrian 7 pts (10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Mr. Ypsi, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, wally_wabash, NCF, and myself.
Just one change for me this week...John Carroll up one to 5, Heidelberg down one to 6. The rest stay the same. John Carroll made it somewhat difficult to move over Heidelberg this week by playing a pretty poor game offensively, but I couldn't ignore how dominant they have been over the course of 6 games now, particularly on the defensive side of the ball.
Can't wait to finally get some h2h's going here. 10 teams...7 are undefeated, another is undefeated in Division III play. Glad we are finally about to get some primary data.
By the way, one thing to think about as we creep closer and closer to regional rankings....as long as Greenville keeps winning, they are going to be ranked. Which one of these 10 teams would get bumped for Greenville?
Carroll's poor game offensively is semi-explicable to me; Musky's poor record obscures the fact that their defense is actually okay. They made Mount Union work for what they got, and held Ott to 12 points the week before JCU. That, and I heard the weather was sloppy. Once JCU got out to the big lead, they may have buckled down and played it super-conservative rather than going for more numbers. I think you can also argue that this little wart is offset by the fact that Heidelberg's defense dropped an equal turd this week by allowing 400+ yards to Otterbein; really, for one week, Heidelberg was totally reliant on Cartel Brooks (and their OL, of course) because they got very little from the passing game and the defense wasn't that great.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 24, 2013, 02:27:36 PM
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on October 24, 2013, 02:03:03 PM
Only received 7 ballots this week. USee arrived like a bright flash of light, but, sadly, was gone just as quickly. 70 possible points this week. Here's the North Region Fan Poll. Top 10 answers are on the board.
1. Mount Union 70 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Franklin 59 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4)
3. North Central 56 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 4)
4. Wabash 52 pts (3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5)
T5. Wheaton 32 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8)
T5. Wittenberg 32 pts (5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8)
T5. John Carroll 32 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 9)
8. Heidelberg 30 pts (4, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8, 8)
9. Illinois Wesleyan 15 pts (8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9)
10. Adrian 7 pts (10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Mr. Ypsi, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, wally_wabash, NCF, and myself.
Just one change for me this week...John Carroll up one to 5, Heidelberg down one to 6. The rest stay the same. John Carroll made it somewhat difficult to move over Heidelberg this week by playing a pretty poor game offensively, but I couldn't ignore how dominant they have been over the course of 6 games now, particularly on the defensive side of the ball.
Can't wait to finally get some h2h's going here. 10 teams...7 are undefeated, another is undefeated in Division III play. Glad we are finally about to get some primary data.
By the way, one thing to think about as we creep closer and closer to regional rankings....as long as Greenville keeps winning, they are going to be ranked. Which one of these 10 teams would get bumped for Greenville?
My guess Illinois Wesleyan, but that's just a guess.
Well, if IWU gets blasted by Wheaton, that may be likely. But if they play them close, that should solidify their position, and if (as my green goggles are predicting) they go and beat the Thunder, they're a lock for the top 10 and probably jump a few teams.
The following week they host NCC, but that should be largely irrelevant, since everyone expects a blow-out by the Cards. And if (my green goggles again ;)) they go nose-to-nose with NCC, they should rise even further - afterall, no one else has come anywhere close to them.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 24, 2013, 02:27:36 PM
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on October 24, 2013, 02:03:03 PM
Only received 7 ballots this week. USee arrived like a bright flash of light, but, sadly, was gone just as quickly. 70 possible points this week. Here's the North Region Fan Poll. Top 10 answers are on the board.
1. Mount Union 70 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Franklin 59 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4)
3. North Central 56 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 4)
4. Wabash 52 pts (3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5)
T5. Wheaton 32 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8)
T5. Wittenberg 32 pts (5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8)
T5. John Carroll 32 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 9)
8. Heidelberg 30 pts (4, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8, 8)
9. Illinois Wesleyan 15 pts (8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9)
10. Adrian 7 pts (10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Mr. Ypsi, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, wally_wabash, NCF, and myself.
Just one change for me this week...John Carroll up one to 5, Heidelberg down one to 6. The rest stay the same. John Carroll made it somewhat difficult to move over Heidelberg this week by playing a pretty poor game offensively, but I couldn't ignore how dominant they have been over the course of 6 games now, particularly on the defensive side of the ball.
Can't wait to finally get some h2h's going here. 10 teams...7 are undefeated, another is undefeated in Division III play. Glad we are finally about to get some primary data.
By the way, one thing to think about as we creep closer and closer to regional rankings....as long as Greenville keeps winning, they are going to be ranked. Which one of these 10 teams would get bumped for Greenville?
With respect: I don't necessarily think that is true, nor do I think it should be.
Greenville is undefeated while in playing in arguably the weakest conference in the region (actually, I don't even think that's really arguable) and they have won a couple of very close shaves against very "meh" opponents. They barely survived Millikin in Week 1; Millikin is 1-5 with a three-point win over lowly Aurora and has gotten destroyed in all three CCIW games. They beat UMAC bedfellows Eureka and Crown by one point each; Crown is 2-5 and lost to Macalester, probably qualifying them as one of the (how do I put this nicely?) worst teams in Division III. Meanwhile, St. Scholastica got blown out in their opener by Whitworth (2-5, 0-3 in the NWC) and has been running roughshod over the same conference, or at least they haven't been pulling out one-point wins to survive.
Asking the rhetorical question: do you think Illinois Wesleyan or Adrian would need one-point wins to survive those teams? Heck, do you think Denison or Ohio Wesleyan would need one-point wins to survive those teams? I don't. So I don't think we have to rank Greenville ahead of those teams just because Greenville has managed to stay undefeated. I'm usually a champion for undefeated teams from the lesser conferences (my own background, remember?), and I do think that Greenville should be in the tournament if they're undefeated, I'm a firm believer in Pool A bids, that's no mystery. But I don't think we're obligated to
rank them just because they're undefeated and going to the playoffs. I think there's a decent chance St. Scholastica will render this whole discussion moot by beating them in Week 11, anyway.
To clarify, in case my original post missed the point: are you referring to your own NRFP or the Regional Rankings? I still don't think Greenville should crack either, unless they find a new gear and beat St. Scholastica by 40, but still just asking.
sorry guys, did not forget you but was tied up this week. I sent my ballot to Wes, albeit late. I moved JCU up to 3rd. cannot ignore their D any longer. Still an indistiguishable logjam at 4-9 in my opinon.
I'm talking about the regional rankings, ETP. Barring total implosion by 4-5 teams on the NRFP list, I don't see Greenville cracking this top 10. But in the regional rankings, they certainly will as long as they keep winning. Just last year, CUC was not only ranked, but ranked 2nd in the region. And before them we've seen CWRU be ranked as high as 2nd in the regional rankings in spite of some really, really soft schedules in the 2007-2008 window. So when we get to regional ranking time and Greenville is 8-0 or 9-0, they'll be on that list for sure.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 24, 2013, 06:42:44 PM
I'm talking about the regional rankings, ETP. Barring total implosion by 4-5 teams on the NRFP list, I don't see Greenville cracking this top 10. But in the regional rankings, they certainly will as long as they keep winning. Just last year, CUC was not only ranked, but ranked 2nd in the region. And before them we've seen CWRU be ranked as high as 2nd in the regional rankings in spite of some really, really soft schedules in the 2007-2008 window. So when we get to regional ranking time and Greenville is 8-0 or 9-0, they'll be on that list for sure.
Understood - at first I thought you were talking NRFP. Makes more sense now.
Re: who gets dropped from this list so Greenville gets into RR, my hunch is that it'll be either the CCIW third wheel or OAC third wheel (assuming neither ends up with a three-way tie at 9-1). RR always seems to love them some undefeated teams and hate teams with 2 losses. Or, if someone beats Adrian, I can see the MIAA going unrepresented in the RR's in favor of Greenville.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 24, 2013, 06:48:11 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 24, 2013, 06:42:44 PM
I'm talking about the regional rankings, ETP. Barring total implosion by 4-5 teams on the NRFP list, I don't see Greenville cracking this top 10. But in the regional rankings, they certainly will as long as they keep winning. Just last year, CUC was not only ranked, but ranked 2nd in the region. And before them we've seen CWRU be ranked as high as 2nd in the regional rankings in spite of some really, really soft schedules in the 2007-2008 window. So when we get to regional ranking time and Greenville is 8-0 or 9-0, they'll be on that list for sure.
Understood - at first I thought you were talking NRFP. Makes more sense now.
Re: who gets dropped from this list so Greenville gets into RR, my hunch is that it'll be either the CCIW third wheel or OAC third wheel (assuming neither ends up with a three-way tie at 9-1). RR always seems to love them some undefeated teams and hate teams with 2 losses. Or, if someone beats Adrian, I can see the MIAA going unrepresented in the RR's in favor of Greenville.
Agree with this analysis. I, too, thought he was talking about our poll. IF, heaven forbid, IWU loses the next two weeks, even I may drop them out (they would then have no compelling wins - Hope would probably be the best), though time will tell who I would replace them with - probably NOT Greenville!
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 24, 2013, 08:56:01 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 24, 2013, 06:48:11 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 24, 2013, 06:42:44 PM
I'm talking about the regional rankings, ETP. Barring total implosion by 4-5 teams on the NRFP list, I don't see Greenville cracking this top 10. But in the regional rankings, they certainly will as long as they keep winning. Just last year, CUC was not only ranked, but ranked 2nd in the region. And before them we've seen CWRU be ranked as high as 2nd in the regional rankings in spite of some really, really soft schedules in the 2007-2008 window. So when we get to regional ranking time and Greenville is 8-0 or 9-0, they'll be on that list for sure.
Understood - at first I thought you were talking NRFP. Makes more sense now.
Re: who gets dropped from this list so Greenville gets into RR, my hunch is that it'll be either the CCIW third wheel or OAC third wheel (assuming neither ends up with a three-way tie at 9-1). RR always seems to love them some undefeated teams and hate teams with 2 losses. Or, if someone beats Adrian, I can see the MIAA going unrepresented in the RR's in favor of Greenville.
Agree with this analysis. I, too, thought he was talking about our poll. IF, heaven forbid, IWU loses the next two weeks, even I may drop them out (they would then have no compelling wins - Hope would probably be the best), though time will tell who I would replace them with - probably NOT Greenville!
IWU could lose the next two weeks and potentially hang on to 10th. After the top 10 there really aren't any compelling teams waiting to take over a spot. My short list of teams include Hope, Greenville, and Chicago (who I expect to drop off after this weekend). I think they'd have to be competitive to have any shot at staying above Hope, but if they keep both games within about 7 points I think it will make for a difficult decision for that 10th spot.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 24, 2013, 09:13:37 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 24, 2013, 08:56:01 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 24, 2013, 06:48:11 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 24, 2013, 06:42:44 PM
I'm talking about the regional rankings, ETP. Barring total implosion by 4-5 teams on the NRFP list, I don't see Greenville cracking this top 10. But in the regional rankings, they certainly will as long as they keep winning. Just last year, CUC was not only ranked, but ranked 2nd in the region. And before them we've seen CWRU be ranked as high as 2nd in the regional rankings in spite of some really, really soft schedules in the 2007-2008 window. So when we get to regional ranking time and Greenville is 8-0 or 9-0, they'll be on that list for sure.
Understood - at first I thought you were talking NRFP. Makes more sense now.
Re: who gets dropped from this list so Greenville gets into RR, my hunch is that it'll be either the CCIW third wheel or OAC third wheel (assuming neither ends up with a three-way tie at 9-1). RR always seems to love them some undefeated teams and hate teams with 2 losses. Or, if someone beats Adrian, I can see the MIAA going unrepresented in the RR's in favor of Greenville.
Agree with this analysis. I, too, thought he was talking about our poll. IF, heaven forbid, IWU loses the next two weeks, even I may drop them out (they would then have no compelling wins - Hope would probably be the best), though time will tell who I would replace them with - probably NOT Greenville!
IWU could lose the next two weeks and potentially hang on to 10th. After the top 10 there really aren't any compelling teams waiting to take over a spot. My short list of teams include Hope, Greenville, and Chicago (who I expect to drop off after this weekend). I think they'd have to be competitive to have any shot at staying above Hope, but if they keep both games within about 7 points I think it will make for a difficult decision for that 10th spot.
Heck, if IWU stays within 7 of both Wheaton and NCC, I'm moving them UP, not down! (Personally, I think they will beat Wheaton; it is NCC that makes me soil my underwear! :o ;D)
I just wish IWU would upgrade their OOC schedule. Hope is fine (though we have now beaten them 6(?) straight years, but usually a close game), Aurora is kinda understandable as the geographically closest d3 school (except for a couple of former SLIAC schools and, perhaps, Wabash - but not sure that either the Titans or Little Giants are eager to take on the other in a regular-season game), but Alma??!! IF they do finish 9-1 I think they are
fairly safe for a C (but not the guarantee one might wish), but unlikely to get a home game.
I'm of the opinion that we will not see IWU v. Wabash during the regular season in my lifetime (gulp)---just won't happen. I'd be surprised if we will see Wabash opening v. any CCIW team. With the NCAC now playing totally h to h, finally, there's A) not much opportunity and B) not much sense in the matchup. Wabash is committed in the short-term to playing Hampden-Sydney in the season opener. While this is a mistake in my view (too long an explanation of this to include here), I believe they will eventually return to playing inside Indiana for their one non-conference game. And if not in Indiana, one of the UAA teams, probably Chicago or Wash U. Also, too long to explain right now, I'd be surprised if they would arrange with Franklin to play in an opener, but I've been wrong about that before. The last time the LGs and Grizzlies met in back to back years, they split home and home in two of the most thrilling early-season games I can recall--Franklin in OT and Wabash holding on at the end. Of course, the other teams in Indiana will have something to say about Wabash starting with one of them.
I wonder if Chicago will sneak into the RR's, if they beat Pacific and then through the UAA. Yeah, they played a lot of dreck and they lost to the one really good team on their schedule (Rhodes), however...you just wonder if a 9-1 Chicago doesn't sneak on at 9 or 10.
Quote from: smedindy on October 25, 2013, 05:19:32 PM
I wonder if Chicago will sneak into the RR's, if they beat Pacific and then through the UAA. Yeah, they played a lot of dreck and they lost to the one really good team on their schedule (Rhodes), however...you just wonder if a 9-1 Chicago doesn't sneak on at 9 or 10.
I would actually support a 9-1 Chicago being regionally ranked because that would mean they've added wins over a decent Pacific team and a very underrated WashU. I don't expect that to happen but if it does, I'd have no problem seeing them in the RR's.
I would probably vote for Chicago this weekend if they make that trip out to Oregon and beat that team. That team that rolled up Adrian earlier this season...that's a hard common opponent result to ignore. That, plus one of Wheaton or IWU (my current 8 and 9 teams) are going to lose. Chicago would have a better win than the loser of that game and makes for a difficult choice.
Hopefully I made up for my tardiness last week by having already submitted my 10 to Wes for this week!
With Olivet's win over Adrian and Wooster taking down Denison...does Olivet have to get consideration for the coveted 10 spot?
I'm throwing a nickel to Hope. I considered Olivet and Greenville, but man, it's tough to distinguish between those teams now.
Quote from: USee on October 27, 2013, 09:32:17 AM
Hopefully I made up for my tardiness last week by having already submitted my 10 to Wes for this week!
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.adster.ca%2Fimg%2FImage%2FBlog%2520Photos%2FAintFirstorLast.jpg&hash=23b1e82a01dde3529cf9e6221e8bb9169dd271c5)
I'm probably the last one in this week... got home from Tennessee yesterday and got part of my top 25 ballot done but finishing catching up today. The top 9 are all in the top 17 on my Top 25 ballot... 10th though... there's four teams from the MIAA with 2 or fewer losses... there's Greenville who is 8-0... there's other teams with 2 losses that shouldn't even be in the discussion but with no one really wanting that 10th spot are still out there on the far fringes of the radar like Baldwin-Wallace, Mt St Joseph, Benedictine, Concordia WI, and Chicago.
I finally settled on a 10th team and my guess is the majority went with them as well.
Here's the North Region Fan Poll. Football's over for me, so look at me being productive on a Monday! We've got a full hot tub this week. Everybody's in, so 80 possible points.
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Franklin 69 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3)
3. North Central 62 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5)
4. Wabash 54 pts (3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 7)
5. John Carroll 46 pts (3, 3, 5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 8)
6. Heidelberg 36 pts (4, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 9)
T7. Illinois Wesleyan 34 pts (5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8)
T7. Wittenberg 34 pts (5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8)
9. Wheaton 17 pts (8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9)
10. Hope 5 pts (10, 10, 10, 10, 10, -, -, -)
ARV
Olivet 2 pts (10, 10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Greenville 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Usee, smedindy, wally_wabash, NCF, Li'l Giant, Mr. Ypsi, FCGrizzliesGrad, and myself.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on October 28, 2013, 01:48:26 PM
Here's the North Region Fan Poll. Football's over for me, so look at me being productive on a Monday! We've got a full hot tub this week. Everybody's in, so 80 possible points.
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Franklin 69 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3)
3. North Central 62 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5)
4. Wabash 54 pts (3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 7)
5. John Carroll 46 pts (3, 3, 5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 8)
6. Heidelberg 36 pts (4, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 9)
T7. Illinois Wesleyan 34 pts (5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8)
T7. Wittenberg 34 pts (5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8)
9. Wheaton 17 pts (8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9)
10. Hope 5 pts (10, 10, 10, 10, 10, -, -, -)
ARV
Olivet 2 pts (10, 10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Greenville 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Usee, smedindy, wally_wabash, NCF, Li'l Giant, Mr. Ypsi, FCGrizzliesGrad, and myself.
It was me! I voted for Greenville. Adrian lost, Denison lost, I don't like Baldwin-Wallace all that much, Chicago lost...sort of came down to Hope, Olivet, and Greenville and I've decided to reward 8-0 there. 8-0 is a strong accomplishment regardless of league. And really as long as nobody else wants to win a big game (yes, I see you Olivet) and claim that spot, I'm giving it to Greenville.
As for the rest...UMU and Franklin remain my top two. I shuffled John Carroll up to third this week. What they've done defensively for 7 games is crazy. We wait one more week for the Streaks to see how that defense holds up against some real offensive power.
Carroll up to third means Wabash goes back to 4th and North Central to 5th. Kind of a ho-hummer for Wabash on Saturday (which made it a little easier to move JCU up, but I think I was going to do that anyway).
Heidelberg and Wittenberg stick at 6 and 7 for me. IWU and Wheaton flipped positions at 8 and 9 thanks to the h2h. I spent some time thinking about where to put IWU after beating Wheaton and how many teams they should jump, but I really couldn't find a compellng reason to move them up and over anybody in front of them. These were my 8 and 9 teams last week, they played a relatively close game (Wheaton inside the 5 with a chance to take the lead, they fail, IWU scores a late TD to give the 11 point margin), so I think these teams are pretty close to one another and still a shade behind the top 7.
And then Greenville at 10.
Haven't posted my ballot in awhile:
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on October 28, 2013, 01:48:26 PM
Here's the North Region Fan Poll. Football's over for me, so look at me being productive on a Monday! We've got a full hot tub this week. Everybody's in, so 80 possible points.
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Franklin 69 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3)
3. North Central 62 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5)
4. Wabash 54 pts (3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 7)
5. John Carroll 46 pts (3, 3, 5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 8)
6. Heidelberg 36 pts (4, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 9)
T7. Illinois Wesleyan 34 pts (5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8)
T7. Wittenberg 34 pts (5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8)
9. Wheaton 17 pts (8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9)
10. Hope 5 pts (10, 10, 10, 10, 10, -, -, -)
ARV
Olivet 2 pts (10, 10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Greenville 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Usee, smedindy, wally_wabash, NCF, Li'l Giant, Mr. Ypsi, FCGrizzliesGrad, and myself.
IWU's win over Wheaton (which I predicted in both the CCIW and MIAA Pick 'ems :)), shook things up a bit. The question was how far the Titans rise? I jumped them over JCU, Heidi, and (of course) Wheaton - none of the others has a win as impressive as IWU over Wheaton. (JCU has been doing it in more impressive fashion, but is pulverizing a tomato can
that much better than simply soundly beating them?)
#10 came down to an MIAA team by lack of appealing alternatives (once Denison lost). Albion is the undefeated conference leader, but they were absolutely destroyed in their two OOC losses (and Central is not looking as good as expected). It was tempting to tab Olivet, who is 6-1 and just knocked Adrian out of the spot, but Hope beat them by 33. Hope's two losses were both quite respectable (by 7 @ IWU - my #9 Wheaton just lost by 11 @ IWU - and by 3 to Adrian), so Hope it is.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on October 28, 2013, 01:48:26 PM
Here's the North Region Fan Poll. Football's over for me, so look at me being productive on a Monday! We've got a full hot tub this week. Everybody's in, so 80 possible points.
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Franklin 69 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3)
3. North Central 62 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5)
4. Wabash 54 pts (3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 7)
5. John Carroll 46 pts (3, 3, 5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 8)
6. Heidelberg 36 pts (4, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 9)
T7. Illinois Wesleyan 34 pts (5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8)
T7. Wittenberg 34 pts (5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8)
9. Wheaton 17 pts (8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9)
10. Hope 5 pts (10, 10, 10, 10, 10, -, -, -)
ARV
Olivet 2 pts (10, 10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Greenville 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Usee, smedindy, wally_wabash, NCF, Li'l Giant, Mr. Ypsi, FCGrizzliesGrad, and myself.
Here are my picks. No changes at the top for me with UMU, Franklin, JCU and NCC. #5-8 are interchangeable to me as I just don't see any evidence of one being better than the others. IWU has all the tools to beat NCC but will have to protect the ball this week. Wabash has a good defense but I am not yet convinced they can beat good teams with their offense. Heidi has been winning but no signature wins yet. Witt will get their chance in a couple weeks. I moved Wheaton to #9 and slotted Hope at #10.
49 points per game (5th nationally) isn't enough? Tough room...
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 29, 2013, 10:27:00 AM
49 points per game (5th nationally) isn't enough? Tough room...
"good teams"? But they can only play the teams on their schedule.
Quote from: ADL70 on October 29, 2013, 10:44:16 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 29, 2013, 10:27:00 AM
49 points per game (5th nationally) isn't enough? Tough room...
"good teams"? But they can only play the teams on their schedule.
Here are the best five results in the region through EIGHT weeks of the season:
Mount Union defeats Franklin 30-27
Franklin loses to Mount Union 27-30
Franklin loses to Butler 28-31
IWU defeats Wheaton 30-19
Olivet defeats Adrian 21-17
80 percent of the season is over and three of the best five results in the region involve one team, two of them are losses that are more impressive than anything anybody else has done in victory, and another result involves teams that aren't even ranked in the NRFP.
So no, Wabash hasn't played or beaten teams that are particularly good.
Neither has anybody else.
I was going to add Adrian's game against Pacific, but it was a 10-point loss...
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 29, 2013, 11:05:45 AM
Quote from: ADL70 on October 29, 2013, 10:44:16 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 29, 2013, 10:27:00 AM
49 points per game (5th nationally) isn't enough? Tough room...
"good teams"? But they can only play the teams on their schedule.
Here are the best five results in the region through EIGHT weeks of the season:
Mount Union defeats Franklin 30-27
Franklin loses to Mount Union 27-30
Franklin loses to Butler 28-31
IWU defeats Wheaton 30-19
Olivet defeats Adrian 21-17
80 percent of the season is over and three of the best five results in the region involve one team, two of them are losses that are more impressive than anything anybody else has done in victory, and another result involves teams that aren't even ranked in the NRFP.
So no, Wabash hasn't played or beaten teams that are particularly good. Neither has anybody else.
North Central beat UWSP by 20 (who lost by 1 pt to Platteville). While I wouldn't put that result up there with some of the games listed, I feel like I have a much better feel for how good they are then I do for the teams behind them. As far as Wabash, I group them (as I said) with the teams I ranked 5-8 because none of them has done anything to distinguish themselves YET. Wheaton drops a bit because they have had too many injuries and the backups aren't playing well enough at this point.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 29, 2013, 10:27:00 AM
49 points per game (5th nationally) isn't enough? Tough room...
You are seriously going to argue that because Wabash beat Allegheny and Hanover by 60+ their offense can beat good teams? It may be true but having just witnessed a team that lead their league in offense on the back of 60 pt wins to horrific teams, only to struggle to score against a top 20 defense I am pretty comfortable in my assessment. I also have the benefit of having seen Wabash live and in person. You will argue its at a scrimmage, but my observations from that day have been largely true for both of the teams that day, and that is also what informs my viewpoint. I have seen every team on this list at least 2x this year (live and online).
If Wabash puts 45+ pts on Witt while holding them to less than 2 scores, I will get on the BashWagon. Until then, call me optimisticly pessimistic.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 29, 2013, 11:05:45 AM
Quote from: ADL70 on October 29, 2013, 10:44:16 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 29, 2013, 10:27:00 AM
49 points per game (5th nationally) isn't enough? Tough room...
"good teams"? But they can only play the teams on their schedule.
Here are the best five results in the region through EIGHT weeks of the season:
Mount Union defeats Franklin 30-27
Franklin loses to Mount Union 27-30
Franklin loses to Butler 28-31
IWU defeats Wheaton 30-19
Olivet defeats Adrian 21-17
80 percent of the season is over and three of the best five results in the region involve one team, two of them are losses that are more impressive than anything anybody else has done in victory, and another result involves teams that aren't even ranked in the NRFP.
So no, Wabash hasn't played or beaten teams that are particularly good. Neither has anybody else.
But Usee's post was he was concerned if Wabash's O could beat good team's with their O. Three of the team's he ranks above Wabash are in your list of teams that have played a good opponent, and JCU, NCC, and Heidi all have higher total offense than Wabash (although JCU is a virtual tie), JCU and NCC trail in ppg, but I will acknowledge it's difficult to compare blow-outs to blow-outs. And he adds that 5-8 are interchangeable. So it's his ranking of NCC above 5-8 that you would seem to have issue with and though not "in region" he makes a good point of the quality of the win over UWSP.
Part of this written before USee's latest posts.
But I repeat it's difficult to compare blow-outs to blow-outs.
And there's been posts from Wabash faithful questioning QB play, if I'm not mistaken.
Quote from: ADL70 on October 29, 2013, 12:05:05 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 29, 2013, 11:05:45 AM
Quote from: ADL70 on October 29, 2013, 10:44:16 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 29, 2013, 10:27:00 AM
49 points per game (5th nationally) isn't enough? Tough room...
"good teams"? But they can only play the teams on their schedule.
Here are the best five results in the region through EIGHT weeks of the season:
Mount Union defeats Franklin 30-27
Franklin loses to Mount Union 27-30
Franklin loses to Butler 28-31
IWU defeats Wheaton 30-19
Olivet defeats Adrian 21-17
80 percent of the season is over and three of the best five results in the region involve one team, two of them are losses that are more impressive than anything anybody else has done in victory, and another result involves teams that aren't even ranked in the NRFP.
So no, Wabash hasn't played or beaten teams that are particularly good. Neither has anybody else.
But Usee's post was he was concerned if Wabash's O could beat good team's with their O. Three of the team's he ranks above Wabash are in your list of teams that have played a good opponent, and JCU, NCC, and Heidi all have higher total offense than Wabash (although JCU is a virtual tie), JCU and NCC trail in ppg, but I will acknowledge it's difficult to compare blow-outs to blow-outs. And he adds that 5-8 are interchangeable. So it's his ranking of NCC above 5-8 that you would seem to have issue with and though not "in region" he makes a good point of the quality of the win over UWSP.
Part of this written before USee's latest posts.
But I repeat it's difficult to compare blow-outs to blow-outs
also hard to compare when there are teams in the North Region scoring a lot of points and the third/fourth string plays the entire fourth quarter and the starters arent even in the second half.
Crap. I keep forgetting about that practice in August after about a week and a half of camp. Relevant.
Quote from: ADL70 on October 29, 2013, 12:05:05 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 29, 2013, 11:05:45 AM
Quote from: ADL70 on October 29, 2013, 10:44:16 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 29, 2013, 10:27:00 AM
49 points per game (5th nationally) isn't enough? Tough room...
"good teams"? But they can only play the teams on their schedule.
Here are the best five results in the region through EIGHT weeks of the season:
Mount Union defeats Franklin 30-27
Franklin loses to Mount Union 27-30
Franklin loses to Butler 28-31
IWU defeats Wheaton 30-19
Olivet defeats Adrian 21-17
80 percent of the season is over and three of the best five results in the region involve one team, two of them are losses that are more impressive than anything anybody else has done in victory, and another result involves teams that aren't even ranked in the NRFP.
So no, Wabash hasn't played or beaten teams that are particularly good. Neither has anybody else.
But Usee's post was he was concerned if Wabash's O could beat good team's with their O. Three of the team's he ranks above Wabash are in your list of teams that have played a good opponent, and JCU, NCC, and Heidi all have higher total offense than Wabash (although JCU is a virtual tie), JCU and NCC trail in ppg, but I will acknowledge it's difficult to compare blow-outs to blow-outs. And he adds that 5-8 are interchangeable. So it's his ranking of NCC above 5-8 that you would seem to have issue with and though not "in region" he makes a good point of the quality of the win over UWSP.
Part of this written before USee's latest posts.
But I repeat it's difficult to compare blow-outs to blow-outs.
And there's been posts from Wabash faithful questioning QB play, if I'm not mistaken.
Wabash's QB play is good, not great. It's fine. Some Wabash faithful are overly picky about that sort of thing and don't seem to be fully on board with what this offense does and asks of its QB. Is Wabash going to ride the right arm of their quarterback to a win anytime soon? Nope. Is that strategy going to be in any game plan? Nope. In short...totally overblown.
It's dirty little secret time...
North Central has played one of the weakest schedules in the country through 8 weeks. It's true. Hold your nose and look it up (http://d3football.com/seasons/2013/schedule?tmpl=sos-template). With nothing but WIAC and CCIW teams on the schedule, North Central has managed to play seven games and not play one good team. Not one. Here again we're getting too wrapped up in all of the conference rep BS. Just because you slap a "UW" in front of a school's name doesn't make them good at football. LaCrosse, Stout? These are not good teams. Not at all. Stevens Point is ok, but they lost to LaCrosse who I just told you isn't very good. They did play Platteville close, but look at Platteville's scores (against a worse schedule than North Central even)...I'm pretty sure that the Pioneers are about to get smacked around pretty hard down the stretch here. But even then, you're playing the "they beat somebody who gave somebody else a decent game" card which is really starting to reach.
And we can pick apart Heidelberg's schedule the same way. And Wittenberg (but, Butler...I know...how did that go again?). And John Carroll (unless all of a sudden we are going to respect the MWC...didn't think so). Mount Union hasn't played anybody except for Franklin and vice versa.
If we want to discount Wabash's offense and their ppg and whatever else because you don't like their opponents, that's fine. I just want to raise awareness that nobody else in the region has exactly been crushing it against any kind of murderer's row either. In fact, amongst the teams listed in the NRFP, Wabash's schedule hasn't been all that bad. Bad? Yes. But better than most of the teams on this list.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 29, 2013, 12:46:11 PM
Crap. I keep forgetting about that practice in August after about a week and a half of camp. Relevant.
Quote from: ADL70 on October 29, 2013, 12:05:05 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 29, 2013, 11:05:45 AM
Quote from: ADL70 on October 29, 2013, 10:44:16 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 29, 2013, 10:27:00 AM
49 points per game (5th nationally) isn't enough? Tough room...
"good teams"? But they can only play the teams on their schedule.
Here are the best five results in the region through EIGHT weeks of the season:
Mount Union defeats Franklin 30-27
Franklin loses to Mount Union 27-30
Franklin loses to Butler 28-31
IWU defeats Wheaton 30-19
Olivet defeats Adrian 21-17
80 percent of the season is over and three of the best five results in the region involve one team, two of them are losses that are more impressive than anything anybody else has done in victory, and another result involves teams that aren't even ranked in the NRFP.
So no, Wabash hasn't played or beaten teams that are particularly good. Neither has anybody else.
But Usee's post was he was concerned if Wabash's O could beat good team's with their O. Three of the team's he ranks above Wabash are in your list of teams that have played a good opponent, and JCU, NCC, and Heidi all have higher total offense than Wabash (although JCU is a virtual tie), JCU and NCC trail in ppg, but I will acknowledge it's difficult to compare blow-outs to blow-outs. And he adds that 5-8 are interchangeable. So it's his ranking of NCC above 5-8 that you would seem to have issue with and though not "in region" he makes a good point of the quality of the win over UWSP.
Part of this written before USee's latest posts.
But I repeat it's difficult to compare blow-outs to blow-outs.
And there's been posts from Wabash faithful questioning QB play, if I'm not mistaken.
Wabash's QB play is good, not great. It's fine. Some Wabash faithful are overly picky about that sort of thing and don't seem to be fully on board with what this offense does and asks of its QB. Is Wabash going to ride the right arm of their quarterback to a win anytime soon? Nope. Is that strategy going to be in any game plan? Nope. In short...totally overblown.
It's dirty little secret time...North Central has played one of the weakest schedules in the country through 8 weeks. It's true. Hold your nose and look it up (http://d3football.com/seasons/2013/schedule?tmpl=sos-template). With nothing but WIAC and CCIW teams on the schedule, North Central has managed to play seven games and not play one good team. Not one. Here again we're getting too wrapped up in all of the conference rep BS. Just because you slap a "UW" in front of a school's name doesn't make them good at football. LaCrosse, Stout? These are not good teams. Not at all. Stevens Point is ok, but they lost to LaCrosse who I just told you isn't very good. They did play Platteville close, but look at Platteville's scores (against a worse schedule than North Central even)...I'm pretty sure that the Pioneers are about to get smacked around pretty hard down the stretch here. But even then, you're playing the "they beat somebody who gave somebody else a decent game" card which is really starting to reach.
And we can pick apart Heidelberg's schedule the same way. And Wittenberg (but, Butler...I know...how did that go again?). And John Carroll (unless all of a sudden we are going to respect the MWC...didn't think so). Mount Union hasn't played anybody except for Franklin and vice versa.
If we want to discount Wabash's offense and their ppg and whatever else because you don't like their opponents, that's fine. I just want to raise awareness that nobody else in the region has exactly been crushing it against any kind of murderer's row either. In fact, amongst the teams listed in the NRFP, Wabash's schedule hasn't been all that bad. Bad? Yes. But better than most of the teams on this list.
Unfortunately, I would have to agree with you on this.
Wally,
You highlight all the hard parts about ranking teams and I agree. You are going to champion your team and I get it. You minimize my view point in the process and argue your team is better. I say there is ZERO evidence 5-8 are better than each other, so swap em around if you want. the good news is your "next level" defense and 60+ point vs Hanover offense will have their day in court. If you want to crown them now, go for it. Based on what I have seen so far, Wabash isn't better than the teams I have ranked ahead of them. Sorry if that hurts your feelings. I will be the first one here to say I am wrong when the data shows it. You aren't changing my opinion because "..you just told me".
And some of those teams above you are going to be playing some tougher games than Wabash will before the playoffs start. That's because they play in conferences with tougher opponents. You don't like that either. Sorry. It's a fact. Doesn't mean Wabash won't kick their proverbial tail when they get there chance in November, but it's part of how we rank em today.
And yes, your offfense failed to score a single point against Wheaton in a scrimmage in August despite getting the ball 6x inside the Wheaton 50. Wheaton scored 3pts against your defense during that same stretch. What I saw that day, I have seen pretty consitently 2 months later from both teams. Call it irrelevant if you want, I call it data.
Wabash is 5th in the country in offense? Are you kidding me? I must have it all wrong!
Massey SOS Ratings:
North Central - 42 (A lot revolves around the heavy WIAC schedule and the teams that played Dubuque that beat Coe...interconnectivity)
Wheaton - 65 (Helped by IWU)
Franklin - 74 (Thanks to Mt. Union & Butler)
Illinois Wesleyan - 87 (Helped by Wheaton)
Mt. Union - 110 (thanks to Franklin)
John Carroll - 127 (St. Norbert)
Wittenberg - 135 (Butler is the only reason this is up there)
Heidelberg - 181
Wabash - 207
In this context - the 'bad' teams some teams have played are a lot better than the 'bad' teams the NCAC and OAC palled around with. Allegheny's only ranked ahead of MacMurray and Maranatha Baptist, fer cry-ay-ay. The third ranked team in the NCAC is Wooster at 144. Hanover's at 162 so they didn't help Wabash at. all. in the SOS game. I thought it would be Denison, but losing to a team that got blitzed by Manchester and then only beat Anderson by one will get you seriously downgraded.
This is such an odd duck year with back loaded schedules and teams cratering left and right. I think most all of the "bad" WIAC teams could stomp Hanover.
I would have ranked NCC in the 5-8 bucket but in my opinion, having seen them play and knowing their personel, combined with a decent win against UWSP, I see separation.
I would absolutely love to rank NCC 10th or worse, believe me, but I just don't think that's appropriate from my view.
Quote from: smedindy on October 29, 2013, 01:08:54 PM
Massey SOS Ratings:
North Central - 42 (A lot revolves around the heavy WIAC schedule and the teams that played Dubuque that beat Coe...interconnectivity)
Wheaton - 65 (Helped by IWU)
Franklin - 74 (Thanks to Mt. Union & Butler)
Illinois Wesleyan - 87 (Helped by Wheaton)
Mt. Union - 110 (thanks to Franklin)
John Carroll - 127 (St. Norbert)
Wittenberg - 135 (Butler is the only reason this is up there)
Heidelberg - 181
Wabash - 207
In this context - the 'bad' teams some teams have played are a lot better than the 'bad' teams the NCAC and OAC palled around with. Allegheny's only ranked ahead of MacMurray and Maranatha Baptist, fer cry-ay-ay. The third ranked team in the NCAC is Wooster at 144. Hanover's at 162 so they didn't help Wabash at. all. in the SOS game.
This is such an odd duck year with back loaded schedules and teams cratering left and right. I think most all of the "bad" WIAC teams could stomp Hanover.
more data to consider. As a side note Massey had Wheaton beating IWU 28-21.
Quote from: USee on October 29, 2013, 01:17:10 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 29, 2013, 01:08:54 PM
Massey SOS Ratings:
North Central - 42 (A lot revolves around the heavy WIAC schedule and the teams that played Dubuque that beat Coe...interconnectivity)
Wheaton - 65 (Helped by IWU)
Franklin - 74 (Thanks to Mt. Union & Butler)
Illinois Wesleyan - 87 (Helped by Wheaton)
Mt. Union - 110 (thanks to Franklin)
John Carroll - 127 (St. Norbert)
Wittenberg - 135 (Butler is the only reason this is up there)
Heidelberg - 181
Wabash - 207
In this context - the 'bad' teams some teams have played are a lot better than the 'bad' teams the NCAC and OAC palled around with. Allegheny's only ranked ahead of MacMurray and Maranatha Baptist, fer cry-ay-ay. The third ranked team in the NCAC is Wooster at 144. Hanover's at 162 so they didn't help Wabash at. all. in the SOS game.
This is such an odd duck year with back loaded schedules and teams cratering left and right. I think most all of the "bad" WIAC teams could stomp Hanover.
more data to consider. As a side note Massey had Wheaton beating IWU 28-21.
In their prediction? Massey now sees IWU losing to North Central 31-24.
For you playing the futures game, it pegs the score at Wabash 35, Witt 30.
Yes, last week prior to the game.
Bash has Witt in C'ville this year? I would like to see the offense that could score 30 on the L'Giants at home. That doesn't pass my sniff test, but then again, that was August after a week of practice so probably irrelevant.
I'm interested to see how the first regional ranking break out. Here is (most of) the relevant data for the North region (d3fb.com lists the UMAC in the north region - but i see in past years st. scholastica was seeded in the west regional rankings - what gives? - i've added them here below). Here are the signifigant two loss or better teams in the region. I've only listed signifigant wins (mostly wins against someone else on the list).
Team, overall record, in-region record, losses, signifigant wins, SOS ranking, OWP (OWP rank, OOWP, NCAA aggregate).
Albion 5-2 5-2 Losses to (Wheaton, Central), 132 .4419 (159) .5667 0.484
Adrian 6-2 6-2 Losses to (Pacific, Olivet), Wins (Hope) 115 .4694 (131) .5593 0.499
Hope 6-2 6-2 Losses to (IWU, Adrian), Wins (Olivet) 80 .5000 (103) .5710 0.524
Olivet 6-1 6-1 Loss to (Hope), Wins (Adiran) 197 .3556 (209) .5678 0.426
Wabash 7-0 7-0 129 .4773 (126) .5032 0.486
Wittenberg 6-1 6-0 (Loss to Butler*) 96 .5135 (94) .5019 0.510
Franklin 5-2 5-1 (Losses to Butler*, Mount Union), win (MSJ) 141 .5278 (81) .3865 0.481
MSJ 5-2 5-2 Losses to (Augustana, Franklin), 210 .3810 (203) .4610 0.408
IWU 7-0 7-0 Wins (Wheaton, Hope) 131 .4091 (183) .6355 0.485
North Central 7-0 7-0 Wins (UW-Stevens Point) 201 .3077 (226) .6556 0.424
Wheaton 6-1 6-1 Loss to (IWU), Wins (Albion) 39 .6098 (38) .5000 0.573
Concordia 5-2 5-2 Losses to (Augsburg, Trine), Wins (Benedictine) 161 .4615 (142) .4585 0.460
Benedictine 5-2 5-2 Losses to (Wheaton, Concordia), 138 .4524 (151) .5395 0.481
Heidelberg 7-0 7-0 230 .1905 (231) .6553 0.345
John Carroll 7-0 7-0 Wins (St. Norbert) 106 .4634 (135) .5839 0.504
Mount Union 7-0 7-0 Wins (Franklin) 202 .3250 (221) .6179 0.423
Chicago 5-2 5-2 Losses to (Rhodes, Pacific) 152 .4390 (169) .5190 0.466
Greenville 8-0 8-0 213 .3636 (207) .4857 0.404
St. Scholastica 7-1 7-1 (loss to Whitworth) 200 .4000 (192) .4744 0.425
Here is my guesstimate at the North Region 10
1. Mount Union (objective criteria be darned - I credit the committee for traditionally calling a spade a spade)
2. John Carroll (better SOS than WAB, IWU, H'burg ,win agains presumptive RRO St. Norbert)
3. Illinois Wesleyan (SOS a toss-up with WAB, win against presumptive RRO Wheaton)
4. Wabash (better SOS than NC, have to believe that the committee won't completely ignore Witt's D1 loss)
5. North Central (would have been helped if WW-SP lost fewer games and ended up in west region rankings, ditto on Witt's loss)
6. Wittenberg (to be honest, I think 4-7 is a crap shoot, could be in any order, Witt can't slide that far)
7. Heidelberg (this low solely based on atrocius (thus far) SOS, which will improve, if they can slay some dragons)
8. Franklin (gets on the board. Don't think they can be ranked higher with 2 losses plus 1 in region loss - even against UMU - against so many unbeaten teams. They will move up once the three week bloodbath commences).
9. Wheaton (toss up with Franklin on final ranking, killer SOS keeps them on the board)
10. Greenville (poor SOS - might get thrown a bone and ranked due to clean sheet thus far, if they actually are in region)
---
There's my $0.02, Wally - you do a better job of this than anybody - what have i missed?
Quote from: USee on October 29, 2013, 01:03:30 PM
Wally,
You highlight all the hard parts about ranking teams and I agree. You are going to champion your team and I get it. You minimize my view point in the process and argue your team is better. I say there is ZERO evidence 5-8 are better than each other, so swap em around if you want. the good news is your "next level" defense and 60+ point vs Hanover offense will have their day in court. If you want to crown them now, go for it. Based on what I have seen so far, Wabash isn't better than the teams I have ranked ahead of them. Sorry if that hurts your feelings. I will be the first one here to say I am wrong when the data shows it. You aren't changing my opinion because "..you just told me".
And some of those teams above you are going to be playing some tougher games than Wabash will before the playoffs start. That's because they play in conferences with tougher opponents. You don't like that either. Sorry. It's a fact. Doesn't mean Wabash won't kick their proverbial tail when they get there chance in November, but it's part of how we rank em today.
And yes, your offfense failed to score a single point against Wheaton in a scrimmage in August despite getting the ball 6x inside the Wheaton 50. Wheaton scored 3pts against your defense during that same stretch. What I saw that day, I have seen pretty consitently 2 months later from both teams. Call it irrelevant if you want, I call it data.
Wabash is 5th in the country in offense? Are you kidding me? I must have it all wrong!
See, that's the thing is that you don't get it. I champion my team on Saturdays and in the NCAC forum, but I do my level best to check that business at the NRFP door and approach this with observation, objectivity, and fairness. I'm not doing this because it's an extra avenue for me to root for Wabash...I've got plenty of that elsewhere. I'd be doing this poll a disservice if I just voted for "my team", results and stats and facts be damned.
So, yes, I reject the idea that a team that scores 49 ppg through seven games has a deficient offense. Not because that team is Wabash and I really really like them, but because that logic doesn't hold water. We have a large enough sample size to say pretty definitively that yes, Wabash's offense can score points. Or if the logic does hold water, then we have to have the same questions and concerns about Heidelberg and North Central and John Carroll and Wittenberg and on and on.
And you keep digging on Hanover. Hanover, and you'll love this, but Hanover is as good or better than half (or maybe more?) of the CCIW. Carthage, Elmhurst, Millikin? Those are bad, bad, awful teams. North Park, while a fun story this year, is improved but not particularly good either. Augustana seems to be maybe a touch better than those, but they did just lose to North Park. So would any of those teams losing to Hanover be any kind of surprise? It would not. It would not be any surprise whatsoever as long as you have the discipline to examine the teams involved and not let yourself be biased by what leagues those teams play in. So yes, Wabash beat up on Hanover. North Central and IWU and Wheaton are beating up on a whole league full of Hanovers. Stones and glass houses with the throwing and all of that. And yes, Wabash isn't beating anybody all that good either. But lets just apply our logic points evenly and to everybody.
Quote from: wabndy on October 29, 2013, 02:18:47 PM
I'm interested to see how the first regional ranking break out. Here is (most of) the relevant data for the North region (d3fb.com lists the UMAC in the north region - but i see in past years st. scholastica was seeded in the west regional rankings - what gives? - i've added them here below). Here are the signifigant two loss or better teams in the region. I've only listed signifigant wins (mostly wins against someone else on the list).
Team, overall record, in-region record, losses, signifigant wins, SOS ranking, OWP (OWP rank, OOWP, NCAA aggregate).
Albion 5-2 5-2 Losses to (Wheaton, Central), 132 .4419 (159) .5667 0.484
Adrian 6-2 6-2 Losses to (Pacific, Olivet), Wins (Hope) 115 .4694 (131) .5593 0.499
Hope 6-2 6-2 Losses to (IWU, Adrian), Wins (Olivet) 80 .5000 (103) .5710 0.524
Olivet 6-1 6-1 Loss to (Hope), Wins (Adiran) 197 .3556 (209) .5678 0.426
Wabash 7-0 7-0 129 .4773 (126) .5032 0.486
Wittenberg 6-1 6-0 (Loss to Butler*) 96 .5135 (94) .5019 0.510
Franklin 5-2 5-1 (Losses to Butler*, Mount Union), win (MSJ) 141 .5278 (81) .3865 0.481
MSJ 5-2 5-2 Losses to (Augustana, Franklin), 210 .3810 (203) .4610 0.408
IWU 7-0 7-0 Wins (Wheaton, Hope) 131 .4091 (183) .6355 0.485
North Central 7-0 7-0 Wins (UW-Stevens Point) 201 .3077 (226) .6556 0.424
Wheaton 6-1 6-1 Loss to (IWU), Wins (Albion) 39 .6098 (38) .5000 0.573
Concordia 5-2 5-2 Losses to (Augsburg, Trine), Wins (Benedictine) 161 .4615 (142) .4585 0.460
Benedictine 5-2 5-2 Losses to (Wheaton, Concordia), 138 .4524 (151) .5395 0.481
Heidelberg 7-0 7-0 230 .1905 (231) .6553 0.345
John Carroll 7-0 7-0 Wins (St. Norbert) 106 .4634 (135) .5839 0.504
Mount Union 7-0 7-0 Wins (Franklin) 202 .3250 (221) .6179 0.423
Chicago 5-2 5-2 Losses to (Rhodes, Pacific) 152 .4390 (169) .5190 0.466
Wash U. 5-2 5-2 Losses to (UW-Whitewater, Coe), Wins (Rhodes, Centre) 23 .6410 (24) .5057 0.596
Greenville 8-0 8-0 213 .3636 (207) .4857 0.404
St. Scholastica 7-1 7-1 (loss to Whitworth) 200 .4000 (192) .4744 0.425
Here is my guesstimate at the North Region 10
1. Mount Union (objective criteria be darned - I credit the committee for traditionally calling a spade a spade)
2. John Carroll (better SOS than WAB, IWU, H'burg ,win agains presumptive RRO St. Norbert)
3. Illinois Wesleyan (SOS a toss-up with WAB, win against presumptive RRO Wheaton)
4. Wabash (better SOS than NC, have to believe that the committee won't completely ignore Witt's D1 loss)
5. North Central (would have been helped if WW-SP lost fewer games and ended up in west region rankings, ditto on Witt's loss)
6. Wittenberg (to be honest, I think 4-7 is a crap shoot, could be in any order, Witt can't slide that far)
7. Heidelberg (this low solely based on atrocius (thus far) SOS, which will improve, if they can slay some dragons)
8. Franklin (gets on the board. Don't think they can be ranked higher with 2 losses plus 1 in region loss - even against UMU - against so many unbeaten teams. They will move up once the three week bloodbath commences).
9. Wheaton (toss up with Franklin on final ranking, killer SOS keeps them on the board)
10. Greenville (poor SOS - might get thrown a bone and ranked due to clean sheet thus far, if they actually are in region)
---
There's my $0.02, Wally - you do a better job of this than anybody - what have i missed?
I think you've got the 10 pegged unless something goofy happens like Witt losing to OWU or Greenville losing to Westminster this weekend. I do think that you'll find Greenville ranked higher than 10th. I would guess that Greenville lands behind the winner of UMU/Heidelberg, John Carroll, Wabash, winner of NCC/IWU, and I think Franklin. I'm curious to see how the RAC treats Wittenberg (I kind of think it's tough to put Witt in front of Franklin, but it isn't out of the realm of possibility). So, I think Greenville lands somewhere between 6 and 8 next week. And then they'll move up based on other important h2hs that we have over the last two weeks. They could have an outside shot at a first round home game** when all the dust settles.
Just one other note...the Fightin' Carlsons of St. Scholastica are a West region team and WashU is South.
**Edit: Should qualify that statement with a "if possible" because I don't know if Greenville plays in a facility that can host a championship event.
Quote from: wabndy on October 29, 2013, 02:18:47 PM
Here is my guesstimate at the North Region 10
1. Mount Union (objective criteria be darned - I credit the committee for traditionally calling a spade a spade)
2. John Carroll (better SOS than WAB, IWU, H'burg ,win agains presumptive RRO St. Norbert)
3. Illinois Wesleyan (SOS a toss-up with WAB, win against presumptive RRO Wheaton)
4. Wabash (better SOS than NC, have to believe that the committee won't completely ignore Witt's D1 loss)
5. North Central (would have been helped if WW-SP lost fewer games and ended up in west region rankings, ditto on Witt's loss)
6. Wittenberg (to be honest, I think 4-7 is a crap shoot, could be in any order, Witt can't slide that far)
7. Heidelberg (this low solely based on atrocius (thus far) SOS, which will improve, if they can slay some dragons)
8. Franklin (gets on the board. Don't think they can be ranked higher with 2 losses plus 1 in region loss - even against UMU - against so many unbeaten teams. They will move up once the three week bloodbath commences).
9. Wheaton (toss up with Franklin on final ranking, killer SOS keeps them on the board)
10. Greenville (poor SOS - might get thrown a bone and ranked due to clean sheet thus far, if they actually are in region)
---
There's my $0.02, Wally - you do a better job of this than anybody - what have i missed?
Great post.... that took some time..... +1 for the effort!
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 29, 2013, 02:38:32 PM
And you keep digging on Hanover. Hanover, and you'll love this, but Hanover is as good or better than half (or maybe more?) of the CCIW. Carthage, Elmhurst, Millikin? Those are bad, bad, awful teams. North Park, while a fun story this year, is improved but not particularly good either. Augustana seems to be maybe a touch better than those, but they did just lose to North Park. So would any of those teams losing to Hanover be any kind of surprise? It would not. It would not be any surprise whatsoever as long as you have the discipline to examine the teams involved and not let yourself be biased by what leagues those teams play in. So yes, Wabash beat up on Hanover. North Central and IWU and Wheaton are beating up on a whole league full of Hanovers. Stones and glass houses with the throwing and all of that. And yes, Wabash isn't beating anybody all that good either. But lets just apply our logic points evenly and to everybody.
Wally? Really?
#162 Hanover?
Augustana beat MSJ who beat Hanover.
Elmhurst hasn't been totally poleaxed in any game, unlike Hanover.
Carthage laid waste to Lakeland, and aside from North Central hasn't been totally blown out.
That trio is probably better than Wooster or Denison. Augie, for sure. I'd say they're better than Hanover.
They're not THAT far apart (Carthage 137, Elmhurst 138)
162 per Massey and Massey is going to dump on any and all HCAC teams because they don't win their non league games. What did they win? One game this year? Earlham over Kenyon I think was the only one.
The Augustana-MSJ-Hanover linkage is fair.
But beyond that, no, I don't believe those teams (Carthage, Millikin, Elmhust, North Park) are demonstrably better than Hanover. Hanover is going to wind up 5-5. I don't think the bottom half of the CCIW would have done much better against the same schedule. Maybe they could scratch out an extra win somewhere (maybe MSJ or RHIT), but that's about it. One whole win worth of difference.
Certainly, the CCIW teams aren't losing to the bad teams in the HCAC, so there's a line between 'terrible' for the CCIW and TERRIBLE, which is a lot of the HCAC below the Hanover line.
Face it, there are some surprisingly ridiculously bad teams this year and that makes it hard to see where other teams line up before it's go time.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 29, 2013, 02:38:32 PM
Quote from: USee on October 29, 2013, 01:03:30 PM
Wally,
You highlight all the hard parts about ranking teams and I agree. You are going to champion your team and I get it. You minimize my view point in the process and argue your team is better. I say there is ZERO evidence 5-8 are better than each other, so swap em around if you want. the good news is your "next level" defense and 60+ point vs Hanover offense will have their day in court. If you want to crown them now, go for it. Based on what I have seen so far, Wabash isn't better than the teams I have ranked ahead of them. Sorry if that hurts your feelings. I will be the first one here to say I am wrong when the data shows it. You aren't changing my opinion because "..you just told me".
And some of those teams above you are going to be playing some tougher games than Wabash will before the playoffs start. That's because they play in conferences with tougher opponents. You don't like that either. Sorry. It's a fact. Doesn't mean Wabash won't kick their proverbial tail when they get there chance in November, but it's part of how we rank em today.
And yes, your offfense failed to score a single point against Wheaton in a scrimmage in August despite getting the ball 6x inside the Wheaton 50. Wheaton scored 3pts against your defense during that same stretch. What I saw that day, I have seen pretty consitently 2 months later from both teams. Call it irrelevant if you want, I call it data.
Wabash is 5th in the country in offense? Are you kidding me? I must have it all wrong!
See, that's the thing is that you don't get it. I champion my team on Saturdays and in the NCAC forum, but I do my level best to check that business at the NRFP door and approach this with observation, objectivity, and fairness. I'm not doing this because it's an extra avenue for me to root for Wabash...I've got plenty of that elsewhere. I'd be doing this poll a disservice if I just voted for "my team", results and stats and facts be damned.
So, yes, I reject the idea that a team that scores 49 ppg through seven games has a deficient offense. Not because that team is Wabash and I really really like them, but because that logic doesn't hold water. We have a large enough sample size to say pretty definitively that yes, Wabash's offense can score points. Or if the logic does hold water, then we have to have the same questions and concerns about Heidelberg and North Central and John Carroll and Wittenberg and on and on.
And you keep digging on Hanover. Hanover, and you'll love this, but Hanover is as good or better than half (or maybe more?) of the CCIW. Carthage, Elmhurst, Millikin? Those are bad, bad, awful teams. North Park, while a fun story this year, is improved but not particularly good either. Augustana seems to be maybe a touch better than those, but they did just lose to North Park. So would any of those teams losing to Hanover be any kind of surprise? It would not. It would not be any surprise whatsoever as long as you have the discipline to examine the teams involved and not let yourself be biased by what leagues those teams play in. So yes, Wabash beat up on Hanover. North Central and IWU and Wheaton are beating up on a whole league full of Hanovers. Stones and glass houses with the throwing and all of that. And yes, Wabash isn't beating anybody all that good either. But lets just apply our logic points evenly and to everybody.
No, I definitely get it. I should have said you have a Wabash "bias" vs. "champion". That isn't a rooting interest per se, as I believe you try your hardest to put your interests aside. The problem is, that's simply not possible. See, your measuring stick is Wabash because that's the team you see all the time, just like mine is Wheaton. If you rooted for Randolph Macon but lived in C'ville and watched the LG's every Saturday, that might be different. But you simply have more data on your team than you do on any other team so your observations are by definition skewed.
If we were all really honest, we would not be able to vote in this poll for the team we root for. Let's do that and see where the data leads us shall we?
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 29, 2013, 04:39:48 PM
162 per Massey and Massey is going to dump on any and all HCAC teams because they don't win their non league games. What did they win? One game this year? Earlham over Kenyon I think was the only one.
The Augustana-MSJ-Hanover linkage is fair.
But beyond that, no, I don't believe those teams (Carthage, Millikin, Elmhust, North Park) are demonstrably better than Hanover. Hanover is going to wind up 5-5. I don't think the bottom half of the CCIW would have done much better against the same schedule. Maybe they could scratch out an extra win somewhere (maybe MSJ or RHIT), but that's about it. One whole win worth of difference.
My point RE: Hanover, wasn't to say they are better or worse than those teams in the CCIW. I think what your sensing, and I agree with, is that the CCIW overall is down this year. Heck, Hanover may finish 4th in the CCIW this year if they played that schedule. I don't know. My point was I don't put much weight into Wabash's 49pt average when it is against the likes of Hanover and Allegheny. Same way I didn't think Wheaton was as good on offense as their 69-0 win against Albion (who is 5-2 and probably better than Hanover). My hunch about Wheaton was manifest last Saturday when they could only muster 267 yds of offense and 19 pts against a good IWU team. They failed to score 2x when they had the ball inside the 5 yd line. So in my rankings, and based on the data I have, I haircut Wabash's offense. I don't do that with their defense. I saw that defense and, despite the fact they are destroying bad teams, I think this defense will hold up against better competition. Not so sure about the LG's offense, even with the current production. I could be wrong, but that's my current thinking until I see more data. Witt game will be a reasonable test but ultimately we won't know until the playoffs, where I am pretty sure Wabash won't be scoring 60 pts very often, but I bet their defense holds some good teams well below their averages.
USee, disagree on poll voting.
As you know, I run the d3fanpoll for basketball. I find that voters fairly consistently vote their own team lowest among the voters (or nearly so). I have fairly often been among the lowest voters for IWU in the NRFP (AND the fan basketball poll, for that matter). I see your point (the reason judges are supposed to recuse themselves), but if entirely true, why didn't you give IWU a higher vote in the NRFP?! ;D
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 30, 2013, 01:00:35 AM
USee, disagree on poll voting.
As you know, I run the d3fanpoll for basketball. I find that voters fairly consistently vote their own team lowest among the voters (or nearly so). I have fairly often been among the lowest voters for IWU in the NRFP (AND the fan basketball poll, for that matter). I see your point (the reason judges are supposed to recuse themselves), but if entirely true, why didn't you give IWU a higher vote in the NRFP?! ;D
I also disagree. I don't have Wabash as high as others and always evaluate them fairly based on the data at hand.
Guys, you should bottle your secret sauce and sell it. You would make billions. There is a reason the law system has strict rules about conflicts of interest and even our own RAC members have to recuse themselves when discussing their own teams. Most conferences coaches can't vote for their own team in preseason ballots or for their own players in all conference voting. It's because we all have a built in bias. You can say you try to be objective and discount your own team all you want, but I am not buying it and no one outside this room would buy it either. When you vote for your own team you cannot be objective. That's not my idea, its pretty well accepted outside of here.
Quote from: USee on October 30, 2013, 06:04:14 PM
Guys, you should bottle your secret sauce and sell it. You would make billions. There is a reason the law system has strict rules about conflicts of interest and even our own RAC members have to recuse themselves when discussing their own teams. Most conferences coaches can't vote for their own team in preseason ballots or for their own players in all conference voting. It's because we all have a built in bias. You can say you try to be objective and discount your own team all you want, but I am not buying it and no one outside this room would buy it either. When you vote for your own team you cannot be objective. That's not my idea, its pretty well accepted outside of here.
Oh, I fully understand (and accept) your point in general. But the clear evidence for voters in the bball fan poll is that voters strive so hard to NOT be a 'homer', they end up being
harder on their own team than other voters are.
I don/t know how you guys will want to factor this in. I offer it so that both sides can keep this offense/defense discussion about Wabash going. The Wabash defense/special teams have scored at least one TD in 6 of the 7 games. They have 10 TDs total. Add the PATs and this totals 70 points. That's 20% of the Wabash total points for the season.
I've seen all of Wabash's games. I'm estimating that the first-team offense has played around three-fourths of the total minutes. The Wabash defense has probably played about 80% of the total minutes. Reduced minutes for first teams is typical in blowouts of the kind Wabash has created. Other superior teams are in the same ballpark.
I will say this: Coach Raeburn is generous in two ways. He rewards his backups by getting them into games as early as possible. We've seen the starters out in mid/late 3rd quarters in several games when Wabash was in the high 30s or low 40s on points. The defense may get one or two more series than the offense. There's a reason Wabash retains so many senior players year in and year out.
I am prepared to argue that the Wabash offense, sometimes questioned (sometimes by me), is actually better than what many want to admit. And so is the Wabash defense, if that's possible to imagine. We have not seen the best from either of them, even though the defense is easier to credit. Whether the offense or the defense will produce against better competition--well, I hope we get to see that past the end of the regular season.
A note on Hanover. The engine of their offense, a fine QB, was injured in the first game and sat out for several weeks. Without him, the offense was anemic and the defense had to spend way too much time on the field. I'm not saying Hanover is a better than average team. Even with him they are pretty average. Without him they were without hope. He's been back and Hanover is playing better. This is just one caution about only looking at scores without considering circumstances.
As to the Wheaton scrimmage: Wabash's QB was in his first intercollegiate game. Holmes, a returning 1000+yard rusher did not play. He took an early hit and was seated the rest of the day--coaching decision. Raeburn approaches a scrimmage in a very different way than a lost of coaches. We've seen this year after year. Yes, Wabash struggled offensively. But you can't take that scrimmage of evidence of anything about this Wabash team. Agree with this or not, that's OK.
Quote from: USee on October 30, 2013, 06:04:14 PM
Guys, you should bottle your secret sauce and sell it. You would make billions. There is a reason the law system has strict rules about conflicts of interest and even our own RAC members have to recuse themselves when discussing their own teams. Most conferences coaches can't vote for their own team in preseason ballots or for their own players in all conference voting. It's because we all have a built in bias. You can say you try to be objective and discount your own team all you want, but I am not buying it and no one outside this room would buy it either. When you vote for your own team you cannot be objective. That's not my idea, its pretty well accepted outside of here.
I'm pretty miffed and offended that you're not taking our word for what we do - the process we go through. That's questioning our integrity - not cool. You're also questioning the integrity of Pat's polling group - since they can and do vote for the schools they coach or cover.
Polls are a different thing than the voting you're talking about - there's nothing that disqualifies someone from voting in a poll no matter what it is. Conflict of interest? In this poll? In the Fan Poll? In the overall Top 25? Right...sure.
A few more numbers. Wabash has scored a TOTAL of 44 points in the fourth quarter this year--of 346 total points (just under 13%). In six of seven games, Wabash has scored, in the 4th, 7, 6, 3, 7, 7, 14, 0.
The Wabash defense has given up a TOTAL of 17 first-half points, never more than 7 in a single game. That's two TDs and a FG! They have 4 first-half shutouts.
Wabash has scored 222 points in quarters 1 and 2--an average of 31.7 points/game. The defense/special teams' contribution in the first half is 5TDs. The offense: 23 TDs and 7 FGs.
Let's not think that the Wabash offense is incapable of scoring.
Other ranked teams I expect have similar numbers. But those 4th-quarter points say a lot about how Wabash plays the game.
As has been said... the group that's voting here do their best to be as unbiased as possible and often means being a bit biased in the opposite direction. You can look back in this season's votes and see I was the lowest voter for Franklin most weeks. Ultimately the NRFP, the Fan Top 25 Poll, the d3football.com poll have no bearing on any postseason status, it's just for fun and discussion. The folks that do have say in the postseason do recuse themselves from discussions about their respective teams... unlike D1 where the story has been Florida St not voting themself #1 in the "coaches" poll which is 1/3 of the B(C)S forumla.
Quote from: smedindy on October 30, 2013, 07:04:25 PM
Quote from: USee on October 30, 2013, 06:04:14 PM
Guys, you should bottle your secret sauce and sell it. You would make billions. There is a reason the law system has strict rules about conflicts of interest and even our own RAC members have to recuse themselves when discussing their own teams. Most conferences coaches can't vote for their own team in preseason ballots or for their own players in all conference voting. It's because we all have a built in bias. You can say you try to be objective and discount your own team all you want, but I am not buying it and no one outside this room would buy it either. When you vote for your own team you cannot be objective. That's not my idea, its pretty well accepted outside of here.
I'm pretty miffed and offended that you're not taking our word for what we do - the process we go through. That's questioning our integrity - not cool. You're also questioning the integrity of Pat's polling group - since they can and do vote for the schools they coach or cover.
Polls are a different thing than the voting you're talking about - there's nothing that disqualifies someone from voting in a poll no matter what it is. Conflict of interest? In this poll? In the Fan Poll? In the overall Top 25? Right...sure.
Offended? integrity? what are you smoking? I din't say there was anything wrong with having a bias, but you somehow think that you don't factor it in? That's just not intellectually honest. Even if you vote your team artificially low, that's still an effect of bias. Doesn't mean its right or wrong but not admitting it exists doesn't make it go away. that's ridiculous.you guys aren't above the law. Come on man. Seriously Smed? Wow.
Okay, so we're talking about bias. I'm gonna give a bit of what I go through when I pick a jury regarding bias.
Bias is okay. It just means that we prefer one thing over another. The example I use is pizza. I prefer sausage pizza. My wife hates Italian sausage. She's biased against sausage pizza.
Or let's talk trucks; this being Texas. I prefer Ford trucks. My brother, he's a Chevy truck man. He's biased against Ford trucks.
It's a preference. It doesn't mean anything about which pizza or truck is better. You're damn right I'm biased in favor of Wabash. Does my bias, intentional or otherwise, have an influence on where I vote them? Probably. I've had them at #4 the last 4 weeks. One could have them ranked as low as 8 and still not be "wrong". So why do I have them at #4? I could articulate lots of reasons. But could it be bias? Sure?
Look at it this way: Would any of you non-Wabash folks voting in this poll want me officiating a game between Wabash and your school? Bet you wouldn't.
I don't take offense to that bias issue. It just means I'm human. What matters most is that we admit that we have biases. Hiding them? Not cool. Be open about it. I'm a Wabash man and I voted them #4 the last 4 weeks. That is, as they say, what it is.
God bless all of you.
Quote from: Li'l Giant on October 30, 2013, 09:29:20 PM
Okay, so we're talking about bias. I'm gonna give a bit of what I go through when I pick a jury regarding bias.
Bias is okay. It just means that we prefer one thing over another. The example I use is pizza. I prefer sausage pizza. My wife hates Italian sausage. She's biased against sausage pizza.
Or let's talk trucks; this being Texas. I prefer Ford trucks. My brother, he's a Chevy truck man. He's biased against Ford trucks.
It's a preference. It doesn't mean anything about which pizza or truck is better. You're damn right I'm biased in favor of Wabash. Does my bias, intentional or otherwise, have an influence on where I vote them? Probably. I've had them at #4 the last 4 weeks. One could have them ranked as low as 8 and still not be "wrong". So why do I have them at #4? I could articulate lots of reasons. But could it be bias? Sure?
Look at it this way: Would any of you non-Wabash folks voting in this poll want me officiating a game between Wabash and your school? Bet you wouldn't.
I don't take offense to that bias issue. It just means I'm human. What matters most is that we admit that we have biases. Hiding them? Not cool. Be open about it. I'm a Wabash man and I voted them #4 the last 4 weeks. That is, as they say, what it is.
LG- Very well said. But I must say I am offended your wife hates pizza.
Quote from: USee on October 30, 2013, 10:02:12 PM
LG- Very well said. But I must say I am offended your wife hates pizza.
She likes pizza. It's sausage pizza she hates.
Quote from: Li'l Giant on October 30, 2013, 09:29:20 PM
Okay, so we're talking about bias. I'm gonna give a bit of what I go through when I pick a jury regarding bias.
Bias is okay. It just means that we prefer one thing over another. The example I use is pizza. I prefer sausage pizza. My wife hates Italian sausage. She's biased against sausage pizza.
Or let's talk trucks; this being Texas. I prefer Ford trucks. My brother, he's a Chevy truck man. He's biased against Ford trucks.
It's a preference. It doesn't mean anything about which pizza or truck is better. You're damn right I'm biased in favor of Wabash. Does my bias, intentional or otherwise, have an influence on where I vote them? Probably. I've had them at #4 the last 4 weeks. One could have them ranked as low as 8 and still not be "wrong". So why do I have them at #4? I could articulate lots of reasons. But could it be bias? Sure?
Look at it this way: Would any of you non-Wabash folks voting in this poll want me officiating a game between Wabash and your school? Bet you wouldn't.
I don't take offense to that bias issue. It just means I'm human. What matters most is that we admit that we have biases. Hiding them? Not cool. Be open about it. I'm a Wabash man and I voted them #4 the last 4 weeks. That is, as they say, what it is.
Good (and valid) post.
And you may be like the Ypsi guy who reffed youth soccer games that we hated to get - he tried so hard to be fair that WE always got screwed! (I finally put Wabash 4th this week, but had them THIRD the previous three weeks.) So maybe I
would want you reffing a Wabash/IWU game - you might be so 'neutral' that you would screw the LG's! ;D
I taught sociology my whole career. The fundamental point USee is making is totally valid. I initially posted a rebuttal because he seemed to be making the point that people would over-rate their teams. My experience is that, in poll voting (and, perhaps, reffing ;)) at least, people try so hard to be objective that they (fairly) consistently UNDER-rate their teams.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 30, 2013, 10:11:21 PMMy experience is that, in poll voting (and, perhaps, reffing ;)) at least, people try so hard to be objective that they (fairly) consistently UNDER-rate their teams.
Which itself is a bias. You have to know the right answer to intentionally answer wrongly.
Quote from: Li'l Giant on October 30, 2013, 10:21:20 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 30, 2013, 10:11:21 PMMy experience is that, in poll voting (and, perhaps, reffing ;)) at least, people try so hard to be objective that they (fairly) consistently UNDER-rate their teams.
Which itself is a bias. You have to know the right answer to intentionally answer wrongly.
True. But the opposite of the bias that prompted my initial rebuttal to USee. ;)
Quote from: Li'l Giant on October 30, 2013, 10:07:35 PM
Quote from: USee on October 30, 2013, 10:02:12 PM
LG- Very well said. But I must say I am offended your wife hates pizza.
She likes pizza. It's sausage pizza she hates.
I know, but if I had said "I am offended you wife doesn't like sausage pizza", the depraved posters would have had a field day.
Quote from: USee on October 31, 2013, 12:14:36 AM
Quote from: Li'l Giant on October 30, 2013, 10:07:35 PM
Quote from: USee on October 30, 2013, 10:02:12 PM
LG- Very well said. But I must say I am offended your wife hates pizza.
She likes pizza. It's sausage pizza she hates.
I know, but if I had said "I am offended you wife doesn't like sausage pizza", the depraved posters would have had a field day.
OOH, now you've stepped in it! :o
Who, exactly, are the 'depraved posters'? ;D
I may go cross-eyed if this goes any further.
http://vimeo.com/75727059
Check out the video from the FC Touchdown Club. Well done.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on October 31, 2013, 10:07:29 AM
I may go cross-eyed if this goes any further.
And painless?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyDb4szpWmc
Sorry, I was responding to the allegation that I (we) somehow vote our team higher in the polls purely because of who they are. I don't. I never have. Sorry. I just haven't. Believe me or don't - I haven't. I do see Wabash and the North teams more often, so I may have better knowledge of them. But I don't game my ratings based on that.
In my as-unbiased-as-possible rankings I moved Heidelberg up and put IWU and Wheaton down at 8 and 9. But man, when they're at 8 and 9 then this region is damn, damn tough. All nine of those teams are well within my Top 20 ballot.
For those scoring the regional rankings at home, here is an update of last week's snapshot of relevant teams:
Team, overall record, in-region record, losses, signifigant wins, SOS ranking, OWP (OWP rank, OOWP, NCAA aggregate).
Albion 6-2 6-2 Losses to (Wheaton, Central), Win (Olivet) 95 5000 (104) .5424 0.514
Hope 7-2 7-2 Losses to (IWU, Adrian), Wins (Olivet) 104 4762 (135) .5692 0.507
Olivet 6-2 6-2 Losses to (Hope, Albion) 186 .3966 (207) .5400 0.444
Wabash 8-0 8-0 145 .4643 (152) .5068 0.478
Wittenberg 7-1 7-0 Loss to (Butler*) 102 .5102 (97) .5078 0.509
Franklin 6-2 6-1 Losses to (Butler*, Mount Union), 157 .4898 (121) .4352 0.472
IWU 7-1 7-1 Wins (Wheaton, Hope), Loss (North Central) 101 .4737 (137) .5815 0.510
North Central 8-0 8-0 Win (IWU) 153 4151 (187) .5914 0.474
Wheaton 7-1 7-1 Loss to (IWU), Wins (Albion) 65 .5455 (68) .5147 0.535
Concordia 6-2 6-2 Losses to (Augsburg, Trine), Wins (Benedictine) 209 4038 (203) .4604 0.423
Benedictine 6-2 6-2 Losses to (Wheaton, Concordia), 175 .4286 (177) .5146 0.457
Heidelberg 7-1 7-1 Loss to (Mount Union) 219 .3091 (230) .5995 0.406
John Carroll 8-0 8-0 Wins (St. Norbert) 172 .4182 (182) .5525 0.463
Mount Union 8-0 8-0 Wins (Franklin, Heidelberg) 165 .4259 (179) .5535 0.468
Greenville 9-0 9-0 Win (Eureka) 224 3509 (225) .4858 0.396
I've dropped the three loss teams from the list.
My revised guesses for this week's North region rankings:
1. Mount Union (wins against RRO Franklin, Heidelberg)
2. North Central (quality win against RRO IWU, better SOS than John Carroll)
3. Wabash (Wabash's SOS edges John Carroll, could easly see 3 and 4 flipped, Witt: will post more on NCAC page).
4. John Carroll (Witt has better SOS, but 1 non D3 loss)
5. Wittenberg (see my post on NCAC page)
6. Greenville (Wally convinced me they belong higher, even with a lousy SOS.)
7. Illinois Wesleyan (tempted to rank them lower than Franklin b/c of NCC game, but strong SOS keems them here)
8 Wheaton (loss to IWU, who lost to NCC pushed them low, but killer SOS keeps them here
9. Franklin (played UMU closer than Heidelberg, better SOS than the princes, but 2 losses still hurts - will move up as the herd thins above)
10. Heidelberg (low SOS, but can still pick up good claim to move way up the list with a win this weekend)
Quote from: wabndy on November 04, 2013, 12:21:45 PM
For those scoring the regional rankings at home, here is an update of last week's snapshot of relevant teams:
Team, overall record, in-region record, losses, signifigant wins, SOS ranking, OWP (OWP rank, OOWP, NCAA aggregate).
Albion 6-2 6-2 Losses to (Wheaton, Central), Win (Olivet) 95 5000 (104) .5424 0.514
Hope 7-2 7-2 Losses to (IWU, Adrian), Wins (Olivet) 104 4762 (135) .5692 0.507
Olivet 6-2 6-2 Losses to (Hope, Albion) 186 .3966 (207) .5400 0.444
Wabash 8-0 8-0 145 .4643 (152) .5068 0.478
Wittenberg 7-1 7-0 Loss to (Butler*) 102 .5102 (97) .5078 0.509
Franklin 6-2 6-1 Losses to (Butler*, Mount Union), 157 .4898 (121) .4352 0.472
IWU 7-1 7-1 Wins (Wheaton, Hope), Loss (North Central) 101 .4737 (137) .5815 0.510
North Central 8-0 8-0 Win (IWU) 153 4151 (187) .5914 0.474
Wheaton 7-1 7-1 Loss to (IWU), Wins (Albion) 65 .5455 (68) .5147 0.535
Concordia 6-2 6-2 Losses to (Augsburg, Trine), Wins (Benedictine) 209 4038 (203) .4604 0.423
Benedictine 6-2 6-2 Losses to (Wheaton, Concordia), 175 .4286 (177) .5146 0.457
Heidelberg 7-1 7-1 Loss to (Mount Union) 219 .3091 (230) .5995 0.406
John Carroll 8-0 8-0 Wins (St. Norbert) 172 .4182 (182) .5525 0.463
Mount Union 8-0 8-0 Wins (Franklin, Heidelberg) 165 .4259 (179) .5535 0.468
Greenville 9-0 9-0 Win (Eureka) 224 3509 (225) .4858 0.396
I've dropped the three loss teams from the list.
My revised guesses for this week's North region rankings:
1. Mount Union (wins against RRO Franklin, Heidelberg)
2. North Central (quality win against RRO IWU, better SOS than John Carroll)
3. Wabash (Wabash's SOS edges John Carroll, could easly see 3 and 4 flipped, Witt: will post more on NCAC page).
4. John Carroll (Witt has better SOS, but 1 non D3 loss)
5. Wittenberg (see my post on NCAC page)
6. Greenville (Wally convinced me they belong higher, even with a lousy SOS.)
7. Illinois Wesleyan (tempted to rank them lower than Franklin b/c of NCC game, but strong SOS keems them here)
8 Wheaton (loss to IWU, who lost to NCC pushed them low, but killer SOS keeps them here
9. Franklin (played UMU closer than Heidelberg, better SOS than the princes, but 2 losses still hurts - will move up as the herd thins above)
10. Heidelberg (low SOS, but can still pick up good claim to move way up the list with a win this weekend)
Nice work. One note, according to the podcast today, Greenville is a West Region team. Also listed here: http://d3football.com/teams/west. So you can slide someone else in.
Quote from: TitanPride on November 04, 2013, 12:30:40 PM
Nice work. One note, according to the podcast today, Greenville is a West Region team. Also listed here: http://d3football.com/teams/west. So you can slide someone else in.
Thanks - hadn't had a chance to listen yet. Thanks Wally . . .
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 29, 2013, 02:49:21 PM
I do think that you'll find Greenville ranked higher than 10th. I would guess that Greenville lands behind the winner of UMU/Heidelberg, John Carroll, Wabash, winner of NCC/IWU, and I think Franklin.
With that change, I'd then say:
6. IWU
7. Wheaton
8. Franklin
9. Heidelberg
10. Albion (of the two loss teams, they have a slightly stronger SOS than Hope, a win over Olivet, and signifigantly stronger SOS than Benedictine or Concordia).
Greenville being a West region team is new since I talked about them last week. They were definitely listed on the North Region page last week...unless I have completely lost my mind, which isn't out of the question.
And now I need to find a new team to vote for...
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 04, 2013, 01:05:05 PM
Greenville being a West region team is new since I talked about them last week. They were definitely listed on the North Region page last week...unless I have completely lost my mind, which isn't out of the question.
And now I need to find a new team to vote for...
No, you haven't lost your mind. I remember looking and noting that St. Scholastica was the only UMAC team listed in the West, while the rest of the UMAC was listed in the North. Now the entire UMAC is listed in the West. May have been overlooked and corrected when the new page was rolled out? I haven't listened to the podcast yet so IDK if this was just recently explained why the UMAC is now entirely listed in the West.
Quote from: TitanPride on November 04, 2013, 12:30:40 PM
Quote from: wabndy on November 04, 2013, 12:21:45 PM
For those scoring the regional rankings at home, here is an update of last week's snapshot of relevant teams:
Team, overall record, in-region record, losses, signifigant wins, SOS ranking, OWP (OWP rank, OOWP, NCAA aggregate).
Albion 6-2 6-2 Losses to (Wheaton, Central), Win (Olivet) 95 5000 (104) .5424 0.514
Hope 7-2 7-2 Losses to (IWU, Adrian), Wins (Olivet) 104 4762 (135) .5692 0.507
Olivet 6-2 6-2 Losses to (Hope, Albion) 186 .3966 (207) .5400 0.444
Wabash 8-0 8-0 145 .4643 (152) .5068 0.478
Wittenberg 7-1 7-0 Loss to (Butler*) 102 .5102 (97) .5078 0.509
Franklin 6-2 6-1 Losses to (Butler*, Mount Union), 157 .4898 (121) .4352 0.472
IWU 7-1 7-1 Wins (Wheaton, Hope), Loss (North Central) 101 .4737 (137) .5815 0.510
North Central 8-0 8-0 Win (IWU) 153 4151 (187) .5914 0.474
Wheaton 7-1 7-1 Loss to (IWU), Wins (Albion) 65 .5455 (68) .5147 0.535
Concordia 6-2 6-2 Losses to (Augsburg, Trine), Wins (Benedictine) 209 4038 (203) .4604 0.423
Benedictine 6-2 6-2 Losses to (Wheaton, Concordia), 175 .4286 (177) .5146 0.457
Heidelberg 7-1 7-1 Loss to (Mount Union) 219 .3091 (230) .5995 0.406
John Carroll 8-0 8-0 Wins (St. Norbert) 172 .4182 (182) .5525 0.463
Mount Union 8-0 8-0 Wins (Franklin, Heidelberg) 165 .4259 (179) .5535 0.468
Greenville 9-0 9-0 Win (Eureka) 224 3509 (225) .4858 0.396
I've dropped the three loss teams from the list.
My revised guesses for this week's North region rankings:
1. Mount Union (wins against RRO Franklin, Heidelberg)
2. North Central (quality win against RRO IWU, better SOS than John Carroll)
3. Wabash (Wabash's SOS edges John Carroll, could easly see 3 and 4 flipped, Witt: will post more on NCAC page).
4. John Carroll (Witt has better SOS, but 1 non D3 loss)
5. Wittenberg (see my post on NCAC page)
6. Greenville (Wally convinced me they belong higher, even with a lousy SOS.)
7. Illinois Wesleyan (tempted to rank them lower than Franklin b/c of NCC game, but strong SOS keems them here)
8 Wheaton (loss to IWU, who lost to NCC pushed them low, but killer SOS keeps them here
9. Franklin (played UMU closer than Heidelberg, better SOS than the princes, but 2 losses still hurts - will move up as the herd thins above)
10. Heidelberg (low SOS, but can still pick up good claim to move way up the list with a win this weekend)
Nice work. One note, according to the podcast today, Greenville is a West Region team. Also listed here: http://d3football.com/teams/west. So you can slide someone else in.
solid work etc. however it exposes the flaws in the entire NCAA ranking system based on limited comparitive metrics and raw numbers. Anyone that truly thinks that Franklin is fairly seeded as the 9th best team in the North Region is kidding themselves. The GRIZ will move up based on upcoming games (assuming Bash wins and UMU and NCC hold serve). Hopefully FC will not be punished for scheduling up versus scheduling themselves to a better seed.
Remember, only one Griz loss counts, the Butler game never happened in the eyes of the NCAA.
Quote from: GRIZ_BACKER on November 04, 2013, 01:45:17 PM
solid work etc. however it exposes the flaws in the entire NCAA ranking system based on limited comparitive metrics and raw numbers. Anyone that truly thinks that Franklin is fairly seeded as the 9th best team in the North Region is kidding themselves. The GRIZ will move up based on upcoming games (assuming Bash wins and UMU and NCC hold serve). Hopefully FC will not be punished for scheduling up versus scheduling themselves to a better seed.
I like where your head is at, GB. Keep that up.
I'm not totally sure where to expect Franklin to land in Wendesday's RRs, but I have a hard time believing that after the attrition coming in the next two weeks that Franklin won't be the top single-loss team on the board. Whether that gets them a home game or not, I don't know. That all depends on how much weight the Butler game gets. Undefeated teams that are in Franklin's travel zone would be Mount Union (doubtful to see a rematch there plus I think Mount Union is going to be in an easterly influenced quadrant), North Central, Wabash, Whitewater, Illinois College. If you see all of those teams in the same quadrant, Franklin may not get to host a first round game. Will be interesting to see how the RAC treats Franklin and those two close losses.
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 04, 2013, 01:58:36 PM
Quote from: GRIZ_BACKER on November 04, 2013, 01:45:17 PM
solid work etc. however it exposes the flaws in the entire NCAA ranking system based on limited comparitive metrics and raw numbers. Anyone that truly thinks that Franklin is fairly seeded as the 9th best team in the North Region is kidding themselves. The GRIZ will move up based on upcoming games (assuming Bash wins and UMU and NCC hold serve). Hopefully FC will not be punished for scheduling up versus scheduling themselves to a better seed.
I like where your head is at, GB. Keep that up.
I'm not totally sure where to expect Franklin to land in Wendesday's RRs, but I have a hard time believing that after the attrition coming in the next two weeks that Franklin won't be the top single-loss team on the board. Whether that gets them a home game or not, I don't know. That all depends on how much weight the Butler game gets. Undefeated teams that are in Franklin's travel zone would be Mount Union (doubtful to see a rematch there plus I think Mount Union is going to be in an easterly influenced quadrant), North Central, Wabash, Whitewater, Illinois College. If you see all of those teams in the same quadrant, Franklin may not get to host a first round game. Will be interesting to see how the RAC treats Franklin and those two close losses.
If I had to bet my house in Vegas I say the Griz end up 4th and will host the OAC/CCIW second place. Or get to play at an Illinois College (FC will pound them just like they did Adrian last year) and get the second round "death sentence". (assumption that NCC, Bash, and Whitewater are 10-0 and UMU goes East).
If Witt wins instead, The GRIZ could be a 3. The problem with the entire seeding is that the selection folks are not as familiar with the teams and pure numbers play a more significant role. Regardless of whether Butler counts it really should. Both FC and Witt get no love for scheduling a difficult opponent.
I disagree on scheduling Butler. The criteria is known, and perhaps there was no other attractive game that week, but it does nothing for Franklin and Witt and does nothing for their SOS or their conferences SOS.
Most of my wrath is at Witt for that - because that was their only at-large bite.
Quote from: smedindy on November 04, 2013, 02:30:46 PM
I disagree on scheduling Butler. The criteria is known, and perhaps there was no other attractive game that week, but it does nothing for Franklin and Witt and does nothing for their SOS or their conferences SOS.
Most of my wrath is at Witt for that - because that was their only at-large bite.
Bottom line, FC needs to find a way to get teams like Witt, Bash, etc on the schedule versus 1AA etc. I agree. Scheduling Mount and Whitewater is one thing but they need to find a solid D3 for the seocnd non conference.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on November 04, 2013, 01:07:19 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 04, 2013, 01:05:05 PM
Greenville being a West region team is new since I talked about them last week. They were definitely listed on the North Region page last week...unless I have completely lost my mind, which isn't out of the question.
And now I need to find a new team to vote for...
No, you haven't lost your mind. I remember looking and noting that St. Scholastica was the only UMAC team listed in the West, while the rest of the UMAC was listed in the North. Now the entire UMAC is listed in the West. May have been overlooked and corrected when the new page was rolled out? I haven't listened to the podcast yet so IDK if this was just recently explained why the UMAC is now entirely listed in the West.
I only remember seeing 3 teams from the UMAC in the North... Eureka, Greenville and MacMurray since they were all in Illinois... I still see the other two listed on the North page as well as Westminster?
Quote from: GRIZ_BACKER on November 04, 2013, 05:00:01 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 04, 2013, 02:30:46 PM
I disagree on scheduling Butler. The criteria is known, and perhaps there was no other attractive game that week, but it does nothing for Franklin and Witt and does nothing for their SOS or their conferences SOS.
Most of my wrath is at Witt for that - because that was their only at-large bite.
Bottom line, FC needs to find a way to get teams like Witt, Bash, etc on the schedule versus 1AA etc. I agree. Scheduling Mount and Whitewater is one thing but they need to find a solid D3 for the seocnd non conference.
I hope Wabash follows suit...... while the Hanover game wasn't the worst, it will surely not help them that much. I would much rather see the Little Giants pick up an In-region... top half of their conference opponent for their non-conference game. Next year and in 2015, we open up with a good program, in Hampden-Sydney College...although I believe it is out of region. But it should help Wabash's overall strength of schedule a bit.?
One problem for FC is that the OAC and NCAC both only play 1 non-conference game now. They'd have to play the bye week dance with them. For instance, this year they could have played Mount 9/7 and BW 9/14. I was going to say someone like TMC might be a good second option, but with the MSJ game locked in they only have 1 other OOC game as well.
p.s. If there was a way to make Franklin/Wabash the opener every year that'd be awesome.
I agree that Witt's scheduling of Butler as its sole non-conference game was not the best choice from a playoff perspective. Knowing that you might need all the help you can get to convice voters to give you a Pool C bid if you don't get the AQ . . . I just don't see it.
I don't have nearly as much beef with Franklin going to D1. Franklin's coach has long been quoted as wanting to give his players early experience with the best competition he can find. I think that philosophy has helped make Franklin a much better football team. Given the competition in the HCAC, Franklin knows that it 1) has to win it's AQ bid, and 2) if it doesn't, Pool C is not likely to come calling. Franklin should feel pretty confident that it will run the table in the HCAC (you can think like that when you haven't lost a conference game since 2009). If Franklin thinks that Butler is the best competition it can schedule for an open date, and it won't affect their conference standing, then I don't think they can be faulted for doing that. What do they give up by scheduling a UMU/UWW and a D1 opponent? At best, maybe a 3 or 4 seed in the final regional bracket had they just run the table on some less challenging opponents - which amounts to maybe one home playoff game. I don't think its unreasonable to choose to put on the line vs getting your team ready for a long season.
For both teams, would Butler count as a "money game"? Would there be a financial benefit to playing a D1 non-scholarship game?
I've been down this road before here or on the NCAC board. We all have to realize that is is not that easy to schedule out-of-conference games, particularly when there is only one game to be scheduled. Coach A doesn't just call Coach B and say "let's play." Many factors are involved. Maybe they should not be, but they are. We, as fans, want to see particular match ups, and for our own good reason in terms of the competition. Schools often think differently. Franklin's philosophy (however admirable or however foolish) is rare.
My guess about Wittenberg and Butler playing this year (and next, by the way) is that Wittenberg might not have been able to get another CLOSE BY school to play them in that first game. OAC teams have only that one non-conference date. Other teams whose geography makes sense well might not have wanted to face the Old Tigers. Well, you say, go East or West. To where, exactly.? Who would want to schedule them; maybe someone, maybe no one. It's the same problem of their strength. And that's not even taking into account an administration who might be saying hold down the expenses. (I have no idea whether the Wittenberg administration is saying that, but I can imagine that lots of administrations do say that.)
Wittenberg calls up Schools A through (pick a letter) and they all say no. Butler's open, OK. Or thinking about it the other way around, Butler has not always been as strong as they are now. Butler might have called Witt a few years ago, when Witt was banging everyone around, seeking a game. And Witt said yes. Both think that they would get good competition and a win.
Suffice to say, scheduling is more complicated than we perceive or want to imagine it is.
Not long ago, I said I would later say something about my dislike of Wabash v. Hampden-Sydney. One thing I will say now is that I don't like the match because of its out-of-region status. Another thing is that I don't believe the arrangement started with either head coach but was a product coming out of administrative discussion and decision-making at a much higher level. (What did I just say about complexities.)
In bball, at least, starting this year, if at least 75% (?) of your games are traditional in-region, then ALL (d3) games are in region. Not positive that that also holds for fball, but I think it does (and all other sports). Pat?
If that is correct, then 'in-region' is no longer a consideration (since 90% of your games are in conference, and therefore traditional in-region).
Just to clarify the Wabash vs. Hampden-Sydney series...it is regional as Virginia and Indiana are in the same administrative region. Between the mileage rule, the geographic region boundaries, and the administrative regions, it's pretty hard to find non-regional games anymore. Wabash's recent games with WashU were an odd exception particularly considering things like Witt/Huntingdon being regional.
But then even beyond that, starting this season what Mr. Ypsi has relayed is also correct. As long as you play most of your games in region, all of your in-division games will count for SOS purposes even if they aren't technically in-region.
Sheesh, why that qualifier? Just dump the distinction, which with all the ways to qualify as in-region, no longer has any real meaning.
HSC vs Wabash is not out of region based on the new definition. Both teams play 75 percent plus in D3.
Quote from: ADL70 on November 04, 2013, 08:58:53 PM
Sheesh, why that qualifier? Just dump the distinction, which with all the ways to qualify as in-region, no longer has any real meaning.
We've discussed this before. The NCAA d3 sports world is bigger than football. It does make more sense in other sports.
There is something to be said for encouraging d3 schools not to overextend their budget trying to play all sports from one coast to the next. That, I gather, is the reason. However, it seems like the NCAA retreats farther and farther away from providing a disincentive to schedule non-region play.
The new rule does exactly what you want. ALL d3 matches are in-region, IF you play at least 8 (of 10) within the region. Allows teams to schedule whatever OOC matches they want (if they have the budget, and abide by the 75% rule).
For teams right on the edge of the regions, that can be important - allowing going over 200 miles into another region to still be counted. Not all schools have a plethora of choices within their region, and may have closer choices in other regions (e.g., MIAA teams and Chicago area schools).
Was the poll posted?
General question on what everyone thinks of the "once ranked, always ranked" clause in terms of giving teams results vs. RRO's.
The major pro that I see is it a big win should still be viewed as a big win even if the opponent slips a little bit the next week. If Heidelberg beats John Carroll next week, it seems like they should get credit for that even if Mount beats JCU the following week and somehow JCU slips out of the final regional ranking. JCU is an impressive team and a win over them should give you a boost even if they lose to Mount, finish 8-2, and drop from the final RR's, right? Same could be said for NCC vs. Wheaton this week - if Wheaton drops to 8-2 and somehow slips from the final RR's, that still seems like it should count as a "quality win" to me.
The con is that the first set of RR's will be influenced by the sequence of scheduling, as we have hinted at before. A particular conference will stand a good chance of getting two or three teams into the early RR's if your conference schedule happens to keep the three best teams apart until late in the season (as we've hinted with the OAC and CCIW this season); a side clause is that a sort-of-decent team might be ranked in the first RR's by virtue of a) going undefeated through an OOC schedule with no power teams and b) not playing the two best teams in their conference until the last two weeks. Pacific in the NWC is a specific example here, currently sitting at 7-1 with games against 5-2 Willamette and ridiculously awesome Linfield yet to play. Now I think Pacific is a fine team, and they have beaten Adrian, Occidental and Chicago in OOC play, all teams with winning records, so you can't accuse them of playing a really WEAK schedule, but nor have they played a really strong one either (and they've lost to the one really good team they played, although it was a one-point loss). If they played Linfield two weeks ago and were 6-2 today with losses to PLU and Linfield, I think there's a good chance they don't get ranked at all. Just one example of a team I expect to crack the RR's due to a scheduling quirk, thereby benefitting Pacific Lutheran and (presumably) Linfield since they will both get a win over a regionally-ranked Pacific team that otherwise may not have cracked the rankings. Does that make sense?
I do like the "once ranked, always ranked" clause because I still think teams should get credit for beating "good" teams that don't quite end up in the final regional rankings, but I wanted to acknowledge that a bit of scheduling randomness will influence the first set of RR's, while the final RR's don't have that influence.
Just a stream of consciousness here. Any thoughts?
And they're here!!!
http://www.d3blogs.com/d3football/2013/11/06/first-2013-ncaa-regional-rankings/
NORTH
The North Region rankings were released with conference record rather than Division III record printed.
1 Mount Union 7-0 8-0
2 North Central (Ill.) 5-0 8-0
3 Wabash 7-0 8-0
4 Wittenberg 7-0 7-1
5 John Carroll 8-0 8-0
6 Illinois Wesleyan 4-1 7-1
7 Franklin 6-0 6-2
8 Wheaton (Ill.) 4-1 7-1
9 Heidelberg 6-1 7-1
10 Hope 4-1 7-2
They got the IWU/Wheaton order right.
I find little that can REALLY be quibbled with here. I think you can argue Franklin should be higher than IWU based on the fact that they have a closer loss to North #1 than IWU had against North #2, and possible that Wittenberg is overranked based on the common opponent with Butler (BUT that isn't supposed to count anyway). Obviously the NCC/Wheaton, Berg/JCU, and Bash/Witt games will re-jigger this order by next week.
Franklin is 6-1, 6-2.
IWU's win over Wheaton is far more impressive than any of Franklin's wins, out-weighing the closer loss.
Quote from: wabndy on November 04, 2013, 12:47:29 PM
disclosure - combined from several posts
1. Mount Union (wins against RRO Franklin, Heidelberg)
2. North Central (quality win against RRO IWU, better SOS than John Carroll)
3. Wabash (Wabash's SOS edges John Carroll, could easly see 3 and 4 flipped, Witt: will post more on NCAC page).
4. John Carroll (Witt has better SOS, but 1 non D3 loss)
5. Wittenberg (see my post on NCAC page)
6. IWU (tempted to rank them lower than Franklin b/c of NCC game, but strong SOS keems them here)
7. Wheaton (loss to IWU, who lost to NCC pushed them low, but killer SOS keeps them here)
8. Franklin (played UMU closer than Heidelberg, better SOS than the princes, but 2 losses still hurts - will move up as the herd thins above)
9. Heidelberg (low SOS, but can still pick up good claim to move way up the list with a win this weekend)
10. Albion (of the two loss teams, they have a slightly stronger SOS than Hope, a win over Olivet, and signifigantly stronger SOS than Benedictine or Concordia).
So I had JC and Witt flipped, Wheaton and Franklin flipped, and went with Albion over Hope for the lanterne rouge spot. Makes sense given that the SOS between Albion and Hope is pretty darn close and Hope's RRO loss (IWU) is ranked higher than Albion's RRO loss (Wheaton).
Even though these rankings will change with the upcoming games, the North Region is really stacked with quality football teams in 2013.
I understand the logic, but if I'm Mike Leonard, I'm wondering else I have to do. I understand the Butler game never really happened in the eyes of the NCAA. Franklin can't control their conference. Wabash has fought that battle, too. The LGs can't do anything about the damage being in the NCAC has done to their resume recently. Franklin led the team who never loses in the regular season with 5 minutes to go. They haven't lost otherwise, yet they're 8th in the region.
Also, I have the ballots. I'll try to get that up tonight. If not, 1st thing in the morning.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on November 06, 2013, 02:59:49 PM
I understand the logic, but if I'm Mike Leonard, I'm wondering else I have to do. I understand the Butler game never really happened in the eyes of the NCAA. Franklin can't control their conference. Wabash has fought that battle, too. The LGs can't do anything about the damage being in the NCAC has done to their resume recently. Franklin led the team who never loses in the regular season with 5 minutes to go. They haven't lost otherwise, yet they're 8th in the region.
Also, I have the ballots. I'll try to get that up tonight. If not, 1st thing in the morning.
Agreed. What's funny is that either take on the Butler game (it counts vs. it doesn't count) should
help Franklin, right? If it never happened, then we say they're 6-1 with the lone loss a 30-27 road loss to the region's #1 team who also happens to be the defending national champion, and they've spent the rest of the season blowing the doors off everyone they've played. If it did happen, they lost 31-28 to the same team that one week earlier had obliterated the same team ranked #4 in this poll. That certainly appears to be worthy of better than 8th in the region. Mr. Ypsi, I understand your point that IWU's win over Wheaton is better than any of Franklin's wins, but in theory it seems that the rankings should be based on the result's overall quality, not just W/L's, and Franklin's
losses are arguably better "results" than any of the wins claimed by teams ranked above them. This is not a knock on anyone above them, BTW - as bashbrother said, the North is stacked with very good teams and all of these guys are good. I just think Franklin is getting the shaft a bit here. What's funny is that Wabash-Witt will probably be decided by three points this week and the lose will suddenly get shoved down to #9 in these rankings. Just watch.
The really crazy thing is that Franklin will be a low seed, yet who want to play them in round 1?
Quote from: NCF on November 06, 2013, 03:28:05 PM
The really crazy thing is that Franklin will be a low seed, yet who want to play them in round 1?
And then you end up with a match-up worthy of a regional final in the 1st round. Which really punishes both teams.
Quote from: Li'l Giant on November 06, 2013, 03:35:27 PM
Quote from: NCF on November 06, 2013, 03:28:05 PM
The really crazy thing is that Franklin will be a low seed, yet who want to play them in round 1?
And then you end up with a match-up worthy of a regional final in the 1st round. Which really punishes both teams.
We don't necessarily know this for sure yet. Playoff brackets can be built in funny ways. I think that the North and West are likely to get more overall teams into the playoffs than the East, which means some of them will get shipped places, and the South is going to have a bunch of Pool B possibilities.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on November 06, 2013, 02:59:49 PM
I understand the Butler game never really happened in the eyes of the NCAA.
Others have posted similar statements. That seems to be an oversimplification. Look at the secondary criteria:
http://www.d3football.com/interactive/faq/playoffs#3
If the evaluation of the primary criteria does not result in a decision by the committee, the following secondary criteria (for ranking and selections) will be evaluated:
● Non-Division III win-loss percentage
● Results versus common non-Division III opponents
● Non-Division III Strength of Schedule
It seems like games against D1 teams do in fact count. Given the derth of objective criteria you can use to compare two teams that don't play any common opponents, how can the committee not consider these secondary criteria. Had Witt actually beaten Butler, I have no doubt they'd be ranked higher than Wabash.
Quote from: NCF on November 06, 2013, 03:28:05 PM
The really crazy thing is that Franklin will be a low seed, yet who want to play them in round 1?
For the sake of discussion - lets assume we don't have any crazy big upsets for the rest of the season. If tradition holds, Mount Union will be shipped east and North Central will headline a north-ish bracket. John Carroll and either Wabash or Wittenberg will pick up a loss. That would leave Franklin a very respectable #3 or #4 seed and a home playoff game since there are no guarantees JC or Heidelberg will get a Pool C bid and the NCAC runner up probably won't get one either.
Or NC could be second fiddle to UW-Whitewater in a North-ish bracket. That's happened before.
Or they could mix up the bracket like last year where after beating Adrian in the first round, Franklin was sent down to UMHB
Quote from: smedindy on November 06, 2013, 04:31:48 PM
Or NC could be second fiddle to UW-Whitewater in a North-ish bracket. That's happened before.
Looks like the North and West will be stacked this year. Will the North and West meet in the semi's? If so, brutal.
When it comes down to it, no one will be really happy with their seeding and placement except the two top seeds in the tournament, which probably will be Mt. Union and Whitewater I am guessing from seeing the rankings. Though UMHB has a strong case as well.
Quote from: smedindy on November 06, 2013, 04:41:33 PM
When it comes down to it, no one will be really happy with their seeding and placement except the two top seeds in the tournament, which probably will be Mt. Union and Whitewater I am guessing from seeing the rankings. Though UMHB has a strong case as well.
Certainly somebody wants to host "lowly" 2 loss #7 Franklin. LOL
Quote from: GRIZ_BACKER on November 06, 2013, 05:35:57 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 06, 2013, 04:41:33 PM
When it comes down to it, no one will be really happy with their seeding and placement except the two top seeds in the tournament, which probably will be Mt. Union and Whitewater I am guessing from seeing the rankings. Though UMHB has a strong case as well.
Certainly somebody wants to host "lowly" 2 loss #7 Franklin. LOL
Not that they want to, but they will HAVE to. ;D
Thanks, gentlemen, on the clarification of regional. I was just wrong. Still, I do not like the Wabash-HSC match up and the way it was developed.
I think the committee got the rankings right. As far as what I would say to mark Leonard, I would tell him not to lose or else schedule different teams. I still think it matters more who you beat than who you lost to. Leading Mt Union in the 4th quarter doesn't tell me anything when you still lost. In fact we may look back and say that was more of an indicator of Mt slipping this year as much as Frankljn rising. We don't know yet but if you followed the fans on the OAC board you may think UMU isn't quite what it has been. Wouldn't surprise me to see them lose to JCU. We just don't know. Franklin will get their chance along with all these teams.
Quote from: USee on November 06, 2013, 10:13:56 PM
I think the committee got the rankings right. As far as what I would say to mark Leonard, I would tell him not to lose or else schedule different teams. I still think it matters more who you beat than who you lost to. Leading Mt Union in the 4th quarter doesn't tell me anything when you still lost. In fact we may look back and say that was more of an indicator of Mt slipping this year as much as Frankljn rising. We don't know yet but if you followed the fans on the OAC board you may think UMU isn't quite what it has been. Wouldn't surprise me to see them lose to JCU. We just don't know. Franklin will get their chance along with all these teams.
As long as FC can avoid the 4/5 and Mount I like their chances either at home or on the road. We shall see.
Quote from: GRIZ_BACKER on November 06, 2013, 11:09:00 PM
Quote from: USee on November 06, 2013, 10:13:56 PM
I think the committee got the rankings right. As far as what I would say to mark Leonard, I would tell him not to lose or else schedule different teams. I still think it matters more who you beat than who you lost to. Leading Mt Union in the 4th quarter doesn't tell me anything when you still lost. In fact we may look back and say that was more of an indicator of Mt slipping this year as much as Frankljn rising. We don't know yet but if you followed the fans on the OAC board you may think UMU isn't quite what it has been. Wouldn't surprise me to see them lose to JCU. We just don't know. Franklin will get their chance along with all these teams.
As long as FC can avoid the 4/5 and Mount I like their chances either at home or on the road. We shall see.
Even as the 4/5 I think Franklin can win the North Region if Mount goes East.
I still think Franklin can beat Mount Union, frankly (GET IT?!?) They already showed that they're capable of competing at their level.
Quote from: sigma one on November 06, 2013, 09:27:15 PM
Thanks, gentlemen, on the clarification of regional. I was just wrong. Still, I do not like the Wabash-HSC match up and the way it was developed.
Fair enough. I think it's fantastic (though I'm a little concerned about how it will go). But I also love the fact that it matches the last two football playing schools in D3 that are all-male liberal arts academies (as far as I know). Yes, I know about SJU, but they are paired so closely with CSB, something Bash and HSC don't have, that I'm ignoring them. If D3 is partially about playing teams that share mission and values, this certainly fits the bill. It also helps that both teams are well-thought of in their respective conference and region, although the hat tip definitely goes to Wabash between the two teams here.
Wouldn't mind seeing the match up in more than just football, but that's simply because I like the idea in general and think football will go Wabash's way.
Here's this week's North Region Fan Poll. We may not agree, but at least there is no 3 way tie in the middle. We've at least got a definitive 10.
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Franklin 68 pts (2, 2, 2, 2 ,3, 3, 3, 3)
3. North Central 64 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 5)
4. Wabash 57 pts (3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5)
5. John Carroll 48 pts (3, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 7)
6. Wittenberg 38 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8)
7. Heidelberg 36 pts (6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7)
8. Illinois Wesleyan 24 pts (7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9)
9. Wheaton 17 pts (8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9)
10. Hope 8 pts (10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10)
The North Region Fan Poll is Mr. Ypsi, Li'l Giant, FCGrizzliesGrad, wally_wabash, NCF, smedindy, USee, and myself.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on November 07, 2013, 09:18:47 AM
Here's this week's North Region Fan Poll. We may not agree, but at least there is no 3 way tie in the middle. We've at least got a definitive 10.
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Franklin 68 pts (2, 2, 2, 2 ,3, 3, 3, 3)
3. North Central 64 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 5)
4. Wabash 57 pts (3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5)
5. John Carroll 48 pts (3, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 7)
6. Wittenberg 38 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8)
7. Heidelberg 36 pts (6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7)
8. Illinois Wesleyan 24 pts (7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9)
9. Wheaton 17 pts (8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9)
10. Hope 8 pts (10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10)
The North Region Fan Poll is Mr. Ypsi, Li'l Giant, FCGrizzliesGrad, wally_wabash, NCF, smedindy, USee, and myself.
Couple changes for me. I moved NCC up to #2 with their convincing win over a very good IWU team. Franklin is #3 for me. I just think NCC is better than I thought and I am starting to think UMU isn't as separated from some of the other teams as they have been. We will know for sure in the next couple weeks. I bumped IWU down but still don't see any basis for separation between 5-8. Wheaton is a touch behind because of their issues at receiver and injuries requiring less experienced players to step in. Hope vs Albion is a toss up. They play next week. Some great games coming up that will provide lots of clarity.
Quote from: NCF on November 07, 2013, 08:08:07 AM
Quote from: GRIZ_BACKER on November 06, 2013, 11:09:00 PM
Quote from: USee on November 06, 2013, 10:13:56 PM
I think the committee got the rankings right. As far as what I would say to mark Leonard, I would tell him not to lose or else schedule different teams. I still think it matters more who you beat than who you lost to. Leading Mt Union in the 4th quarter doesn't tell me anything when you still lost. In fact we may look back and say that was more of an indicator of Mt slipping this year as much as Frankljn rising. We don't know yet but if you followed the fans on the OAC board you may think UMU isn't quite what it has been. Wouldn't surprise me to see them lose to JCU. We just don't know. Franklin will get their chance along with all these teams.
As long as FC can avoid the 4/5 and Mount I like their chances either at home or on the road. We shall see.
Even as the 4/5 I think Franklin can win the North Region if when Mount goes East.
Quote from: D3MAFAN on November 07, 2013, 10:04:43 AM
Quote from: NCF on November 07, 2013, 08:08:07 AM
Quote from: GRIZ_BACKER on November 06, 2013, 11:09:00 PM
Quote from: USee on November 06, 2013, 10:13:56 PM
I think the committee got the rankings right. As far as what I would say to mark Leonard, I would tell him not to lose or else schedule different teams. I still think it matters more who you beat than who you lost to. Leading Mt Union in the 4th quarter doesn't tell me anything when you still lost. In fact we may look back and say that was more of an indicator of Mt slipping this year as much as Frankljn rising. We don't know yet but if you followed the fans on the OAC board you may think UMU isn't quite what it has been. Wouldn't surprise me to see them lose to JCU. We just don't know. Franklin will get their chance along with all these teams.
As long as FC can avoid the 4/5 and Mount I like their chances either at home or on the road. We shall see.
Even as the 4/5 I think Franklin can win the North Region if when Mount goes East.
Well in 2008 Franklin was a 5 seed with a senior QB and in the second round won at #1 seed North Central ;)
and then what happened the next week???? 8-) ;D
Quote from: USee on November 07, 2013, 06:35:15 PM
and then what happened the next week???? 8-) ;D
And then the Earth exploded meaning Franklin certainly didn't lose a home game (at the high school) in the snow to 7th seeded Wheaton :-\ ;D
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 07, 2013, 06:41:10 PM
Quote from: USee on November 07, 2013, 06:35:15 PM
and then what happened the next week???? 8-) ;D
And then the Earth exploded meaning Franklin certainly didn't lose a home game (at the high school) in the snow to 7th seeded Wheaton :-\ ;D
Yeah - undoubtedly last into Pool C Wheaton had quite the run! The second week is almost forgotten, but the 1st (Trine, with Eric Watt) and 3rd (Franklin, with blanking on the QB's name :-[) they defeated teams with QBs that come along once in a lifetime!
IWU faced the same test in 2011, but failed it. We had overall a much better team than Monmouth, but they had senior Alex Tanney and we had sophomore Rob Gallik. (Rob has become a very fine QB, but he is no Alex Tanney!)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 07, 2013, 07:14:43 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 07, 2013, 06:41:10 PM
Quote from: USee on November 07, 2013, 06:35:15 PM
and then what happened the next week???? 8-) ;D
And then the Earth exploded meaning Franklin certainly didn't lose a home game (at the high school) in the snow to 7th seeded Wheaton :-\ ;D
Yeah - undoubtedly last into Pool C Wheaton had quite the run! The second week is almost forgotten, but the 1st (Trine, with Eric Watt) and 3rd (Franklin, with blanking on the QB's name :-[) they defeated teams with QBs that come along once in a lifetime!
IWU faced the same test in 2011, but failed it. We had overall a much better team than Monmouth, but they had senior Alex Tanney and we had sophomore Rob Gallik. (Rob has become a very fine QB, but he is no Alex Tanney!)
Chad Rupp who was a Gagliardi finalist that year
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 07, 2013, 07:59:11 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 07, 2013, 07:14:43 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 07, 2013, 06:41:10 PM
Quote from: USee on November 07, 2013, 06:35:15 PM
and then what happened the next week???? 8-) ;D
And then the Earth exploded meaning Franklin certainly didn't lose a home game (at the high school) in the snow to 7th seeded Wheaton :-\ ;D
Yeah - undoubtedly last into Pool C Wheaton had quite the run! The second week is almost forgotten, but the 1st (Trine, with Eric Watt) and 3rd (Franklin, with blanking on the QB's name :-[) they defeated teams with QBs that come along once in a lifetime!
IWU faced the same test in 2011, but failed it. We had overall a much better team than Monmouth, but they had senior Alex Tanney and we had sophomore Rob Gallik. (Rob has become a very fine QB, but he is no Alex Tanney!)
Chad Rupp who was a Gagliardi finalist that year
Thanks. It was driving me nuts, but the site doesn't still have box scores for games 5 years ago.
And congratulations to Franklin for perhaps falling back briefly after Rupp graduated, but then coming back stronger than ever. Trine was great for Watt's tenure (even putting a scare into national champion UWW in 2010, Watt's senior year), but fell back to mediocrity thereafter. The same has happened to Monmouth after once-in-a-lifetime QB Tanney graduated.
Upset of the year in D3? Bluffton 24, Franklin 17!! :o
Combined with Witt blitzing Wabash, gonna be an interesting poll this week!
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 09, 2013, 04:40:19 PM
Upset of the year in D3? Bluffton 24, Franklin 17!! :o
Combined with Witt blitzing Wabash, gonna be an interesting poll this week!
I'd add to that JCU
crushing Heidelberg. It wouldn't be indefensible to jump JCU ahead of even NCC would it? Their defense is just ridiculous this year. Several teams have an argument to be made for the #2 slot.
Quote from: wabndy on November 04, 2013, 09:53:59 PM
Quote from: ADL70 on November 04, 2013, 08:58:53 PM
Sheesh, why that qualifier? Just dump the distinction, which with all the ways to qualify as in-region, no longer has any real meaning.
We've discussed this before. The NCAA d3 sports world is bigger than football. It does make more sense in other sports.
There is something to be said for encouraging d3 schools not to overextend their budget trying to play all sports from one coast to the next. That, I gather, is the reason.
No, the reason is to avoid missed class time by giving coaches an incentive not to schedule games that are too distant from campus.
The same 10 for me, seriously re-arranged.
Quote from: smedindy on November 09, 2013, 09:58:12 PM
The same 10 for me, seriously re-arranged.
Same here, though I seriously debated replacing Hope with Albion (but that will be resolved next Saturday).
Quote from: hazzben on November 09, 2013, 09:43:07 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 09, 2013, 04:40:19 PM
Upset of the year in D3? Bluffton 24, Franklin 17!! :o
Combined with Witt blitzing Wabash, gonna be an interesting poll this week!
I'd add to that JCU crushing Heidelberg. It wouldn't be indefensible to jump JCU ahead of even NCC would it? Their defense is just ridiculous this year. Several teams have an argument to be made for the #2 slot.
I do have an internal debate going on involving JCU. But the other party is not North Central. :o
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 09, 2013, 10:09:15 PM
Quote from: hazzben on November 09, 2013, 09:43:07 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 09, 2013, 04:40:19 PM
Upset of the year in D3? Bluffton 24, Franklin 17!! :o
Combined with Witt blitzing Wabash, gonna be an interesting poll this week!
I'd add to that JCU crushing Heidelberg. It wouldn't be indefensible to jump JCU ahead of even NCC would it? Their defense is just ridiculous this year. Several teams have an argument to be made for the #2 slot.
I do have an internal debate going on involving JCU. But the other party is not North Central. :o
I don't participate in the poll, but I'm having the same debate. Fortunately we'll find out the answer next week.
If we divorced all knowledge of events prior to this season and looked solely at results from 2013, John Carroll would be a slam dunk as one of the best teams in the country. I think "we" the D3 fan community have been justifiably cautious in embracing them because lots of teams get off to hot starts and are brought back to Earth when they play the best team or two in their conference. But to date I think an argument can be made that no one but UMHB and Linfield has been as dominant every single week as John Carroll.
I did drop UMU from #1 to #3 on my national ballot, when comparing Heidi's results vs. UMU to JCU. UMU is still #1 on my North region ballot, but not by the margin they once were. NCC remains #2 (they did, after all, just crush both IWU and Wheaton), but JCU has jumped to #3. And while a JCU win next week would somewhat surprise me, it would certainly not shock me - I think they are the gravest regular season threat to UMU in many a season (despite Franklin almost pulling it off just weeks ago).
North Central's run this season hasn't been too shabby, though. I think it's now 123 then a gap to 4 then 5678 in a clown car.
Quote from: smedindy on November 09, 2013, 10:26:37 PM
North Central's run this season hasn't been too shabby, though. I think it's now 123 then a gap to 4 then 5678 in a clown car.
Ha! +k
Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 09, 2013, 09:53:57 PM
Quote from: wabndy on November 04, 2013, 09:53:59 PM
Quote from: ADL70 on November 04, 2013, 08:58:53 PM
Sheesh, why that qualifier? Just dump the distinction, which with all the ways to qualify as in-region, no longer has any real meaning.
We've discussed this before. The NCAA d3 sports world is bigger than football. It does make more sense in other sports.
There is something to be said for encouraging d3 schools not to overextend their budget trying to play all sports from one coast to the next. That, I gather, is the reason.
No, the reason is to avoid missed class time by giving coaches an incentive not to schedule games that are too distant from campus.
You're drinking the koolade.
A Michigan team playing in Alabama is "not too distant from campus"?
And this latest mutation makes Linfield's game in Cleveland "in region."
Quote from: ADL70 on November 09, 2013, 11:25:07 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 09, 2013, 09:53:57 PM
Quote from: wabndy on November 04, 2013, 09:53:59 PM
Quote from: ADL70 on November 04, 2013, 08:58:53 PM
Sheesh, why that qualifier? Just dump the distinction, which with all the ways to qualify as in-region, no longer has any real meaning.
We've discussed this before. The NCAA d3 sports world is bigger than football. It does make more sense in other sports.
There is something to be said for encouraging d3 schools not to overextend their budget trying to play all sports from one coast to the next. That, I gather, is the reason.
No, the reason is to avoid missed class time by giving coaches an incentive not to schedule games that are too distant from campus.
You're drinking the koolade.
A Michigan team playing in Alabama is "not too distant from campus"?
And this latest mutation makes Linfield's game in Cleveland "in region."
I am not "drinking the koolade". This is the reason that has been consistently stated by the D3 presidents and athletic directors who set the policies of the division for the NCAA. If you don't believe me, Google it for yourself.
The fact that the administrative regions now constitute part of the in-region formula, which leads to such occasional real-life silliness as Illinois and Wisconsin teams going to the West Coast and playing in-region contests, doesn't change that. Such occurrences are pretty rare in the larger scheme of D3 athletics. Given the way that scheduling works, most of the athletic contests between geographically distant schools that take place within the same administrative regions occur during semester break, anyway. (The classic example is basketball snowbird trips to southern California by midwestern schools located in Administrative Region 4.)
Also, Linfield and Case Western Reserve are not in the same administrative region. CWRU is in Administrative Region 3, while Linfield is in Administrative Region 4.
I managed to snap out of my shock long enough to put my rankings together... same 10 as last week but all jumbled up. With so much jumbling I decided to do a bit of jumbling in my top 25 ballot too... top 3 in the North are all in the top 6 overall... the next six are fairly spread out over the top 25 as opposed to a couple weeks ago when they were all crammed together.
Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 10, 2013, 07:25:48 AM
Quote from: ADL70 on November 09, 2013, 11:25:07 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 09, 2013, 09:53:57 PM
Quote from: wabndy on November 04, 2013, 09:53:59 PM
Quote from: ADL70 on November 04, 2013, 08:58:53 PM
Sheesh, why that qualifier? Just dump the distinction, which with all the ways to qualify as in-region, no longer has any real meaning.
We've discussed this before. The NCAA d3 sports world is bigger than football. It does make more sense in other sports.
There is something to be said for encouraging d3 schools not to overextend their budget trying to play all sports from one coast to the next. That, I gather, is the reason.
No, the reason is to avoid missed class time by giving coaches an incentive not to schedule games that are too distant from campus.
You're drinking the koolade.
A Michigan team playing in Alabama is "not too distant from campus"?
And this latest mutation makes Linfield's game in Cleveland "in region."
I am not "drinking the koolade". This is the reason that has been consistently stated by the D3 presidents and athletic directors who set the policies of the division for the NCAA. If you don't believe me, Google it for yourself.
The fact that the administrative regions now constitute part of the in-region formula, which leads to such occasional real-life silliness as Illinois and Wisconsin teams going to the West Coast and playing in-region contests, doesn't change that. Such occurrences are pretty rare in the larger scheme of D3 athletics. Given the way that scheduling works, most of the athletic contests between geographically distant schools that take place within the same administrative regions occur during semester break, anyway. (The classic example is basketball snowbird trips to southern California by midwestern schools located in Administrative Region 4.)
Also, Linfield and Case Western Reserve are not in the same administrative region. CWRU is in Administrative Region 3, while Linfield is in Administrative Region 4.
I was responding to a post by Mr. Ypsi that for hoops at least if 75% of a team's game were traditional in region then all games are in region. And on this site Linfield @ CWRU is shown as in region (even though not in same Admin region).
But apparently for regional ranking purposes, if I read the NCAA DIII Manual correctly, regional preference has been eliminated from the criteria for all sports effective 8/1/13, as I felt it should be.
31.3.3.2.1 Primary Criteria—Ranking and Selection (All Contests Leading up to NCAA Championships).
(a) Won-lost percentage against Division III opponents; (Adopted: 4/15/03, Revised: 7/24/12 effective 8/1/13)
(b) Division III head-to-head competition; (Revised: 7/24/12 effective 8/1/13)
(c) Results versus common Division III opponents; (Revised: 7/24/12 effective 8/1/13)
(d) Results versus ranked Division III teams as established by the rankings at the time of selection. Conference postseason contests are included; (Revised: 7/24/12 effective 8/1/13, 1/16/13 effective 8/1/13)
(e) Division III strength of schedule (see Bylaw 31.3.3.2.3); and (Adopted: 1/13/10, Revised: 7/24/12 effective 8/1/13)
(f) Should a committee find that evaluation of a team’s won-lost percentage during the last 25 percent of the season is applicable (i.e., end-of-season performance), it may adopt such criteria with approval from the Championships Committee. (Adopted: 7/24/12 effective 8/1/13)
31.3.3.2.2 Secondary Criteria—Ranking and Selection.
(a) Non-Division III won-lost percentage; (Revised: 7/24/12 effective 8/1/13)
(b) Results versus common non-Division III opponents; and (Revised: 7/24/12 effective 8/1/13)
(c) Non-Division III strength of schedule. (Revised: 7/24/12 effective 8/1/13)
Chuck's figure is wrong; it's 70%, not 75%. And the regional emphasis has not been entirely discarded. (http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/NCAA/Resources/Latest+News/2012/February/DIII+Championships+Committee+addresses+regional+concerns+via+selection+criteria) As Chuck said, the percentage rule (although it's actually 70%) produces a minimum threshold of the number of in-region games that each team must play in order to qualify for postseason tournaments (and, thus, for the regional rankings as well). For football purposes, that's practically meaningless; I can't think of any D3 football team that isn't scheduling seven in-region football games a year.
As for Linfield and CWRU being listed as an in-region game on d3football.com, that's an error. Linfield and CWRU are not in the same administrative region, as I said earlier. The administrative regions are listed under 8.3 in the d3football.com playoff FAQ. (http://www.d3football.com/interactive/faq/playoffs)
Fewer than 7? Look at CWRU (if Linfield, Puget Sound, and Trinity are errors) and Wesley.
Your NCAA link is a release that predates the amendment to the DIII Manual.
Perhaps Pat can clarify and correct the site if Linfield @ CWRU is an error.
For SOS purposes, all in-division games count. If Pat has to mark every game as regional to make the math work out, so be it.
JCU @UMU this week. This is a huge game and it wouldn't surprise me in the least to see JCU beat the Raiders. JCU's defense is for real. I still think the North is overall down relative to years past and the West has the strongest teams. I actually think we may not see Mt Union or UWW in the Stagg this year. #newblood
Quote from: USee on November 11, 2013, 10:16:24 AM
JCU @UMU this week. This is a huge game and it wouldn't surprise me in the least to see JCU beat the Raiders. JCU's defense is for real. I still think the North is overall down relative to years past and the West has the strongest teams. I actually think we may not see Mt Union or UWW in the Stagg this year. #newblood
Looking forward to making the trip to see this game-should be a great one!
Here's this week's North Region Fan Poll. We'll do one more next week and then a final one after the season.
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. John Carroll 68 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3)
3. North Central 67 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4. Wittenberg 57 pts (3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4)
5. Illinois Wesleyan 39 pts (5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6)
T6. Franklin 33 pts (5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 9)
T6. Wabash 33 pts (6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 9)
8. Heidelberg 25 pts (6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9)
9. Wheaton 18 pts (7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10, 10)
10. Hope 12 pts (8, 8, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, -)
ARV
DePauw 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -) - JK. I voted for Hope, too.
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Mr. Ypsi, FCGrizzliesGrad, smedindy, wally_wabash, Li'l Giant, USee, NCF, and myself.
The only surprise to me is the leeway Franklin got for losing to Bluffton from some voters. I know that's a very, very uncharacteristic result given the rest of the season, but still, it has to hurt more than dropping to #5 or #6. I know some of you guys voted them #2 or 3, justifiably, and may have been reluctant to drop them more than a few spots, but I really think they have to be behind Wabash, Heidelberg, and Wheaton after that. That loss is far, far worse result than anything on anyone else's schedule in the top 9.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on November 12, 2013, 02:21:43 PM
The only surprise to me is the leeway Franklin got for losing to Bluffton from some voters. I know that's a very, very uncharacteristic result given the rest of the season, but still, it has to hurt more than dropping to #5 or #6. I know some of you guys voted them #2 or 3, justifiably, and may have been reluctant to drop them more than a few spots, but I really think they have to be behind Wabash, Heidelberg, and Wheaton after that. That loss is far, far worse result than anything on anyone else's schedule in the top 9.
Agree. To add some flavor, The GRIZ were down 3-4 starting receivers (except for Linville). 2nd and 3rd string didnt step up as well along with some turnovers. 8-9 is justified on results, but I personally am not worried about the GRIZ if and when they get healthy. Hopefully they can get by Hanover this Saturday and get right for the playoffs. At this point, assuming Franklin is going to get in might be a mistake. In a way, it makes the trip to Hanover more fun (who knows what may happen?)
I shuffled Franklin down from 2 to 7- behind IWU and Wabash but ahead of H'berg and Wheaton. I just couldn't talk myself into Wheaton or H'berg being better than Franklin. I think there's enough good stuff out of Franklin this season to give them a mini-pass for having a crappy game against Bluffton. Stuff happens.
It was only crappy in terms of turnovers, too. They still gained almost 500 yards. They were good in all phases other than fumbling. Pretty easy to understand where Franklin still stands to me. I would have ranked Franklin & Wabash the exact same if I could have.
Only crappy in terms of turnovers? Really? Come on man.
I actually added Franklin and Hope to the soup that was my 5-8 and is now my 5-10. Wabash was the benefactor as I moved them UP ONE SPOT to 6 because their game w Witt confirmed what I have thought about them and the other teams have 2 losses. I went:
Mt Union
NCC
JCU
Witt
IWU
Wabash
Franklin
Hope
Heidleberg
Wheaton
I think the bottom 6 on this list could all play each other 10 times and split. (I may be giving Hope too much credit but I am pretty confident in the others).
What? 463 total yards. 31 first downs. They ran over 100 plays. Held Bluffton under 300 total yards including a 1.5 per carry. Bluffton punted 9 times. I'm not sure what else you want. If they don't fumble, they win going away.
What I want is DON"T LOSE TO FREAKING BLUFFTON. That's a really bad loss. Doesn't matter how. Wheaton put up over 500 yards last year vs Elmhurst and lost very similarly via turnovers. Of course Elmhurst ended up taking St Thomas to the wire in the playoffs. Bluffton? come on man.
Unfortunately, that wasn't an option provided to me when I completed my ballot.
I wasn't debating your poll position. I actually agree with you as I ranked Wabash and Franklin together as well. I just reacted to defending their loss via turnovers. I think their loss puts them in the undecipherable group. Capable of losing well to Mt Union or losing poorly to Bluffton, but still losing. Fun times.
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. John Carroll 68 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3)
3. North Central 67 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4. Wittenberg 57 pts (3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4)
5. Illinois Wesleyan 39 pts (5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6)
T6. Franklin 33 pts (5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 9)
T6. Wabash 33 pts (6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 9)
8. Heidelberg 25 pts (6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9)
9. Wheaton 18 pts (7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10, 10)
10. Hope 12 pts (8, 8, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10)
As usual I'm the harshest on Franklin. You often see a good team stumble at some point during a season against a lesser opponent but they manage to recover and get the win. Franklin however fell flat on their face. Sure the winning TD was a bit fluky (see the d3 play of the week) but they should never have been in that position against Bluffton.
I was toying a bit on possible seeds and with the strength of the North and West when it comes to "C" land and the dearth of teams South or East plus the 500 mile rule I think:
1. The OAC winner will move "East".
2. The OAC runner-up will move "East"
3. St. Norbert will come to the "North"
4. UW - Whitewater will come to the "North"
5. If Thomas More is the "C" instead of Wabash they'll plant here.
6. St. Scholastica probably stays home in the West to play Bethel.
So...
1. UW - Whitewater
2. North Central (they'll never catch a break, will they?)
3. Wittenberg
4. IWU
5. Wabash (or Franklin)
6. Franklin (or St. Norbert)
7. St. Norbert (or Thomas More)
8. MIAA (tough break for an improving league)
If the East gets a "C" instead of Wabash, the OAC runner up may stay 'home'.
If the MIAA runner up gets a "C" instead of Wabash, then I think we may either get the OAC runner up back OR W&J moves here.
I think Wabash deserves 6 more than 5, but the committee won't schedule them against Witt in the first round.
Of course, this may be ripped up if the committee decides to concentrate on first round pairings only, and let the chips fall in the second round where they may.
Quote from: smedindy on November 13, 2013, 12:53:59 PM
2. North Central (they'll never catch a break, will they?)
2010
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. John Carroll 68 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3)
3. North Central 67 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4. Wittenberg 57 pts (3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4)
5. Illinois Wesleyan 39 pts (5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6)
T6. Franklin 33 pts (5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 9)
T6. Wabash 33 pts (6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 9)
8. Heidelberg 25 pts (6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9)
9. Wheaton 18 pts (7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10, 10)
10. Hope 12 pts (8, 8, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10)
How I voted.
I'm tougher on Wabash and Franklin than most everyone else. I think their losses make for really big question marks that I can't get over. Losing to Witt is a "better" loss than losing to Bluffton. But I've felt all year long that a matchup between the two would fall Franklin's way. I still feel that way regardless of the Bluffton loss.
I guess I'm higher on Heidelberg and Wheaton than everyone else, too. Not sure what that says about my voting tendencies, but that's my ballot.
The regional rankings:
NORTH
1 Mount Union 9-0 9-0
2 North Central (Ill.) 9-0 9-0
3 John Carroll 9-0 9-0
4 Wittenberg 8-0 8-1
5 Illinois Wesleyan 8-1 8-1
6 Wabash 8-1 8-1
7 Wheaton (Ill.) 7-2 7-2
8 Hope 7-2 7-2
9 Franklin 6-2 6-3
9 Heidelberg 7-2 7-2
Well done, laddies. The NCAA is nearly in accordance with your beliefs :)
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on November 13, 2013, 02:44:07 PM
Well done, laddies. The NCAA is nearly in accordance with your beliefs :)
Oh, not even close. :)
Needed something to do for the next couple days around here... I know Wally is the prognosticator of all things postseason related, but I thought I'd throw in my thoughts about how the double secret probation final regional rankings might look in the North. I should point out that a) I'm not nearly as proficient in NCAA thinking as Wally is and b) I absolutely hate the SoS number in football because there's not nearly enough data points for it to be of any use (just compare #17 Framingham St and #153 Mount Union and tell me Framingham has played such an incredibly stronger schedule than Mount Union ::))
To start let's assume NCC, Witt, IWU, Wabash, Wheaton, Franklin, and Heidelberg all win (which obviously isn't a guarantee :( but is the most likely outcome).
I don't see any of them changing spots over each other except that I think Heidelberg edges ahead of Franklin. Not sure how they ended up tied this week.
If Hope wins I think they stay where they are, if they lose... I think Albion will just slip in at 10th.
Now the biggie... if Mount wins they obviously stay #1 but I don't think JC drops too far. Witt would pass them and I think IWU does too. They'd be 1-1 vs RRO compared to IWU going 2-1 (as long as Hope wins). But they'd stay ahead of 0-1 Wabash.
If John Carroll wins... I think by the slimmest of margins NCC would stay ahead and take #1 with John Carroll 2nd... both 2-0 vs RRO... similar SoS... but based on where the RRO will be ranked I give that slight edge to NCC. Mount meanwhile falls down to the IWU area... both would be 2-1 vs RRO but at the moment IWU has the edge in that dreaded SoS number.
1) Mount Union/North Central
2) North Central/John Carroll
3) Wittenberg
4) Illinois Wesleyan
5) Mount Union vs John Carroll loser
6) Wabash
7) Wheaton
8) Hope/Heidelberg
9) Heidelberg/Franklin
10) Franklin/Albion
So after all that thought... I'm not sure why I did it :P And because I did it, someone will lose that shouldn't (please don't do that again Franklin) and render it all moot. That or I'll have made such a glaring error or omission that Wally will chastise me for daring to step into his realm ;D Maybe I should just go to sleep and stop trying to think at 4:30am
It's not out of the question that NCC could be #1 if JCU wins. I would favor JCU to go ahead and slip into #1 if they beat Mount Union. They'd be 2-0 against RRO as NCC is and one of those two for JCU is Mount Union. Hard to get a better pelt than that on the wall.
If JCU loses, then they probably slip behind IWU but only if Hope wins the MIAA. If Hope loses and slips out of the rankings, then IWU loses a feather in their cap (which is their only real advantage over the Streaks) and if my quick estimation is close, JCU is going to hop IWU in SOS on Saturday.
I should probably make a quick note on SOS...as you've pointed out, it's really not as simple as just doing the math and ranking the teams. The NCAA's SOS calculation is a really rudimentary way of trying to measure how good the teams you played are (OWP) and how good the teams they played are (OOWP). It's a decent enough tool, but it definitely shouldn't be used without further examination. My rule of thumb is that schedule strengths aren't really THAT much different until you get around a 0.050 difference. To give you an idea of the slice of D3 that is included there, if you take the 0.050 window around 0.500, you get 75 teams (1/3 of the playoff eligible D3 universe) bookended by Oberlin on the high end and Mount Union on the low end. So when I see SOS's separated by 0.010 or 0.020 I generally pretty much count them as being the same. I try not to get too caught up in the numerical rankings (those differences can be deceptively large) and look at the actual SOS result itself.
Now, if the North RAC wanted to play the game, they could slip Wooster into the final rankings and give Wabash an RRO win. Just saying. The East is doing it. IWU doesn't really need the extra RRO win. Come on, RAC, do the region a solid. Wooster is the 10th best team in the region. I promise. They are. :)
I'm already a nervous wreck over this bubble thing. Going to be a rough few days here.
Thing is that Brockport definitely could claim to be the 10th best East team. Their Massey rating is 37th. Their three losses are by a combined 12 points, including an OT loss to Alfred and a close loss to Rowan, and they pounded Lycoming into the dust.
So the East may be 'gaming' it a bit, but not in a truly underhanded way.
In Massey, Mt. Union's SOS is 106th and Framingham's is 159th. Framingham scheduled smart by playing Endicott and Rowan in non-conference, and their league held its own in non-conference but that's usually the weakest area of D3.
Quote from: smedindy on November 14, 2013, 11:39:32 AM
Thing is that Brockport definitely could claim to be the 10th best East team. Their Massey rating is 37th. Their three losses are by a combined 12 points, including an OT loss to Alfred and a close loss to Rowan, and they pounded Lycoming into the dust.
So the East may be 'gaming' it a bit, but not in a truly underhanded way.
No, they could be. Keith pinpointed them as a possible 10th team in the pre-rankings primer yesterday. But why 6-3 Brockport and not 6-3 Widener. Or Lycoming. Or Albright. Or Delaware Valley. Or 6-2 Western Connecticut. Or Endicott. I'm not saying there is anything underhanded going on, just interesting that of all of the available choices, the one with the biggest possible positive domino effect is the one they chose. Just interesting is all.
My end of regular season ballot:
1- Mount Union
2- North Central
3- Witt
4- John Carroll
5- IWU
6- Wabash
7- Franklin
8- Albion
9- Concordia (Wis)
10- Hope
With only ten spots for the entire region, you're not gonna get three from the same conference.
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 19, 2013, 12:09:53 PM
With only ten spots for the entire region, you're not gonna get three from the same conference.
;D
+K
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 19, 2013, 12:09:53 PM
My end of regular season ballot:
1- Mount Union
2- North Central
3- Witt
4- John Carroll
5- IWU
6- Wabash
7- Franklin
8- Albion
9- Concordia (Wis)
10- Hope
With only ten spots for the entire region, you're not gonna get three from the same conference.
Well that's rational. You could be on the national selection committee with that line of thinking.
Ok, I'll admit. I was offline for a couple days and hadn't read the complete nonsense from the interview with chairman Stupid. I read this first and thought Wally had sprung a leak. Now, after reading enough to become physically ill, I get it. Very funny. Very, very funny actually. Well played W2
Sorry for the delay, gang. Here's the Final Regular Season North Region Fan Poll. One more when Mount Union is the only one left (or something strange happens.)
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 71 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3. John Carroll 62 pts (2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4)
4. Wittenberg 59 pts (3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4)
5. Illinois Wesleyan 47 pts (5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6)
6. Wabash 35 pts (6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7)
7. Franklin 32 pts (5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9)
8. Heidelberg 23 pts (6, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9)
9. Wheaton 21 pts (6, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10)
10. Albion 10 pts (8, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Mr. Ypsi, smedindy, NCF, wally_wabash, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, USee, and myself.
If you folks wouldn't mind sending me your end of the year ballots, I'd like to get the poll up soonish before we put this season to bed.
So when is the final poll going to be up?
I was waiting on one more, but I'll go ahead with what we have. I'll have it tonight.
Here it is - the season ending North Region Fan Poll
1. Mount Union 79 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2)
2. North Central 73 pts (1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3. Wittenberg 63 pts (3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4. John Carroll 49 pts (3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 7, 7)
5. Franklin 42 pts (4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 9)
6. Illinois Wesleyan 40 pts (4, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8)
7. Wabash 36 pts (5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8)
8. Wheaton 27 pts (5, 5, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9)
9. Heidelberg 23 pts (6, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9)
10. Albion 7 pts (10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, -)
ARV Hope 1 pts (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Mr. Ypsi, smedindy, NCF, wally_wabash, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, USee, and myself.
Might as well get my ballot out of the way so everyone knows where all the odd votes came from ::)
1. Mount Union 79 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2)
2. North Central 73 pts (1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3. Wittenberg 63 pts (3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4. John Carroll 49 pts (3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 7, 7)
5. Franklin 42 pts (4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 9)
6. Illinois Wesleyan 40 pts (4, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8)
7. Wabash 36 pts (5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8)
8. Wheaton 27 pts (5, 5, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9)
9. Heidelberg 23 pts (6, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9)
10. Albion 7 pts (10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, -)
ARV Hope 1 pts (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Already had the discussion about Mount-NCC on the Top 25 board. I know a lot of people are all about H2H results but a one point win in no way says better team to me. And looking at all the other results from this season, NCC is more impressive to me than Mount was.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on December 30, 2013, 07:52:41 PM
Might as well get my ballot out of the way so everyone knows where all the odd votes came from ::)
1. Mount Union 79 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2)
2. North Central 73 pts (1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3. Wittenberg 63 pts (3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4. John Carroll 49 pts (3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 7, 7)
5. Franklin 42 pts (4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 9)
6. Illinois Wesleyan 40 pts (4, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8)
7. Wabash 36 pts (5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8)
8. Wheaton 27 pts (5, 5, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9)
9. Heidelberg 23 pts (6, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9)
10. Albion 7 pts (10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, -)
ARV Hope 1 pts (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Already had the discussion about Mount-NCC on the Top 25 board. I know a lot of people are all about H2H results but a one point win in no way says better team to me. And looking at all the other results from this season, NCC is more impressive to me than Mount was.
While I still kept UMU first, I can certainly understand your reasoning on #1 - a one-point win AT HOME in weird weather conditions is certainly NOT conclusive evidence of superiority. But I'm curious about your subbing Hope in for Albion at #10. Yes, Albion suffered nearly a triple monkey stomp (while Hope would probably not have lost as badly), but THAT h-to-h was a three-point win by Albion AT HOPE. (Regardless, I really wanted to just submit nine - the gulf between #9 and #10 was huge this year.)
Yeah, the Hope / Albion H2H rather much settled that one since that was at Albion.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on December 30, 2013, 07:52:41 PM
Might as well get my ballot out of the way so everyone knows where all the odd votes came from ::)
1. Mount Union 79 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2)
2. North Central 73 pts (1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3. Wittenberg 63 pts (3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4. John Carroll 49 pts (3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 7, 7)
5. Franklin 42 pts (4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 9)
6. Illinois Wesleyan 40 pts (4, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8)
7. Wabash 36 pts (5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8)
8. Wheaton 27 pts (5, 5, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9)
9. Heidelberg 23 pts (6, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9)
10. Albion 7 pts (10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, -)
ARV Hope 1 pts (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Already had the discussion about Mount-NCC on the Top 25 board. I know a lot of people are all about H2H results but a one point win in no way says better team to me. And looking at all the other results from this season, NCC is more impressive to me than Mount was.
Have to disagree here. A senior laden NC could not stop Burke and company. Mounts young secondary stepped up in the final minute while NC's defense folded. Could we put an end to the weather being to bame? Both teams played in the same conditions. It's not like Bethel who had to play without their all-MIAC player of the year. Mount was clearly the better team that day.
I have no idea what the weather did to the NCC offense, but I can say with 100% conviction that the slippery field completely eliminated Burke's ability to run. Look back at when he was effective. Early in 1st and 3rd quarters. Which is when the field was in best condition after shoveling.
Maybe NCC's offense is a lot better too on a clean field, but I have no doubt that Mount scores in the upper 50's or more in good weather. Maybe the final is 59-58? Don't know, but NCC didn't have the speed defensively to stop Mount. I fully understand Mount wasn't good enough defensively to stop anyone either, so I agree with NCF that the snow shouldn't be THE reason.
Overall I thought NCC was a very good CCIW team. Exactly what I expected from them. Very similar to the Wheaton playoff teams of the past. Very solid, well coached, playing smart/efficient ball. Just missing a couple elite physical playmakers to push them over the top.
Quote from: NCF on December 31, 2013, 06:43:27 AM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on December 30, 2013, 07:52:41 PM
Might as well get my ballot out of the way so everyone knows where all the odd votes came from ::)
1. Mount Union 79 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2)
2. North Central 73 pts (1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3. Wittenberg 63 pts (3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4. John Carroll 49 pts (3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 7, 7)
5. Franklin 42 pts (4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 9)
6. Illinois Wesleyan 40 pts (4, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8)
7. Wabash 36 pts (5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8)
8. Wheaton 27 pts (5, 5, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9)
9. Heidelberg 23 pts (6, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9)
10. Albion 7 pts (10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, -)
ARV Hope 1 pts (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Already had the discussion about Mount-NCC on the Top 25 board. I know a lot of people are all about H2H results but a one point win in no way says better team to me. And looking at all the other results from this season, NCC is more impressive to me than Mount was.
Have to disagree here. A senior laden NC could not stop Burke and company. Mounts young secondary stepped up in the final minute while NC's defense folded. Could we put an end to the weather being to bame? Both teams played in the same conditions. It's not like Bethel who had to play without their all-MIAC player of the year. Mount was clearly the better team that day.
NCF
I don't understand your refusal to at least let people talk about the weather without you saying people are "blaming" the weather.
I don't blame the weather for NCC's loss, I blame missed assignments and coaching decisions.
That said, I happen to believe NCC was probably more impacted by the weather than Mt.
Despite HS Coach's post, Burke ran for a ton of yards as did Mitchell. Both of these runners rely on lateral quickness. IMO a defense is disadvantaged against that sort of runner in those conditions.
Now, if the game was played on a dry field it's entirely possible Mt puts up a lot of points and wins, but IMO those points would come from the passing game and not the running game. Mt benefitted from the yardage via the run in that game in those conditions.
I am not saying ncc wins in dry conditions, but I believe if they lose in dry conditions it's not because they can't contain the Mt running game.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on December 30, 2013, 11:30:31 AM
Here it is - the season ending North Region Fan Poll
1. Mount Union 79 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2)
2. North Central 73 pts (1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3. Wittenberg 63 pts (3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4. John Carroll 49 pts (3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 7, 7)
5. Franklin 42 pts (4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 9)
6. Illinois Wesleyan 40 pts (4, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8)
7. Wabash 36 pts (5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8, 8)
8. Wheaton 27 pts (5, 5, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9)
9. Heidelberg 23 pts (6, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9)
10. Albion 7 pts (10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, -)
ARV Hope 1 pts (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Mr. Ypsi, smedindy, NCF, wally_wabash, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, USee, and myself.
I don't think there's anything crazy in my final ballot. Nothing too shocking here. I did give some thought to moving Wabash ahead of IWU, but ultimately decided that it wouldn't be particularly fair to penalize IWU for making the playoffs which is essentially what I'd be doing.
I can understand the arguments for voting MHB or even Linfield ahead of Mount Union in a national poll, but with due respect to GrizzGrad, I think it's overthinking things to move NCC ahead of UMU. The teams played, UMU won. Even peeling back the head to head layer, I'm not sure NCC did anything much more impressive than UMU did. The Heidelberg/JCU double is as good (probably a skosh better) than the IWU/Wheaton double. The rest of the conference games are a wash (neither league was particularly special beneath the top three). Maybe winning at Bethel is a teeny better than the Wesley win in the regional finals, but only maybe. Again, it's splitting hairs. It all depends on how much weight you want to give to everything else that happened outside of the head to head.
Hey we're back! Would love a pre-season ballot from y'all whenever you have time. I'll send private messages to everybody too.
Just sent off my ballot.
I don't know how the pre-season poll will shake out, but the regional pecking order should be greatly clarified before the calendar flips to October. Key September games (teams that may or may not be in your top ten, but are surely on everyone's 'watch list'):
Sept 6: HSC @ Wabash (the Stag Bowl ;)), Franklin @ IWU, ONU @ WashU, Butler @ Witt, Ott @ SJF, and Thomas More @ Wesley.
Sept 13: Elmhurst @ Olivet, UWW @ Franklin, IWU @ Albion, Augie @ Hope.
Sept 20: NPU @ WashU, Heidi @ JCU, UW-Platt @ NCC, ONU @ Bald Wally.
Sept 27: ONU @ Heidi, NCC @ UWSP, Bald Wally @ JCU.
Here's the Pre-Season North Region Fan Poll:
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 70 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3)
T3. John Carroll 54 pts (2, 2, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6)
T3. Wabash 54 pts (3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 6, 7)
5. Wittenberg 41 pts (3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 8, 9, -)
6. Wheaton 39 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8)
T7. Franklin 35 pts (4, 5, 5, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9)
T7. Heidelberg 35 pts (3, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9)
9. Illinois Wesleyan 15 pts (7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9, -, -)
10. Wooster 7 pts (8, 10, 10, 10, 10, -, -)
ARV:
Albion 4 pts (9, 10, 10, -, -, -, -, -)
Mount St. Joseph 4 pts (7, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Olivet 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Adrian 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, USee, Mr. Ypsi, smedindy, wally_wabash, and myself.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 01, 2014, 03:30:43 PM
Here's the Pre-Season North Region Fan Poll:
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 70 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3)
T3. John Carroll 54 pts (2, 2, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6)
T3. Wabash 54 pts (3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 6, 7)
5. Wittenberg 41 pts (3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 8, 9, -)
6. Wheaton 39 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8)
T7. Franklin 35 pts (4, 5, 5, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9)
T7. Heidelberg 35 pts (3, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9)
9. Illinois Wesleyan 15 pts (7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9, -, -)
10. Wooster 7 pts (8, 10, 10, 10, 10, -, -)
ARV:
Albion 4 pts (9, 10, 10, -, -, -, -, -)
Mount St. Joseph 4 pts (7, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Olivet 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Adrian 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, USee, Mr. Ypsi, smedindy, wally_wabash, and myself.
Good stuff. Really interesting spread on Wittenberg.
Yes, that's quite a spread. I was surprised folks had Witt 3rd with all they lost unless it's under the "until we see a game played I'm basing it off last year" philosophy.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 01, 2014, 03:30:43 PM
Here's the Pre-Season North Region Fan Poll:
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 70 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3)
T3. John Carroll 54 pts (2, 2, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6)
T3. Wabash 54 pts (3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 6, 7)
5. Wittenberg 41 pts (3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 8, 9, -)
6. Wheaton 39 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8)
T7. Franklin 35 pts (4, 5, 5, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9)
T7. Heidelberg 35 pts (3, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9)
9. Illinois Wesleyan 15 pts (7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9, -, -)
10. Wooster 7 pts (8, 10, 10, 10, 10, -, -)
ARV:
Albion 4 pts (9, 10, 10, -, -, -, -, -)
Mount St. Joseph 4 pts (7, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Olivet 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Adrian 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, USee, Mr. Ypsi, smedindy, wally_wabash, and myself.
The spread on Franklin stands out to me too. Same with Heidelberg.
It won't take long to figure out Berg. They play JCU in their OAC opener with both teams coming off the week 2 bye. Nothing like playoffs on the line in September!
At least it starts to clear things up. Last season seemed to have a lot of poll inertia because the big matchups were late in the season.
Even with all that Witt lost, I can't see them as being worse than any MIAA team or any HCAC team not named Franklin. And we really won't know after week one, with it being Butler and all.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 01, 2014, 03:30:43 PM
Here's the Pre-Season North Region Fan Poll:
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 70 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3)
T3. John Carroll 54 pts (2, 2, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6)
T3. Wabash 54 pts (3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 6, 7)
5. Wittenberg 41 pts (3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 8, 9, -)
6. Wheaton 39 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8)
T7. Franklin 35 pts (4, 5, 5, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9)
T7. Heidelberg 35 pts (3, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9)
9. Illinois Wesleyan 15 pts (7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9, -, -)
10. Wooster 7 pts (8, 10, 10, 10, 10, -, -)
ARV:
Albion 4 pts (9, 10, 10, -, -, -, -, -)
Mount St. Joseph 4 pts (7, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Olivet 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Adrian 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, USee, Mr. Ypsi, smedindy, wally_wabash, and myself.
Since we're talking about what stands out... who had MSJ at 7th? ??? I didn't even have them on my watch list which had about 6 extra teams on it... then again I didn't have Wooster on it either so :-\
I'm the 4 for Franklin. I'm always that guy with them, though. I must be the President of the Mike Leonard Fan Club.
I voted MT SJ. They have 18 returning starters and the best backfield combo in their league. I think Franklin is vulnerable with 11 returning starters (9 offense and 2 defense) and two tough games @IWU and v UWW. MSJ gets Franklin at home and outside of that, @Hanover looks like their only real test. I like them at 8-2 and challenging for the AQ. But its preseason so I could be completely wrong. They host Augie in week 1 so will adjust as needed.
my ballot for the week is in.
Waiting on one more.
Quote from: USee on September 03, 2014, 03:59:08 PM
I voted MT SJ. They have 18 returning starters and the best backfield combo in their league. I think Franklin is vulnerable with 11 returning starters (9 offense and 2 defense) and two tough games @IWU and v UWW. MSJ gets Franklin at home and outside of that, @Hanover looks like their only real test. I like them at 8-2 and challenging for the AQ. But its preseason so I could be completely wrong. They host Augie in week 1 so will adjust as needed.
Catching up over here -- found this interesting. You seem to be suggesting that a team's ability to win against its schedule is as relevant as its ability to hypothetically win against the teams you're also ranking. True?
Quote from: BashDad on September 10, 2014, 12:00:34 PM
Quote from: USee on September 03, 2014, 03:59:08 PM
I voted MT SJ. They have 18 returning starters and the best backfield combo in their league. I think Franklin is vulnerable with 11 returning starters (9 offense and 2 defense) and two tough games @IWU and v UWW. MSJ gets Franklin at home and outside of that, @Hanover looks like their only real test. I like them at 8-2 and challenging for the AQ. But its preseason so I could be completely wrong. They host Augie in week 1 so will adjust as needed.
Catching up over here -- found this interesting. You seem to be suggesting that a team's ability to win against its schedule is as relevant as its ability to hypothetically win against the teams you're also ranking. True?
Definitely not. I am just making the case that if they are as good as Franklin this year (and Franklin may not be as good as years past) then they are in my North top ten. One of the primary evaluation tools we have for a team is how they do against its schedule. Before the playoffs, its all speculation beyond that. If they prove they belong in the top ten, then yes, that means I think they can beat most of those below them.
Right, but forecasting how team x will fare against their scheduled opponents--and using that forecast to qualify that team against another--seems beside the point to me. A poll is different from a playoff projection. But maybe I'm just confused.
Quote from: BashDad on September 10, 2014, 02:36:59 PM
Right, but forecasting how team x will fare against their scheduled opponents--and using that forecast to qualify that team against another--seems beside the point to me. A poll is different from a playoff projection. But maybe I'm just confused.
Maybe I am confused. How would you do it? To be clear, I am certainly not implying that if Mt St Joe's wins the HCAC they should be ranked #1 in the North Region poll. I made a case for why they are in my top ten. They subsequently just pounded Augie, who was picked to finish #4 in the CCIW, right behind IWU so I don't think its completely out of the question.
Quote from: USee on September 10, 2014, 03:03:08 PM
Quote from: BashDad on September 10, 2014, 02:36:59 PM
Right, but forecasting how team x will fare against their scheduled opponents--and using that forecast to qualify that team against another--seems beside the point to me. A poll is different from a playoff projection. But maybe I'm just confused.
Maybe I am confused. How would you do it? To be clear, I am certainly not implying that if Mt St Joe's wins the HCAC they should be ranked #1 in the North Region poll. I made a case for why they are in my top ten. They subsequently just pounded Augie, who was picked to finish #4 in the CCIW, right behind IWU so I don't think its completely out of the question.
I don't think he's arguing with the fact that MSJ may be rank-worthy; I think what he's saying is that the
caliber of the team should determine the ranking, not just the
likelihood of winning all of their games. Using an extreme example: now that they won their OOC opener, St. Scholastica is likely to run the table in the UMAC and finish 10-0 if the past is any indication. St. John's will have a significantly harder path to 10-0 through the MIAC. Deciding to rank St. Scholastica ahead of St. John's because I think that CSS has a better chance of going undefeated is a flawed premise. I should be ranking CSS over St. John's because I think they're a better team, not because I think they have a better chance to go undefeated.
I'm getting way ahead, but I'll be interested to see what folks do with Franklin next week.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 10, 2014, 04:25:52 PM
I'm getting way ahead, but I'll be interested to see what folks do with Franklin next week.
Well, for THIS week, I'm the only one who kept Franklin in the poll. (Preseason I had them #10; I dropped them to #17, raising IWU to #16, because losing by just one TD on a ranked opponent's field is no disgrace. I was surprised that I was their sole votes.
Unless they are totally eviscerated by unanimous #1 UWW, I'll still have them on my ballot; but suspect I will continue to be their sole supporter unless they play a very close game (in which case they'll get support from several others) or actually pull the upset (in which case I'd imagine everyone will jump on the bandwagon.
OOPS - I just noticed I was on the North Region fan poll page! :-[ For the North, I have IWU rising from 7 to 6, Franklin falling from 4 to 7. But my comments on the UWW @ Franklin game still hold (except I doubt I'm the ONLY supporter of Franklin this week).
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 10, 2014, 03:57:25 PM
Quote from: USee on September 10, 2014, 03:03:08 PM
Quote from: BashDad on September 10, 2014, 02:36:59 PM
Right, but forecasting how team x will fare against their scheduled opponents--and using that forecast to qualify that team against another--seems beside the point to me. A poll is different from a playoff projection. But maybe I'm just confused.
Maybe I am confused. How would you do it? To be clear, I am certainly not implying that if Mt St Joe's wins the HCAC they should be ranked #1 in the North Region poll. I made a case for why they are in my top ten. They subsequently just pounded Augie, who was picked to finish #4 in the CCIW, right behind IWU so I don't think its completely out of the question.
I don't think he's arguing with the fact that MSJ may be rank-worthy; I think what he's saying is that the caliber of the team should determine the ranking, not just the likelihood of winning all of their games. Using an extreme example: now that they won their OOC opener, St. Scholastica is likely to run the table in the UMAC and finish 10-0 if the past is any indication. St. John's will have a significantly harder path to 10-0 through the MIAC. Deciding to rank St. Scholastica ahead of St. John's because I think that CSS has a better chance of going undefeated is a flawed premise. I should be ranking CSS over St. John's because I think they're a better team, not because I think they have a better chance to go undefeated.
I completely agree with this. Which is why I am confused w BashDads confusion! I am using the tools at my disposal to see where MT St Joe should be ranked and I have them at 7. I think they are better than all the MIAA candidates and I think they will beat franklin, who I think will turn out to be a pretty good team, if not 7-3.
NRFP Week 2
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 69 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3)
3. Wabash 63 pts (2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5)
4. John Carroll 55 pts (2, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6)
5. Wittenberg 45 pts (4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 7, 8)
6. Wheaton 40 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7)
T7. Heidelberg 30 pts (4, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9)
T7. Illinois Wesleyan 30 pts (5, 6, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8)
9. Mount St Joseph 11 pts (7, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, -, -)
10. Franklin 9 pts (7, 9, 10, 10, 10, -, -, -)
ARV
Adrian 3 pts (9, 10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Ohio Northern 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Olivet 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Albion 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Usee, NCF, Mr. Ypsi, smedindy, wally_wabash, and myself.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 10, 2014, 07:32:53 PM
NRFP Week 2
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 69 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3)
3. Wabash 63 pts (2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5)
4. John Carroll 55 pts (2, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6)
5. Wittenberg 45 pts (4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 7, 8)
6. Wheaton 40 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7)
T7. Heidelberg 30 pts (4, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9)
T7. Illinois Wesleyan 30 pts (5, 6, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8)
9. Mount St Joseph 11 pts (7, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, -, -)
10. Franklin 9 pts (7, 9, 10, 10, 10, -, -, -)
ARV
Adrian 3 pts (9, 10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Ohio Northern 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Olivet 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Albion 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Usee, NCF, Mr. Ypsi, smedindy, wally_wabash, and myself.
- I bumped Wabash up to #2 because, well, that was impressive. Wabash now has the most impressive non-league pelt that anybody in the region is going to get (barring Franklin doing something wild on Saturday). Wabash also got a bump because of the John Carroll situation addressed in a second. Fair to North Central? Perhaps not, but they get a chance to play this week while Wabash sits out, so they could make a case to jump back.
- I moved John Carroll down from 2 because without Myers, they aren't part of a real conversation about being the second best team in the region.
- I actually moved Witt up from 8 because I was pretty convinced that they'd catch a wicked beatdown and they far exceeded my expectation.
- IWU and MSJ came in to my 10. IWU for obvious reasons (pretty easy swap with the h2h result with Franklin) and MSJ was impressive.
-Franklin and Wooster out for me. I had considered keeping Franklin in the top 10, but they got shredded by a freshman making his first start (something that NEVER happens at IWU) and if that's the defense they'll be featuring, they aren't a top 10 team here. Looking at Wooster's future schedule, they'll probably need a win over Wabash or Witt to get back on my list.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 10, 2014, 07:32:53 PM
NRFP Week 2
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 69 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3)
3. Wabash 63 pts (2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5)
4. John Carroll 55 pts (2, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6)
5. Wittenberg 45 pts (4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 7, 8)
6. Wheaton 40 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7)
T7. Heidelberg 30 pts (4, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9)
T7. Illinois Wesleyan 30 pts (5, 6, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8)
9. Mount St Joseph 11 pts (7, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, -, -)
10. Franklin 9 pts (7, 9, 10, 10, 10, -, -, -)
ARV
Adrian 3 pts (9, 10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Ohio Northern 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Olivet 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Albion 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Usee, NCF, Mr. Ypsi, smedindy, wally_wabash, and myself.
I left my top 6 the same from last week. Yes, Wabash's win was impressive but NCC not having played I didn't feel like I had enough information to make a change.
I was high enough on Witt that I felt they justified the 5 spot to me.
We'll find out about JCU and Heidelberg soon enough.
As for Franklin, the loss to IWU didn't look like a bad enough loss to dump them from the top 10. I think IWU is going to be a good team and I think Franklin will too. We'll learn more about Franklin this week, obviously.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 10, 2014, 07:32:53 PM
NRFP Week 2
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 69 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3)
3. Wabash 63 pts (2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5)
4. John Carroll 55 pts (2, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6)
5. Wittenberg 45 pts (4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 7, 8)
6. Wheaton 40 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7)
T7. Heidelberg 30 pts (4, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9)
T7. Illinois Wesleyan 30 pts (5, 6, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8)
9. Mount St Joseph 11 pts (7, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, -, -)
10. Franklin 9 pts (7, 9, 10, 10, 10, -, -, -)
ARV
Adrian 3 pts (9, 10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Ohio Northern 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Olivet 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Albion 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Usee, NCF, Mr. Ypsi, smedindy, wally_wabash, and myself.
My thinking was pretty close to Wally but I kept NCC at 2 for now. I actually think the top 3 are fairly close together and the next tier is 4-6. I was really surprised by IWU's freshman qb. I thought IWU's D was going to be really good and they gave up 35 at home so I don't have IWU higher. My top 6 are pretty set for now. Bottom 4 are still up for grabs but I feel pretty good about these picks based on what we know today. I give the nod to Albion over a host of others (Adrian, Olivet, Franklin) but we see IWU @ Albion this weekend and Franklin v UWW so we will have some good data after that.
MSJ's issue may be youth on offense as we go through the season. They rotated a freshman and sophomore QB, start 2 FR on the OLine, and routinely use a FR slot receiver. In addition they also have 2 SO who start on offense. If they get into a dog fight, that youth may show but I'll say this is the most athletic team on offense MSJ has had in a very long time. The other question is Defense. Against good teams the last two years, they have given up points and yards by the bunches. They did well against Auggie but it's still to be determined if that was more of MSJs quick start on offense scoring points and Auggie needing to abandon their offensive ID as a wing t option team.
I'd like MSJ to become relevant again but I think they are a year away from truly being a contender to win a playoff game.
Adam,
Augie is no longer a wing-T option team and hasn't been for a couple of head coaches now. They run a shotgun spread formation and throw it around quite a bit.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 10, 2014, 07:32:53 PM
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 69 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3)
3. Wabash 63 pts (2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5)
4. John Carroll 55 pts (2, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6)
5. Wittenberg 45 pts (4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 7, 8)
6. Wheaton 40 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7)
T7. Heidelberg 30 pts (4, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9)
T7. Illinois Wesleyan 30 pts (5, 6, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8)
9. Mount St Joseph 11 pts (7, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, -, -)
10. Franklin 9 pts (7, 9, 10, 10, 10, -, -, -)
ARV
Adrian 3 pts (9, 10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Ohio Northern 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Olivet 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Albion 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Right now if I could redo it I'd swap Franklin and ONU. I base most of my ballot on my top 25 ballot then fill in the bottom. I have Mount #2, North Central #7, John Carroll #11, then a logjam with Witt 15, Wabash 17, Wheaton 18, Heidelberg 19, IWU 20. That bunch might fluctuate every week until losses happen. Finishing my North ballot I have another tight bunch that could fluctuate a lot with Franklin, ONU, MSJ, Adrian at 9-12
I'm going to venture a guess that you didn't watch the Wabash game. That or this is some subtle trolling, dude.
Quote from: BashDad on September 11, 2014, 08:08:39 PM
I'm going to venture a guess that you didn't watch the Wabash game. That or this is some subtle trolling, dude.
Wabash had an extremely impressive opener, no doubt, but is it really THAT egregious to have them ranked behind Wit and John Carroll. It was just one game, and Witt and JCU didn't exactly crap the bed in their respective openers. If he had those guys ranked ahead of Bash in the preseason, I can see why he'd leave them there (for now, anyway). I'm of the opinion that preseason rankings need not be tossed away after one week unless something really drastic happens.
I really hope JCU gets Myers back in time for their big games.
Maybe. But something smells.
If you had Wittenberg and the Scarlett Question Marks ranked ahead of Wabash last week, you probably weren't picking Wabash to win against Nash Nance and co.
Wait. Let me just check something.
Oh, look:
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 04, 2014, 02:22:16 PM
Hampden-Sydney @ Wabash (-3.5)
So even with this initial estimation incorrect, we're still going with
nah, the order of teams is just as I thought? I think that's weird at best and petulant at worst.
And just to be clear--because none of this matters and who gives a ****--the only reason that I seem to give a **** is because ugh, Fan of Franklin, how predictable. I literally saw that Wabash got a 5th place vote and I immediately thought, "I bet it's that Franklin dude."
I hope your team loses every game forever!
Internet message board beefs live on!
Something smells alright... and your tears smell (and taste) delicious 8-)
If Wabash is the juggernaut that you seem to think they are, they'll show it on the field all season long and will rise accordingly. Until then... we're an entire week into the season. And if you think I'm being rough on Wabash... they jumped up 1 spot on my north ballot, 4 on my top 25 ballot and the gap between them and Witt on my Top 25 ballot shrank from 9 to 2.
I didn't see any of this complaining about the preseason poll when I had Wabash 6th... and someone else had them 7th.
J'accuse, dude.
It looks silly to put Witt's loss v Butler over Wabash's win v HSC.
Quote from: BashDad on September 11, 2014, 09:33:41 PM
J'accuse, dude.
It looks silly to put Witt's loss v Butler over Wabash's win v HSC.
Did anyone say they did? I kept both exactly where they were: nationally, Wabash 9th, regionally, 3rd. Witt 13th nationally, 8th in the region.
Quote from: BashDad on September 11, 2014, 09:33:41 PM
J'accuse, dude.
It looks silly to put Witt's loss v Butler over Wabash's win v HSC.
Why does it look silly? Just because Witt lost and Wabash won? This isn't a standings list. If you swap those opponents I bet you'd have a fairly similar result and accordingly in my rankings they are quite close.
Not all wins and not all losses are created equal. Would it look silly to put a 6 point loss to Mount Union ahead of a 13 point win over Franklin? It wouldn't to me.
Quote from: USee on September 11, 2014, 02:17:39 PM
Adam,
Augie is no longer a wing-T option team and hasn't been for a couple of head coaches now. They run a shotgun spread formation and throw it around quite a bit.
Don't know which Auggie team you've been watching but I coached at MSJ last year and they ran the triple and the wing t. I watched three quarters last Saturday at MSJ and they were still running it.
For all of the hand wringing last year about how beating up on Hanover was a complete non-starter (the national selection committee excluded Wabash because of it...and because there were already too many North teams in), playing and beating (not just winning...BEATING) Hampden-Sydney ought to count for something more than a shrug. By contrast, JCU beat St. Vincent which is less impressive than a similar result against Hanover. But of course, I'm biased.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 11, 2014, 09:42:40 PM
Quote from: BashDad on September 11, 2014, 09:33:41 PM
J'accuse, dude.
It looks silly to put Witt's loss v Butler over Wabash's win v HSC.
Why does it look silly? Just because Witt lost and Wabash won? This isn't a standings list. If you swap those opponents I bet you'd have a fairly similar result and accordingly in my rankings they are quite close.
Not all wins and not all losses are created equal. Would it look silly to put a 6 point loss to Mount Union ahead of a 13 point win over Franklin? It wouldn't to me.
If you actually think I'm saying that all wins and losses are created equal, I'm going to start calling you mean names.
Quote from: Adam Sayer on September 11, 2014, 09:48:06 PM
Quote from: USee on September 11, 2014, 02:17:39 PM
Adam,
Augie is no longer a wing-T option team and hasn't been for a couple of head coaches now. They run a shotgun spread formation and throw it around quite a bit.
Don't know which Auggie team you've been watching but I coached at MSJ last year and they ran the triple and the wing t. I watched three quarters last Saturday at MSJ and they were still running it.
I am talking about the Augie team that is spelled with one "g" not two. The one I have seen play live for about 30 years. Which one are you talking about? When Barnes was at the helm he changed the entire offense to a mulitple spread, shotgun offense and scrapped the wing-T. They ran that for a couple years and the Barnes left and they hired Cushman. He ran the spread and morphed back into an option scheme for the run game. In the last couple years they are running an option running offense out of the spread and a spread passing game, but it is not the wing-T.
Quote from: BashDad on September 11, 2014, 10:43:45 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 11, 2014, 09:42:40 PM
Quote from: BashDad on September 11, 2014, 09:33:41 PM
J'accuse, dude.
It looks silly to put Witt's loss v Butler over Wabash's win v HSC.
Why does it look silly? Just because Witt lost and Wabash won? This isn't a standings list. If you swap those opponents I bet you'd have a fairly similar result and accordingly in my rankings they are quite close.
Not all wins and not all losses are created equal. Would it look silly to put a 6 point loss to Mount Union ahead of a 13 point win over Franklin? It wouldn't to me.
If you actually think I'm saying that all wins and losses are created equal, I'm going to start calling you mean names.
I don't wanna let go.
You know what would be particularly embarrassing? The argument for why Wittenberg should be favored in a game against Wabash.
You won't offer that because, oof, why would you.
So I'll do it for you.
Here is the argument for why Wittenberg could be favored in a game against Wabash:
1. They won last year.
2. They...
Oh, wait. That's it. That's all anyone can possibly say in favor of ranking Wittenberg over Wabash. And that is a bull**** way of ranking teams.
Wittenberg's closer-than-we-thought loss at Butler is applicable only if you're prepared to say that the loss is indicative of a Wittenberg squad that is a better team in 2014 than they were in 2013. Is that really what you think?
Quote from: BashDad on September 12, 2014, 01:11:41 PM
Quote from: BashDad on September 11, 2014, 10:43:45 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 11, 2014, 09:42:40 PM
Quote from: BashDad on September 11, 2014, 09:33:41 PM
J'accuse, dude.
It looks silly to put Witt's loss v Butler over Wabash's win v HSC.
Why does it look silly? Just because Witt lost and Wabash won? This isn't a standings list. If you swap those opponents I bet you'd have a fairly similar result and accordingly in my rankings they are quite close.
Not all wins and not all losses are created equal. Would it look silly to put a 6 point loss to Mount Union ahead of a 13 point win over Franklin? It wouldn't to me.
If you actually think I'm saying that all wins and losses are created equal, I'm going to start calling you mean names.
I don't wanna let go.
You know what would be particularly embarrassing? The argument for why Wittenberg should be favored in a game against Wabash.
You won't offer that because, oof, why would you.
So I'll do it for you.
Here is the argument for why Wittenberg could be favored in a game against Wabash:
1. They won last year.
2. They...
Oh, wait. That's it. That's all anyone can possibly say in favor of ranking Wittenberg over Wabash. And that is a bull**** way of ranking teams.
Wittenberg's closer-than-we-thought loss at Butler is applicable only if you're prepared to say that the loss is indicative of a Wittenberg squad that is a better team in 2014 than they were in 2013. Is that really what you think?
Based on the extremely limited data we have so far this year, yes I would say I'd take 2014 Witt over 2013 Witt. I'd also take 2014 Wabash over 2013 Wabash.
Since there apparently isn't much of an argument on why Witt would be favored (don't forget this year the game is in Ohio), how about listing the multitude of reasons why Wabash should be favored? You've had a lot of talk about Witt being worse but you haven't really given any reasons why Wabash is better other than you're a homer and don't like that someone isn't as high on them as you.
November 8th the Little Giants will have their chance to prove me wrong. Who knows... I may have the teams flipped before then but as of September 12th I stand by my assertion that I believe Wittenberg is a tiny bit better.
You're kidding me.
I'm not sure that there is a cogent argument to be made as to how 2014 Wittenberg is better than 2013 Wittenberg when 2014 Wittenberg is basically 2013 Wittenberg minus 30 seniors. And minus the program's best ever quarterback. And the program's second best WR.
It's not like all 30 seniors were vital playmakers. Witt returned 12 starters... Wabash only a bit more at 14.
You don't know what you're talking about.
I'd argue from a physical match up problem point of view he was their best WR ever too. They've had some good ones, but he was a physical freak for D3 at his size and strength. He looked like a freaking DE.
And best QB by a mile, IMO.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 12, 2014, 02:07:45 PM
It's not like all 30 seniors were vital playmakers. Witt returned 12 starters... Wabash only a bit more at 14.
Wittenberg lost eight (EIGHT!!) 1st team all-league players, one second team player, two HM players. That's 11 all-conference players, goneski. That's half of a starting lineup.
Half. Nobody who has to replace half of their starting lineup is better the next year.
By contrast, Wabash graduated four 1st team players and three HM players.
Because many of us were so focused on our Old Tiger hate, we lost focus on how freakin' good Witt was last year. They were. They were the epitome of a team that had great seniors that led them to a special place.
Of course, a special place for most everyone is a loss in Alliance in late November or December...
Now did they get run out of town by Butler last year, yeah. But it's apples and orangutangs to this year's Witt vs. this years Butler.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 12, 2014, 02:07:45 PM
Witt returned 12 starters... Wabash only a bit more at 14.
This isn't correct. Witt returns 7 starters from their game against Wabash. Wabash returns 15, plus Tyler Holmes and Mason Zurek.
Quote from: BashDad on September 12, 2014, 03:33:19 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 12, 2014, 02:07:45 PM
Witt returned 12 starters... Wabash only a bit more at 14.
This isn't correct. Witt returns 7 starters from their game against Wabash. Wabash returns 15, plus Tyler Holmes and Mason Zurek.
We seem to be getting way ahead of ourselves. There are a lot of games to play before Wabash and Witt play, and a lot of water will flow under the bridge in the meantime. Just a quick note, Tyler Holmes, who along with Mason Zurek were missing from the game in 2013, ate up most of the 4th quarter with his running game in Wabash's win in 2012. We saw on Saturday how effective dominating the time of possession and keeping the other team's offense standing on the sidelines can be.
Quote from: BashDad on September 12, 2014, 03:33:19 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 12, 2014, 02:07:45 PM
Witt returned 12 starters... Wabash only a bit more at 14.
This isn't correct. Witt returns 7 starters from their game against Wabash. Wabash returns 15, plus Tyler Holmes and Mason Zurek.
I got those numbers from the Wittenberg season outlook and Wabash media guide respectively. Maybe Witt had some starters injured last season before they played Wabash that are now back. All I know is that if the numbers truly wrong, go blame whoever wrote the guides.
Anyways I think this discussion has about run it's course (at least for the middle of September anyways) but I have two final comments.
1) This isn't the first time a fan of a team has been unhappy with where I've ranked them. I recall a Heidelberg fan a couple seasons ago didn't like that I had them ranked 4th or 5th (coincidentally behind Witt) near the end of the season when all the other ballots had them 2nd and talked about how a game between them wouldn't be close and they'd shut their offense down... Heidelberg proceeded to give up 52 points to Witt in a first round loss. Not surprisingly he didn't have anything to say after that. Easy to have bravado beforehand. Not so easy to admit mistakes. Now if I still have Witt ranked higher before the Wabash game (which is no certainty) and Wabash wins easily... I'll admit I was wrong. Are you willing to do the same if Wabash goes down?
2) If you're unhappy with how I've ranked them, you may want to go yell at Massey. His ratings have Wabash even lower than I do at 6th behind NCC, Mount, JC, Heidi, and Witt.
Am I saying Witt would blow out Wabash if they played this weekend? Absolutely not. Would a Wabash win surprise me? Not at all. But if you asked me to make a bet straight up this instant I'd take Witt. Now if you gave me Wabash plus a few points... say 4 or so... I'd probably take them.
The good news is we have 2 more months to observe the two teams and adjust how we perceive them accordingly.
Quote from: USee on September 12, 2014, 12:59:13 PM
Quote from: Adam Sayer on September 11, 2014, 09:48:06 PM
Quote from: USee on September 11, 2014, 02:17:39 PM
Adam,
Augie is no longer a wing-T option team and hasn't been for a couple of head coaches now. They run a shotgun spread formation and throw it around quite a bit.
Don't know which Auggie team you've been watching but I coached at MSJ last year and they ran the triple and the wing t. I watched three quarters last Saturday at MSJ and they were still running it.
I am talking about the Augie team that is spelled with one "g" not two. The one I have seen play live for about 30 years. Which one are you talking about? When Barnes was at the helm he changed the entire offense to a mulitple spread, shotgun offense and scrapped the wing-T. They ran that for a couple years and the Barnes left and they hired Cushman. He ran the spread and morphed back into an option scheme for the run game. In the last couple years they are running an option running offense out of the spread and a spread passing game, but it is not the wing-T.
I'm telling you. They lined up with wings, orbited, and ran the hell out off the option. They may not be wing t all the time but they ran out of it frequently last year against us and this year.
It's way too early to rely on Massey for anything, and this from a data and metrics geek. One game - no one is really connected and last year's results are still biased in there. Any results metrics like Massey or Sagarin would have too much variability baked in there and I'd suggest waiting until week 4 or 5 - when everyone's played four games and probably finished their non-conference slate.
Also, a media guide 'returning starter' is a bit, well, um, loose with the definition at times.
If an OL or DL starts one or two games during the year, he probably is listed as a returning starter. Also, what do you do about receivers, backs and defenders who play on alternate series, or come in during 3rd down or in power situations? Starters? No. Experienced? Yep.
Many times, starters are given to the SID during the week by the coach, but the players who play the first offensive play are different and it's not changed in Stat Crew. You have to be vigilant to get this done properly. This happens when teams open in sets to take advantage of the other teams strengths or weaknesses.
^ This. Touches upon a number of pet peeves of mine.
I had Wabash even farther ahead of Witt than most (#3 Wabash vs. #8 Witt on my ballot), but have absolutely no problem with a ranking putting Witt ahead. Good grief, we are 1 or sometimes 0 games into the season. No one knows squat about the teams yet. Give it some time - this weekend should help considerably with some of the matchups; the next few weeks even more.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 12, 2014, 05:13:00 PM
Quote from: BashDad on September 12, 2014, 03:33:19 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 12, 2014, 02:07:45 PM
Witt returned 12 starters... Wabash only a bit more at 14.
This isn't correct. Witt returns 7 starters from their game against Wabash. Wabash returns 15, plus Tyler Holmes and Mason Zurek.
I got those numbers from the Wittenberg season outlook and Wabash media guide respectively. Maybe Witt had some starters injured last season before they played Wabash that are now back. All I know is that if the numbers truly wrong, go blame whoever wrote the guides.
Anyways I think this discussion has about run it's course (at least for the middle of September anyways) but I have two final comments.
1) This isn't the first time a fan of a team has been unhappy with where I've ranked them. I recall a Heidelberg fan a couple seasons ago didn't like that I had them ranked 4th or 5th (coincidentally behind Witt) near the end of the season when all the other ballots had them 2nd and talked about how a game between them wouldn't be close and they'd shut their offense down... Heidelberg proceeded to give up 52 points to Witt in a first round loss. Not surprisingly he didn't have anything to say after that. Easy to have bravado beforehand. Not so easy to admit mistakes. Now if I still have Witt ranked higher before the Wabash game (which is no certainty) and Wabash wins easily... I'll admit I was wrong. Are you willing to do the same if Wabash goes down?
2) If you're unhappy with how I've ranked them, you may want to go yell at Massey. His ratings have Wabash even lower than I do at 6th behind NCC, Mount, JC, Heidi, and Witt.
Am I saying Witt would blow out Wabash if they played this weekend? Absolutely not. Would a Wabash win surprise me? Not at all. But if you asked me to make a bet straight up this instant I'd take Witt. Now if you gave me Wabash plus a few points... say 4 or so... I'd probably take them.
The good news is we have 2 more months to observe the two teams and adjust how we perceive them accordingly.
I would say you betting on Witt is a good sign for Wabash considering the bet you made last week
Hampden-Sydney @ Wabash (-3.5). Just saying.
Quote from: smedindy on September 12, 2014, 06:34:11 PM
Also, a media guide 'returning starter' is a bit, well, um, loose with the definition at times.
If an OL or DL starts one or two games during the year, he probably is listed as a returning starter. Also, what do you do about receivers, backs and defenders who play on alternate series, or come in during 3rd down or in power situations? Starters? No. Experienced? Yep.
Many times, starters are given to the SID during the week by the coach, but the players who play the first offensive play are different and it's not changed in Stat Crew. You have to be vigilant to get this done properly. This happens when teams open in sets to take advantage of the other teams strengths or weaknesses.
At CWRU to be considered a returning starter the player must have started the majority of games and the starters listed in the box score are those observed in on the first offensive play.
Not everyone does that ADL, that's the point.
Quote from: Adam Sayer on September 12, 2014, 05:19:12 PM
Quote from: USee on September 12, 2014, 12:59:13 PM
Quote from: Adam Sayer on September 11, 2014, 09:48:06 PM
Quote from: USee on September 11, 2014, 02:17:39 PM
Adam,
Augie is no longer a wing-T option team and hasn't been for a couple of head coaches now. They run a shotgun spread formation and throw it around quite a bit.
Don't know which Auggie team you've been watching but I coached at MSJ last year and they ran the triple and the wing t. I watched three quarters last Saturday at MSJ and they were still running it.
I am talking about the Augie team that is spelled with one "g" not two. The one I have seen play live for about 30 years. Which one are you talking about? When Barnes was at the helm he changed the entire offense to a mulitple spread, shotgun offense and scrapped the wing-T. They ran that for a couple years and the Barnes left and they hired Cushman. He ran the spread and morphed back into an option scheme for the run game. In the last couple years they are running an option running offense out of the spread and a spread passing game, but it is not the wing-T.
I'm telling you. They lined up with wings, orbited, and ran the hell out off the option. They may not be wing t all the time but they ran out of it frequently last year against us and this year.
Maybe, but do you have Witt ranked ahead of Wabash? 8-)
Quote from: smedindy on September 12, 2014, 06:34:11 PM
Also, a media guide 'returning starter' is a bit, well, um, loose with the definition at times.
If an OL or DL starts one or two games during the year, he probably is listed as a returning starter. Also, what do you do about receivers, backs and defenders who play on alternate series, or come in during 3rd down or in power situations? Starters? No. Experienced? Yep.
Many times, starters are given to the SID during the week by the coach, but the players who play the first offensive play are different and it's not changed in Stat Crew. You have to be vigilant to get this done properly. This happens when teams open in sets to take advantage of the other teams strengths or weaknesses.
Man, I spend one day in a car and miss all of this.
First, excellent points here, smed. I've always tried to take a more qualitative approach than just a number of returning starters for the reasons you list here...what I really want to know is the number of returning "experienced guys" - if my team rotated two kids at right guard last season and the official "starter" graduated but another kid who played half the series over the course of a seaso returns, I like my chances lining that guy up at RG next year. Similarly, with skill guys, I want to see who got the ball in their hands some. If a guy caught 15 or 20 balls as the 3rd/4th WR, or got 50-60 rushing attempts over the course of a season, I like having that guy back whether we classify him a "returning starter" or not.
Second, I can't believe how much energy was spent arguing about Witt and Wabash yesterday. FCGrizzlies is not being THAT unreasonable, guys. Witt rolled y'all last year, at home, and while they may have lost an awful lot, they brought back enough to give Butle a much better run in game 1. That doesn't mean 2014 Witt is actually better than 2013 Witt (since 2014 Butler and 2013 Butler are two different teams), but I don't think we should be THAT dismissive of the possibility Witt could reload pretty rapidly. You guys have seen this story before, you're all fans of a really good program: when you have a good coach and good system in place, you can take heavy graduation losses and keep a darned high level of performance year-to-year.
Hey, Wes, where's the poll??!! I know that this week I'm not the hold-up.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 19, 2011, 05:46:01 PM
As an outside observer, the SCIAC is a quality conference. IMHO, its top level teams are better than the top level teams in the North Region of the other conferences with the exception of the OAC and the CCIW.
You forgot the Minnesota Conference as well. Other than that, you're just saying that the top level teams in the SCIAC are better than the teams in the North Region, with the convenient exception of the three sole conferences that have combined to give us essentially every national champion of the last two decades...
If that's what you're saying than I think that Belgium's military is better than the United States' when you exclude all of their tanks, inter-continental missiles, cruise missiles, drone capabilities, technological innovations, soldiers, guns, and ammo.
Quote from: HCAlum86 on September 16, 2014, 11:19:56 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 19, 2011, 05:46:01 PM
As an outside observer, the SCIAC is a quality conference. IMHO, its top level teams are better than the top level teams in the North Region of the other conferences with the exception of the OAC and the CCIW.
You forgot the Minnesota Conference as well. Other than that, you're just saying that the top level teams in the SCIAC are better than the teams in the North Region, with the convenient exception of the three sole conferences that have combined to give us essentially every national champion of the last two decades...
If that's what you're saying than I think that Belgium's military is better than the United States' when you exclude all of their tanks, inter-continental missiles, cruise missiles, drone capabilities, technological innovations, soldiers, guns, and ammo.
The MIAC is West region, not North.
But I think the NCAC is probably better than the SCIAC.
The SCIAC is a pretty decent conference, though. Massey had them rated right above the NCAC in 2013. The issue is that the SCIAC's non-conference is pretty limited so they play a lot of NWC teams, and those teams ain't hay. Plus they have just a nine-game schedule and with Chapman, only two non-league games.
Cal Lutheran played Pacific Lutheran and Linfield last year. This year they swapped Willamette for Linfield, but the Bearcats aren't scrubs.
Hey, Wes, what's (or who's) the hold-up on the poll?
I was the hold up. Sorry gang. Had them since Tuesday. Just not enough hours in the day. Here's the Week 3 NRFP.
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 71 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3. Wabash 62 pts (2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5)
4. John Carroll 56 pts (3, 3, 4, 4, 4 ,4, 5, 5)
5. Wittenberg 47 pts (4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6)
6. Heidelberg 36 pts (4, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8)
7. Wheaton 35 pts (5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8)
8. Illinois Wesleyan 29 pts (6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8)
9. Adrian 12 pts (9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 10, 10, -)
10. Franklin 8 pts (9, 9, 9, 10, 10, -, -, -)
ARV
Ohio Northern 2 pts (10, 10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Mount St Joseph 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Rose-Hulman 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by FCGrizzliesGrad, USee, wally_wabash, Mr. Ypsi, smedindy, NCF, Li'l Giant, and myself.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 19, 2014, 01:49:53 AM
I was the hold up. Sorry gang. Had them since Tuesday. Just not enough hours in the day. Here's the Week 3 NRFP.
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 71 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3. Wabash 62 pts (2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5)
4. John Carroll 56 pts (3, 3, 4, 4, 4 ,4, 5, 5)
5. Wittenberg 47 pts (4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6)
6. Heidelberg 36 pts (4, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8)
7. Wheaton 35 pts (5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8)
8. Illinois Wesleyan 29 pts (6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8)
9. Adrian 12 pts (9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 10, 10, -)
10. Franklin 8 pts (9, 9, 9, 10, 10, -, -, -)
ARV
Ohio Northern 2 pts (10, 10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Mount St Joseph 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Rose-Hulman 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by FCGrizzliesGrad, USee, wally_wabash, Mr. Ypsi, smedindy, NCF, Li'l Giant, and myself.
I see the gap between Wabash and Wittenberg shrank from 18 points to 15 points. Can't wait to hear the complaints about that :D
Three teams from the HCAC getting a vote? Has that ever happened?
I think the "three HCAC teams getting a vote" occurrence is mostly because it's early in the season and no one can really tell who's the best team in that league, so MSJ and RHIT grabbed a vote at the bottom of the poll. Sort of like the 10-spot being divided among a handful of MIAA teams for most of last season.
Three teams getting a vote is a sign of conference depth...IF they're appearing TOGETHER on some ballots. But if it's just a matter of deciding which HCAC team to stick at #10 and one voter prefers MSJ while another prefers RHIT, I don't think that's really a sign of newfound conference depth.
(I know you didn't say it was; you just pointed out the curiosity of three HCAC teams getting a vote)
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 19, 2014, 01:49:53 AM
I was the hold up. Sorry gang. Had them since Tuesday. Just not enough hours in the day. Here's the Week 3 NRFP.
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 71 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3. Wabash 62 pts (2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5)
4. John Carroll 56 pts (3, 3, 4, 4, 4 ,4, 5, 5)
5. Wittenberg 47 pts (4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6)
6. Heidelberg 36 pts (4, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8)
7. Wheaton 35 pts (5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8)
8. Illinois Wesleyan 29 pts (6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8)
9. Adrian 12 pts (9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 10, 10, -)
10. Franklin 8 pts (9, 9, 9, 10, 10, -, -, -)
ARV
Ohio Northern 2 pts (10, 10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Mount St Joseph 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Rose-Hulman 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by FCGrizzliesGrad, USee, wally_wabash, Mr. Ypsi, smedindy, NCF, Li'l Giant, and myself.
I'll get my rankings down in this post this evening, but if I try to do it off the top of my head right now I'm sure I'll mix something up. What I do know is that I put Franklin back at 10 this week because I didn't really know what else to do with that spot. I considered ONU, but then WashU got clobbered this week and I'm not really sure how good that ONU result is now. I considered leaving MSJ at 10, but after they lost I couldn't convince myself that they are really better than Franklin. Gave a passing thought to RHIT, but I couldn't get over them giving up 68 points in a game. That shouldn't happen. Concordia would have been my next option but alas they lost also. Sooo...Franklin is in on the legacy vote. Among those just missing out are the teams noted above plus B-W, Wooster (although it'll be tough to put them in without a marquee win somewhere), and DePauw (who probably jumps all the way in to my 10 if they win in Springfield).
I also actually bumped Witt up one (so I'm one of the points that Witt gained on Wabash this week, FCGG) even though Butler got smeared which takes some shine off of Witt's close game in week 1. No, Witt's sliding up one spot had more to do with Wheaton being just kind of meh through two games. Wheaton's results so far without Wheaton's name behind it would probably make them Baldwin-Wallace.
Last week when I moved Wabash up to 2 I did so based on the quality of result and said something along the lines of beating H-SC was about as good a non-league result as anybody in the region can get. North Central has an opportunity to bag their own big game this weekend and if they repeat the 2013 playoff result I'll put them back at 2.
My ballot matched the final poll, except I had Wheaton 5th, and reversed 9 and 10.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 19, 2014, 01:49:53 AM
I was the hold up. Sorry gang. Had them since Tuesday. Just not enough hours in the day. Here's the Week 3 NRFP.
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 71 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3. Wabash 62 pts (2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5)
4. John Carroll 56 pts (3, 3, 4, 4, 4 ,4, 5, 5)
5. Wittenberg 47 pts (4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6)
6. Heidelberg 36 pts (4, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8)
7. Wheaton 35 pts (5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8)
8. Illinois Wesleyan 29 pts (6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8)
9. Adrian 12 pts (9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 10, 10, -)
10. Franklin 8 pts (9, 9, 9, 10, 10, -, -, -)
ARV
Ohio Northern 2 pts (10, 10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Mount St Joseph 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Rose-Hulman 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by FCGrizzliesGrad, USee, wally_wabash, Mr. Ypsi, smedindy, NCF, Li'l Giant, and myself.
I've got the top 5 matched with the poll, then diverge on the bottom 5. I guess that makes sense.
Here's a question for discussion: why is Adrian the unanimous "MIAA team du jour" instead of Albion?
Adrian is 2-0 and Albion is 0-2, I get that, and perhaps for now it's as open-and-shut as that. This is pure speculation...but Albion actually won the league last year (including a shutout of Adrian, at Adrian), has 15 starters back, and relative to their expectations, has played pretty well in its first two weeks. Using a rather crude measure of how they stack up against a "pretty good CCIW team" - last year they lost to Wheaton 66-0; this year they lost to Illinois Wesleyan 35-28 and were generally "in the game" throughout.
Meanwhile, Adrian has beaten Defiance (3-7 last year) and Carthage (1-9 last year). I know you can only beat the guys in front of you, and that they haven't exactly struggled in either game, so I'm not saying Adrian's ranking is totally unfounded. I'm just surprised that the rankings are unanimous in their regard of Adrian as the "token MIAA team in the 9/10 spot" when Albion won the league last year and might be better.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 19, 2014, 01:47:58 PM
Here's a question for discussion: why is Adrian the unanimous "MIAA team du jour" instead of Albion?
For me, it's a couple of things. First, it's 0-2 vs. 2-0...says the guy who placed a vote for Franklin this week. But Franklin's 0-2 vs. IWU and UWW is a little different than 0-2 vs. UWSP and Wheaton (I have Wheaton at a very tentative 7th right now...if the wind were blowing a different direction when I submitted my ballot I may have swapped them with IWU). And I'm also partial to teams with better defenses and I think Adrian has the superior defense. Albion can certainly make me think twice with some really good results in their next two games.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 19, 2014, 10:24:07 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 19, 2014, 01:47:58 PM
Here's a question for discussion: why is Adrian the unanimous "MIAA team du jour" instead of Albion?
For me, it's a couple of things. First, it's 0-2 vs. 2-0...says the guy who placed a vote for Franklin this week. But Franklin's 0-2 vs. IWU and UWW is a little different than 0-2 vs. UWSP and Wheaton (I have Wheaton at a very tentative 7th right now...if the wind were blowing a different direction when I submitted my ballot I may have swapped them with IWU). And I'm also partial to teams with better defenses and I think Adrian has the superior defense. Albion can certainly make me think twice with some really good results in their next two games.
I respect the logic, no qualms from me. Just wanted to raise the discussion point.
FWIW, you got your wires crossed a little with Wheaton/IWU.
Albion is 0-2 with losses to UWSP and IWU
Franklin is 0-2 with losses to UWW and IWU
Neither has played Wheaton this year. I brought up Albion's blowout loss to Wheaton from last year as a contrast to their much-more-competitive loss vs IWU this year as an indication that Albion may be a better team than last season. We'll find out soon enough :)
It seems to me that the distribution to each conference remains fairly consistent year to year even as teams ebb and flow. Three from the CCIW and OAC, two from the NCAC, one from the HCAC and MIAA. Lurking and occasionally sneaking into the list might be an extra team from CCIW, OAC, or NCAC or an unbeaten NACC team.
As far as the Adrian/Albion thing... I agree the 2-0 vs 0-2 thing is probably a big factor, but it's tough to compare when the schedules are so vastly different. Even though they didn't get a single vote I wouldn't be surprised if Albion is sitting between 11-13 on most people's lists. I also wouldn't be surprised if the gap between the two closes by the time they play in a month.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 20, 2014, 12:01:30 AM
It seems to me that the distribution to each conference remains fairly consistent year to year even as teams ebb and flow. Three from the CCIW and OAC, two from the NCAC, one from the HCAC and MIAA. Lurking and occasionally sneaking into the list might be an extra team from CCIW, OAC, or NCAC or an unbeaten NACC team.
As far as the Adrian/Albion thing... I agree the 2-0 vs 0-2 thing is probably a big factor, but it's tough to compare when the schedules are so vastly different. Even though they didn't get a single vote I wouldn't be surprised if Albion is sitting between 11-13 on most people's lists. I also wouldn't be surprised if the gap between the two closes by the time they play in a month.
Albion/Adrian is also impacted by Adrian being the (narrow) favorite in the MIAA pre-season poll (IIRC). A four-way race among Adrian, Albion, Hope, and Olivet was predicted, I believe. I still think that is likely, though I think Adrian is now the clear front-runner.
Thanks for sharing your opinions. FCGrizzlies, you're absolutely right that it's tough to weigh
"2-0 with blowout wins against two bad teams"
vs.
"0-2 with close losses to respectable-to-good teams"
and Mr. Ypsi, thanks, I did not check the MIAA preseason poll - so if Adrian was the preseason favorite (the MIAA race looked very tight entering this season), that's perfectly reasonable. I thought Albion might have been the favorite as the defending champ with a goodly # of returning starters, but the league was tightly contested as usual (and, with three different champs in the last four years, defending champs cannot be considered comfortable favorites in the MIAA).
My top 6 stayed the same (UMU, NCC, Bash, JCU, Wheaton, Witt)
IWU took over my 7 spot after MTSJ loss at home to Millsaps. MTSJ needed to win that game to retain their ranking for me. I still think they are about even with Franklin this year so neither of them are in my top 10. My 8 spot has still been Heidelberg. #9 went to Adrian for me as the bottom of the MIAA dominated the bottom of the CCIW. #10 is ONU for me for many of the same reasons Wally picked Franklin. Basically there are 3-4 teams that are grouped at 9-13 and they need to sort themselves out.
This is the time of the season when teams develop dramatcially. Playing time for first year starters really starts to become meaningful experience, injuries happen and offenses/defenses evolve. There are some great games this weekend. I am looking forward to sitting in front of my computer with multiple games on at the same time.
Can I make Thomas More an honorary member of the North Region? Does anybody want to be in and stay on this list?
Week 4 NRFP.
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 71 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
T3. John Carroll 60 pts (2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4)
T3. Wabash 60 pts (3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5)
5. Wittenberg 47 pts (4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6)
6. Wheaton 42 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6)
7. Adrian 19 pts (7, 7, 7, 8, 9, 10, 10, -)
8. Heidelberg 17 pts (7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, -, -)
9. Ohio Northern 15 pts (8, 8, 8, 8, 9, 10, -, -)
10. Franklin 14 pts (7, 7, 9, 9, 10, 10, -, -)
ARV
Illinois Wesleyan 11 pts (7, 8, 9, 10, 10, -, -, -)
Mount St Joseph 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Rose-Hulman 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Mr. Ypsi, smedindy, wally_wabash, USee, FCGrizzliesGead, NCF, Li'l Giant, and myself.
EDIT: I wish you all would have been awake at 2:27 when I posted this because it originally said "North Region Flan Poll." That's something entirely different.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 25, 2014, 02:27:11 AM
EDIT: I wish you all would have been awake at 2:27 when I posted this because it originally said "North Region Flan Poll." That's something entirely different.
I'd have to put at #1 the blancmange that nearly won Wimbledon
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 25, 2014, 02:27:11 AM
Week 4 NRFP.
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 71 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
T3. John Carroll 60 pts (2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4)
T3. Wabash 60 pts (3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5)
5. Wittenberg 47 pts (4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6)
6. Wheaton 42 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6)
7. Adrian 19 pts (7, 7, 7, 8, 9, 10, 10, -)
8. Heidelberg 17 pts (7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, -, -)
9. Ohio Northern 15 pts (8, 8, 8, 8, 9, 10, -, -)
10. Franklin 14 pts (7, 7, 9, 9, 10, 10, -, -)
ARV
Illinois Wesleyan 11 pts (7, 8, 9, 10, 10, -, -, -)
Mount St Joseph 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Rose-Hulman 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Mr. Ypsi, smedindy, wally_wabash, USee, FCGrizzliesGead, NCF, Li'l Giant, and myself.
EDIT: I wish you all would have been awake at 2:27 when I posted this because it originally said "North Region Flan Poll." That's something entirely different.
I moved IWU out and Franklin back in. Otherwise mostly status quo for me. I never moved NCC/Wabash from 2/3 I have not moved JCU/wabash from 3/4. No justification for it. I think JCU beat up on a "worse than we thought" Heidi team. Although I would say its worse than you guys thought because I have never moved them from #9 in my poll all season. ;D. I picked Franklin to move back in because MT St Joes won a ho hum game and, while I was a band wagon rider early with them, they have left me less than convinced. Wheaton maintains the #5 spot with Witt at 6 for me in pretty interchangeable spots that will sort itself out in the next few weeks. bottom of my poll is a toss up really.
4 OAC teams in the top 10. Take a picture because that'll end after this weekend when Berg and ONU play!
Also, I think the ONU game is huge for Berg now in terms of their rep. With a healthy Myers JCU is a legit top 10 team. Their D is very good and Myers is obviously outstanding and, quite possibly, the most physically gifted player in the region. Berg is not a top 10 team. That being said they needed to show up last Saturday and they absolutely didn't. IMO they need to beat ONU fairly convincingly (2 TD's?) this weekend to reassert themselves as being above the fray in the OAC. ONU has shown signs of life offensively with Angle, Price, etc. and neither team has been great on defense. Should be a fun game if you enjoy scoring.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 25, 2014, 11:52:12 AM
Also, I think the ONU game is huge for Berg now in terms of their rep.
Agreed. ONU has a chance to vault themselves back into the OAC's upper echelon this week. I hope they take it.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 25, 2014, 11:52:12 AM
4 OAC teams in the top 10. Take a picture because that'll end after this weekend when Berg and ONU play!
Depends on a lot of things. If the ONU / Berg game is close, and no one else really impresses, then I could vote both of them again.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 25, 2014, 02:27:11 AM
Week 4 NRFP.
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 71 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
T3. John Carroll 60 pts (2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4)
T3. Wabash 60 pts (3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5)
5. Wittenberg 47 pts (4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6)
6. Wheaton 42 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6)
7. Adrian 19 pts (7, 7, 7, 8, 9, 10, 10, -)
8. Heidelberg 17 pts (7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, -, -)
9. Ohio Northern 15 pts (8, 8, 8, 8, 9, 10, -, -)
10. Franklin 14 pts (7, 7, 9, 9, 10, 10, -, -)
ARV
Illinois Wesleyan 11 pts (7, 8, 9, 10, 10, -, -, -)
Mount St Joseph 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Rose-Hulman 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Mr. Ypsi, smedindy, wally_wabash, USee, FCGrizzliesGead, NCF, Li'l Giant, and myself.
EDIT: I wish you all would have been awake at 2:27 when I posted this because it originally said "North Region Flan Poll." That's something entirely different.
I flipped NCC and Wabash this week. Partly because NCC handled their business with Platteville (but I'm not sure Platteville is as good as people think...they get the WIAC amplifier) but also because Wabash wasn't great last week. They weren't really in any danger at Denison, but five fumbles is just careless enough to be a yellow flag if not a red flag.
I dropped Heidelberg all the way out. Overreaction? Probably. But here's my thing with that team- they've now had four full years with some combination of Cartel Brooks, Mees, and Germany Woods and while they absolutely wipe out the really bad teams they play (of which there are many), every time they play a good team they face plant. So I'm out on the Berg.
I have no idea what to do with the bottom four in this thing. I went Adrian, ONU, IWU, Franklin but I don't know. I can't very well put Franklin ahead of IWU and I can't really do much with MSJ or RHIT because I really just don't think they're better than Franklin. So I've got a massive logjam.
Basically, whereas last year we had 9 really solid teams here, this year we've got what looks like maybe six really solid teams and then a whole bunch of meh afterward.
Quote from: USee on September 25, 2014, 08:07:29 AM
I moved IWU out and Franklin back in.
I know you said the bottom is pretty much a toss-up, so I won't go hard after you for this, but I'm giving Mr. Ypsi a hard time elsewhere for a similar problem, so I'd better be consistent.
IWU beat Franklin head to head. I don't really see how you can rank Franklin ahead of IWU unless Franklin's overall resume started to look better than IWU's (not just a little better, but a lot better), and right now it doesn't. If IWU had lost to an 0-2 team last week, fine, I kind of get it, but they lost to a 3-0 team (we'll see just how good Simspon is as the season goes along).
Franklin's blowout loss to UWW (yes, competitive in the sense that they scored twice in the first quarter) and a blowout win against a yucky Anderson team does not really make a strong case to override the head-to-head IWU win over Franklin, does it? Are Franklin's three "results" on the season better than IWU's three results? I
guess you can argue that IWU got Franklin at home and give them a one-score win at home as basically an "equal" result, but I think H2H wins still have to count for something.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 25, 2014, 03:43:54 PM
Quote from: USee on September 25, 2014, 08:07:29 AM
I moved IWU out and Franklin back in.
I know you said the bottom is pretty much a toss-up, so I won't go hard after you for this, but I'm giving Mr. Ypsi a hard time elsewhere for a similar problem, so I'd better be consistent.
IWU beat Franklin head to head. I don't really see how you can rank Franklin ahead of IWU unless Franklin's overall resume started to look better than IWU's (not just a little better, but a lot better), and right now it doesn't. If IWU had lost to an 0-2 team last week, fine, I kind of get it, but they lost to a 3-0 team (we'll see just how good Simspon is as the season goes along).
Franklin's blowout loss to UWW (yes, competitive in the sense that they scored twice in the first quarter) and a blowout win against a yucky Anderson team does not really make a strong case to override the head-to-head IWU win over Franklin, does it? Are Franklin's three "results" on the season better than IWU's three results? I guess you can argue that IWU got Franklin at home and give them a one-score win at home as basically an "equal" result, but I think H2H wins still have to count for something.
Wally has IWU at 9 and Franklin at 10. Me thinks you missed this. ???
I am interested in who has JCU at 2 over NCC?
Quote from: USee on September 25, 2014, 04:02:49 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 25, 2014, 03:43:54 PM
Quote from: USee on September 25, 2014, 08:07:29 AM
I moved IWU out and Franklin back in.
I know you said the bottom is pretty much a toss-up, so I won't go hard after you for this, but I'm giving Mr. Ypsi a hard time elsewhere for a similar problem, so I'd better be consistent.
IWU beat Franklin head to head. I don't really see how you can rank Franklin ahead of IWU unless Franklin's overall resume started to look better than IWU's (not just a little better, but a lot better), and right now it doesn't. If IWU had lost to an 0-2 team last week, fine, I kind of get it, but they lost to a 3-0 team (we'll see just how good Simspon is as the season goes along).
Franklin's blowout loss to UWW (yes, competitive in the sense that they scored twice in the first quarter) and a blowout win against a yucky Anderson team does not really make a strong case to override the head-to-head IWU win over Franklin, does it? Are Franklin's three "results" on the season better than IWU's three results? I guess you can argue that IWU got Franklin at home and give them a one-score win at home as basically an "equal" result, but I think H2H wins still have to count for something.
Wally has IWU at 9 and Franklin at 10. Me thinks you missed this. ???
Me thinks you mis-read who I'm responding to.
I'm not yelling at Wally, I'm yelling at the guy who "moved IWU out and Franklin back in" :)
IWU 9, Franklin 10 is a ranking that I am fine with. IWU
should be ranked ahead of Franklin.
For now, anyway, unless/until the overall body of work for Franklin supersedes the overall body of work for IWU.
So much for my attempt at deflection!
I never let a good head to head result get in the way of a subjective ranking! I also think Mt St Joes is going to beat Franklin later this year but have Franklin ahead of them right now too. It's not too much of a stretch to think Franklin would win over IWU in a rematch. Nor is is too much of a stretch to say MtSJ will beat Franklin this year. Its a quagmire at the bottom.
I have em right where I want em!
Quote from: USee on September 25, 2014, 05:22:22 PM
It's not too much of a stretch to think Franklin would win over IWU in a rematch.
That's a fair statement, and if there is eventually some more data that supports Franklin being equal to or better than IWU (like, if Franklin kills the rest of their schedule while IWU gets hammered by NCC and Wheaton, and Simpson loses a few games), maybe I'll buy it. But two weeks after IWU beat Franklin, it's hard for me to swallow.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 25, 2014, 02:27:11 AM
Week 4 NRFP.
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 71 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
T3. John Carroll 60 pts (2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4)
T3. Wabash 60 pts (3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5)
5. Wittenberg 47 pts (4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6)
6. Wheaton 42 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6)
7. Adrian 19 pts (7, 7, 7, 8, 9, 10, 10, -)
8. Heidelberg 17 pts (7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, -, -)
9. Ohio Northern 15 pts (8, 8, 8, 8, 9, 10, -, -)
10. Franklin 14 pts (7, 7, 9, 9, 10, 10, -, -)
ARV
Illinois Wesleyan 11 pts (7, 8, 9, 10, 10, -, -, -)
Mount St Joseph 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Rose-Hulman 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Mr. Ypsi, smedindy, wally_wabash, USee, FCGrizzliesGead, NCF, Li'l Giant, and myself.
EDIT: I wish you all would have been awake at 2:27 when I posted this because it originally said "North Region Flan Poll." That's something entirely different.
How do I get to vote in the flan poll? I'm Mexican. I'm well qualified.
I'm with Wally as to Heidelberg.
Quote from: USee on September 25, 2014, 05:22:22 PM
So much for my attempt at deflection!
I never let a good head to head result get in the way of a subjective ranking! I also think Mt St Joes is going to beat Franklin later this year but have Franklin ahead of them right now too. It's not too much of a stretch to think Franklin would win over IWU in a rematch. Nor is is too much of a stretch to say MtSJ will beat Franklin this year. Its a quagmire at the bottom.
I have em right where I want em!
Man. Polls are so stupid.
Quote from: Li'l Giant on September 25, 2014, 08:21:57 PM
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 25, 2014, 02:27:11 AM
Week 4 NRFP.
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. North Central 71 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
T3. John Carroll 60 pts (2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4)
T3. Wabash 60 pts (3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5)
5. Wittenberg 47 pts (4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6)
6. Wheaton 42 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6)
7. Adrian 19 pts (7, 7, 7, 8, 9, 10, 10, -)
8. Heidelberg 17 pts (7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, -, -)
9. Ohio Northern 15 pts (8, 8, 8, 8, 9, 10, -, -)
10. Franklin 14 pts (7, 7, 9, 9, 10, 10, -, -)
ARV
Illinois Wesleyan 11 pts (7, 8, 9, 10, 10, -, -, -)
Mount St Joseph 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Rose-Hulman 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Mr. Ypsi, smedindy, wally_wabash, USee, FCGrizzliesGead, NCF, Li'l Giant, and myself.
EDIT: I wish you all would have been awake at 2:27 when I posted this because it originally said "North Region Flan Poll." That's something entirely different.
How do I get to vote in the flan poll? I'm Mexican. I'm well qualified.
I'm with Wally as to Heidelberg.
Just send a PM to Old Pal Wes by Tuesday of each week. I assume he is still taking new voters.
Well, he IS a voter already. Unless Wes is really having a flan poll. Has to be better than 538's Burrito obsession!
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 25, 2014, 05:39:55 PM
Quote from: USee on September 25, 2014, 05:22:22 PM
It's not too much of a stretch to think Franklin would win over IWU in a rematch.
That's a fair statement, and if there is eventually some more data that supports Franklin being equal to or better than IWU (like, if Franklin kills the rest of their schedule while IWU gets hammered by NCC and Wheaton, and Simpson loses a few games), maybe I'll buy it. But two weeks after IWU beat Franklin, it's hard for me to swallow.
Sorry.
Quote from: BashDad on September 25, 2014, 08:27:21 PM
Quote from: USee on September 25, 2014, 05:22:22 PM
So much for my attempt at deflection!
I never let a good head to head result get in the way of a subjective ranking! I also think Mt St Joes is going to beat Franklin later this year but have Franklin ahead of them right now too. It's not too much of a stretch to think Franklin would win over IWU in a rematch. Nor is is too much of a stretch to say MtSJ will beat Franklin this year. Its a quagmire at the bottom.
I have em right where I want em!
Man. Polls are so stupid.
As are some comments
Quote from: USee on September 25, 2014, 05:22:22 PM
It's not too much of a stretch to think Franklin would win over IWU in a rematch.
I would counter this argument by saying it's less of a stretch that IWU would win a second time because they've already proven that they can.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 26, 2014, 03:37:23 AM
Quote from: USee on September 25, 2014, 05:22:22 PM
It's not too much of a stretch to think Franklin would win over IWU in a rematch.
I would counter this argument by saying it's less of a stretch that IWU would win a second time because they've already proven that they can.
So what? They beat a top 50 team at home in the opener. They also lost to an unranked Simpson on the road. I ranked Franklin ahead of IWU by 1 spot at #10. I am ok with it.
Quote from: USee on September 26, 2014, 09:32:39 AM
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 26, 2014, 03:37:23 AM
Quote from: USee on September 25, 2014, 05:22:22 PM
It's not too much of a stretch to think Franklin would win over IWU in a rematch.
I would counter this argument by saying it's less of a stretch that IWU would win a second time because they've already proven that they can.
So what? They beat a top 50 team at home in the opener. They also lost to an unranked Simpson on the road. I ranked Franklin ahead of IWU by 1 spot at #10. I am ok with it.
You know, this argument would make sense if that "top 50 team" they beat in the opener wasn't the
very same team you're ranking ahead of them.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 26, 2014, 09:53:34 AM
Quote from: USee on September 26, 2014, 09:32:39 AM
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 26, 2014, 03:37:23 AM
Quote from: USee on September 25, 2014, 05:22:22 PM
It's not too much of a stretch to think Franklin would win over IWU in a rematch.
I would counter this argument by saying it's less of a stretch that IWU would win a second time because they've already proven that they can.
So what? They beat a top 50 team at home in the opener. They also lost to an unranked Simpson on the road. I ranked Franklin ahead of IWU by 1 spot at #10. I am ok with it.
You know, this argument would make sense if that "top 50 team" they beat in the opener wasn't the very same team you're ranking ahead of them.
Ba-dum, dum...
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 26, 2014, 09:53:34 AM
Quote from: USee on September 26, 2014, 09:32:39 AM
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 26, 2014, 03:37:23 AM
Quote from: USee on September 25, 2014, 05:22:22 PM
It's not too much of a stretch to think Franklin would win over IWU in a rematch.
I would counter this argument by saying it's less of a stretch that IWU would win a second time because they've already proven that they can.
So what? They beat a top 50 team at home in the opener. They also lost to an unranked Simpson on the road. I ranked Franklin ahead of IWU by 1 spot at #10. I am ok with it.
You know, this argument would make sense if that "top 50 team" they beat in the opener wasn't the very same team you're ranking ahead of them.
I don't think its a big deal.
Quote from: USee on September 26, 2014, 10:11:59 AM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 26, 2014, 09:53:34 AM
Quote from: USee on September 26, 2014, 09:32:39 AM
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 26, 2014, 03:37:23 AM
Quote from: USee on September 25, 2014, 05:22:22 PM
It's not too much of a stretch to think Franklin would win over IWU in a rematch.
I would counter this argument by saying it's less of a stretch that IWU would win a second time because they've already proven that they can.
So what? They beat a top 50 team at home in the opener. They also lost to an unranked Simpson on the road. I ranked Franklin ahead of IWU by 1 spot at #10. I am ok with it.
You know, this argument would make sense if that "top 50 team" they beat in the opener wasn't the very same team you're ranking ahead of them.
I don't think its a big deal.
Nothing about a "fan poll" is a big deal. It's just very entertaining.
Quote from: smedindy on September 25, 2014, 01:24:54 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 25, 2014, 11:52:12 AM
4 OAC teams in the top 10. Take a picture because that'll end after this weekend when Berg and ONU play!
Depends on a lot of things. If the ONU / Berg game is close, and no one else really impresses, then I could vote both of them again.
Great point. I didn't take into account that the loser may still warrant a spot depending on the outcome of the other games. The way the bottom of the poll has been going it's certainly a strong possibility that the loser of a close ONU/Berg game would still be a top 10 team.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 26, 2014, 10:33:11 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 25, 2014, 01:24:54 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 25, 2014, 11:52:12 AM
4 OAC teams in the top 10. Take a picture because that'll end after this weekend when Berg and ONU play!
Depends on a lot of things. If the ONU / Berg game is close, and no one else really impresses, then I could vote both of them again.
Great point. I didn't take into account that the loser may still warrant a spot depending on the outcome of the other games. The way the bottom of the poll has been going it's certainly a strong possibility that the loser of a close ONU/Berg game would still be a top 10 team.
Or that neither of them are.
I'm not following. "Neither of them are" meaning that neither the winner nor loser of the Berg/ONU game would be in the top 10?
I would counter that Simpson' not being ranked shouldn't be a point against IWU. The IIAC ain't a bunch of sissy-marys.
Quote from: smedindy on September 26, 2014, 11:51:45 AM
I would counter that Simpson' not being ranked shouldn't be a point against IWU. The IIAC ain't a bunch of sissy-marys.
No, but losing to Simpson is clearly a point against IWU. That's why they dropped out of my top 10
Quote from: USee on September 26, 2014, 12:02:58 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 26, 2014, 11:51:45 AM
I would counter that Simpson' not being ranked shouldn't be a point against IWU. The IIAC ain't a bunch of sissy-marys.
No, but losing to Simpson is clearly a point against IWU. That's why they dropped out of my top 10
Losing to IWU probably ought to be a point against Franklin, then.
If only there was a way to decide which team would win a hypothetical game between these two...oh wait, look!
http://d3football.com/seasons/2014/boxscores/20140906_wzrl.xml
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 26, 2014, 12:05:28 PM
Quote from: USee on September 26, 2014, 12:02:58 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 26, 2014, 11:51:45 AM
I would counter that Simpson' not being ranked shouldn't be a point against IWU. The IIAC ain't a bunch of sissy-marys.
No, but losing to Simpson is clearly a point against IWU. That's why they dropped out of my top 10
Losing to IWU probably ought to be a point against Franklin, then.
If only there was a way to decide which team would win a hypothetical game between these two...oh wait, look!
http://d3football.com/seasons/2014/boxscores/20140906_wzrl.xml
Is there any new information you have to offer? I get that you have your pants in a bunch because I ranked IWU ahead of Franklin despite the HTH. Continuing to state that doesn't help your argument and won't change my mind. As I said, I am quite comfortable with my methodology in ranking the #8-12th teams in the North. Sorry if that bothers you.
Quote from: USee on September 26, 2014, 12:09:48 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 26, 2014, 12:05:28 PM
Quote from: USee on September 26, 2014, 12:02:58 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 26, 2014, 11:51:45 AM
I would counter that Simpson' not being ranked shouldn't be a point against IWU. The IIAC ain't a bunch of sissy-marys.
No, but losing to Simpson is clearly a point against IWU. That's why they dropped out of my top 10
Losing to IWU probably ought to be a point against Franklin, then.
If only there was a way to decide which team would win a hypothetical game between these two...oh wait, look!
http://d3football.com/seasons/2014/boxscores/20140906_wzrl.xml
Is there any new information you have to offer? I get that you have your pants in a bunch because I ranked IWU ahead of Franklin despite the HTH. Continuing to state that doesn't help your argument and won't change my mind. As I said, I am quite comfortable with my methodology in ranking the #8-12th teams in the North. Sorry if that bothers you.
I'm all for looking at the whole season even when there's a H2H result (see my ranking N Central over Mount Union in the final poll last year) but even as a Franklin fan I just can't see it as of week 3. I know Franklin is always tough to rank because they crush the terrible teams in the HCAC but lose to the high quality opponents to start the season.
Wins over Franklin and Albion (two teams who will be fighting for their conference titles) and a 10 point loss to a quality IIAC team (who could be the second best team in a solid conference) I feel is better resume than a win over Anderson plus losses by 7 to IWU and 29 to UWW.
Going back in the dialogue... I am curious as to your reasoning that a loss to Simpson is a negative while a loss to IWU wouldn't be a similar negative. I'm not basing that off of A beat B who beat C but by the fact that those losses appear to be quite similar in scope in my opinion.
Quote from: smedindy on September 26, 2014, 11:51:45 AM
I would counter that Simpson' not being ranked shouldn't be a point against IWU. The IIAC ain't a bunch of sissy-marys.
+k for the subtle nod to
Blazing Saddles . :)
Quote from: USee on September 26, 2014, 12:02:58 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 26, 2014, 11:51:45 AM
I would counter that Simpson' not being ranked shouldn't be a point against IWU. The IIAC ain't a bunch of sissy-marys.
No, but losing to Simpson is clearly a point against IWU. That's why they dropped out of my top 10
If Simpson's a team of quality and distinction, not so much. Better than losing to North Park.
I'm the one who had NC at #3. I just thought a healthy Mark Myers gave JCU the edge.
Quote from: NCF on September 27, 2014, 06:26:41 PM
I'm the one who had NC at #3. I just thought a healthy Mark Myers gave JCU the edge.
Prophetic
I've sent my ballot in... and now I'm going into witness protection ;)
Quote from: smedindy on September 26, 2014, 08:04:08 PM
Quote from: USee on September 26, 2014, 12:02:58 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 26, 2014, 11:51:45 AM
I would counter that Simpson' not being ranked shouldn't be a point against IWU. The IIAC ain't a bunch of sissy-marys.
No, but losing to Simpson is clearly a point against IWU. That's why they dropped out of my top 10
If Simpson's a team of quality and distinction, not so much. Better than losing to North Park.
Any particular reason why you're picking on my alma mater, smed, as opposed to one of the eight teams in the North Region that Massey rates below NPU? ;)
I think if North Central lost to North Park, there'd be many heads asploding!
Same goes for Wheaton and Illinois Wesleyan in terms of multiple postgame Scanners incidents.
But my admittedly-early take is that NPU might not even be the worst team in its league, let alone the North Region. Carthage, to cite just one example, has looked dire.
I know they weren't last year. Hiram's not the worst in the NCAC this year. Worlds are turning.
Earlham appears to be back at the bottom though so not everything is upside down ;)
Week 5 North Region Fan Poll:
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Wabash 68 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 5)
3. John Carroll 66 pts (2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4. Wittenberg 51 pts (4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 8)
5. North Central 49 pts (3, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6)
6. Wheaton 44 pts (4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6)
7. Franklin 19 pts (7, 7, 7, 9, 9, 9, 10, -)
8. Illinois Wesleyan 16 pts (6, 7, 7, 8, -, -, -, -)
T9. Heidelberg 14 pts (7, 7, 8, 9, 10, -, -, -, -)
T9. Adrian 14 pts (7, 8, 8, 9, 9, -, -, -)
ARV
Mount St Joseph 8 pts (8, 8, 10, 10, -, -, -, -)
Rose-Hulman 4 pts (9, 9, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Chicago 3 pts (10, 10, 10, -, -, -, -, -)
Albion 3 pts (8, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Ohio Northern 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The Flan Poll is voted on by FCGrizzliesGrad, smedindy, wally_wabash, NCF, Usee, Li'l Giant, Mr. Ypsi, and myself.
Now, I get the chance to see all the ballots. One of you said you were going in to hiding, which I might recommend. But, there were several of the ballots that I just didn't get. I'm typically with the majority most of the way down the ballot. But, a couple of those outliers (Witt voted as an 8, NC voted as a 3, Bash as a 5, Franklin just being out altogether, just to name a few) that puzzled me.
I was:
Mount
Bash
JCU
Witt
NC
Wheaton
Franklin
Adrian
RHIT
Chicago
I'll open up the kimono tonight when I have my ballot in front of me but for now (and this is going to be a fun couple of days here)...
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on October 01, 2014, 12:24:41 PM
Week 5 North Region Fan Poll:
7. Franklin 19 pts (7, 7, 7, 9, 9, 9, 10, -)
8. Illinois Wesleyan 16 pts (6, 7, 7, 8, -, -, -, -)
How?
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 01, 2014, 12:33:18 PM
I'll open up the kimono tonight when I have my ballot in front of me but for now (and this is going to be a fun couple of days here)...
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on October 01, 2014, 12:24:41 PM
Week 5 North Region Fan Poll:
7. Franklin 19 pts (7, 7, 7, 9, 9, 9, 10, -)
8. Illinois Wesleyan 16 pts (6, 7, 7, 8, -, -, -, -)
How?
Feel free to read the pages of nonsense on a similar situation that were in the National Top 25 Fan Poll thread yesterday.
I would say it's a case of penalizing for a loss, but that was last week. I openly admit that I forgot about IWU in my ballot. Neglected to rank them at all on accident.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on October 01, 2014, 12:24:41 PM
Week 5 North Region Fan Poll:
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Wabash 68 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 5)
3. John Carroll 66 pts (2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4. Wittenberg 51 pts (4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 8)
5. North Central 49 pts (3, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6)
6. Wheaton 44 pts (4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6)
7. Franklin 19 pts (7, 7, 7, 9, 9, 9, 10, -)
8. Illinois Wesleyan 16 pts (6, 7, 7, 8, -, -, -, -)
T9. Heidelberg 14 pts (7, 7, 8, 9, 10, -, -, -, -)
T9. Adrian 14 pts (7, 8, 8, 9, 9, -, -, -)
ARV
Mount St Joseph 8 pts (8, 8, 10, 10, -, -, -, -)
Rose-Hulman 4 pts (9, 9, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Chicago 3 pts (10, 10, 10, -, -, -, -, -)
Albion 3 pts (8, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Ohio Northern 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The Flan Poll is voted on by FCGrizzliesGrad, smedindy, wally_wabash, NCF, Usee, Li'l Giant, Mr. Ypsi, and myself.
My ballot.
Quote from: jknezek on October 01, 2014, 12:35:33 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 01, 2014, 12:33:18 PM
I'll open up the kimono tonight when I have my ballot in front of me but for now (and this is going to be a fun couple of days here)...
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on October 01, 2014, 12:24:41 PM
Week 5 North Region Fan Poll:
7. Franklin 19 pts (7, 7, 7, 9, 9, 9, 10, -)
8. Illinois Wesleyan 16 pts (6, 7, 7, 8, -, -, -, -)
How?
Feel free to read the pages of nonsense on a similar situation that were in the National Top 25 Fan Poll thread yesterday.
I am too tired to participate.
No, actually, that's BS. I can't stop raging about this sort of crap.
Let's start with one thing: IWU beat Franklin. Thus, to rank Franklin ahead of IWU, someone must have decided that the other data available suggest that Franklin is now better than IWU.
Week 1: IWU beats Franklin. IWU was (as far as I can tell) ahead of Franklin on all ballots.
Week 2: Franklin loses to UWW 42-13 (although they acquitted themselves fairly well, leading 13-7 after one quarter before wearing down). IWU beats Albion 35-28. Again, IWU remains ahead of Franklin on all ballots.
Week 3: Franklin beats Anderson 62-14. IWU loses to Simpson 13-3. Franklin passes IWU on several (not all) ballots and is ranked higher overall. I blow a gasket.
I'm still not sure how IWU's loss to a Simpson team that's been referred to as "a road loss against a Top 50 team" and "not a bad loss, more like a surprising loss" and "a road loss to a team that's going to finish in the top third of its conference" by two separate voters in this poll is grounds for them falling behind a team that they beat head-to-head two weeks earlier.
If IWU had gone ahead and lost to an otherwise winless team, or lost to a team that Franklin had beaten head to head, or if Franklin had beaten UWW, there would be some sense in this. Any of those would be "results" that would be grounds for overruling the H2H. None of those things has actually happened. The only grounds for this is that some voters "think" Simpson is not very good, and that IWU has to be penalized for losing to a team that is "not very good" or something. Well, for one, Simpson still hasn't lost, so we have NO data supporting this idea. For two, if IWU must be penalized because they lost to Simspon, then Franklin
really must be penalized because they lost to IWU who lost to Simpson, right?
You don't have to be slaves to head-to-head results
when there is data that trumps the head-to-head result, (example: if UWP beats UWSP in a few weeks, there's some sense in ranking NCC>UWSP because NCC>UWP and UWP>UWSP, contradicting last week's UWSP>NCC result) but right now there is none. This is one of those utterly stupid things where the most "recent" result trumps all else, even a game that the two teams actually played against each other less than a month ago. If IWU had lost to Simpson in week 1 and beaten Franklin in week 3, everyone would have IWU ahead of Franklin. Ugh.
*Edit: I posted the wrong result for IWU in week 2, this is corrected now. They beat Albion 35-28.
Also, +K to wally for posting the initial carrot, knowing that this was easy as pulling the string on one of those talking dolls.
It's all just fascinating. Are we giving Franklin credit for taking a lead against Whitewater? Is just holding a lead for a few minutes in a game that you lose by 30 enough to turn heads and dismiss a very relevant H2H? I can't do it, you guys. I can't say that because Franklin managed to lead Whitewater after they had two possessions to Whitewater's one that that nullifies their losing to IWU who was starting a freshman quarterback. I'm also not overly penalizing Franklin for losing to Whitewater, but I can't give them any credit for one quarter of play. It's not like the Mount Union game last year when they had a real opportunity to win.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 01, 2014, 01:27:25 PM
If IWU had lost to Simpson in week 1 and beaten Franklin in week 3, everyone would have IWU ahead of Franklin. Ugh.
All of this. Maybe even less logical than talking oneself out of the most meaningful piece of data we can have (a head-to-head result) is how much results matter less and less over time. And not 8 weeks. We're talking about two weeks here. You're absolutely right. If Franklin and IWU have the exact same game results that they have gathered so far but you just shuffle the order in which those results happened, IWU would be ranked on every ballot and they would be ranked ahead of Franklin on every ballot. It's not even a question.
Things I have learned on here lately regarding polls:
1) The most important thing is what a pollster believes should have happened.
2) The most recent result is 2x more important than last week, and each week prior drops exponentially.
3) H2H is drastically more important when it confirms a belief. When it contradicts a belief it is a significantly less valuable data point.
Could the fact that it was a close one-possession road loss factor into it? Game site can make a difference. I think Franklin is better than they were in week 1 but I'm not so sure about IWU.
Basically, anyone below Wheaton is all conjecture right now. Burning people at the stake for making somewhat nuanced suggestions isn't helpful.
Quote from: jknezek on October 01, 2014, 01:53:16 PM
Things I have learned on here lately regarding polls:
1) The most important thing is what a pollster believes should have happened.
2) The most recent result is 2x more important than last week, and each week prior drops exponentially.
3) H2H is drastically more important when it confirms a belief. When it contradicts a belief it is a significantly less valuable data point.
I think you are trying too hard to get into peoples heads, when that is NOT the case, and trying to make it personal. And I vehemently disagree with you on your conjectures.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 01, 2014, 01:48:14 PM
All of this. Maybe even less logical than talking oneself out of the most meaningful piece of data we can have (a head-to-head result) is how much results matter less and less over time. And not 8 weeks. We're talking about two weeks here. You're absolutely right. If Franklin and IWU have the exact same game results that they have gathered so far but you just shuffle the order in which those results happened, IWU would be ranked on every ballot and they would be ranked ahead of Franklin on every ballot. It's not even a question.
You can't be so absolute. You can't have rigidity like that.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 01, 2014, 01:27:25 PM
Quote from: jknezek on October 01, 2014, 12:35:33 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 01, 2014, 12:33:18 PM
I'll open up the kimono tonight when I have my ballot in front of me but for now (and this is going to be a fun couple of days here)...
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on October 01, 2014, 12:24:41 PM
Week 5 North Region Fan Poll:
7. Franklin 19 pts (7, 7, 7, 9, 9, 9, 10, -)
8. Illinois Wesleyan 16 pts (6, 7, 7, 8, -, -, -, -)
How?
Feel free to read the pages of nonsense on a similar situation that were in the National Top 25 Fan Poll thread yesterday.
I am too tired to participate.
No, actually, that's BS. I can't stop raging about this sort of crap.
And I'm raging at the fact you are raging in that you insist on hard, fast rules and no nuance...
I don't mean to slander IWU. I really don't. I sort of forgot about IWU too. Which, if I don't think of them when ranking my top 10 teams in the region, doesn't that mean something?
I suppose the answer could be "that means you're disregarding a head to head result" or "that means you're not using the data that's in front of you" or even "that means you're an idiot".
I think there are differing philosophies about what a poll ranking really means. Is it just "who the best teams are *this week*" or "who the best teams are taking into consideration the season as a whole as it has gone by" or "teams ranked in order of who would win games on a neutral field head to head". I've seen all three of these listed as considerations for polls in the past.
It is not unusual from my limited time participating in this poll and brief one season on the Fan Top 25 poll to see a head to head result not have the anticipated effect on ranking. Part of the problem is the poll isn't just about Franklin and IWU. We're trying (at least it's part of my mental calculus) to rank these teams all relative to each other.
If I think Franklin is the 7th best team in the region I don't subscribe to the theory that IWU must be 6th because of the head to head result. Otherwise, we're not having a poll that relies upon our discretion in any way, we're just doing math.
Again, this isn't the first time that's come up in either regional or national polls.
Quote from: smedindy on October 01, 2014, 01:55:10 PM
Quote from: jknezek on October 01, 2014, 01:53:16 PM
Things I have learned on here lately regarding polls:
1) The most important thing is what a pollster believes should have happened.
2) The most recent result is 2x more important than last week, and each week prior drops exponentially.
3) H2H is drastically more important when it confirms a belief. When it contradicts a belief it is a significantly less valuable data point.
I think you are trying too hard to get into peoples heads, when that is NOT the case, and trying to make it personal. And I vehemently disagree with you on your conjectures.
Everyone is allowed an opinion on my conjectures. I'll simply say there is NOTHING personal about anyone in what I wrote above. If you are talking about yesterday I already said my phrasing was bad and explained what I meant, and that it wasn't personal, as well as apologized for the wording. Feel free to disagree... it's the point of the exercise.
But you are actively discouraging people from participating by indirectly lambasting them in a denigrating manner...
No one likes to be called out like that in a way that belittles them. Save the rage, if there is rage, for Pat's poll, or the AFCA or any other poll that is official. We have opinions but we want others to join in because their views and insights help form all of our knowledge.
Disagree yes. question, yes, but to me that tone seemed mocking when some put thought into this.
Quote from: smedindy on October 01, 2014, 02:06:54 PM
But you are actively discouraging people from participating by indirectly lambasting them in a denigrating manner...
No one likes to be called out like that in a way that belittles them. Save the rage, if there is rage, for Pat's poll, or the AFCA or any other poll that is official. We have opinions but we want others to join in because their views and insights help form all of our knowledge.
Disagree yes. question, yes, but to me that tone seemed mocking when some put thought into this.
Quote from: smedindy on October 01, 2014, 02:06:54 PM
But you are actively discouraging people from participating by indirectly lambasting them in a denigrating manner...
No one likes to be called out like that in a way that belittles them.
I didn't belittle anyone. I disagreed with the way some people did things, just like you disagreed with me above. But the closest I came to belittling anything was calling a hypothetical situation "ridiculous". If you can find a quote where I belittled anyone, or denigrated anyone, let me know. I'm pretty quick to apologize and admit it when necessary.
Getting into the mind of what a pollster believes to me is mocking them and belittling their thought process, at least to me. But I'll drop that now.
It's NOT ridiculous, at least I don't think it is, and a couple of others here didn't either. Just because it offends the sensibilities of some who demand order when there is nuance, I can't help it.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 01, 2014, 02:15:29 PM
I'm not the one who posted a long diatribe after they were tired.
Quote from: smedindy on October 01, 2014, 02:17:33 PM
Getting into the mind of what a pollster believes to me is mocking them.
Yeesh. Standard debate practices is to get into your opponents mind so you can try and understand what they are talking about and try and refute it. You put forward that ExTP is much too rigid in his arguments. Aren't you in his mind? Doesn't seem mocking to me, or denigrating, just refutation, but it's the same thing. There is good empirical evidence for at least two of the three statements I made.
Poll Bias, or anchoring, is a well researched problem. That is point 1.
We all should agree that point 2 is a problem. Every talking head will tell you to lose early, not late, because you get punished extra for losing late in the season. Plenty of empirical data to support that assumption over the D1 poll years.
Point 3 is related to point 1. I probably can't find much evidence to support it specifically, but it is extremely logical based on what we know about poll bias.
Becoming aware of issues like this can sometimes help people recognize if/when they are doing it. Then again, other people just don't care or don't believe.
Quote from: smedindy on October 01, 2014, 01:57:44 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 01, 2014, 01:48:14 PM
All of this. Maybe even less logical than talking oneself out of the most meaningful piece of data we can have (a head-to-head result) is how much results matter less and less over time. And not 8 weeks. We're talking about two weeks here. You're absolutely right. If Franklin and IWU have the exact same game results that they have gathered so far but you just shuffle the order in which those results happened, IWU would be ranked on every ballot and they would be ranked ahead of Franklin on every ballot. It's not even a question.
You can't be so absolute. You can't have rigidity like that.
Is there any debate here at all that if IWU had beaten Franklin 4 days ago that Franklin would be ranked ahead of IWU?
There's just a missing piece that you see that I don't. I see that IWU beat Franklin head to head. I see that Franklin got boatraced by the best team in the nation. I see that IWU lost to Simpson. There is nothing here that tells me that IWU beating Franklin was weird. We might get there. After a few more weeks, IWU might lose again to Augustana or something. Franklin might beat MSJ and RHIT by 100. But right now, there is no evidence to suggest that Franklin is better than IWU other than we thought Franklin was better than IWU to begin with and that's what we're going to stick with in spite of the result of the actual game that those two teams played.
I think the nuance is they are advocating a position of rigidity, which I disagree with. I can see your point, a bit, and maybe I have been a bit sensitive - but I CARE about my ballot and I do take nuance into account and it really cheeses ME off when people claim to think they know how, why I think, if I think by rote AND that there MUST be a sense of rigid order when there is NOT.
I happen to think that most of us are taking everything into account so there's not much poll bias in our smaller data set since most of the voters seem to research and do this for love, not because they are forced to and they pawn off the duties to the intern or the associate SID. I know I don't try to be biased. Maybe I'm speaking for myself in my rosy-jack utopian world.
And yakkers and mediots feed into the issue of #2, which I know I try to rise above.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 01, 2014, 02:28:25 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 01, 2014, 01:57:44 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 01, 2014, 01:48:14 PM
All of this. Maybe even less logical than talking oneself out of the most meaningful piece of data we can have (a head-to-head result) is how much results matter less and less over time. And not 8 weeks. We're talking about two weeks here. You're absolutely right. If Franklin and IWU have the exact same game results that they have gathered so far but you just shuffle the order in which those results happened, IWU would be ranked on every ballot and they would be ranked ahead of Franklin on every ballot. It's not even a question.
You can't be so absolute. You can't have rigidity like that.
Is there any debate here at all that if IWU had beaten Franklin 4 days ago that Franklin would be ranked ahead of IWU?
There's just a missing piece that you see that I don't. I see that IWU beat Franklin head to head. I see that Franklin got boatraced by the best team in the nation. I see that IWU lost to Simpson. There is nothing here that tells me that IWU beating Franklin was weird. We might get there. After a few more weeks, IWU might lose again to Augustana or something. Franklin might beat MSJ and RHIT by 100. But right now, there is no evidence to suggest that Franklin is better than IWU other than we thought Franklin was better than IWU to begin with and that's what we're going to stick with in spite of the result of the actual game that those two teams played.
The date point of the FIRST game of the year, ON the road, and then the subsequent results. I had IWU ahead of Franklin early on, but it was kind of a thin margin. A close loss AT IWU didn't scream to me that Franklin is worse NOW than IWU. I wasn't tremendously impressed with IWU's result against Albion.
Location matters, too. Franklin loses to IWU at home, yeah that's different. But it was the first game on the road and it was a one-possession game and it wasn't a last minute score to get to one possession.
I think IWU, on a neutral field, wouldn't beat Franklin 51 times out of 100. They are 10 and 11 right now for me. And frankly anyone under Wheaton and Heidelberg for me is up in the air as to where they land.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 01, 2014, 02:28:25 PM
Is there any debate here at all that if IWU had beaten Franklin 4 days ago that Franklin would be ranked ahead of IWU?
Is that so surprising? I don't think it is. A result from the first game of the season is going to be considered differently than a result from the last game of the season, especially, if your poll philosophy has to do with ranking the teams as the sit *now* at the time of the ranking.
How often have we heard "it's better to lose early than lose late"?
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 01, 2014, 01:48:14 PM
It's all just fascinating. Are we giving Franklin credit for taking a lead against Whitewater?
Similar thing happened in the D3football.com poll. Whitewater lost a 1st place vote after the Franklin game, before getting it back the following week. I guess someone temporarily lost confidence in Whitewater since the game wasn't a blowout in the first quarter.
Some people forget Franklin is a very good football program, and it's an accomplishment in itself just to win against them on the road.
Now that we're all cheesed off (I hope it's a good smoked Gouda)...
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.
I'm not arguing for "rigidity" or against "nuance" - none of my posts said that h2h trumped all. Really, go back and read them. Here, I'll help:
"You don't have to be slaves to head-to-head results when there is data that trumps the head-to-head result, (example: if UWP beats UWSP in a few weeks, there's some sense in ranking NCC>UWSP because NCC>UWP and UWP>UWSP, contradicting last week's UWSP>NCC result) but right now there is none."
I'm usually the cause of oddball votes generating discussion... but for once it's not my fault. I had IWU at 7.
Now as to the other odd votes Wes mentioned... I may have been responsible for some of those. :-\
But ETP, there are results and other mitigating factors weighing in:
1. First game.
2. ROAD GAME! One possession road game.
3. IWU's less than impressive run against Albion and loss to Simpson.
4. Franklin's rebound after Whitewater.
Don't get cheesed off when others figure THAT into the equation and you loudly exclaim "H2H! H2H!" when those factors play into it!
IWU played Albion and Simpson on the road. Why don't they get a pass?
Quote from: smedindy on October 01, 2014, 05:59:56 PM
1. First game.
2. ROAD GAME! One possession road game.
3. IWU's less than impressive run against Albion and loss to Simpson.
4. Franklin's rebound after Whitewater.
1. Some funky things happen in the first game. The games still count in the standings.
2. This is your most valid point; I'm fine with calling a one-score road game a tossup.
3. Albion was in the playoffs last year and their "other" loss this year is to the UWSP team that just beat NCC. Simpson was 7-3 last year and is currently 3-0. Those are both pretty decent teams. I don't see how splitting close games with them is worse than...
4. Franklin's "rebound" has come against two teams that went 4-16 last year and are a combined 1-6 (with the lone win against Earlham). They've blown the doors off both teams like they should, but still...those are two
horrendous teams. I don't see how two blowout wins against two teams they were really supposed to blow out outweighs a prior h2h loss. IWU would have beaten those teams just as badly.
(To be clear: I think Franklin has done an admirable job building their program and scheduling tough OOC, I know they're not scared of good competition)
If Wabash beat Wittenberg 42-35 at Hollett and Wittenberg blew out Hiram and Kenyon the next two weeks, would you use Witt's "rebound" as evidence that they deserved to move up in the rankings?
It's the combo. Loss to Simpson is fine, if you will. But personally, I'm not sold on Albion.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 01, 2014, 06:32:09 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 01, 2014, 05:59:56 PM
1. First game.
2. ROAD GAME! One possession road game.
3. IWU's less than impressive run against Albion and loss to Simpson.
4. Franklin's rebound after Whitewater.
1. Some funky things happen in the first game. The games still count in the standings.
2. This is your most valid point; I'm fine with calling a one-score road game a tossup.
3. Albion was in the playoffs last year and their "other" loss this year is to the UWSP team that just beat NCC. Simpson was 7-3 last year and is currently 3-0. Those are both pretty decent teams. I don't see how splitting close games with them is worse than...
4. Franklin's "rebound" has come against two teams that went 4-16 last year and are a combined 1-6 (with the lone win against Earlham). They've blown the doors off both teams like they should, but still...those are two horrendous teams. I don't see how two blowout wins against two teams they were really supposed to blow out outweighs a prior h2h loss. IWU would have beaten those teams just as badly.
(To be clear: I think Franklin has done an admirable job building their program and scheduling tough OOC, I know they're not scared of good competition)
If Wabash beat Wittenberg 42-35 at Hollett and Wittenberg blew out Hiram and Kenyon the next two weeks, would you use Witt's "rebound" as evidence that they deserved to move up in the rankings?
Games still count but it's a feeling out period, I think. Your team in week one is not the team in week 5 or 7. Right now I think Franklin is a tick, a skosh, a smidge better than IWU.
Of course your hypothetical ignores the universe of other games. I guess that Albion game hangs with me - even though they were a playoff team last year. I don't trust the MIAA farther than I can throw them...
On another note, what in the heck happened to the CCIW mid-pack teams? If we're seriously debating Illinois Wesleyan as ranked or unranked, then whither Carthage, Millikin, and Augie? Is the NCAC closing up with the CCIW?
*ducking*
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on October 01, 2014, 12:24:41 PM
The Flan Poll is voted on by FCGrizzliesGrad, smedindy, wally_wabash, NCF, Usee, Li'l Giant, Mr. Ypsi, and myself.
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.meals.com%2FImagesRecipes%2F28972lrg.jpg&hash=6c2084e0331b71d073723f5d12b8a4ea7dfcbdc3)
Olé!
Quote from: smedindy on October 01, 2014, 07:03:59 PM
On another note, what in the heck happened to the CCIW mid-pack teams? If we're seriously debating Illinois Wesleyan as ranked or unranked, then whither Carthage, Millikin, and Augie?
How do Millikin and Carthage qualify as "CCIW mid-pack teams"? Last year MU went 1-6 and finished seventh (two games behind the trio of teams that tied for fourth), and Carthage went 0-7 and finished eighth. The year before that, Millikin went 2-5 and finished sixth while Carthage went 1-6 and finished seventh.
Coming into this season, Augie qualified as a "mid-pack team." Millikin and Carthage didn't.
Quote from: smedindy on October 01, 2014, 06:55:42 PM. I guess that Albion game hangs with me - even though they were a playoff team last year. I don't trust the MIAA farther than I can throw them...
Am I to assume you were one of the 2 voters who did not vote for either Adrian or Albion?
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on October 01, 2014, 12:24:41 PM
Week 5 North Region Fan Poll:
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Wabash 68 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 5)
3. John Carroll 66 pts (2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4. Wittenberg 51 pts (4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 8)
5. North Central 49 pts (3, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6)
6. Wheaton 44 pts (4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6)
7. Franklin 19 pts (7, 7, 7, 9, 9, 9, 10, -)
8. Illinois Wesleyan 16 pts (6, 7, 7, 8, -, -, -, -)
T9. Heidelberg 14 pts (7, 7, 8, 9, 10, -, -, -, -)
T9. Adrian 14 pts (7, 8, 8, 9, 9, -, -, -)
ARV
Mount St Joseph 8 pts (8, 8, 10, 10, -, -, -, -)
Rose-Hulman 4 pts (9, 9, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Chicago 3 pts (10, 10, 10, -, -, -, -, -)
Albion 3 pts (8, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Ohio Northern 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The Flan Poll is voted on by FCGrizzliesGrad, smedindy, wally_wabash, NCF, Usee, Li'l Giant, Mr. Ypsi, and myself.
I think Wabash/John Carroll is a toss up to this point. Wabash/JCU/Witt/Wheaton all slid up one spot for me as North Central moved down to sixth. I struggled with the Wheaton/North Central placement because Wheaton hasn't been great and North Central has a pair of solid wins, but then again Wheaton has managed to not lose despite not being great whereas North Central failed to find a way to win when they didn't have a great game. So for now, Wheaton gets the edge.
In the bottom four here I dropped ONU out, slid IWU and Franklin up one and added Chicago. That's national team defense leader Chicago. Might be a short stay if Rhodes leave the city with a win.
And then out on the fringe of the rankings for me are (in no particular order) Heidelberg, ONU, Wooster, MSJ, RHIT, and DePauw. Wooster has the next best shot to play their way in this weekend. And then I'm really starting to lean toward including DePauw if they keep up what they are doing. If they can shut down Denison and win comfortably, they could easily vault into my top ten next week.
Quote from: smedindy on October 01, 2014, 05:59:56 PM
But ETP, there are results and other mitigating factors weighing in:
1. First game.
2. ROAD GAME! One possession road game.
3. IWU's less than impressive run against Albion and loss to Simpson.
4. Franklin's rebound after Whitewater.
I mean, it was the first game for IWU too. Not just the first game for the team, but the first college game for their quarterback- a quarterback who didn't have the opportunity to play with and learn from a stellar senior quarterback like Franklin's QB did. If the first game is goofy for Franklin, shouldn't it be goofy for IWU as well?
I'm all for nuance, but I think the time for nuance comes later in the season when we get into league play and common opponents and using all of that information to place teams that have accumulated a loss or two. Right now, I just don't believe that there is anything close to adequate information to dismiss a head to head result. I don't think I've ready anything yet this week regarding the IWU/Franklin or IWU/Simpson placements in these polls that doesn't distill down to "I thought Franklin was better than IWU in August so I'm going to go ahead and stick with that despite whatever happened when those two teams actually played each other."
Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 01, 2014, 07:22:50 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 01, 2014, 07:03:59 PM
On another note, what in the heck happened to the CCIW mid-pack teams? If we're seriously debating Illinois Wesleyan as ranked or unranked, then whither Carthage, Millikin, and Augie?
How do Millikin and Carthage qualify as "CCIW mid-pack teams"? Last year MU went 1-6 and finished seventh (two games behind the trio of teams that tied for fourth), and Carthage went 0-7 and finished eighth. The year before that, Millikin went 2-5 and finished sixth while Carthage went 1-6 and finished seventh.
Coming into this season, Augie qualified as a "mid-pack team." Millikin and Carthage didn't.
Traditional mid-pack teams, I should have said...or something. In that small-ish of a conference it's hard to be mid pack with three really good teams. But they'd be mid pack in the OAC, and top 1/3 in the NCAC. I think. Anyway, they're not as strong as they were.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 01, 2014, 09:07:46 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 01, 2014, 05:59:56 PM
But ETP, there are results and other mitigating factors weighing in:
1. First game.
2. ROAD GAME! One possession road game.
3. IWU's less than impressive run against Albion and loss to Simpson.
4. Franklin's rebound after Whitewater.
I mean, it was the first game for IWU too. Not just the first game for the team, but the first college game for their quarterback- a quarterback who didn't have the opportunity to play with and learn from a stellar senior quarterback like Franklin's QB did. If the first game is goofy for Franklin, shouldn't it be goofy for IWU as well?
I'm all for nuance, but I think the time for nuance comes later in the season when we get into league play and common opponents and using all of that information to place teams that have accumulated a loss or two. Right now, I just don't believe that there is anything close to adequate information to dismiss a head to head result. I don't think I've ready anything yet this week regarding the IWU/Franklin or IWU/Simpson placements in these polls that doesn't distill down to "I thought Franklin was better than IWU in August so I'm going to go ahead and stick with that despite whatever happened when those two teams actually played each other."
That's not it at all. I do not distill it down to there no matter what you may think. It's solely based on the current data points and how I read them.
I defended whoever voted North Central ahead of the Wisconsin Schools on the other boards, even though I didn't do that myself, because I KNOW how I put a ballot together and can see their sides and nuances, and I think (hopefully, maybe naively) that everyone but one or two actually takes data points into account and not rote ballot juggling.
If someone is tracking changes, I first posted this right after I dropped my laptop on my big toe, and I probably was a bit harsher and ungentlemanly.
Quote from: Li'l Giant on October 01, 2014, 08:04:45 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 01, 2014, 06:55:42 PM. I guess that Albion game hangs with me - even though they were a playoff team last year. I don't trust the MIAA farther than I can throw them...
Am I to assume you were one of the 2 voters who did not vote for either Adrian or Albion?
I threw some bones to Adrian. I have the least amount of mistrust for them. I was about ready to bail an MIAA team if B-W played well, or ONU didn't give up a badillion, or if earlier MSJ was undefeated. But that Millsaps loss may be an albatross for MSJ.
It seems that aside from two from the NCAC, CCIW and OAC, no one really wants to be ranked 7-10 until the MIAA and HCAC starts to sort themselves out.
One thing to watch for here - AND in "B" land, is that cancelled game between Chicago and Pacific. That may benefit Chicago, since I don't know how much Pacific would help them. They may win just two games this year (Lewis & Clark and rookie George Fox).
Quote from: smedindy on October 01, 2014, 11:01:26 PM
It seems that aside from two from the NCAC, CCIW and OAC, no one really wants to be ranked 7-10 until the MIAA and HCAC starts to sort themselves out.
One thing to watch for here - AND in "B" land, is that cancelled game between Chicago and Pacific. That may benefit Chicago, since I don't know how much Pacific would help them. They may win just two games this year (Lewis & Clark and rookie George Fox).
As a UAA alum, I've been following Chicago's start with a cautious optimism.
They were 4-0 at this time last year, too. They might be a hair better this year but they've also added one really tough game in Bethel. I think the game with Rhodes this week is huge - it's their best chance for a win over a quality opponent (other than the Bethel game). The UAA as a whole is down this year - only Chicago has looked really good this far - but still, if the Maroos lose to Rhodes this week, they would probably have to upset Bethel to make the B picture.
Quote from: smedindy on October 01, 2014, 11:01:26 PM
One thing to watch for here - AND in "B" land, is that cancelled game between Chicago and Pacific. That may benefit Chicago, since I don't know how much Pacific would help them. They may win just two games this year (Lewis & Clark and rookie George Fox).
Wesley is putting the Pool B to bed this weekend, yes? When they beat Louisiana College on Saturday, they finish their D-III schedule at 5-0. I'm not sure anybody can take that playoff spot from Wesley.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 02, 2014, 01:09:46 AM
Quote from: smedindy on October 01, 2014, 11:01:26 PM
One thing to watch for here - AND in "B" land, is that cancelled game between Chicago and Pacific. That may benefit Chicago, since I don't know how much Pacific would help them. They may win just two games this year (Lewis & Clark and rookie George Fox).
Wesley is putting the Pool B to bed this weekend, yes? When they beat Louisiana College on Saturday, they finish their D-III schedule at 5-0. I'm not sure anybody can take that playoff spot from Wesley.
There is a remote possibility, I would think that if by some remote chance, each of the teams that Wesley face this year end up as sub .500 teams and the other team on the board opponents end up with a higher SOS, there may be a chance, but I doubt it. They are a lock as of today.
We may be getting ahead of ourselves then - I know it's too early for Wally's (awesome) playoff selection exercise - but a one loss Chicago would be a reasonable B-gets-a-C candidate, right? Especially seeing how the North region already has a bit of a mess...some of the usual C candidates will have two losses by season's end. Not sure how Chicago's SOS will look but their results against Rhodes and Bethel will be key. If they can split those (I'm assuming if they win both and finish undefeated they'd be a lock, even if Wesley takes the B), and play it close in the loss, and both of THOSE teams end up regionally ranked (might need Bethel to win the MIAC)...its a lot of ifs, and there's plenty of season to be played, so I'll knock it off there for now.
Wally, we're about two weeks away from the weekly playoff selection projection, yes? Do you start when the first RR's come out or before? I feel like you started after 5 or 6 games last year for some reason.
Since we're discussing Chicago and pool B/C and all that... Texas Lutheran could very well end up 9-1 (barring an upset of UMHB) and that would be an interesting conversation between them and Chicago.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 02, 2014, 07:40:36 AM
We may be getting ahead of ourselves then - I know it's too early for Wally's (awesome) playoff selection exercise - but a one loss Chicago would be a reasonable B-gets-a-C candidate, right? Especially seeing how the North region already has a bit of a mess...some of the usual C candidates will have two losses by season's end. Not sure how Chicago's SOS will look but their results against Rhodes and Bethel will be key. If they can split those (I'm assuming if they win both and finish undefeated they'd be a lock, even if Wesley takes the B), and play it close in the loss, and both of THOSE teams end up regionally ranked (might need Bethel to win the MIAC)...its a lot of ifs, and there's plenty of season to be played, so I'll knock it off there for now.
Wally, we're about two weeks away from the weekly playoff selection projection, yes? Do you start when the first RR's come out or before? I feel like you started after 5 or 6 games last year for some reason.
Thanks! And I'll probably do the first one after week 6 or 7 (probably 6 because I'll get the itch I'm sure). I did start really early last year because I wanted to see how the thing evolves over the course of most of the season. It was interesting.
I think the wrinkle I'm going to toss in this year is to use these fan polls as substitute RRs until we get the real deal in November.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 02, 2014, 01:09:46 AM
Quote from: smedindy on October 01, 2014, 11:01:26 PM
One thing to watch for here - AND in "B" land, is that cancelled game between Chicago and Pacific. That may benefit Chicago, since I don't know how much Pacific would help them. They may win just two games this year (Lewis & Clark and rookie George Fox).
Wesley is putting the Pool B to bed this weekend, yes? When they beat Louisiana College on Saturday, they finish their D-III schedule at 5-0. I'm not sure anybody can take that playoff spot from Wesley.
Oh, my sweet Wesley...
Quote from: smedindy on October 02, 2014, 11:20:21 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 02, 2014, 01:09:46 AM
Quote from: smedindy on October 01, 2014, 11:01:26 PM
One thing to watch for here - AND in "B" land, is that cancelled game between Chicago and Pacific. That may benefit Chicago, since I don't know how much Pacific would help them. They may win just two games this year (Lewis & Clark and rookie George Fox).
Wesley is putting the Pool B to bed this weekend, yes? When they beat Louisiana College on Saturday, they finish their D-III schedule at 5-0. I'm not sure anybody can take that playoff spot from Wesley.
Oh, my sweet Wesley...
As you wish.
Quote from: smedindy on October 02, 2014, 11:20:21 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 02, 2014, 01:09:46 AM
Quote from: smedindy on October 01, 2014, 11:01:26 PM
One thing to watch for here - AND in "B" land, is that cancelled game between Chicago and Pacific. That may benefit Chicago, since I don't know how much Pacific would help them. They may win just two games this year (Lewis & Clark and rookie George Fox).
Wesley is putting the Pool B to bed this weekend, yes? When they beat Louisiana College on Saturday, they finish their D-III schedule at 5-0. I'm not sure anybody can take that playoff spot from Wesley.
Oh, my sweet Wesley...
Nice Princess Bride reference Smed. How about this one?
Hello! My name is Smedindy! You killed my fan poll! Prepare to die!
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 02, 2014, 11:38:30 AM
Quote from: smedindy on October 02, 2014, 11:20:21 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 02, 2014, 01:09:46 AM
Quote from: smedindy on October 01, 2014, 11:01:26 PM
One thing to watch for here - AND in "B" land, is that cancelled game between Chicago and Pacific. That may benefit Chicago, since I don't know how much Pacific would help them. They may win just two games this year (Lewis & Clark and rookie George Fox).
Wesley is putting the Pool B to bed this weekend, yes? When they beat Louisiana College on Saturday, they finish their D-III schedule at 5-0. I'm not sure anybody can take that playoff spot from Wesley.
Oh, my sweet Wesley...
As you wish.
creepy, just creepy guys. on the other hand, this whole conversation was inconceivable... How I miss Andre the Giant...
Quote from: jknezek on October 02, 2014, 11:43:29 AM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 02, 2014, 11:38:30 AM
Quote from: smedindy on October 02, 2014, 11:20:21 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 02, 2014, 01:09:46 AM
Quote from: smedindy on October 01, 2014, 11:01:26 PM
One thing to watch for here - AND in "B" land, is that cancelled game between Chicago and Pacific. That may benefit Chicago, since I don't know how much Pacific would help them. They may win just two games this year (Lewis & Clark and rookie George Fox).
Wesley is putting the Pool B to bed this weekend, yes? When they beat Louisiana College on Saturday, they finish their D-III schedule at 5-0. I'm not sure anybody can take that playoff spot from Wesley.
Oh, my sweet Wesley...
As you wish.
creepy, just creepy guys. on the other hand, this whole conversation was inconceivable... How I miss Andre the Giant...
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 02, 2014, 12:24:11 PM
Quote from: jknezek on October 02, 2014, 11:43:29 AM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 02, 2014, 11:38:30 AM
Quote from: smedindy on October 02, 2014, 11:20:21 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 02, 2014, 01:09:46 AM
Quote from: smedindy on October 01, 2014, 11:01:26 PM
One thing to watch for here - AND in "B" land, is that cancelled game between Chicago and Pacific. That may benefit Chicago, since I don't know how much Pacific would help them. They may win just two games this year (Lewis & Clark and rookie George Fox).
Wesley is putting the Pool B to bed this weekend, yes? When they beat Louisiana College on Saturday, they finish their D-III schedule at 5-0. I'm not sure anybody can take that playoff spot from Wesley.
Oh, my sweet Wesley...
As you wish.
creepy, just creepy guys. on the other hand, this whole conversation was inconceivable... How I miss Andre the Giant...
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Loving the quotes but I just have to point out that the character's name was Westley, not Wesley, so this whole thread started on a misconception. That being said, "never go against a Sicilian when death is on the line"
Quote from: jknezek on October 02, 2014, 12:33:56 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 02, 2014, 12:24:11 PM
Quote from: jknezek on October 02, 2014, 11:43:29 AM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 02, 2014, 11:38:30 AM
Quote from: smedindy on October 02, 2014, 11:20:21 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 02, 2014, 01:09:46 AM
Quote from: smedindy on October 01, 2014, 11:01:26 PM
One thing to watch for here - AND in "B" land, is that cancelled game between Chicago and Pacific. That may benefit Chicago, since I don't know how much Pacific would help them. They may win just two games this year (Lewis & Clark and rookie George Fox).
Wesley is putting the Pool B to bed this weekend, yes? When they beat Louisiana College on Saturday, they finish their D-III schedule at 5-0. I'm not sure anybody can take that playoff spot from Wesley.
Oh, my sweet Wesley...
As you wish.
creepy, just creepy guys. on the other hand, this whole conversation was inconceivable... How I miss Andre the Giant...
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Loving the quotes but I just have to point out that the character's name was Westley, not Wesley, so this whole thread started on a misconception. That being said, "never go against a Sicilian when death is on the line"
Just look back at the past few pages... we're not a group who lets little things like facts get in our way :D
Something sure to get people more riled than the absence of IWU on my ballot: I think that movie sucks. I've never understood the deal people have with it.
Quote from: Li'l Giant on October 02, 2014, 01:19:12 PM
Something sure to get people more riled than the absence of IWU on my ballot: I think that movie sucks. I've never understood the deal people have with it.
As with most things, the book is better than the movie. Too much of the background got chopped out to make the movie. But I still like them both for entertainment purposes. It's not great cinema, or literature, by any stretch...
I find it interesting there is so much ink being wasted over 2 teams that are at the bottom of the fan poll and virutally non-existent in the D3.com poll (although it should be noted that Franklin is an ORV and IWU is absent). Rankings are not exact science. Its part art and part science. I am frankly (no pun!) surprised there isn't a lot more discussion over the ranking of Wabash vs JCU. I spent a lot more time on that in my thought process than I did IWU vs Franklin.
The reality of IWU/Franklin is these two teams are not dramatically different. A 7 point home win by IWU was not a blowout and in my opinion, IWU played progressively worse the next two weeks after that win while Franklin seemed to stabilize and arguably improve. For me these two teams are interchangeable and given the current mediocrity of both I don't think its worth the breath to determine who is 3-10pts better. If they played 10 times one of the two would probably win 6. I don't know who and it doesn't matter. The HTH is important to me in the week after but since it was so early and fairly close, it doesn't mean as much to me since teams are so different now (yes even 2 weeks later). I am much more interested in whether JCU or Wabash are #2 and the discussion on Wheaton vs NCC. Of course those debates are more speculative without a HTH. Wabash's HTH w HSC was an impressive win. If it were close, it wouldn't mean as much in my mind, but Wabash dominated. I know the LG's D is for real. I have seen them up close and they keep doing their thing, including shutting down an AA QB. I have my concerns about JCU since they laid an egg in last years playoffs (which shouldn't matter in this years rankings). Their D seems legit but they seemed good last year too and we were fooled. Last year they gave up 3 TD's through 9 weeks before giving up 69 pts in their 2 season ending losses. So JCU may be fools gold. I have Bash ahead because I am much more convinced of the quality of their defense and O/D Line than I am for JCU.
I have Wheaton over NCC in my rankings in part because I believe it and in part because I hope its tru. But Wheaton (despite Wally's assertion) has been solid in going 3-0. their offense needs to be tuned but they have played great defense, don't turn it over and have controlled the LOS in every game. Thats a recipe for a lot of wins. Wheaton turnedit over 4x in a scrimmage against Bash (another reason I am high on Bash) and 4x in 3 games since.
Quote from: Li'l Giant on October 02, 2014, 01:19:12 PM
Something sure to get people more riled than the absence of IWU on my ballot: I think that movie sucks. I've never understood the deal people have with it.
I could say something about the Wire....
Quote from: smedindy on October 02, 2014, 03:04:17 PM
Quote from: Li'l Giant on October 02, 2014, 01:19:12 PM
Something sure to get people more riled than the absence of IWU on my ballot: I think that movie sucks. I've never understood the deal people have with it.
I could say something about the Wire....
Lord, give me strength.
Quote from: smedindy on October 02, 2014, 03:04:17 PM
Quote from: Li'l Giant on October 02, 2014, 01:19:12 PM
Something sure to get people more riled than the absence of IWU on my ballot: I think that movie sucks. I've never understood the deal people have with it.
I could say something about the Wire....
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.quickmeme.com%2Fimg%2F41%2F4188f806d63f804d97db9d102ca94ce77269e398bbf6ef0b64c1e848a5241c3f.jpg&hash=f2305549eda944e4f55c26e228ea725ac4cf820c)
Quote from: Li'l Giant on October 02, 2014, 04:48:23 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 02, 2014, 03:04:17 PM
Quote from: Li'l Giant on October 02, 2014, 01:19:12 PM
Something sure to get people more riled than the absence of IWU on my ballot: I think that movie sucks. I've never understood the deal people have with it.
I could say something about the Wire....
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.quickmeme.com%2Fimg%2F41%2F4188f806d63f804d97db9d102ca94ce77269e398bbf6ef0b64c1e848a5241c3f.jpg&hash=f2305549eda944e4f55c26e228ea725ac4cf820c)
Just yankin' the chain around...I understand the differences in various and sundry people tastes. A whole boatload of people still watch CBS for some reason! ;)
/they see me trollin', they hatin'
Quote from: smedindy on October 02, 2014, 11:20:21 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 02, 2014, 01:09:46 AM
Quote from: smedindy on October 01, 2014, 11:01:26 PM
One thing to watch for here - AND in "B" land, is that cancelled game between Chicago and Pacific. That may benefit Chicago, since I don't know how much Pacific would help them. They may win just two games this year (Lewis & Clark and rookie George Fox).
Wesley is putting the Pool B to bed this weekend, yes? When they beat Louisiana College on Saturday, they finish their D-III schedule at 5-0. I'm not sure anybody can take that playoff spot from Wesley.
Oh, my sweet Wesley...
Hey guys.
Quote from: USee on October 02, 2014, 02:30:32 PM
I am much more interested in whether JCU or Wabash are #2 and the discussion on Wheaton vs NCC. Of course those debates are more speculative without a HTH. Wabash's HTH w HSC was an impressive win. If it were close, it wouldn't mean as much in my mind, but Wabash dominated. I know the LG's D is for real. I have seen them up close and they keep doing their thing, including shutting down an AA QB. I have my concerns about JCU since they laid an egg in last years playoffs (which shouldn't matter in this years rankings). Their D seems legit but they seemed good last year too and we were fooled. Last year they gave up 3 TD's through 9 weeks before giving up 69 pts in their 2 season ending losses. So JCU may be fools gold. I have Bash ahead because I am much more convinced of the quality of their defense and O/D Line than I am for JCU.
I can't believe I'm going to do this because it's JCU. For the record I'm going to need a shower as soon as I post this. But allow me to play devil's advocate...
Are we sure HSC is that good? I mean, they're very good at QB and WR, but I mean overall. The CNU game certainly wasn't confidence inspiring. I would say JCU has been better against overall better opponents to date. I thought St. Vincent stunk, but they're 2-2 so they're better than I thought I guess. BW is obviously better than Denison. But maybe HSC is much better than Berg so it evens back out. I don't know, I'm just asking.
And I'm not sure you should use giving up 44 to Mount as a strike against the JCU D because in that case that means Witt, Wesley, NC...well, basically everyone but UWW has a suspect D. JCU played Mount on par with NC. And NC was in a blizzard. I don't think that's a knock on their D at all.
No, we aren't sure HSC is that good but we are sure their QB and receiver are pretty good and Wabash held them in check for the most part. JCU gave up 25 at home in a loss to STJF in the first round, that's mainly why I think they may be a phony.
I think JCU looks really good so far this year. They have dominated on both sides of the ball in all three games they have played. It's looking like the Mount / JC game at the end of the season could be one for the ages.
Quote from: Sir Battlescars on October 03, 2014, 11:21:05 PM
I think JCU looks really good so far this year. They have dominated on both sides of the ball in all three games they have played. It's looking like the Mount / JC game at the end of the season could be one for the ages.
Same as last year and it ended unceremoniously for JCU
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 03, 2014, 05:59:53 PM
Quote from: USee on October 02, 2014, 02:30:32 PM
I am much more interested in whether JCU or Wabash are #2 and the discussion on Wheaton vs NCC. Of course those debates are more speculative without a HTH. Wabash's HTH w HSC was an impressive win. If it were close, it wouldn't mean as much in my mind, but Wabash dominated. I know the LG's D is for real. I have seen them up close and they keep doing their thing, including shutting down an AA QB. I have my concerns about JCU since they laid an egg in last years playoffs (which shouldn't matter in this years rankings). Their D seems legit but they seemed good last year too and we were fooled. Last year they gave up 3 TD's through 9 weeks before giving up 69 pts in their 2 season ending losses. So JCU may be fools gold. I have Bash ahead because I am much more convinced of the quality of their defense and O/D Line than I am for JCU.
I can't believe I'm going to do this because it's JCU. For the record I'm going to need a shower as soon as I post this. But allow me to play devil's advocate...
Are we sure HSC is that good? I mean, they're very good at QB and WR, but I mean overall. The CNU game certainly wasn't confidence inspiring. I would say JCU has been better against overall better opponents to date. I thought St. Vincent stunk, but they're 2-2 so they're better than I thought I guess. BW is obviously better than Denison. But maybe HSC is much better than Berg so it evens back out. I don't know, I'm just asking.
And I'm not sure you should use giving up 44 to Mount as a strike against the JCU D because in that case that means Witt, Wesley, NC...well, basically everyone but UWW has a suspect D. JCU played Mount on par with NC. And NC was in a blizzard. I don't think that's a knock on their D at all.
If you mean to say JCU's Defense played Mount on par w NC's defense you may be validated in terms of the scoreboard. But in the JCU/Mount game the Raiders led that game by 18 at halftime and it was never closer than 8 pts the entire second half. JCU was mostly one dimensional with Myers throwing it 56 times for 451 yds. They had less than 100 yds rushing.
NCC on the other hand led the game 4 different times including by 5 with 1:38 to go. They ran the ball for just under 200 yds and threw it for just under 200 yds on 41 and 39 attempts respectively. Mount had 550 yds and 44 pts vs JCU and 421 yds and 40 pts vs NCC (with 6 pts off an interception return). I don't think JCU played Mount as close as NCC, although in the end they both lost so who cares.
The point is I am not giving JCU the benefit of the doubt I gave them last year just because they play in the OAC and they have only given up 4 first downs this year. I think they are very good so I have them ranked 3rd in my poll. But I have Wabash ranked 2nd because I think, based on my subjective analysis, they are a little better right now.
Quote from: USee on October 03, 2014, 10:06:28 PM
No, we aren't sure HSC is that good but we are sure their QB and receiver are pretty good and Wabash held them in check for the most part. JCU gave up 25 at home in a loss to STJF in the first round, that's mainly why I think they may be a phony.
First off, thanks for the responses USee. My only hope in playing devil's advocate was to spur a little debate for fun in between polls.
The above quote is certainly a weak point in what I'm saying. SJF is not an offensive juggernaut. Clearly after beating JCU and their performance in Belton they were very good, but I think most of us would say they're good more because of D. Therefore I agree that the 23 points is a black mark for JCU.
Quote from: USee on October 04, 2014, 08:22:45 AM
If you mean to say JCU's Defense played Mount on par w NC's defense you may be validated in terms of the scoreboard. But in the JCU/Mount game the Raiders led that game by 18 at halftime and it was never closer than 8 pts the entire second half. JCU was mostly one dimensional with Myers throwing it 56 times for 451 yds. They had less than 100 yds rushing.
NCC on the other hand led the game 4 different times including by 5 with 1:38 to go. They ran the ball for just under 200 yds and threw it for just under 200 yds on 41 and 39 attempts respectively. Mount had 550 yds and 44 pts vs JCU and 421 yds and 40 pts vs NCC (with 6 pts off an interception return). I don't think JCU played Mount as close as NCC, although in the end they both lost so who cares.
The point is I am not giving JCU the benefit of the doubt I gave them last year just because they play in the OAC and they have only given up 4 first downs this year. I think they are very good so I have them ranked 3rd in my poll. But I have Wabash ranked 2nd because I think, based on my subjective analysis, they are a little better right now.
I was at both games and NCC was DEFINITELY better than JCU. My point was just that I don't think they were better defensively. NCC struck me as more similar to the Witt D than JCU. I just thought JCU was slightly better on D.
I should have explained the blizzard comment. Mount had fewer yards and points against NCC because of the weather, IMO. The weather affected both offenses big time as the game wore on. Burke and Mitchell both rely on change of direction rather than top end speed to make long runs. They're both "make you miss" guys. The weather took that crucial skill away. But the thing is both guys STILL had well over 100 yds rushing apiece. NCC was having trouble stopping the read option and the snow aided them big time.
The problem that afternoon was that, while I think Mount puts up 55+ against NCC on a normal field, I also think NCC puts up 55+ on Mount on a normal field too. Stanek did a good job running the ball which Myers cannot do. And I thought NCC had better RB's too.
Quote from: USee on October 04, 2014, 08:22:45 AM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 03, 2014, 05:59:53 PM
Quote from: USee on October 02, 2014, 02:30:32 PM
I am much more interested in whether JCU or Wabash are #2 and the discussion on Wheaton vs NCC. Of course those debates are more speculative without a HTH. Wabash's HTH w HSC was an impressive win. If it were close, it wouldn't mean as much in my mind, but Wabash dominated. I know the LG's D is for real. I have seen them up close and they keep doing their thing, including shutting down an AA QB. I have my concerns about JCU since they laid an egg in last years playoffs (which shouldn't matter in this years rankings). Their D seems legit but they seemed good last year too and we were fooled. Last year they gave up 3 TD's through 9 weeks before giving up 69 pts in their 2 season ending losses. So JCU may be fools gold. I have Bash ahead because I am much more convinced of the quality of their defense and O/D Line than I am for JCU.
I can't believe I'm going to do this because it's JCU. For the record I'm going to need a shower as soon as I post this. But allow me to play devil's advocate...
Are we sure HSC is that good? I mean, they're very good at QB and WR, but I mean overall. The CNU game certainly wasn't confidence inspiring. I would say JCU has been better against overall better opponents to date. I thought St. Vincent stunk, but they're 2-2 so they're better than I thought I guess. BW is obviously better than Denison. But maybe HSC is much better than Berg so it evens back out. I don't know, I'm just asking.
And I'm not sure you should use giving up 44 to Mount as a strike against the JCU D because in that case that means Witt, Wesley, NC...well, basically everyone but UWW has a suspect D. JCU played Mount on par with NC. And NC was in a blizzard. I don't think that's a knock on their D at all.
If you mean to say JCU's Defense played Mount on par w NC's defense you may be validated in terms of the scoreboard. But in the JCU/Mount game the Raiders led that game by 18 at halftime and it was never closer than 8 pts the entire second half. JCU was mostly one dimensional with Myers throwing it 56 times for 451 yds. They had less than 100 yds rushing.
NCC on the other hand led the game 4 different times including by 5 with 1:38 to go. They ran the ball for just under 200 yds and threw it for just under 200 yds on 41 and 39 attempts respectively. Mount had 550 yds and 44 pts vs JCU and 421 yds and 40 pts vs NCC (with 6 pts off an interception return). I don't think JCU played Mount as close as NCC, although in the end they both lost so who cares.
The point is I am not giving JCU the benefit of the doubt I gave them last year just because they play in the OAC and they have only given up 4 first downs this year. I think they are very good so I have them ranked 3rd in my poll. But I have Wabash ranked 2nd because I think, based on my subjective analysis, they are a little better right now.
I think it's ridiculous to be bring up last year this far into the season, but since you are it's not like JC's two losses last year weren't to two top tier teams. And since you keep bringing up last year with JC, don't you have to do the same for Wabash? Wabash lost to Witt last year and Witt lost convincingly to Mount in the playoffs. That being the case, you have to give the nod to JC.
WOW Mount has a 400 yard advantage in offense AT THE HALF. If Rocky Pentello were dead he would be rolling in his grave. Will Capital even come out for the second half? Mount had blown scoring opportunities or it could be worse. I'm glad I didn't drive to this game.
Quote from: Sir Battlescars on October 04, 2014, 11:00:52 AM
Quote from: USee on October 04, 2014, 08:22:45 AM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 03, 2014, 05:59:53 PM
Quote from: USee on October 02, 2014, 02:30:32 PM
I am much more interested in whether JCU or Wabash are #2 and the discussion on Wheaton vs NCC. Of course those debates are more speculative without a HTH. Wabash's HTH w HSC was an impressive win. If it were close, it wouldn't mean as much in my mind, but Wabash dominated. I know the LG's D is for real. I have seen them up close and they keep doing their thing, including shutting down an AA QB. I have my concerns about JCU since they laid an egg in last years playoffs (which shouldn't matter in this years rankings). Their D seems legit but they seemed good last year too and we were fooled. Last year they gave up 3 TD's through 9 weeks before giving up 69 pts in their 2 season ending losses. So JCU may be fools gold. I have Bash ahead because I am much more convinced of the quality of their defense and O/D Line than I am for JCU.
I can't believe I'm going to do this because it's JCU. For the record I'm going to need a shower as soon as I post this. But allow me to play devil's advocate...
Are we sure HSC is that good? I mean, they're very good at QB and WR, but I mean overall. The CNU game certainly wasn't confidence inspiring. I would say JCU has been better against overall better opponents to date. I thought St. Vincent stunk, but they're 2-2 so they're better than I thought I guess. BW is obviously better than Denison. But maybe HSC is much better than Berg so it evens back out. I don't know, I'm just asking.
And I'm not sure you should use giving up 44 to Mount as a strike against the JCU D because in that case that means Witt, Wesley, NC...well, basically everyone but UWW has a suspect D. JCU played Mount on par with NC. And NC was in a blizzard. I don't think that's a knock on their D at all.
If you mean to say JCU's Defense played Mount on par w NC's defense you may be validated in terms of the scoreboard. But in the JCU/Mount game the Raiders led that game by 18 at halftime and it was never closer than 8 pts the entire second half. JCU was mostly one dimensional with Myers throwing it 56 times for 451 yds. They had less than 100 yds rushing.
NCC on the other hand led the game 4 different times including by 5 with 1:38 to go. They ran the ball for just under 200 yds and threw it for just under 200 yds on 41 and 39 attempts respectively. Mount had 550 yds and 44 pts vs JCU and 421 yds and 40 pts vs NCC (with 6 pts off an interception return). I don't think JCU played Mount as close as NCC, although in the end they both lost so who cares.
The point is I am not giving JCU the benefit of the doubt I gave them last year just because they play in the OAC and they have only given up 4 first downs this year. I think they are very good so I have them ranked 3rd in my poll. But I have Wabash ranked 2nd because I think, based on my subjective analysis, they are a little better right now.
I think it's ridiculous to be bring up last year this far into the season, but since you are it's not like JC's two losses last year weren't to two top tier teams. And since you keep bringing up last year with JC, don't you have to do the same for Wabash? Wabash lost to Witt last year and Witt lost convincingly to Mount in the playoffs. That being the case, you have to give the nod to JC.
I don't have to do anything. JCU almost loses to an average ONU team and can't score. Seems like the same movie we saw last year. I likley will drop them from the 3rd spot after their performance.
Y'all see Franklin needed a TD plus a deuce with under 2:00 to play AND survive a field goal at the buzzer to beat Manchester? It was on the road though.
"It was on the road though."
Big difference from Manchester and a team of quality and distinction. A road game is three to five points to a sharp? I bet if I build a sim and run it, that's what it would turn out to be.
Franklin's gonna get docked because of that. JCU's gonna get re-evaluated a bit.
And on cue, Carthage is beating IWU 14-0 in the second at IWU.
So the half-hearted ineffective snark and sacrifices to the God of Rigidity may be all for naught anyway...
Just having a little fun with the thread. Alas, neither of those teams may be what we thought they were. :)
The loudest arguments usually become moot in short order...
With this week's performances by Franklin and IWU, my ballot this week may only go to #8! :P
IWU is playing their starting DB at QB, Tyrell Bolden. He was a HS QB but can't throw much. If that's where they are, they are in big trouble.
IWU's starting QB, Jack Warner, is out sick.
Shouldn't they have a backup QB who isn't, you know, starting at another position?
IWU ought to beat Carthage at home with their backup RG playing quarterback. Not excusable, this one.
IWU had a junior QB who got beat out by the freshman and promptly quit the team, leaving them with their starting CB as the backup QB.
For those tracking in the bottom part of the pool.
Rose Hulman and MSJ both took care of biz. Franklin survived a scare.
Chicago came back to beat Rhodes.
The MIAA has the potential of muddle: Albion beat Hope in OT, Trine beat Alma in OT, Olivet beat Adrian at Adrian by 7.
DPU probably is going to get some votes.
Quote from: USee on October 04, 2014, 10:36:27 PM
IWU had a junior QB who got beat out by the freshman and promptly quit the team, leaving them with their starting CB as the backup QB.
Wow, that doesn't seem like a lot of QB depth for a team that was a playoff contender.
Quote from: smedindy on October 04, 2014, 10:43:00 PM
Quote from: USee on October 04, 2014, 10:36:27 PM
IWU had a junior QB who got beat out by the freshman and promptly quit the team, leaving them with their starting CB as the backup QB.
Wow, that doesn't seem like a lot of QB depth for a team that was a playoff contender.
When were they a playoff contender?
IWU? Playoff teams two of the last three years. I'd say they were a contender as much as the other contenders in the NCAC and CCIW. You're telling me there was NO WAY they could go 9-1?
So was my not ranking IWU in my top 10 justified or do I have to wait until next week's vote for that?
Quote from: Li'l Giant on October 05, 2014, 12:39:27 AM
So was my not ranking IWU in my top 10 justified or do I have to wait until next week's vote for that?
I am one of IWU's biggest fans, and they will not be on my ballot this week. Nor will Franklin.
At this point perhaps Albion and ONU?
Here's my ballot for this week...
1) Mount Union
2-10) TGHIJGSTO! ;)
Quote from: smedindy on October 05, 2014, 12:18:10 AM
IWU? Playoff teams two of the last three years. I'd say they were a contender as much as the other contenders in the NCAC and CCIW. You're telling me there was NO WAY they could go 9-1?
That's correct. There is no way they can go 9-1! 8-)
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 05, 2014, 01:15:16 AM
Here's my ballot for this week...
1) Mount Union
2-10) TGHIJGSTO! ;)
Well played. Also, my adrenaline started pumping when I saw that, so ... thanks? :)
I usually have this done by the end of the SNF game. Not this week. This week this exercise is hard.
My poll is in. I agree, very difficult this week.
My top five stayed the same---until these teams start playing each other. The bottom five changed yet again. :P :P
I spent a fair amount of time yesterday a.m. over coffee and breakfast tacos getting my ballot sorted. Like NCF my bottom 5 saw some changes.
Somebody needs to keep winning because I'm tired of doing math for 15 teams. NRFP:
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Wabash 67 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 5)
3. John Carroll 66 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4. Wittenberg 54 pts (3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6)
5. North Central 49 pts (3, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6)
6. Wheaton 44 pts (4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6)
7. Heidelberg 27 pts (7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 10)
8. Chicago 17 pts (7, 7, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10, -)
9. Rose-Hulman 13 pts (8, 8, 8, 9, 10, 10, -, -)
T10. DePauw 7 pts (9, 9, 9, 10, -, -, -, -)
T10. Mount St Joseph 7 pts (7, 8, -, -, -, -, -, -)
ARV
Franklin 3 pts (8, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Illinois Wesleyan 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Albion 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Adrian 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Ohio Northern 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The Fan Poll is voted on by FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, NCF, wally_wabash, USee, Mr. Ypsi, and myself.
my top 10
UMU
Bash
JCU
Wheaton
Witt
NCC
Heidleberg
Mt St Jo
Univ of Chicago
RHIT
I didn't really consider Depauw and I should have. My last three were a toss up. I bumped Franklin and Adrian to add Chicago and RHiT.
Good to see my alma mater back in the poll. It's been quite a long time.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on October 08, 2014, 02:10:30 PM
Good to see my alma mater back in the poll. It's been quite a long time.
Good show Wes.... looking at the schedule... things
could get interesting in November in the NCAC. Games to be played though.
For those who voted for DePauw. Who have they beat or what have they done that would make them a 10 spot? I don't know a whole lot about D3 outside the NCAC, but, it seems like a little bit of a stretch that they would beat Franklin and didn't Ohio Northern hang pretty close with Heidelberg even though the score was like 100 to 90 or something like that. Just curious.
GO BASH!!!!
I would guess it's more a product of no one really stepping up and laying claim to the last couple of spots more than anything else. The case for a bunch of those teams is pretty much a wash IMO. I'm an OAC guy, but ONU's most impressive feat to date is the 17-10 loss to JCU last week. The WashU win loses luster each week. BW is shaping up to be a 5-4 team in the OAC. Berg scored 69 points on them without one scoring drive lasting more than 2:10.
Do I think ONU beats DePauw on a neutral field? Of course. But I'm biased. I don't take issue with who anyone includes in the bottom of the poll because, honestly, who the heck knows at this point??
Thanks everyone for voting though so we have stuff to debate between games!
Yeah I didn't vote for Depauw but you could ask the same question (and I did) for RHIT, Chicago, and MT St Joes. None of them have a quality win among them. ONU has 2 losses and while I think they would like beat RHIT and Chicago, it's interchangeable at the bottom of the poll.
For me I kept Bash at #2 and JCU #3 for reasons I stated last week. I have Wheaton at #4 because I think that's where they belong and I can't justify NCC with a loss ahead of them right now. They play two weeks from Saturday. Witt is #5 and NCC is #6. I don't have an axe here and NCC may move back up the ranks if they Tyler Dicken is the answer at QB for them. Some good games on the horizon at this point.
Quote from: USee on October 08, 2014, 04:48:25 PM
Yeah I didn't vote for Depauw but you could ask the same question (and I did) for RHIT, Chicago, and MT St Joes. None of them have a quality win among them. ONU has 2 losses and while I think they would like beat RHIT and Chicago, it's interchangeable at the bottom of the poll.
Agree with all of this, except that I think Chicago's win over Rhodes counts for a little something. Rhodes was 8-2 last year (and four points from going undefeated, with 10-7 loss to WashU and 35-34 to BSC) and is currently 4-1. They'll probably be on the fringes of the South RR's. I'll give Chicago a "quality win" credit there.
Quote from: USee on October 08, 2014, 04:48:25 PM
I don't have an axe here and NCC may move back up the ranks if they Tyler Dicken is the answer at QB for them. Some good games on the horizon at this point.
Apologies if this is a private/personal answer, and I'm not a CCIW fan but the name rang a bell when I saw that he'd come into a game for them last week. He started back in 2011 but has not played much the last two years? Injury, just got beat out, or personal reasons?
Quote from: USee on October 08, 2014, 04:48:25 PM
Yeah I didn't vote for Depauw but you could ask the same question (and I did) for RHIT, Chicago, and MT St Joes. None of them have a quality win among them. ONU has 2 losses and while I think they would like beat RHIT and Chicago, it's interchangeable at the bottom of the poll.
I'll post my full ballot later but I voted for DePauw and that was basically my thought. RHIT and MSJ haven't really distinguished themselves either. If DePauw didn't give away the ball 7 times at Witt that game is almost certainly close. That's enough for me to vote them in at 10 among a bunch of teams that are basically fungible.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 08, 2014, 05:23:49 PMAgree with all of this, except that I think Chicago's win over Rhodes counts for a little something. Rhodes was 8-2 last year (and four points from going undefeated, with 10-7 loss to WashU and 35-34 to BSC) and is currently 4-1. They'll probably be on the fringes of the South RR's. I'll give Chicago a "quality win" credit there.
Which is why I voted Chicago #9.
I did give credit to Chicago for Rhodes win and their defense appears to be the better amongst the bottom dwellers so I gave them the nod above RHIT at #9
We'll know more about Chicago in two weeks. If they can play a solid game at Bethel, they'll have solidified their spot in the lower echelon of these rankings, even with a loss.
If they get curbstomped...well, they still might be ranked, seeing what a mishmash things are after the top 6 or so.
This week actually looks like a pretty quiet one on the national D3 scene. Next week offers a bunch of tantalizing matchups with fun angles to them:
Heidelberg's last stand vs. Mount - with a 4-year starter at QB and Cartel Brooks at RB, is Berg's window about to close?
The aforementioned Chicago-Bethel matchup to determine Chicago's status as a contender, pseudo contender, or pretender
UWSP vs. UWP as a survival game in the WIAC race
W & J vs. Bethany (shhhh....if Bethany wins this week, next week will be Bethany's biggest game of the D3fb.com era)
St. John's vs. Gustavus Adolphus (GAC quarterback has been bonkers through five weeks...do we have a new MIAC contender?)
Quote from: bashgiant on October 08, 2014, 04:05:20 PM
For those who voted for DePauw. Who have they beat or what have they done that would make them a 10 spot? I don't know a whole lot about D3 outside the NCAC, but, it seems like a little bit of a stretch that they would beat Franklin and didn't Ohio Northern hang pretty close with Heidelberg even though the score was like 100 to 90 or something like that. Just curious.
GO BASH!!!!
You can ask that question about ANY team below Heidelberg and Wheaton.
I've voted for RHIT since that 'fun' game against Illinois College, as I think they can beat Franklin and MSJ. Franklin's madcap scramble to beat Manchester didn't sit well in many of our eyes.
I'm still leery of MSJ after Millsaps beat them. Millsaps lost to second-year in existence Hendrix to fall to 1-3. That's...not good.
Though, it may turn out that Hendrix could go undefeated year two, and wouldn't that be a kick in the head??? They do have the play Centre and Rhodes, still...
Quote from: bashgiant on October 08, 2014, 04:05:20 PM
For those who voted for DePauw. Who have they beat or what have they done that would make them a 10 spot? I don't know a whole lot about D3 outside the NCAC, but, it seems like a little bit of a stretch that they would beat Franklin and didn't Ohio Northern hang pretty close with Heidelberg even though the score was like 100 to 90 or something like that. Just curious.
GO BASH!!!!
Franklin had a really bad result against a bad football team on Saturday. That was kinda the final straw with me for them. And I'm the guy that always ranks Franklin higher than everybody else. If Franklin beats Manchester by 1, they aren't beating DePauw. Good Franklin beats DePauw, but we don't see much of good Franklin anymore.
ONU has two losses to two teams higher in the poll. DePauw has one loss to one team higher in the poll. Therefore, I don't think I'm reaching by saying DePauw should be ranked ahead.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on October 08, 2014, 12:15:13 PM
Somebody needs to keep winning because I'm tired of doing math for 15 teams. NRFP:
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Wabash 67 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 5)
3. John Carroll 66 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4. Wittenberg 54 pts (3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6)
5. North Central 49 pts (3, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6)
6. Wheaton 44 pts (4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6)
7. Heidelberg 27 pts (7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 10)
8. Chicago 17 pts (7, 7, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10, -)
9. Rose-Hulman 13 pts (8, 8, 8, 9, 10, 10, -, -)
T10. DePauw 7 pts (9, 9, 9, 10, -, -, -, -)
T10. Mount St Joseph 7 pts (7, 8, -, -, -, -, -, -)
ARV
Franklin 3 pts (8, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Illinois Wesleyan 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Albion 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Adrian 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Ohio Northern 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The Fan Poll is voted on by FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, NCF, wally_wabash, USee, Mr. Ypsi, and myself.
We can tell you're tired of doing math... cause there's 16 teams this week ;)
At the moment, I think I'd still take Franklin to beat Rose or MSJ but I'm a lot less confident than in previous years. Franklin did have a stumble last year when they lost at Bluffton 24-17 on a TD in the final minute while no other HCAC team got within 28 points. My hope is that last week was a similar situation and they'll bounce back and crush the rest of the conference but at this point nothing would surprise me. I did give the nod to RHIT because they're undefeated and at this point not many can say that in the North.
On my top 25 ballot I have NCC at 11, Witt 12, Wabash 13 so while it looks like I'm still hating on Wabash from just a north perspective I'm not that far out of line overall. Speaking of the Top 25... the fan poll has Wabash/John Carroll flipped as well as Witt/NCC
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on October 08, 2014, 12:15:13 PM
Somebody needs to keep winning because I'm tired of doing math for 15 teams. NRFP:
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Wabash 67 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 5)
3. John Carroll 66 pts (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4. Wittenberg 54 pts (3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6)
5. North Central 49 pts (3, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6)
6. Wheaton 44 pts (4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6)
7. Heidelberg 27 pts (7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 10)
8. Chicago 17 pts (7, 7, 8, 9, 9, 10, 10, -)
9. Rose-Hulman 13 pts (8, 8, 8, 9, 10, 10, -, -)
T10. DePauw 7 pts (9, 9, 9, 10, -, -, -, -)
T10. Mount St Joseph 7 pts (7, 8, -, -, -, -, -, -)
ARV
Franklin 3 pts (8, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Illinois Wesleyan 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Albion 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Adrian 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Ohio Northern 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
A lot to get to here. First, my top 6 are unchanged from last week. A week ago I had given thought to moving JCU ahead of Wabash but let it ride for a week. Had I done that, we'd have wound up back with Wabash and JCU 2 and 3 this week anyway. I'm not willing to give North Central a pass for losing to a team that nearly lost to River Falls, so they'll continue to sit behind Wheaton and the rest of the undefeateds (most of them anyway) until they force something seismic.
Now for the rest. I had put Chicago in last week, so it was pretty easy to move them up three spots after IWU, Adrian, and Franklin all (essentially) lost. Then it was a matter of deciding on three more teams. I've had an eye on RHIT and DePauw for a couple of weeks now, so they slid in. Why RHIT instead of MSJ? MSJ lost to Millsaps who had ETBU hang a sixty burger on them. Millsaps has also now lost to Hendrix who has been playing football in the modern era for all of 13 months. In fact, MSJ is the only team Millsaps has beaten. Don't be that team. On top of all of that, the dude who accounts for the most offense in Division III is a Fightin' Enginner (are they still Fightin'? were they ever Fightin'?).
On DePauw and in response bashgiant who wonders why DePauw and not Franklin...Franklin lost to IWU who has since week 1 done nothing to engender good feelings about the quality of that team. IWU may not be as good as we thought they were in August. In fact, they may not be very good at all. It's hard to make a convincing counterpoint to that when the Titans are wearing a 20-10 home loss to Carthage. On top of losing that game, Franklin also just got done losing to Manchester with 2 minutes left before needing a TD, a deuce, AND dodging a make-able FG at the end to survive Manchester.
Manchester. On the other hand, DePauw is 3-1, they have flat out handled their opponents in the three wins and if they can just not fumble six times against Wittenberg, they were going toe to toe with the Witt Tigers in Springfield- under the lights which is an odd situation because DePauw doesn't do night games. (side note- how come Wabash never draws one of these night games over in Ohio? Do we not sign off on an evening start time? I'm not complaining...Saturday afternoons are fine, I just think it's odd that Wabash never ever gets under the lights on the road in league play). Now, and I'm going to break my rule that 2014's rankings include 2014 players, teams, and game results, but if we want to go back to the last 10 games these two teams have played, DePauw is 7-3 and has only lost to Witt, Wabash, and Wooster whereas Franklin is 6-4 and while two of those are Whitewater games, they've lost the Bluffton Beavers, nearly lost to Manchester, and lost to an IWU team that might not actually be very good. Can I say that Franklin is a slam dunk right now to beat DePauw? I cannot. Franklin may very well beat DePauw if they played tomorrow, but there's no certainty there. Franklin has been inconsistent dating back to last October.
And one more note on DePauw before I put a bow on my ballot for this week- they're coming. I think bashgiant asked an honest question about a team that he's seen Wabash beat to smithereens for the last 5 years. And for a couple of those years, DePauw was BAD. They aren't bad anymore. They're playing good ball, they've beaten three teams in 2014 that they lost to in 2013 and quite frankly I think they're now a favorite in every game they'll play the rest of the way until week 11. Lynch flipped that thing around about a year quicker than I thought he could.
And then finally, my 10th team is Heidelberg, which I don't like but I already mentioned that they would probably wind up back in my ten as a result of attrition. I just didn't think it would only take one week for 3 of the top ten to lose. Thought they'd space that out a bit more. Anyway, I'll certainly give Heidelberg fair consideration as we play out the next month here, but I hope to avoid an unintentional creep to Heidelberg in my ballot. Aside from beating Mount Union, I don't think Heidelberg can do anything to improve their position much, whereas many teams around and below them have big games against quality teams and can get results that may see a lot of leapfrogging back and forth around Heidelberg.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 09, 2014, 12:11:22 AM
On top of all of that, the dude who accounts for the most offense in Division III is a Fightin' Enginner (are they still Fightin'? were they ever Fightin'?).
If you ask the former voice of the Engineers, John Sherman, yes to both questions. He's now an Assistant AD at Indiana State. Used to have a good time with that guy at the SCAC basketball and baseball tourneys back in my WGRE days.
Great responses on ranking DePauw! After doing a little research(which I have very little time to do) I would think Ohio Northern would be ranked a little bit higher even though they have lost 2. 1)The lost to Heidelberg 69-52 in what I thought at first was a basketball score 2) A lost to John Carroll 17-10 who is ranked 3rd in this fan poll.
I really know zero about Baldwin Wallace or Washington (Mo.) but they were both victories on the road so that should count for a little something I would think. So what say you about Ohio Northern? Again I appreciate all the great responses as they are fast track education for me on the North Region.
GO BASH!
ONU was sexier when they had that road win against 2013 playoff team WashU instead if that road win against 1-4 and has only beat North Park in 2014 WashU.
69 points vs Heidelberg? No thanks
Looks like RHIT is going to slip out of the rankings...
Never mind about Ohio Northern.
I threw a dart for #10. Considered Otterbein, Franklin, MSJ, Adrian, Trine, RHIT, IWU...
I think the OAC has a big drop between 3 and 4. That's a bit unusual...
For those of you who weren't watching, all Simpson has done since beating IWU 3 weeks ago is go 0-2, losing to Buena Vista (its not a vacation destination) and 2-3 Dubuque (by 34).
My ballot this week was identical to last week, except for flipping JCU and Wabash at 2 and 3. On my national ballot last week I had Wabash in front, but for some reason put JCU in front on the regional ballot.
My ballot was identical this week as well.
I flopped JCU and Witt. Too high on the Old Tigers...
I made some significant changes to my ballot this week.
My top five stayed the same, but the bottom five....... changed, yet again. :P :P
Some changes for me, I wouldn't call it wholesale though.
Also might cobble together a first look at the at-large situation sometime later this week. Everybody is halfway through at this point so let the rampant speculation begin.
I am going to avoid the Christmas rush and post my poll now (Sorry Wes)
my top 10 for Oct 12:
UMU
Bash
JCU
NCC
Witt
Wheaton
Heidelberg
Univ of Chicago
Mt St Joe
Depauw
I kept my top 3, dropped Wheaton to 6th and bumped NCC from 6th to 4th. Wheaton had 35 yds (all rushing) in the second half @Augie in a game they were losing. Their defense was very good or I would have dropped them further. They have issues at QB. Witt was unimpressive and NCC continues to roll no matter who they put at QB so I don't see Wheaton as any kind of favorite a week from Saturday when they play. Heidi stayed at 7 and I swapped Univ of Chicago and Mt St Joes. I saw U of C's victory @Trinity as a slight validation of their defense so I gave them the nod. the battle I have been waiting for on my MTSJ pick is this week (v Franklin). I kicked RHIT out and added Depauw. I thought about putting Depauw as high as 8th but chose to wait and see but I suspect they will win out before the Monon game.
Wes, no poll this week?
Here's the poll. Gotta get in 'em in early if you want it early. Just the nature of my schedule. Sorry gang. If I don't have them by Tuesday, it won't get up until late Thurs/early Fri.
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Wabash 69 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4)
3. John Carroll 66 pts (2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4. Wittenberg 52 pts (4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6)
5. North Central 51 pts (3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6)
6. Wheaton 40 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7)
7. Heidelberg 30 pts (6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9)
8. Chicago 20 pts (7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, -)
9. DePauw 13 pts (8, 8, 8, 9, 10, 10, -, -)
10. Mount St Joseph 9 pts (7, 9, 10, 10, 10, -, -, -)
ARV
Franklin 3 pts (8, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Illinois Wesleyan 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Albion 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Trine 2 pts (10, 10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Adrian 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
NRFP is voted on by smedindy, Li'l Giant, NCF, wally_wabash, USee, FCGrizzliesGrad, Mr. Ypsi, and myself.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on October 17, 2014, 01:57:41 AM
Here's the poll. Gotta get in 'em in early if you want it early. Just the nature of my schedule. Sorry gang. If I don't have them by Tuesday, it won't get up until late Thurs/early Fri.
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Wabash 69 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4)
3. John Carroll 66 pts (2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4. Wittenberg 52 pts (4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6)
5. North Central 51 pts (3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6)
6. Wheaton 40 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7)
7. Heidelberg 30 pts (6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9)
8. Chicago 20 pts (7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, -)
9. DePauw 13 pts (8, 8, 8, 9, 10, 10, -, -)
10. Mount St Joseph 9 pts (7, 9, 10, 10, 10, -, -, -)
ARV
Franklin 3 pts (8, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Illinois Wesleyan 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Albion 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Trine 2 pts (10, 10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Adrian 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
NRFP is voted on by smedindy, Li'l Giant, NCF, wally_wabash, USee, FCGrizzliesGrad, Mr. Ypsi, and myself.
Starting to get some clarity... we've gone from 16 teams receiving votes to just 15 :D
Astute readers will note that I finally swapped Wabash and Witt. But if you're upset that you can't be upset about that, you can still complain about them being behind NCC.
DePauw would be my #11
With Chicago most likely losing, hopefully Franklin gets the win Saturday to really jumble the rankings yet again at the bottom ;)
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on October 17, 2014, 01:57:41 AM
Here's the poll. Gotta get in 'em in early if you want it early. Just the nature of my schedule. Sorry gang. If I don't have them by Tuesday, it won't get up until late Thurs/early Fri.
1. Mount Union 80 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Wabash 69 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4)
3. John Carroll 66 pts (2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4. Wittenberg 52 pts (4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6)
5. North Central 51 pts (3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6)
6. Wheaton 40 pts (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7)
7. Heidelberg 30 pts (6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9)
8. Chicago 20 pts (7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, -)
9. DePauw 13 pts (8, 8, 8, 9, 10, 10, -, -)
10. Mount St Joseph 9 pts (7, 9, 10, 10, 10, -, -, -)
ARV
Franklin 3 pts (8, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Illinois Wesleyan 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Albion 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Trine 2 pts (10, 10, -, -, -, -, -, -)
Adrian 1 pt (10, -, -, -, -, -, -, -)
NRFP is voted on by smedindy, Li'l Giant, NCF, wally_wabash, USee, FCGrizzliesGrad, Mr. Ypsi, and myself.
I don't know a whole lot about D3 other than the NCAC but it seems to me that Witts lack of a running game(only 774yds to date) that they would be hard pressed to keep pace with Heidelberg's offensive scoring machine. Has North Central really fallen off that much this year?
Quote from: bashgiant on October 17, 2014, 05:44:42 AM
I don't know a whole lot about D3 other than the NCAC but it seems to me that Witts lack of a running game(only 774yds to date) that they would be hard pressed to keep pace with Heidelberg's offensive scoring machine. Has North Central really fallen off that much this year?
Heidelberg likes to make a whole lot of bad teams look really bad. But when the lights go on and it's go time, they don't look all that special. Over and over again in the last few seasons, we've seen Heidelberg's offense go full turtle as soon they play somebody good.
I've seen Witt sleepwalk through September before, have a result or two that makes you think that they've taken a step backward and then they go and win the league. In 2012 they had narrow, unappealing wins against Wooster and CWRU, then lost to Wabash, then destroyed everybody until snow and injuries got them in the second round at Hobart (included in that run was a monster comeback against previously mentioned Heidelberg...one more instance of Heidelberg getting really small when the stakes go way up). Witt's got a new OC this year, some new offensive personnel...some of what we're seeing might be that adjustment, some of it might be keeping things close before the games get big here in the second half (starting tomorrow). My hunch is that Witt will have the pump primed when November rolls around.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 17, 2014, 02:38:48 AM
With Chicago most likely losing, hopefully Franklin gets the win Saturday to really jumble the rankings yet again at the bottom ;)
A question here: if Chicago loses to a team that you're expecting them to lose to, why would that be cause for them to fall in the rankings?
"7th-ranked-in-the-North" Chicago losing to "4th-ranked-in-the-West" Bethel (presumably, based on the Top 25, as of today the West RR's would be something like UWW, Linfield, Wartburg, Bethel) would be a perfectly normal result. If they get curbstomped, I would understand dropping them, but why would someone drop an undefeated team that falls to 5-1 with a loss to a higher-ranked opponent below other teams (absent a big result from one of those teams, like a win over a higher-ranked opponent)?
I know that this happens in polls all the time - I'm already anticipating the inevitable drop of John Carroll in the national polls from #7ish to #11ish if they lose to Mount Union - but it's dumb.
I wouldn't drop Chicago out against Bethel unless it was reminiscent of a Mt. Union - Muskingum game.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 17, 2014, 11:21:39 AM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 17, 2014, 02:38:48 AM
With Chicago most likely losing, hopefully Franklin gets the win Saturday to really jumble the rankings yet again at the bottom ;)
A question here: if Chicago loses to a team that you're expecting them to lose to, why would that be cause for them to fall in the rankings?
"7th-ranked-in-the-North" Chicago losing to "4th-ranked-in-the-West" Bethel (presumably, based on the Top 25, as of today the West RR's would be something like UWW, Linfield, Wartburg, Bethel) would be a perfectly normal result. If they get curbstomped, I would understand dropping them, but why would someone drop an undefeated team that falls to 5-1 with a loss to a higher-ranked opponent below other teams (absent a big result from one of those teams, like a win over a higher-ranked opponent)?
I know that this happens in polls all the time - I'm already anticipating the inevitable drop of John Carroll in the national polls from #7ish to #11ish if they lose to Mount Union - but it's dumb.
Co-sign.
Quote from: BashDad on October 17, 2014, 01:58:45 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 17, 2014, 11:21:39 AM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 17, 2014, 02:38:48 AM
With Chicago most likely losing, hopefully Franklin gets the win Saturday to really jumble the rankings yet again at the bottom ;)
A question here: if Chicago loses to a team that you're expecting them to lose to, why would that be cause for them to fall in the rankings?
"7th-ranked-in-the-North" Chicago losing to "4th-ranked-in-the-West" Bethel (presumably, based on the Top 25, as of today the West RR's would be something like UWW, Linfield, Wartburg, Bethel) would be a perfectly normal result. If they get curbstomped, I would understand dropping them, but why would someone drop an undefeated team that falls to 5-1 with a loss to a higher-ranked opponent below other teams (absent a big result from one of those teams, like a win over a higher-ranked opponent)?
I know that this happens in polls all the time - I'm already anticipating the inevitable drop of John Carroll in the national polls from #7ish to #11ish if they lose to Mount Union - but it's dumb.
Co-sign.
Sometimes it's not who a team loses to, but the fact that they lost. I can't speak for others but often it's when a team loses that I pay extra attention and reevaluate where I think they should be ranked. Doesn't mean they're automatically dropping a certain number of spots, but it is a perfect time to look back at how their season has been and compare to the teams around them.
::)
I would be very, very surprised to see Bethel lose at home to Chicago tomorrow. The level of physicality the Royals play with is way, way above anything Chicago will have seen. They are obviously good and playing well under a new coaching staff, I am also sure Chicago has some skill players that will match up well with the Royals but the depth and experience of Bethel will most likely overwhelm the Maroons. Upsets happen but I don't think this will be one of them.
So if Bethel beats Chicago, say 28-21, you're STILL going to drop Chicago? Heck, if they stay within 7-10 points of Bethel up there I'd maybe raise their ranking.
In thinking about rankings when a team faces someone out of their weight class, especially if it's a non-conference non-traditional opponent, on the road, I wouldn't penalize them for keeping it within expectations or bettering expectations while losing.
Massey has Bethel winning by 25 in his prediction algorithm. That may be a bit high, but there's not a lot of commonality in their universes (in ANY aspect, but the academic and institutional differences between Bethel and UC could probably be a weighty tome...so I'll keep this to their football universes). Objectively, Bethel's at least a two-three TD favorite, at home. If UC keeps it within those boundaries, good on them...
Most every team in the North would be underdogs at Bethel. Mt. Union wouldn't be. But even Wabash, JCU or North Central may be underdogs AT Bethel. If not, then a pick 'em or a spread within a couple of points. Yes, they lost to Wartburg to kick off the year, but Wartburg may have one of THOSE teams, which in a crowded West may end against a Purple (like it does here, alas...) and Bethel's hasn't let down since then.
Quote from: smedindy on October 17, 2014, 02:39:41 PM
So if Bethel beats Chicago, say 28-21, you're STILL going to drop Chicago? Heck, if they stay within 7-10 points of Bethel up there I'd maybe raise their ranking.
I've never said I was definitely dropping them. Just that another loss by a team in the lower rungs of the poll could create yet another shakeup and that it's a perfect time to go back and reevaluate their season.
Smed,
Not sure if you were talking to me or that wabashing FCGriz dude but Chicago stays in poll no matter the result. I compare it to the beat down Mt Union puts on every OAC and undefeated #2 each year. They typically drop 3-4 spots in the top 25 or about 10-20%. That makes Chicago go from 7-9 in my poll.
As far as favorites @Bethel, NCC played in Arden Hills in the playoffs last year and put a 41-17 physical pounding on the undefeated Royals so I don't think I would be giving the Cardinals points in a rematch.
I wasn't talking to you. USee.
But this isn't last year's NC team. Last year's NC team shoulda coulda woulda beaten Mt. Union. I don't think this year's can.
Quote from: smedindy on October 17, 2014, 03:38:44 PM
I wasn't talking to you. USee.
But this isn't last year's NC team. Last year's NC team shoulda coulda woulda beaten Mt. Union. I don't think this year's can.
We aren't talking about Mt Union. You were talking about Bethel and NCC getting points. You really think Bethel is 24 pts better vs NCC than they were last year? And Mt Union isn't the same team either. Not sure if they are better or worse. Haven't played anybody yet.
No, I didn't say NC was 24 points better. Did you read my post? I was talking about UC being that big of an underdog, not North Central.
QuoteMost every team in the North would be underdogs at Bethel. Mt. Union wouldn't be. But even Wabash, JCU or North Central may be underdogs AT Bethel. If not, then a pick 'em or a spread within a couple of points
Quote from: smedindy on October 17, 2014, 03:52:29 PM
No, I didn't say NC was 24 points better. Did you read my post? I was talking about UC being that big of an underdog, not North Central.
QuoteMost every team in the North would be underdogs at Bethel. Mt. Union wouldn't be. But even Wabash, JCU or North Central may be underdogs AT Bethel. If not, then a pick 'em or a spread within a couple of points
The bold part is what I read. Am I missing something or did you say North Central would be an underdog AT Bethel? I just don't think I can agree that a team that won 41-17 last year would be an underdog with 15 of the same starters this year.
Did you say something different?
Yes, I do. I guess the pollsters would too.
Quote from: smedindy on October 17, 2014, 08:22:24 PM
Yes, I do. I guess the pollsters would too.
Those would be the same pollsters that ranked them 5th and 6th in the final poll last year? The same pollsters who have Bethel at 12, NCC at 13 and UWSP (undefeated w a win over NCC) at 14? Got it. Makes a lot of sense.
I don't know what logical argument there is that makes Bethel a favorite over NCC in any location.
Your argument says maybe that North Central should be LOWER than 13.
Last year is last year by the way - this is this year.
Quote from: smedindy on October 18, 2014, 02:03:04 AM
Your argument says maybe that North Central should be LOWER than 13.
Last year is last year by the way - this is this year.
Your assumption is that the pollsters are right. My argument simply highlights the inefficiency of data from a poll.
Last week is last week too. Do we totally ignore that? And if Last year was Last year why did you say
Quote from: smedindy on October 17, 2014, 03:38:44 PM
But this isn't last year's NC team. Last year's NC team shoulda coulda woulda beaten Mt. Union. I don't think this year's can.
The reality is this years team is different but results from less than a year ago when 2/3 of the players are the same people are not irrelevant. They are also not an absolute predictor of outcomes either but the data informs us. Otherwise on what basis are we ranking anybody? How do we know Mt Union is any good when they haven't played anybody yet? Does it have nothing to do with the fact they have won every league game since before SpongeBob Squarepants was born? Saying Last year is last year is a copout.
How many points are you giving me to take NCC @Bethel?
Big game in Cincinnati today with Franklin @Mt St Joes. I have been high on MSJ all season and have thought they can beat Franklin. They have a good defense and running game I'll be interested to see if it matches up with Franklin.
Can we just cut this down to a Top 6 poll?
#7 Heidelberg lost, #8 Chicago is losing, #9 DePauw lost, #10 Mount St Joseph lost, #T12 Illinois Wesleyan I think is losing, #T12 Trine lost
Earlham nearly won today... maybe they could sneak in at 10th :D
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 18, 2014, 04:50:57 PM
Can we just cut this down to a Top 6 poll?
#7 Heidelberg lost, #8 Chicago is losing, #9 DePauw lost, #10 Mount St Joseph lost, #T12 Illinois Wesleyan I think is losing, #T12 Trine lost
Earlham nearly won today... maybe they could sneak in at 10th :D
IWU lost 7-2 to Augustana. Brutal. This is also the last time in 2014 that I'l mention IWU in this space.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 18, 2014, 05:31:47 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 18, 2014, 04:50:57 PM
Can we just cut this down to a Top 6 poll?
#7 Heidelberg lost, #8 Chicago is losing, #9 DePauw lost, #10 Mount St Joseph lost, #T12 Illinois Wesleyan I think is losing, #T12 Trine lost
Earlham nearly won today... maybe they could sneak in at 10th :D
IWU lost 7-2 to Augustana. Brutal. This is also the last time in 2014 that I'l mention IWU in this space.
That was IWU's homecoming game. Brutal x2.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 18, 2014, 05:31:47 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 18, 2014, 04:50:57 PM
Can we just cut this down to a Top 6 poll?
#7 Heidelberg lost, #8 Chicago is losing, #9 DePauw lost, #10 Mount St Joseph lost, #T12 Illinois Wesleyan I think is losing, #T12 Trine lost
Earlham nearly won today... maybe they could sneak in at 10th :D
IWU lost 7-2 to Augustana. Brutal. This is also the last time in 2014 that I'l mention IWU in this space.
So no mention in two weeks of who North Central will have just beaten that day or Wheaton in 3 weeks?
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 18, 2014, 06:16:31 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 18, 2014, 05:31:47 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 18, 2014, 04:50:57 PM
Can we just cut this down to a Top 6 poll?
#7 Heidelberg lost, #8 Chicago is losing, #9 DePauw lost, #10 Mount St Joseph lost, #T12 Illinois Wesleyan I think is losing, #T12 Trine lost
Earlham nearly won today... maybe they could sneak in at 10th :D
IWU lost 7-2 to Augustana. Brutal. This is also the last time in 2014 that I'l mention IWU in this space.
So no mention in two weeks of who North Central will have just beaten that day or Wheaton in 3 weeks?
Not taking the bait. :)
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 18, 2014, 04:50:57 PM
Can we just cut this down to a Top 6 poll?
#7 Heidelberg lost, #8 Chicago is losing, #9 DePauw lost, #10 Mount St Joseph lost, #T12 Illinois Wesleyan I think is losing, #T12 Trine lost
Earlham nearly won today... maybe they could sneak in at 10th :D
Heidelberg lost a game they were supposed to lose. No need to ding them especially with the other carnage afoot. They're still a better club than whatever the HCAC and MIAA have out there.
Same with Chicago. I mean, they didn't look great, but they weren't supposed to beat Bethel. No need to ding them much.
I guess RHIT and Adrian can get more consideration now? Perhaps OWU, B-W or Otterbein?
Quote from: smedindy on October 18, 2014, 08:25:58 PM
Heidelberg lost a game they were supposed to lose. No need to ding them especially with the other carnage afoot. They're still a better club than whatever the HCAC and MIAA have out there.
Are they? How come every time Heidelberg plays an important game, their best players vanish?
They lost to Mt. Union. I don't think anyone in their right mind thought they'd win so I can't say they really vanished today. There wasn't any 'Berg hype this year. They did score 17 on Mt. Union, who had given up just 20 all year. Hooray for small wins!
I think 'Berg may be susceptible when better athletes work a game plan derived to shut down their best players, and Heidelberg hasn't been able to make adjustments. I can't say that Franklin or Adrian or MSJ would beat them this year.
Quote from: USee on October 17, 2014, 09:30:54 PM
I don't know what logical argument there is that makes Bethel a favorite over NCC in any location.
How about the fact that Bethel played the playoff game without their MIAC MVP QB, injured in the 3rd Q v. Wartburg the week before. (not saying they win with Peterson, but it matters he didn't play)
While NCC graduated their stud at QB, Bethel brought theirs back.
I'm not saying Bethel wins, still too much season left and some really good MIAC match ups (probably wouldn't say the same about the CCIW this year, which is rare). But there are definitely "logical arguments" to be made for Bethel winning.
Quote from: hazzben on October 18, 2014, 09:53:43 PM
Quote from: USee on October 17, 2014, 09:30:54 PM
I don't know what logical argument there is that makes Bethel a favorite over NCC in any location.
How about the fact that Bethel played the playoff game without their MIAC MVP QB, injured in the 3rd Q v. Wartburg the week before. (not saying they win with Peterson, but it matters he didn't play)
While NCC graduated their stud at QB, Bethel brought theirs back.
I'm not saying Bethel wins, still too much season left and some really good MIAC match ups (probably wouldn't say the same about the CCIW this year, which is rare). But there are definitely "logical arguments" to be made for Bethel winning.
Great. If the matchup happens I will expect all you guys to be giving me points. I'll take as many as your confidence will allow.
P.S. What part about Peterson being hurt last year affected your defense giving up 41 pts? I am sure Bethel would have scored 50 with Peterson though! 8-)
Quote from: smedindy on October 18, 2014, 09:26:24 PM
They lost to Mt. Union. I don't think anyone in their right mind thought they'd win so I can't say they really vanished today. There wasn't any 'Berg hype this year. They did score 17 on Mt. Union, who had given up just 20 all year. Hooray for small wins!
I think 'Berg may be susceptible when better athletes work a game plan derived to shut down their best players, and Heidelberg hasn't been able to make adjustments. I can't say that Franklin or Adrian or MSJ would beat them this year.
Cartel Brooks: 7 carries, one yard. ONE YARD. This isn't new, either. This happens every time we shine the lights on Heidelberg.
I can't say that Adrian or MSJ would beat them. I definitely can't say they wouldn't beat them either. Heidelberg hasn't done a thing to convince me that they're any better than any other 2nd or 3rd place team in the region. The whole, "hey, Heidelberg used to be awful and now they're not" shine is off for me.
Heidelberg stinks defensively. Bad. They can't stop a good offense. Their only chance is to out score people and that will work well enough to go 8-2 again this year. It just doesn't work against teams like Mount, JCU. But let's not kid ourselves, IMO they would score all over teams like Franklin (this year), Adrian or MSJ. The level of athleticism is not the same on those defenses. The question is could Berg stop any of those 3 teams?
Also, I thought depending on the outcome today maybe Wooster gets some love. I watched some of that game. The only other Scots game I watched was W&J. Have I picked two duds or are they just that inept defensively? They did not look good either time.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 18, 2014, 11:16:30 PM
Also, I thought depending on the outcome today maybe Wooster gets some love. I watched some of that game. The only other Scots game I watched was W&J. Have I picked two duds or are they just that inept defensively? They did not look good either time.
Yeah, defense is an issue for Wooster. Last year, Colaprete moved a bunch of his players around and had a lot of new guys playing new positions and they struggled. I assumed that they would have been markedly better this year after a year of experience and a year of time with the new coaching staff. Alas, no. They are still not very good on defense.
We spent some time here there and all over Post Patterns discussing the potential for tons of November intrigue in the NCAC. Today's results have shut all that down and Wabash and Witt will play a de facto championship game in Week 10.
I am shopping for a #9 and #10 team for my poll. Tough duty. Kind of the lesser of all evils. Starting to consider Elmhurst who at 4-2 isn't any worse looking than Adrian or some of the other options. They had a horrible opener losing @Loras but only other loss is to U of Chicago, who remains ranked in my poll. But their best win is Augustana, so slim pickins.
FWIW Chicago lost all its votes on the D3.com Top 25.
Quote from: USee on October 20, 2014, 12:17:58 AM
I am shopping for a #9 and #10 team for my poll. Tough duty. Kind of the lesser of all evils. Starting to consider Elmhurst who at 4-2 isn't any worse looking than Adrian or some of the other options. They had a horrible opener losing @Loras but only other loss is to U of Chicago, who remains ranked in my poll. But their best win is Augustana, so slim pickins.
I think Elmhurst would be a reasonable option at the bottom of the poll. None of the MIAA teams has really stood out (the league as a whole is quite competitive, good for a fan of the league, bad for putting a team into the rankings). I think Adrian looks a bit stronger than Elmhurst, but they have some odd common-opponent stuff that makes it difficult to be certain of that.
Adrian 40, Carthage 14 (complete domination; yardage 510-157) vs. Elmhurst 49, Carthage 42 (overtime win)
-or-
Olivet 28, Adrian 21 vs. Elmhurst 33, Olivet 27
One point each way, really. So, uh, take your pick.
One very general note...I think it's tempting for us fans (I'm guilty of this, too, not singling you out, USee, nor anyone else in the voting) to look at the bottom of the poll and say "Ugh, there are only 6 good teams this year!" - forgetting that 1) a 6-4 or 7-3 season, while not
nationally competitive,
is a successful year for most schools and 2) the fact that these teams are all competing with and beating one another is indicative of some parity in the middle of the Division.
It might mean that there are fewer teams we view as realistic contenders for a deep playoff run, but if it leads to more competitive games in the majority of the regular season, cool. In that regard I'm a bit envious of fans in leagues like the MIAA and ODAC, which have been perceived as rather middling conferences but over the past few seasons have really had an "Any Given Saturday" feel to them. The MIAA has not produced a playoff juggernaut for a long time, and perhaps that's just indicative of mediocrity all around the conference, but I think it's neat to enter the season feeling like most everyone in the league will be competitive against one another.
I took a peek at Elmhurst, but passed. We're at the point in the season where I think if you want to be ranked with two losses, you ought to have some kind of meat on that bone. Elmhurst does not. Kind of the same reason I've put Heidelberg back out. If you're going to be 4-2, you need to have done something with those 4 or made a good accounting for yourself with those 2 and you definitely can't be the only team that lost to Loras.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 20, 2014, 09:43:54 AM
I took a peek at Elmhurst, but passed. We're at the point in the season where I think if you want to be ranked with two losses, you ought to have some kind of meat on that bone. Elmhurst does not. Kind of the same reason I've put Heidelberg back out. If you're going to be 4-2, you need to have done something with those 4 or made a good accounting for yourself with those 2 and you definitely can't be the only team that lost to Loras.
I'll be interested to see who meets your criteria. I ended up passing on Elmhurst as well. There isn't much meat on any bones down below #8.
ExTartan, I agree with your comments. The problem is usually you have a couple teams trending higher while a few others may be trending lower. Right now, this week, with #7-10 losing, most of these teams are all trending lower. It makes it a little harder and you have to dig deeper for data to separate the teams.
Quote from: USee on October 20, 2014, 11:58:52 AM
ExTartan, I agree with your comments. The problem is usually you have a couple teams trending higher while a few others may be trending lower. Right now, this week, with #7-10 losing, most of these teams are all trending lower. It makes it a little harder and you have to dig deeper for data to separate the teams.
Oh, sure. There are a slew of teams with records in the 3-3, 4-2, 4-3 range right now that are nearly impossible to disentangle to comprise a set of rankings. I just don't want to fall into the trap of talking about teams en route to winning seasons like they're not any good, or acting like the only teams that matter are the 9-1 and 10-0 teams. It's tempting to look at the warts on anyone's resume and forget that a 7-3 season, even if it includes a weird loss or lacks many "quality wins" - is still a fine year for most teams.
Quote from: USee on October 20, 2014, 11:58:52 AMThere isn't much meat on any bones down below #8.
Agree. Any of those 4-2 teams can be argued for or against. Not sure it's worth the effort at this point, but it can be done.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 20, 2014, 09:43:54 AM
I took a peek at Elmhurst, but passed. We're at the point in the season where I think if you want to be ranked with two losses, you ought to have some kind of meat on that bone. Elmhurst does not. Kind of the same reason I've put Heidelberg back out. If you're going to be 4-2, you need to have done something with those 4 or made a good accounting for yourself with those 2 and you definitely can't be the only team that lost to Loras.
I would also point out that it's very difficult to weigh games in week 1 with much credibility either way as many teams are vastly different now than they were then. Losing at Loras is a really, really bad outcome though. Does anyone still think IWU beats Franklin if they played again today? Could any of us have contemplated IWU losing at home to Carthage and Augie while scoring a combined 12 pts? Teams have injuries and changes that affect them significantly.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 20, 2014, 09:43:54 AM
I took a peek at Elmhurst, but passed. We're at the point in the season where I think if you want to be ranked with two losses, you ought to have some kind of meat on that bone. Elmhurst does not. Kind of the same reason I've put Heidelberg back out. If you're going to be 4-2, you need to have done something with those 4 or made a good accounting for yourself with those 2 and you definitely can't be the only team that lost to Loras.
... by three touchdowns, no less. Even though it was back in Week One, as USee said that's a really, really bad outcome.
I know that you guys are struggling to find worthy teams to slot at the bottom of the poll, but anyone who puts Elmhurst on his ballot is truly reaching. The Bluejays simply aren't very good. In a more typical CCIW season, this particular Elmhurst team would wind up the campaign 5-5 or 4-6, or maybe even 3-7. Even with their respective QB woes, both North Central and Wheaton should beat the Bluejays handily.
I do get that teams evolve and change over the course of the season, but there just aren't enough games for me to dismiss a full 10% of a team's results. Week 1 games have to count.
Whether it's because it's week one or it's a rivalry game or some player was hurt or whatever else, we can always find a reason to shrug off a result we don't like, can't we?
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 20, 2014, 09:41:27 PM
I do get that teams evolve and change over the course of the season, but there just aren't enough games for me to dismiss a full 10% of a team's results. Week 1 games have to count.
Whether it's because it's week one or it's a rivalry game or some player was hurt or whatever else, we can always find a reason to shrug off a result we don't like, can't we?
Yes but the inverse is also true, which is we can easily find a way to ignore team we shouldn't. There are plenty of examples of teams who have bad losses and come back to make deep runs and/or beat teams no one gave them a chance to beat.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 20, 2014, 09:41:27 PM
I do get that teams evolve and change over the course of the season, but there just aren't enough games for me to dismiss a full 10% of a team's results. Week 1 games have to count.
Whether it's because it's week one or it's a rivalry game or some player was hurt or whatever else, we can always find a reason to shrug off a result we don't like, can't we?
It's not a result we don't like, dude. It's a result that has a different nuance than a run-of-the-mill thing. Rigid thinking gets one into traps.
I don't SHRUG anything off....there's nuances. It's not binary.
Quote from: USee on October 21, 2014, 12:20:57 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 20, 2014, 09:41:27 PM
I do get that teams evolve and change over the course of the season, but there just aren't enough games for me to dismiss a full 10% of a team's results. Week 1 games have to count.
Whether it's because it's week one or it's a rivalry game or some player was hurt or whatever else, we can always find a reason to shrug off a result we don't like, can't we?
Yes but the inverse is also true, which is we can easily find a way to ignore team we shouldn't. There are plenty of examples of teams who have bad losses and come back to make deep runs and/or beat teams no one gave them a chance to beat.
Very true, but in this case it should be noted that I didn't ignore Elmhurst- I did mention that I looked at Elmhurst and found that, for me at least, they haven't won any game or performed to a level that warrants overruling that awful result against Loras. Elmhurst has those opportunities coming up (not this week, but in November). I promise that if Elmhurst beats Wheaton and is 6-2 after that game, they'll be in my ten.
Quote from: smedindy on October 21, 2014, 01:22:30 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 20, 2014, 09:41:27 PM
I do get that teams evolve and change over the course of the season, but there just aren't enough games for me to dismiss a full 10% of a team's results. Week 1 games have to count.
Whether it's because it's week one or it's a rivalry game or some player was hurt or whatever else, we can always find a reason to shrug off a result we don't like, can't we?
It's not a result we don't like, dude. It's a result that has a different nuance than a run-of-the-mill thing. Rigid thinking gets one into traps.
I don't SHRUG anything off....there's nuances. It's not binary.
I wasn't taking shots- just laying out an amalgam of all of the different reasons (excuses?) I've read in many different corners of Post Patterns about why people rank teams they way they do in spite of clear h2h results.
Wally,
In the case of Elmhurst I agree with you and didn't put them in my ten either. I was just responding to the general comment and pointing out the inverse is a problem as well.
But again, there's more than clear H2H results...as data collects.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on October 17, 2014, 01:57:41 AM
Here's the poll. Gotta get in 'em in early if you want it early. Just the nature of my schedule. Sorry gang. If I don't have them by Tuesday, it won't get up until late Thurs/early Fri.
I know 4 of the people who vote in this poll also participate in the Top 25 poll and always are in by Tuesday. So of you other four... who's the straggler that forces us to wait another couple days? >:( Maybe we need some suspensions... no tardiness or steroids allowed ;D
My poll has beenin by Sunday afternoon every week.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 22, 2014, 12:11:32 AM
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on October 17, 2014, 01:57:41 AM
Here's the poll. Gotta get in 'em in early if you want it early. Just the nature of my schedule. Sorry gang. If I don't have them by Tuesday, it won't get up until late Thurs/early Fri.
I know 4 of the people who vote in this poll also participate in the Top 25 poll and always are in by Tuesday. So of you other four... who's the straggler that forces us to wait another couple days? >:( Maybe we need some suspensions... no tardiness or steroids allowed ;D
People got stuff goin' on...
Hopefully we get a poll this week. I had a team at 11 last week that I didn't see any talk about and they're going to make it on my ballot this week... but of course I fully expect them to lose ::) Only once this season have the teams I've ranked 9th and 10th both managed to avoid losing in the same week.
Hey, look who showed up against Marietta- Cartel Brooks and his 249 yards. Heidelberg is all glamour muscles, no core. Not in my ten.
I had similar thoughts in Triple Take. I am not in love with that turn of events.
Of course, there has to be a team BETTER than them, or a few. None of the MIAA teams to me are. None of the HCAC teams are, really, except maybe Franklin. Not sold on MSJ. None of the NCAC teams are, really. No one south of Wheaton / North Central in the CCIW. They beat a good Otterbein team in the OAC. Chicago? Dunno.
So this may just be a absolutist way of thinking because a good team doesn't match up with better teams so you unfairly penalize them because they're not elite.
Massey has Heidelberg at 41 right now, and there's enough data where the ratings start to make sense. He has Wheaton at 42.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 26, 2014, 05:39:49 PM
Hey, look who showed up against Marietta- Cartel Brooks and his 249 yards. Heidelberg is all glamour muscles, no core. Not in my ten.
Weren't in my top ten either.
Massey ratings in the North (he's got the NESCAC in there, normalized to null football team across all divsions and not D-3, but you can see the relative ratings anyway); there's enough games and connectivity now that it makes sense. Results build on results so teams that beat other teams can be lower based on their other results and wins and losses.
6. Mt. Union (actually 5th before you go nuts because Amherst is in there- the four in front of them are very plausible).
14. John Carroll
16. Wabash
28. Wittenberg
30. North Central
41. Heidelberg
42. Wheaton (dinged for their non-conference and close wins to meh teams).
75. Otterbein
80. Ohio Northern
85. Chicago
97. Franklin
100. DPU
114. B-W
116. Hope
118. Wooster
119. Denison
124. Elmhurst
125. Ohio Wesleyan
132. Adrian
133. Augustana
139. MSJ
141. Hiram (I've never seen Hiram over 200 before...)
145. Albion
153. Illinois Wesleyan (thud...)
155. RHIT
159. Trine (surprising, I voted for them in my 10...but that Manchester loss does not look good in the algorithm).
160. Olivet
163. Concordia (WI)
170. Carthage
171. Marietta
174. Lakeland
175. Oberlin
176. Muskingum
177. Bluffton
179. Wisconsin Lutheran
182. Capital (Rocky Pentello ain't walkin' through that door...)
194. Manchester
196. Benedictine
204. Defiance
205. North Park
206. Kalamazoo
208. Allegheny
211. Millikin
219. Kenyon
220. Wilmington
222. Hanover
223. Anderson
232. Aurora
236. Concordia (IL)
237. Rockford
238. Earlham
Out of 245...
I don't have 'Berg in my Posters Poll top 25, and they're one bad game from being out of this Top 10, but I don't think there are 10 teams better than them here.
Quote from: smedindy on October 26, 2014, 06:30:03 PM
I don't have 'Berg in my Posters Poll top 25, and they're one bad game from being out of this Top 10, but I don't think there are 10 teams better than them here.
But maybe that's the point. Because if they played a regionally ranked team that would be a big game and we know what they do in big games. Or rather, what they don't do.
But regional rankings aren't necessarily congruent with the best teams in the region - if you recall when Concordia - Chicago was so highly ranked.
We are talking about a team that's only lost to playoff teams (counting this season if they win out and JCU and MTU both make it) in the past three seasons. It's not like they lost to someone inferior. Their last non-playoff loss was a 2011 loss to B-W, which was an upset loss by Capital from making the playoffs. If they go 8-2 again this season, I think they're definitely one of the best 10 teams in the region - and better than probably all of the MIAA and HCAC.
This would be a much easier conversation to have if every time we put an MIAA into the 10, they go out and get drilled by somebody out of the NACC (I prefer the NathCON, but sadly we seem to have left that behind). Maybe we aren't paying enough attention to that league in this forum.
I agree with LG there though; I've not seen any evidence that Heidelberg is actually better than Franklin or a MIAA champ or a runner up from the CCIW or NCAC. While they have, for three years now, been demolishing the bad teams in their league (and Alma), they aren't beating anybody that I don't think could also be beaten by Franklin or an MIAA champ, etc. I've just stopped being wowed by their margins against the dregs of the OAC when they totally no show against UMU and JCU.
Quote from: smedindy on October 26, 2014, 10:48:38 PM
But regional rankings aren't necessarily congruent with the best teams in the region - if you recall when Concordia - Chicago was so highly ranked.
Are you referring to a couple years ago when they went 10-0 and lost to Bethel 24-23 after going for two late in the game? Seems like they were a decent enough team to me.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 27, 2014, 02:00:52 AM
This would be a much easier conversation to have if every time we put an MIAA into the 10, they go out and get drilled by somebody out of the NACC (I prefer the NathCON, but sadly we seem to have left that behind). Maybe we aren't paying enough attention to that league in this forum.
I agree with LG there though; I've not seen any evidence that Heidelberg is actually better than Franklin or a MIAA champ or a runner up from the CCIW or NCAC. While they have, for three years now, been demolishing the bad teams in their league (and Alma), they aren't beating anybody that I don't think could also be beaten by Franklin or an MIAA champ, etc. I've just stopped being wowed by their margins against the dregs of the OAC when they totally no show against UMU and JCU.
Berg isn't great. Everyone knows that. But I think it should be mentioned in their defense that they absolutely gave Mount a better game last year than Witt did. Berg was at least in the game (down 10 pretty much the entire 4th). Witt looked a lot like Berg on D getting their doors blown off all day long. So while Berg is absolutely flawed I think we need to remember that the vast majority of these other teams are too.
Wes has gone AWOL on us. No posts in 10 days. Everything ok?
I didn't think he'd take the loss to OWU so hard.
All kidding aside, based on his Twitter feed I think he's okay. He just must be swamped.
They had sectionals last week, and his team lost, because he tweeted half of his players were in tree stands this weekend. I'm sure he'll be back soon.
Quote from: USee on October 21, 2014, 12:20:57 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 20, 2014, 09:41:27 PM
I do get that teams evolve and change over the course of the season, but there just aren't enough games for me to dismiss a full 10% of a team's results. Week 1 games have to count.
Whether it's because it's week one or it's a rivalry game or some player was hurt or whatever else, we can always find a reason to shrug off a result we don't like, can't we?
Yes but the inverse is also true, which is we can easily find a way to ignore team we shouldn't. There are plenty of examples of teams who have bad losses and come back to make deep runs and/or beat teams no one gave them a chance to beat.
Is this true?
Quote from: BashDad on October 27, 2014, 08:22:03 PM
Quote from: USee on October 21, 2014, 12:20:57 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 20, 2014, 09:41:27 PM
I do get that teams evolve and change over the course of the season, but there just aren't enough games for me to dismiss a full 10% of a team's results. Week 1 games have to count.
Whether it's because it's week one or it's a rivalry game or some player was hurt or whatever else, we can always find a reason to shrug off a result we don't like, can't we?
Yes but the inverse is also true, which is we can easily find a way to ignore team we shouldn't. There are plenty of examples of teams who have bad losses and come back to make deep runs and/or beat teams no one gave them a chance to beat.
Is this true?
You think I'm lying? It's not hard to verify but for your benefit here you go:
2013 St John Fisher lost to 4 loss Salisbury, made the playoffs at 8-2 and lost to MHB in semis
2008 Wheaton lost in week 7 to a middle of the pack Elmhurst team by 14 pts. Made the playoffs at 8-2 and lost in the semi's to Mt Union.
2004 Carthage lost in week 5 35-0 to Augie, won the CCIW and lost in the quarter finals at Mt Union 38-20
** Though not the same category, Wheaton's game saturday night was an example of "bad wins" followed by winning a game no one thought they had a chance to win ;D
Plenty more but that's a start.
Quote from: USee on October 27, 2014, 08:42:28 PM
Quote from: BashDad on October 27, 2014, 08:22:03 PM
Quote from: USee on October 21, 2014, 12:20:57 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 20, 2014, 09:41:27 PM
I do get that teams evolve and change over the course of the season, but there just aren't enough games for me to dismiss a full 10% of a team's results. Week 1 games have to count.
Whether it's because it's week one or it's a rivalry game or some player was hurt or whatever else, we can always find a reason to shrug off a result we don't like, can't we?
Yes but the inverse is also true, which is we can easily find a way to ignore team we shouldn't. There are plenty of examples of teams who have bad losses and come back to make deep runs and/or beat teams no one gave them a chance to beat.
Is this true?
You think I'm lying? It's not hard to verify but for your benefit here you go:
2013 St John Fisher lost to 4 loss Salisbury, made the playoffs at 8-2 and lost to MHB in semis
2008 Wheaton lost in week 7 to a middle of the pack Elmhurst team by 14 pts. Made the playoffs at 8-2 and lost in the semi's to Mt Union.
2004 Carthage lost in week 5 35-0 to Augie, won the CCIW and lost in the quarter finals at Mt Union 38-20
** Though not the same category, Wheaton's game saturday night was an example of "bad wins" followed by winning a game no one thought they had a chance to win ;D
Plenty more but that's a start.
That 2008 Wheaton team dropped a fiddy-burger on Wabash in the 2nd round. That loss to Elmhurst sure pissed them off.
I guess I'm resisting "plenty."
Quote from: BashDad on October 27, 2014, 09:14:33 PM
I guess I'm resisting "plenty."
Ok, I gave you 3 examples off the top of my head. How many examples do you need. I know of at least 5 others I can research and I am guessing there are probably several others. So if you want to pay me for my time I can find "plenty". But for now, I am comfortable with my analysis and statement.
I think it's worth noting that the 2008 Wheaton and 2013 SJF teams needed a whole bunch of help in Week 11 to get invited. Particularly the 2008 Wheaton team...that Week 11 was bananas. Certainly, a two-loss team that gets into the field can win games, My point was that Elmhurst lost to Loras, who is terrible. Week 1 or not, that's a thing that happened. Elmhurst has the opportunity to make that result meaningless by going 7-0 in league play. But anything less and they won't be getting invited, mostly because of that result.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 27, 2014, 10:28:11 PM
I think it's worth noting that the 2008 Wheaton and 2013 SJF teams needed a whole bunch of help in Week 11 to get invited. Particularly the 2008 Wheaton team...that Week 11 was bananas. Certainly, a two-loss team that gets into the field can win games, My point was that Elmhurst lost to Loras, who is terrible. Week 1 or not, that's a thing that happened. Elmhurst has the opportunity to make that result meaningless by going 7-0 in league play. But anything less and they won't be getting invited, mostly because of that result.
True but its a new day and I highly doubt any 2 loss teams are getting in with only 5 Pool C bids.
As far as Elmhurst and Loras, to set the record straight, that was a bad, bad loss. But if you don't believe teams change, often dramatically, during a season then you haven't watched much football (the general "you" not the specific "you"). Elmhurst lost to Loras because they turned it over 7 times and ran for less than 100 yds. Just about every team in the country loses to Loras with 7 turnovers. In the 6 games since they have turned it over 9 times total and have averaged near 200 yds rushing. They are dramatically better now than they were in week 1. I expect a battle this weekend when they play Wheaton.
Teams may change but you can't erase the result when it's that bad. It was week one yes, and on the road, but it's not like North Central flying all the way to Redlands to play. It was freakin' Loras, who were 4-26 the past three years before this season.
If Wabash played Manchester week one, and loss, and they somehow finished 8-2 after that, they wouldn't be going either.
Plus, there's a big difference between "big runs" and "beating a team no one expected them to beat".
Plus, you can't even compare Loras to Salisbury or even to 2004 Augie.
Quote from: smedindy on October 27, 2014, 11:18:20 PM
Teams may change but you can't erase the result when it's that bad. It was week one yes, and on the road, but it's not like North Central flying all the way to Redlands to play. It was freakin' Loras, who were 4-26 the past three years before this season.
If Wabash played Manchester week one, and loss, and they somehow finished 8-2 after that, they wouldn't be going either.
Plus, there's a big difference between "big runs" and "beating a team no one expected them to beat".
Plus, you can't even compare Loras to Salisbury or even to 2004 Augie.
I don't disagree at all. I don't think Elmhurst is a playoff team unless they win out, which will take another, dramatic, evolution of their team. And at 8-2 they would be the AQ from the CCIW so they aren't even a candidate for pool C under any scenario. They do appear in my NRFP 10 this week though.
Quote from: USee on October 27, 2014, 11:29:40 PMThey do appear in my NRFP 10 this week though.
Mine as well.
Quote from: USee on October 27, 2014, 11:01:02 PM
But if you don't believe teams change, often dramatically, during a season then you haven't watched much football (the general "you" not the specific "you").
I've watched a lot of football and I don't think teams "often" change dramatically over the course of the season.
Quote from: BashDad on October 28, 2014, 12:13:49 AM
Quote from: USee on October 27, 2014, 11:01:02 PM
But if you don't believe teams change, often dramatically, during a season then you haven't watched much football (the general "you" not the specific "you").
I've watched a lot of football and I don't think teams "often" change dramatically over the course of the season.
Ok, we definitely disagree and/or have watched a lot of different football. You seem to be arguing with everything I say with no real point.
Since it seems we're squabbling more about the definition of "often" than anything else, let's enumerate a couple of points here.
1. Some teams "are who we thought they were" - they debut in Week 1 as "really good" or "really bad" and stay that way throughout the season.
2. Some teams will find a spark or make a subtle change that lifts the team's ceiling up a level during the season. Whether that's a schematic shift, getting a top player back from an injury (let's go to everyone's favorite Wabash cautionary tale, the 2012 Oberlin team which lost Josh Mandel for three games at midseason and got rolled by some very mediocre teams, then got him back and promptly beat a 7-1 Wabash team otherwise destined for the playoffs), the insertion of a key player into the lineup (Nate Kmic in the 2005 playoffs, anyone?), the maturation of a unit (for example, a young offensive line beginning to gel at midseason), this stuff absolutely can happen during a season. If you truly believe that these things cannot happen...well, then I think you're arguing just for the sake of argument.
3. Some "really bad" teams will, unbelievably, manage to get worse as the season goes along (the flip side of some things above: a scheme change gone wrong, loss of a key player due to injury, a coach that "loses the locker room" or "stops reaching his players"), and a team that opened with a few close/competitive losses starts to get their doors blown off every week by season's end. I present to you the 2013 Hiram team that started off as feisty and above-usual-Hiram-looking as this team, lost Partridge for the season, and ended up on the wrong end of a bunch of blowouts in October and November.
4. Some teams that begin the season in that great wide middle of Division III, beneath the top 25 and above the bottom 25, will float upwards or downwards as the season goes along for the same reasons enumerated in #2 and #3; injuries, scheme change, discovery of a new key player, maturation of an existing player or unit. BashDad disputes the fact that this happens "often" - I disagree.
I think that almost every year, looking back, you can find some curious results from week 1 or 2 that might have made sense at the time, but in retrospect leave you wondering how they ever happened. Elmhurst still deserves to be docked for that loss to Loras - I am a firm believer that rankings and/or playoff seedings should be determined with all results weighed equally, not with a preference given to more recent results - but Elmhurst is starting to look plausible as a 9th or 10th-ranked candidate not just because they have a few wins strung together, but because everybody below the top six has warts.
For example, Franklin lost to a looking-worse-every-week IWU in the opener; at the start of the season, you could have passed that off as a tough opening game against a CCIW contender, but looking at IWU today (1-3 in the CCIW, only conference win against last-place Millikin, and bad OOC loss to Simpson, who - guess what - just lost to Loras!), that game looks almost as bad as the loss to Loras, and I don't think anyone's really disputing that Franklin deserves their spot around 7th or 8th in these rankings. I don't think it's a stone-cold lock that Elmhurst is one of the region's 10 best teams, but I also don't think you can dismiss them because of the worst result on their schedule; otherwise, you'll be tossing out a whole lot of other teams as well.
well said Tartan. with regard to Franklin, I agree that loss was considered a decent loss around labor day and now is starting to look worse and worse. That was a game where inexperience on defense and QB coupled with 2-3 untimely turnovers cost the GRIZ a game they could have still won and would probably win today. It is what it is. All that said, barring some sort of meltdown, Franklin should end up 8-0 in the conference and 8-2 overall with one loss to Whitewater. Probably be a 6-7 seed and hit the road somewhere (my take is Wabash/Witt winner or Wheaton or maybe a John Carroll). Who knows.
Quote from: GRIZ_BACKER on October 28, 2014, 10:11:57 AM
well said Tartan. with regard to Franklin, I agree that loss was considered a decent loss around labor day and now is starting to look worse and worse. That was a game where inexperience on defense and QB coupled with 2-3 untimely turnovers cost the GRIZ a game they could have still won and would probably win today. It is what it is. All that said, barring some sort of meltdown, Franklin should end up 8-0 in the conference and 8-2 overall with one loss to Whitewater. Probably be a 6-7 seed and hit the road somewhere (my take is Wabash/Witt winner or Wheaton or maybe a John Carroll). Who knows.
Maybe a trip back to Belton, TX., pull a UW-Lacrosse and play both the #1 and #2 teams in the country.
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 28, 2014, 10:16:16 AM
Quote from: GRIZ_BACKER on October 28, 2014, 10:11:57 AM
well said Tartan. with regard to Franklin, I agree that loss was considered a decent loss around labor day and now is starting to look worse and worse. That was a game where inexperience on defense and QB coupled with 2-3 untimely turnovers cost the GRIZ a game they could have still won and would probably win today. It is what it is. All that said, barring some sort of meltdown, Franklin should end up 8-0 in the conference and 8-2 overall with one loss to Whitewater. Probably be a 6-7 seed and hit the road somewhere (my take is Wabash/Witt winner or Wheaton or maybe a John Carroll). Who knows.
Maybe a trip back to Belton, TX., pull a UW-Lacrosse and play both the #1 and #2 teams in the country.
Trip to Belton would suggest Franklin will be an 8. IMO there will be a couple teams that get in as a conference winner with no resume etc. Franklin typically schedules a power team or two to beef up the quality of competition vs the HCAC slate. My gut says Witt/Bash or Wheaton. If John Carroll stands tough with Mount I can see them getting a 3.
Quote from: GRIZ_BACKER on October 28, 2014, 10:11:57 AM
well said Tartan. with regard to Franklin, I agree that loss was considered a decent loss around labor day and now is starting to look worse and worse. That was a game where inexperience on defense and QB coupled with 2-3 untimely turnovers cost the GRIZ a game they could have still won and would probably win today. It is what it is. All that said, barring some sort of meltdown, Franklin should end up 8-0 in the conference and 8-2 overall with one loss to Whitewater. Probably be a 6-7 seed and hit the road somewhere (my take is Wabash/Witt winner or Wheaton or maybe a John Carroll). Who knows.
It should be noted IWU is an example of a team that is dramatically different than it was. They lost their Frosh QB to Mono, they then inexplicably took their best defensive player and put him at QB. He had an emergency appendectomy the night before a game, their 3rd string kid played a game and a half and injured his knee and their 4th string qb just played in a one point loss to Elmhurst. So Franklin's loss was to a fairly different IWU team. I think since the opener its fair to say IWU's arrow has pointed down and Franklins has edged up. Two teams in two totally different places right now.
Quote from: USee on October 28, 2014, 10:28:29 AM
Quote from: GRIZ_BACKER on October 28, 2014, 10:11:57 AM
well said Tartan. with regard to Franklin, I agree that loss was considered a decent loss around labor day and now is starting to look worse and worse. That was a game where inexperience on defense and QB coupled with 2-3 untimely turnovers cost the GRIZ a game they could have still won and would probably win today. It is what it is. All that said, barring some sort of meltdown, Franklin should end up 8-0 in the conference and 8-2 overall with one loss to Whitewater. Probably be a 6-7 seed and hit the road somewhere (my take is Wabash/Witt winner or Wheaton or maybe a John Carroll). Who knows.
It should be noted IWU is an example of a team that is dramatically different than it was. They lost their Frosh QB to Mono, they then inexplicably took their best defensive player and put him at QB. He had an emergency appendectomy the night before a game, their 3rd string kid played a game and a half and injured his knee and their 4th string qb just played in a one point loss to Elmhurst. So Franklin's loss was to a fairly different IWU team. I think since the opener its fair to say IWU's arrow has pointed down and Franklins has edged up. Two teams in two totally different places right now.
Wow. Wasnt aware of all the bad luck the Titans have had to deal with. Good information and perspective.
Quote from: GRIZ_BACKER on October 28, 2014, 10:21:03 AM
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 28, 2014, 10:16:16 AM
Quote from: GRIZ_BACKER on October 28, 2014, 10:11:57 AM
well said Tartan. with regard to Franklin, I agree that loss was considered a decent loss around labor day and now is starting to look worse and worse. That was a game where inexperience on defense and QB coupled with 2-3 untimely turnovers cost the GRIZ a game they could have still won and would probably win today. It is what it is. All that said, barring some sort of meltdown, Franklin should end up 8-0 in the conference and 8-2 overall with one loss to Whitewater. Probably be a 6-7 seed and hit the road somewhere (my take is Wabash/Witt winner or Wheaton or maybe a John Carroll). Who knows.
Maybe a trip back to Belton, TX., pull a UW-Lacrosse and play both the #1 and #2 teams in the country.
Trip to Belton would suggest Franklin will be an 8. IMO there will be a couple teams that get in as a conference winner with no resume etc. Franklin typically schedules a power team or two to beef up the quality of competition vs the HCAC slate. My gut says Witt/Bash or Wheaton. If John Carroll stands tough with Mount I can see them getting a 3.
We'd have to wait and see who all is in, but I think it would be odd for Franklin to fly to Texas for that first round game. There are just too many teams close to Franklin for them to be on a plane in round 1. Now, if we wind up with an odd man out situation, like we did with North Central did in 2012, then it's anybody's guess. With PLU not in the picture currently, we're going to wind up with Linfield, SCIAC champ, and UMHB as definite geographic orphans (unless TLU gets in in which case they'll get re-fed to UMHB) which could lend itself to some creative bracketing and a matchup or two that we didn't see coming.
Well, we kinda know that the SCIAC champ will be heading to Linfield, right? So that leaves the question is who is the grist for the UMHB mill. The RR's will tell. Maybe it's the USAC champ. It won't be Centre if they make it; I doubt if they send a 10-0 team there.
This is kind of an odd duck year. Wheaton has had closer-than-should-have wins over Coe (slipping down now), Kalamazoo, and Augie. If they win out, they're 10-0 but the committee has to look at the quality of those wins (not just the teams, but the margins), right? Say JCU and Mt. Union play a barn-burner. Would the seedings (NCAA be damned, I'll call it that) leap a 10-0 team to put the OAC runner-up at a 3?
Quote from: smedindy on October 28, 2014, 11:05:37 AM
Well, we kinda know that the SCIAC champ will be heading to Linfield, right? So that leaves the question is who is the grist for the UMHB mill. The RR's will tell. Maybe it's the USAC champ. It won't be Centre if they make it; I doubt if they send a 10-0 team there.
This is kind of an odd duck year. Wheaton has had closer-than-should-have wins over Coe (slipping down now), Kalamazoo, and Augie. If they win out, they're 10-0 but the committee has to look at the quality of those wins (not just the teams, but the margins), right? Say JCU and Mt. Union play a barn-burner. Would the seedings (NCAA be damned, I'll call it that) leap a 10-0 team to put the OAC runner-up at a 3?
I can't see a scenario where 10-0 Wheaton would be or should be seeded lower than an OAC runner up, whoever it might be. That doesn't preclude Wheaton being a very severe home underdog should they play the OAC runner up at some point during the tournament, but not losing should matter. Conference championships should matter.
As for the Linfield/SCIAC/UMHB situation, yes, the easy and lazy way out is to just send the SCIAC champion up to Oregon. But they don't have to do that if UMHB is also orphaned, particularly if the SCIAC champion is Chapman and they can avoid a regular season rematch with Chapman and Linfield. In that scenario, I'd like to see the committee send Chapman to UMHB, and then somebody else out to Linfield. You're going to have two (at least) flights anyway in this situation. Now, the whole thing gets fouled up if TLU makes the field. Then they'll go to UMHB, SCIAC champ to Linfield, and we can probably-almost-assuredly have a single flight first round, which the NCAA (they of the $50 million legal bill courtesy Team O'Bannon) will probably love. Conspirators might even say that's a good reason to include TLU in the field. :)
With all this playoff "seed" talk, it makes it more interesting what this "Historic" college football playoff our brethren of D1-FBS are talking about and how they select their Top 4 teams. It would be interesting how DIII would select the best 4.
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 28, 2014, 11:28:23 AM
With all this playoff "seed" talk, it makes it more interesting what this "Historic" college football playoff our brethren of D1-FBS are talking about and how they select their Top 4 teams. It would be interesting how DIII would select the best 4.
We pick the best 4 by having teams play three regional rounds in a single elimination format, until one team is left as regional champion. It's a system that has worked remarkably well for decades.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 28, 2014, 11:34:43 AM
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 28, 2014, 11:28:23 AM
With all this playoff "seed" talk, it makes it more interesting what this "Historic" college football playoff our brethren of D1-FBS are talking about and how they select their Top 4 teams. It would be interesting how DIII would select the best 4.
We pick the best 4 by having teams play three regional rounds in a single elimination format, until one team is left as regional champion. It's a system that has worked remarkably well for decades.
AMEN!
Quote from: New Tradition on October 28, 2014, 11:43:06 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 28, 2014, 11:34:43 AM
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 28, 2014, 11:28:23 AM
With all this playoff "seed" talk, it makes it more interesting what this "Historic" college football playoff our brethren of D1-FBS are talking about and how they select their Top 4 teams. It would be interesting how DIII would select the best 4.
We pick the best 4 by having teams play three regional rounds in a single elimination format, until one team is left as regional champion. It's a system that has worked remarkably well for decades.
AMEN!
Yes, a system that works very well. Only if D1-FBS can get over those t.v. contracts and realize that by having the same system would generate just as much revenue, probably more.
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 28, 2014, 11:45:07 AM
Quote from: New Tradition on October 28, 2014, 11:43:06 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 28, 2014, 11:34:43 AM
Quote from: D3MAFAN-MG on October 28, 2014, 11:28:23 AM
With all this playoff "seed" talk, it makes it more interesting what this "Historic" college football playoff our brethren of D1-FBS are talking about and how they select their Top 4 teams. It would be interesting how DIII would select the best 4.
We pick the best 4 by having teams play three regional rounds in a single elimination format, until one team is left as regional champion. It's a system that has worked remarkably well for decades.
AMEN!
Yes, a system that works very well. Only if D1-FBS can get over those t.v. contracts and realize that by having the same system would generate just as much revenue, probably more.
I've presented both of these ideas before, somewhere, that would preserve "guaranteed access" for all AQ champs and still get the little guys involved somehow, which could quite easily be implemented in FBS.
8-team playoff
Pool A: five champions from AQ conferences
Pool B: highest-ranked champion from non-AQ conference
Pool C: two at-large bids (determined however they like)
16-team playoff
Automatic bids to every conference champion (11? I think there are 11 FBS conferences)
Remaining (5?) bids available for at-large selection
I love the eight-team idea, but I'm sure that various SEC and big-conference apologists would blanch at the thought of leaving out a potentially-really-good 10-2 or 11-1 team from their superconference. Which is dumb, because (http://grantland.com/the-triangle/college-football-rankings-fairness/):
"MLB is the most recent major league to expand its playoffs, moving from eight to 10 playoff teams. Proponents of expansion point out that baseball still has the fewest playoff teams of any professional sport, and that more playoff teams is, of course, a fairer way of doing business. Having playoff teams blunts the issues raised by imbalanced schedules and economic and competitive disparities.
What's really blunted, though, is not only the competitive imbalances built into the sport, but also the importance of the entire season itself.The common cry has long been that good teams deserve a chance to win it all, that a 103-win team like the 1993 San Francisco Giants, which lost out on the final day of the season to the 104-win Atlanta Braves, should have a chance to play for the championship. But of course, the Giants did have a chance to win it all. They had 162 games' worth of chances. That was baseball, and the exclusivity of its playoff separated it from the others. What supporters of playoff expansion see as increased competition is actually the creation of a less competitive, lower-stakes environment in which teams not actually worthy of champion status are often awarded it.
Why does a team that had 162 contests in which to finish above its competitors get another try after failing to do so? The real answer is: because it makes for more (and more exciting) TV."
Now, college football teams don't have 162 chances, they have 10-14 depending on which division they play in, etc. But I still happen to agree with this point. As much as we speculate about Pool C, I like the exclusivity of it because it makes a conference championship really mean something, and I think that would be a cool feature of the eight-team playoff idea: winning your conference would be a huge effing deal again.
There is no way a 10-0 Wheaton is anything lower than a 3 seed unless they move them to a bracket that has 3 undefeated teams. And at #3 the Thunder would be more than happy to travel to Wabash in round 2 and see if a dominating 8 pt win over Coe or a 50 pt win over Oberlin is more important. I am also certain they would love to host the OAC runner up. But if all holds you would maybe see
Mt Union
Wabash
Wheaton
JCU
This would be a 1-4, 2-3 matchup for round 2. I wouldn't call this likely since the #1 in this bracket could be UWW and could end up being Wabash if everything falls right. Wheaton has gone west before too. Lots of football left.
Bubble Team - "Why did you pick TLU instead of us?"
NCAA - Blame the O'Bannon decision!
Quote from: USee on October 28, 2014, 12:31:14 PM
There is no way a 10-0 Wheaton is anything lower than a 3 seed unless they move them to a bracket that has 3 undefeated teams. And at #3 the Thunder would be more than happy to travel to Wabash in round 2 and see if a dominating 8 pt win over Coe or a 50 pt win over Oberlin is more important.
60-point win over Oberlin. Let's keep our facts straight. :)
The answer to the question though is that neither of those results are important in a game that happens in the tournament. Doesn't matter at all. Also irrelevant- wins, losses, and margins against North Central or Wittenberg or Hampden-Sydney or any other team these two teams played in weeks 1-11. The deck gets reset every Saturday in the postseason.
Quote from: USee on October 28, 2014, 12:31:14 PM
I am also certain they would love to host the OAC runner up. But if all holds you would maybe see
Mt Union
Wabash
Wheaton
JCU
This would be a 1-4, 2-3 matchup for round 2. I wouldn't call this likely since the #1 in this bracket could be UWW and could end up being Wabash if everything falls right. Wheaton has gone west before too. Lots of football left.
With the way they build brackets now, I would be surprised to see more than two of those four grouped together in the same quadrant. Lot of different things you can do within 500 miles of all of those schools.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 28, 2014, 11:51:54 AM
Which is dumb, because (http://grantland.com/the-triangle/college-football-rankings-fairness/):
"MLB is the most recent major league to expand its playoffs, moving from eight to 10 playoff teams. Proponents of expansion point out that baseball still has the fewest playoff teams of any professional sport, and that more playoff teams is, of course, a fairer way of doing business. Having playoff teams blunts the issues raised by imbalanced schedules and economic and competitive disparities. What's really blunted, though, is not only the competitive imbalances built into the sport, but also the importance of the entire season itself.
The common cry has long been that good teams deserve a chance to win it all, that a 103-win team like the 1993 San Francisco Giants, which lost out on the final day of the season to the 104-win Atlanta Braves, should have a chance to play for the championship. But of course, the Giants did have a chance to win it all. They had 162 games' worth of chances. That was baseball, and the exclusivity of its playoff separated it from the others. What supporters of playoff expansion see as increased competition is actually the creation of a less competitive, lower-stakes environment in which teams not actually worthy of champion status are often awarded it. Why does a team that had 162 contests in which to finish above its competitors get another try after failing to do so? The real answer is: because it makes for more (and more exciting) TV."
Yeah, but there's something awesome about teams like this years Royals making a run.
That said, I think a 16 team playoff is about the perfect ratio (very similar to the D3 ratio). But in the FBS/DI world,
no way are they gonna invite all 10 conference champs (I'm not saying I agree or disagree with that mentality, mind you. It just is what it is).
I think they're on a trajectory towards 8, then 16. They are gonna see the money to be made. The biggest arguments against a playoff were tradition of the bowls and the sanctity of the regular season. We've clearly seen this year, there has been no dilution to the regular season. In fact, I'd argue it has raised the stakes. Instead of just 4 or 5 teams (and their fans) at this point of the season feeling like they have a shot at the title, there are 15+ teams/fan bases. The excitement level hasn't diminished for the top 4 or 5 teams, but it has spread to many more. That's good for college football.
I'd propose a realistic 16 team playoff criteria along these lines:
5 Champs from the Power 5
5 highest ranked (according to a metric/poll of their choosing) champs from Little 5 & IND*
6 At Large Bids
*Because they would be loathe to award bids to 'underserving teams' I'm guessing you'd need a caveat. 5 highest ranked champs/IND, provided they are in the Top 25. Any bids left over shift to the at large category. This allows a higher degree of access, but also weeds out weak sisters that big time CFB doesn't want to put on TV (aka, games that won't make money).
So last year, those 5 bids would go to 2 teams:
UCF (AAC),
Fresno State (MtWest). No bids for Bowling Green (3 losses), Rice (3 losses), Louisiana-Lafayette (4 losses), Notre Dame (4 losses), Navy (4 losses). One loss teams like Northern Illinois (who would have gotten a bid if they hadn't blown it against Bowling Green in the conf title game) and Louisville (lost AAC to UCF) would be relegated to competing for the at large bids.
Which leaves 9 at large bids for the most deserving (however they determine them).
It provides access for quality, competitive Little 5 teams. UCF in particular could have made some noise last year (they took down Baylor in the bowl). And the Networks/Big 5 still get their ratings and lots of really good teams that fell short of conference titles.
P.S. sorry for highjacking your board. You may now return to debating who should ranked 8-10 in the North Region ;D
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 28, 2014, 01:01:54 PM
Quote from: USee on October 28, 2014, 12:31:14 PM
There is no way a 10-0 Wheaton is anything lower than a 3 seed unless they move them to a bracket that has 3 undefeated teams. And at #3 the Thunder would be more than happy to travel to Wabash in round 2 and see if a dominating 8 pt win over Coe or a 50 pt win over Oberlin is more important.
60-point win over Oberlin. Let's keep our facts straight. :)
The answer to the question though is that neither of those results are important in a game that happens in the tournament. Doesn't matter at all. Also irrelevant- wins, losses, and margins against North Central or Wittenberg or Hampden-Sydney or any other team these two teams played in weeks 1-11. The deck gets reset every Saturday in the postseason.
Quote from: USee on October 28, 2014, 12:31:14 PM
I am also certain they would love to host the OAC runner up. But if all holds you would maybe see
Mt Union
Wabash
Wheaton
JCU
This would be a 1-4, 2-3 matchup for round 2. I wouldn't call this likely since the #1 in this bracket could be UWW and could end up being Wabash if everything falls right. Wheaton has gone west before too. Lots of football left.
With the way they build brackets now, I would be surprised to see more than two of those four grouped together in the same quadrant. Lot of different things you can do within 500 miles of all of those schools.
Totally agree WW.
Honestly, before this year I never fully empathized with the Wabash (or NCAC) faithful on the "They didn't play anybody" win train. Now we are making stuff up like "closer-than-should-have-been" wins and it's hitting me how difficult it can be to judge teams in different leagues prior to playoffs. These rankings and such are really very subjective (even with the "objective" criteria) and the teams playing the best come November usually prevail, regardless of what happened in September.
As an apologist for Wheaton I am really pleased with where they are given the fact they graduated 29 seniors and had no experience at QB coming in to this season. IWU was in the same boat (32 seniors last year, no QB experience). The Wheaton team is playing really well at the right time of the year. If they don't finish the deal with Elmhurst, IWU and Carthage these last 3 weeks it will be meaningless.
The good news is their SOS went up 14 spots after the NCC game! The bad news is they are still 187th, the lowest undefeated team's SOS in the country. (Widener is 177th and UWW 164th)
It's not making stuff up, dude. A 14 point win over Kalamazoo isn't one to sing Hosanna's about, especially since Albion threw 75 on them! Really good teams take a team like the Hornets and grind their bones to make bread.
It's been an odd year, but the elite have really smashed their weaker opponents this year (notice how many put up 50s, 60s and 70s along the way) so close results like those stand out. Though if Wheaton was still working out kinks I can see them not rolling up that many early in the year, and certainly the North Central game is impressive, but there is concern that there's not huge meat on that bone. It's clear the CCIW isn't what they normally are this year.
Quote from: smedindy on October 28, 2014, 02:18:17 PM
It's not making stuff up, dude. A 14 point win over Kalamazoo isn't one to sing Hosanna's about, especially since Albion threw 75 on them! Really good teams take a team like the Hornets and grind their bones to make bread.
It's been an odd year, but the elite have really smashed their weaker opponents this year (notice how many put up 50s, 60s and 70s along the way) so close results like those stand out. Though if Wheaton was still working out kinks I can see them not rolling up that many early in the year, and certainly the North Central game is impressive, but there is concern that there's not huge meat on that bone. It's clear the CCIW isn't what they normally are this year.
This is the "Style Points" argument we hear about?
I'm loath to run up the score, and there's diminishing returns obviously since a 35-0 pasting is basically the same as 70-0 when all is said and done. It's that those non-conference games for Wheaton and the Augie game don't scream powerhouse to me.
Quote from: smedindy on October 28, 2014, 02:47:00 PM
I'm loath to run up the score, and there's diminishing returns obviously since a 35-0 pasting is basically the same as 70-0 when all is said and done. It's that those non-conference games for Wheaton and the Augie game don't scream powerhouse to me.
Without the Hampton Sydney game, that argument could be made for Bash as well. Scores sometimes are deceiving. 2nd and 3rd string folks not as deep as a MTU for example could allow for spreads to be smaller. In some cases, coaches call the dogs off early to get more time early in the season to help build depth. There are so many teams in D3 the comparative arguments can be endless.
Quote from: smedindy on October 28, 2014, 02:47:00 PM
It's that those non-conference games for Wheaton and the Augie game don't scream powerhouse to me.
I don't entirely disagree with you, but isn't this related to the whole discussion about teams changing during the season?
Peltz came in and lit it up at QB against NCC after barely playing prior to that game. It remains to be seen whether that was a real-deal performance or a one-game thing, but if that's the caliber of the real guy who's playing QB for the rest of the season...playoff-time Wheaton's offense is a bit different than week-2 Wheaton, right?
For playoff
selection and regional rankings, I'm a pretty firm believer in weighing all results equally, no sympathy points for a team that didn't have their **** together from the get-go. But if you're evaluating who's a threat to make a playoff run...are those first couple of games still very relevant if there's a new, better dude at QB now?
Bash only had that one non-conference game, though. The two closest games were against pretty good offenses (Denison and Wooster). In the latter game, Wooster was shut down for the most part even if they managed 16 points.
I have Wheaton in my top 25, and of course ranked here. It's just that I think they're not primed for a long playoff run if they make it. I'm waiting to see if the QB revelation was a flash-in-the-pan or not.
And I just don't think beating Oberlin by 60 (thanks WW) is any more impressive than beating Coe and KZoo by "less-than-impressive-margins". I think Wheaton showed where they are last Saturday. You telling me NCC isn't any good? So Platteville is far worse than that? You can rationalize your view that Wheaton is weak by saying NCC is worse than we thought or the bottom of the CCIW sucked in the non conference but I think you are not convinced by Wheaton's early wins and not giving them nearly the credit they deserve for beating NCC the way they did.
I get it, Wheaton had 35 yds of offense in the second half vs Augie. I wasn't thinking playoffs at that time. But the team that showed up Saturday (with JP11 at QB) can go toe to toe with anybody in the top 20 (save some purple people eaters). Did anyone on here expect Wheaton to out rush NCC? Anyone? Bueller? I have no idea if they will show up the next 3 weeks but Wheaton was easily a top 10 team Saturday. And I think NCC is a top 15 team still. You don't agree and that's ok. But please don't try to tell me 50 pt blowouts are a sign of national power. That's make believe stuff, especially coming from anyone who has followed Wabash for any length of time.
Quote from: USee on October 28, 2014, 03:45:03 PM
And I just don't think beating Oberlin by 60 (thanks WW) is any more impressive than beating Coe and KZoo by "less-than-impressive-margins". I think Wheaton showed where they are last Saturday. You telling me NCC isn't any good? So Platteville is far worse than that? You can rationalize your view that Wheaton is weak by saying NCC is worse than we thought or the bottom of the CCIW sucked in the non conference but I think you are not convinced by Wheaton's early wins and not giving them nearly the credit they deserve for beating NCC the way they did.
I get it, Wheaton had 35 yds of offense in the second half vs Augie. I wasn't thinking playoffs at that time. But the team that showed up Saturday (with JP11 at QB) can go toe to toe with anybody in the top 20 (save some purple people eaters). Did anyone on here expect Wheaton to out rush NCC? Anyone? Bueller? I have no idea if they will show up the next 3 weeks but Wheaton was easily a top 10 team Saturday. And I think NCC is a top 15 team still. You don't agree and that's ok. But please don't try to tell me 50 pt blowouts are a sign of national power. That's make believe stuff, especially coming from anyone who has followed Wabash for any length of time.
I agree on the blow-out comment. Fools gold.
Things will play themselves out in the next three weeks. Bash still has to win at Witt (has only lost 2 conference games 2009 - present) and then has to beat a resurgent Depauw team (you can throw out the records in that game). While we are the comparative score track, Depauw held its own in Springfield OH against the Tigers. Witt only has the close loss to Butler.
Wheaton is strongly in drivers seat and I dont fully understand why they couldnt make a playoff run any more than a Witt or a Bash etc. Lets all be honest: The road will most likley stop in Alliance, Whitewater,or Denton depending on the brackets for any CCIW, NCAC, HCAC etc. And at this point John Carroll is rock solid and would be in contention for a 1/2 if not for MU.
at the end of the day and any way you look at it, Wheaton's win was a big one.... impressive etc.
If I was a NC fan, I would be scratching my head a little. They beat Platteville handily, lose to Stevens Point and then drop one to Wheaton. Meanwhile, Platteville handles Stevens Point easily. So the common opponent analysis is problematic in determining NC's actual strength.
Usee -
I think you're a wee bit defensive here. Did I not say the win over North Central is impressive? Sorry I'm not genuflecting towards the Thunder after that because I'm taking the rest of their games into consideration.
Quote from: smedindy on October 28, 2014, 04:49:16 PM
Usee -
I think you're a wee bit defensive here. Did I not say the win over North Central is impressive? Sorry I'm not genuflecting towards the Thunder after that because I'm taking the rest of their games into consideration.
You can do whatever you want Smeds. I am highlighting that you have been inconsistent. You can't call the Thunder win "impressive" and spend 10 other posts referencing the mythical "less than impressive wins". It seems to me you are equal weighting all the results and I am definitely weighing the most recent results far heavier than the early ones due to changes of a team over a season. That's ok if we just admit our methodology is different. I care a lot how teams are playing now, less who/how they played in September. I think that's more realistic. You don't appear to think so. We disagree.
I don't necessarily weigh the results equally either. Because each week's ballot is (to me anyway) a question of who the best teams are now, not in Week 1. We already voted on that week. That isn't to say you throw the results out.
I think Wabash's win over Hampden-Sydney will look good whether it happened in Week 1 or Week 11. Mostly because Wabash has been consistent through the season. But, as referenced above, teams evolve. And while a team may have "started slow" or had personnel changes, if I'm in Week 8 and being asked who the best 10 teams in the region are in Week 8, a result in Week 7 is going to seem more useful to me in answering that than one in Week 1.
I'm sure that makes no sense to anyone but me.
Quote from: USee on October 28, 2014, 06:11:34 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 28, 2014, 04:49:16 PM
Usee -
I think you're a wee bit defensive here. Did I not say the win over North Central is impressive? Sorry I'm not genuflecting towards the Thunder after that because I'm taking the rest of their games into consideration.
You can do whatever you want Smeds. I am highlighting that you have been inconsistent. You can't call the Thunder win "impressive" and spend 10 other posts referencing the mythical "less than impressive wins". It seems to me you are equal weighting all the results and I am definitely weighing the most recent results far heavier than the early ones due to changes of a team over a season. That's ok if we just admit our methodology is different. I care a lot how teams are playing now, less who/how they played in September. I think that's more realistic. You don't appear to think so. We disagree.
I have to weight the entire body of work into consideration. Is it a 'weighted average'? Yeah, but you don't throw out data points. You interpret them; and Wheaton hasn't done anything super-duper-ultra spectacular, as good as the NC win was, to leap over Mt. Union, Wabash, JCU, and Witt with what they've done. I have them fifth in the North. I have them 20th nationally. It's not like I have them down in MIAA land. If Witt has another clinker against OWU like against Denison, and Wheaton continues their solid play against Elmhurst, then yeah I'm going to flip 'em.
I'm lowest on them in the Posters Poll - I just think Witt, SJF, HSC, the MIAC 2 and 3 , the WIAC 2 and 3 and W&J are slightly better. Not by leaps and bounds; but we have to rank them in cardinal numbers from 1 to 25 instead of a weighted set. So while I have SJF 12th and Wheaton 20th, it's not that vast of a difference. SJF has three pretty damn tough games to end their year. This'll all wash out.
Quote from: USee on October 28, 2014, 10:28:29 AM
Quote from: GRIZ_BACKER on October 28, 2014, 10:11:57 AM
well said Tartan. with regard to Franklin, I agree that loss was considered a decent loss around labor day and now is starting to look worse and worse. That was a game where inexperience on defense and QB coupled with 2-3 untimely turnovers cost the GRIZ a game they could have still won and would probably win today. It is what it is. All that said, barring some sort of meltdown, Franklin should end up 8-0 in the conference and 8-2 overall with one loss to Whitewater. Probably be a 6-7 seed and hit the road somewhere (my take is Wabash/Witt winner or Wheaton or maybe a John Carroll). Who knows.
It should be noted IWU is an example of a team that is dramatically different than it was. They lost their Frosh QB to Mono, they then inexplicably took their best defensive player and put him at QB. He had an emergency appendectomy the night before a game, their 3rd string kid played a game and a half and injured his knee and their 4th string qb just played in a one point loss to Elmhurst. So Franklin's loss was to a fairly different IWU team.
Yes, but that same Illinois Wesleyan team -- with the original starting QB, Jack Warner -- lost to Simpson two weeks after beating Franklin. In fact, it scored a grand total of
three points against that Simpson team, even with the offensive starting eleven of the Titans still intact at that point. So the Franklin loss can be effectively described as being to the same team in terms of personnel that lost to lowly Simpson two Saturdays later.
Are you gentlemen still doing the north fan poll?
Wes has been absolutely slammed with football sectionals and tee vee stuff and probably other things. I hope he gets a post up soon!
Quote from: smedindy on October 31, 2014, 01:00:13 PM
Wes has been absolutely slammed with football sectionals and tee vee stuff and probably other things. I hope he gets a post up soon!
Oh ok. I look forward to it and haven't seen it in a while was just curious. Appreciate the time and effort everybody puts into the polls.
GO BASH!
Quote from: bashbrother on October 28, 2014, 04:36:59 PM
at the end of the day and any way you look at it, Wheaton's win was a big one.... impressive etc.
If I was a NC fan, I would be scratching my head a little. They beat Platteville handily, lose to Stevens Point and then drop one to Wheaton. Meanwhile, Platteville handles Stevens Point easily. So the common opponent analysis is problematic in determining NC's actual strength.
I imagine UWP will identify itself tomorrow vs UWW. If UWP plays very close or wins- NCC, Wheaton and UWSP all benefit.
I think the UWP loss to NCC is a bit misleading to some. NCC scored 21 in first quarter- but led 21-7 going into fourth. I don't think that sort of score is indicative of NCC winning handily.
Yes, NCC had major yards per rush, but it's not like the total yardage was so lopsided as to indicate UWP was out of it.
I do agree w those that feel NCC is better than their ranking and I don't think UWP is as questionable as some do based on the NCC result.
Tomorrow we find out.
I assume we're still voting. I know Wes has been full of his job and coaching it up.
I've continued to submit ballots. I don't know about anyone else.
Please tell me you don't have MSJ in the top 10 of the North Region, fellas!! ;)
Quote from: SaintsFAN on November 03, 2014, 05:05:21 PM
Please tell me you don't have MSJ in the top 10 of the North Region, fellas!! ;)
Nope, though I do have them about 11 or 12.
I am not submitting a poll as this thread, along w OPW, appears to no longer be viable
I'll volunteer to compile and post the poll for whomever sends it.
Wes is (understandably) busy - so I'll chip in to keep the NRFP alive (at least to the us one more poll in the regular season for Wally's Pool C analyses).
FWIW...
I have received one ballot, and I'm willing to vote myself to add a second. Anyone that still wants to play, send me a ballot and I'll post a poll with whomever still votes by, say, tomorrow afternoon.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on November 05, 2014, 10:03:02 AM
FWIW...
I have received one ballot, and I'm willing to vote myself to add a second. Anyone that still wants to play, send me a ballot and I'll post a poll with whomever still votes by, say, tomorrow afternoon.
I'm going to wait until tomorrow to see if Wes will show up and post a late poll like he had been before disappearing.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 05, 2014, 10:25:42 AM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on November 05, 2014, 10:03:02 AM
FWIW...
I have received one ballot, and I'm willing to vote myself to add a second. Anyone that still wants to play, send me a ballot and I'll post a poll with whomever still votes by, say, tomorrow afternoon.
I'm going to wait until tomorrow to see if Wes will show up and post a late poll like he had been before disappearing.
I dont normally participate but I do follow what others do. Here is my take:
Mount, John Carroll, Wabash, Wheaton, Wittenberg, North Central, Franklin, Depauw, Heidleberg, Trine/Adrian.
After Witt/NC some drop-off on last 4. Bash ahead of Witt due to defense stats. JCU would prob be a 1-2 if not for Mount. (bash gets the 3 as the hampton sydney win not looking as solid as it did a coupe weeks ago) Dont laugh on DePauw (they are getting better each week and have one of the best coaches in D3). The GRIZ are good but not great this season but still have the record and non conf resume (they could schedule themselves away from UWW as an example). Just my two cents
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on November 05, 2014, 10:03:02 AM
FWIW...
I have received one ballot, and I'm willing to vote myself to add a second. Anyone that still wants to play, send me a ballot and I'll post a poll with whomever still votes by, say, tomorrow afternoon.
I just sent you the ballot I sent to Wes this week.
You gotta pick one for tenth, Griz. can't waver.
Good stuff, folks. I have received enough polls to compile a ballot. I'll compile the results and wait to see if any others come in.
I know one or two other folks have mentioned filling out a ballot - and I will update these later if they choose to add their ballot. But, having received polls from wally_wabash, Li'l Giant, NCF, smedindy, Mr. Ypsi, and adding my own voice to the fray, with those six ballots, here is the semblance of an NRFP for this week:
1. Mount Union, 60 points (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Wabash, 52 points (2, 2, 3, 2, 3, 2)
3. John Carroll, 50 points (3, 3, 2, 3, 2, 3)
4. Wheaton, 41 points (4, 4, 4, 5, 4, 4)
5. Wittenberg, 37 points (5, 5, 5, 4, 5, 5)
6. North Central, 30 points (6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6)
7. Franklin, 21 points (8, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8)
8. Chicago, 18 points (7, 8, 8, 9, 7, 9)
9. Heidelberg, 7 points (NR, NR, 10, NR, 9, 7)
10. Trine, 6 points (NR, 9, 9, 10, 10, NR)
Also receiving votes
DePauw, 3 points (10, 10, NR, NR, NR, 10)
Adrian, 2 points (9, NR, NR, NR, NR, NR, NR)
I know FCGrizzliesGrad mentioned filling out a poll. I will be glad to add his results next time. And USee, if he joins back in.
Not trying to usurp anyone's throne here, just offering to fill the void so we have a poll to discuss.
Thanks for doing this. I PM'd Wes a few days ago offering to sub for him for the rest of the season, but I never received a reply.
My quick-hit thoughts:
I think Wabash and John Carroll are fairly interchangeable. Wabash has looked great this season and has a bigger scalp (in the HSC win) than anything JCU has...but JCU came an awful lot closer to beating Mount last year than the 2013 NCAC champ. That's not a great way to compare teams in 2014, but absent any other relevant head-to-head data, I think it's fair. Certainly strong counterarguments to that point.
Wheaton is properly rated based on their season's body of work, but their ceiling may have just climbed a level or two with Peltz breaking out at QB. That's two straight really good performances, and it's got me wondering if Wheaton's first three or four games are even relevant in evaluating this team.
As we've been saying all along, there's a major dropoff after #6.
Franklin does not appear to be quite up to their last few season's standards, but probably should not be counted out as a dangerous first-round playoff opponent in the right matchup.
Heidelberg is one of our most interesting points of conversation, even though they're irrelevant in the playoff picture (except as a possible RRO for JCU and Mount). I postulate that, despite their no-shows against their two best opponents, that everyone below #7 in this poll would get similarly rolled against such quality opposition. We probably won't get a really good comparison for evaluating Berg against the MIAA team du jour, but my money would be on Heidelberg in such a matchup - all of the other candidates have at least one loss to a far inferior opponent (DePauw vs. Ohio Wesleyan, Adrian vs. Wisconsin Lutheran and Olivet, Trine vs. Manchester and Concordia).
Paradoxically enough, I noted that our MIAA leaders, Trine and Adrian, both fell to NACC opponents last week, which made me wonder if we were improperly considering a "token MIAA rep" when we should be considering a "token NACC rep" - except that the NACC teams who won those games have some ugly warts of their own...
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on November 05, 2014, 03:13:03 PM
Franklin does not appear to be quite up to their last few season's standards, but probably should not be counted out as a dangerous first-round playoff opponent in the right matchup.
I agree. Looking at their schedule, they did exactly what they've been doing in previous seasons:
1) Lose to a top ranked non-conference team early in the year
2) Run the table in the HCAC.
However, what's different about this year is that IL-Wesleyan game. If they were the Grizzlies of yester"years", they would typically have little problems against a three-win team.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on November 05, 2014, 03:39:54 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on November 05, 2014, 03:13:03 PM
Franklin does not appear to be quite up to their last few season's standards, but probably should not be counted out as a dangerous first-round playoff opponent in the right matchup.
I agree. Looking at their schedule, they did exactly what they've been doing in previous seasons:
1) Lose to a top ranked non-conference team early in the year
2) Run the table in the HCAC.
However, what's different about this year is that IL-Wesleyan game. If they were the Grizzlies of yester"years", they would typically have little problems against a three-win team.
But don't forget that that 3-win team was using their #4 qb over half the season. (Granted, if they were as good as we initially thought they were, they should have beaten Carthage and Augie with a cheerleader playing qb. :P)
Next week the identity of the token MIAA rep (if we have one) will be decided on the field. Likewise, Wabash's game against Witt this week and JCU's game against Mount the next week should go far in identifying who's #2 and who's #3. 4, 5, and 6 seem pretty well carved in stone, unless Witt beats Wabash or gets monkeystomped.
The #4 qb thing doesn't hold one drop of water when Simpson 13, IWU 3 is a thing that happened. 2014 IWU isn't very good, regardless of who is playing quarterback.
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 05, 2014, 04:11:24 PM
The #4 qb thing doesn't hold one drop of water when Simpson 13, IWU 3 is a thing that happened. 2014 IWU isn't very good, regardless of who is playing quarterback.
Yes, we have certainly discovered that on the season has progressed. Initial expectations were that IWU would battle Wheaton for #2.
IWU's problems. QB's, youth all around, recruiting, game plans?????
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 05, 2014, 04:11:24 PM
The #4 qb thing doesn't hold one drop of water when Simpson 13, IWU 3 is a thing that happened. 2014 IWU isn't very good, regardless of who is playing quarterback.
In the realm of things, I wouldn't necessarily consider a labor day game with a new QB and 3-4 turnovers as the bellweather of the current GRIZ. The GRIZ also led UWW and trailed 14-13 at the half. They can muster up some decent football. Hopefully they get the chance to head to Crawfordsville 11/22.
Quote from: grboob on November 05, 2014, 05:12:34 PM
IWU's problems. QB's, youth all around, recruiting, game plans?????
The first three all seem probable, but not the last. Norm has been the coach for many, many years, winning a few titles along the way.
Quote from: GRIZ_BACKER on November 05, 2014, 05:22:18 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 05, 2014, 04:11:24 PM
The #4 qb thing doesn't hold one drop of water when Simpson 13, IWU 3 is a thing that happened. 2014 IWU isn't very good, regardless of who is playing quarterback.
In the realm of things, I wouldn't necessarily consider a labor day game with a new QB and 3-4 turnovers as the bellweather of the current GRIZ. The GRIZ also led UWW and trailed 14-13 at the half. They can muster up some decent football. Hopefully they get the chance to head to Crawfordsville 11/22.
I would love to see that game!
So sorry gang. Mr. Ypsi has volunteered to take us the rest of the way, which is a tremendous help. Have gotten absolutely piled on at work right at the end of my football season. Trying to launch a new news set and get all our football inventory done has made for a total nightmare. I've gone almost 3 weeks without even making a post, which I'm not sure has even happened since I joined this message board. So, from here until the end of the season, send your ballots to him. Hopefully I'll be back in all my glory next year.
Also, in hastily trying to sort through all my messages to get this thing up as quickly as I could, I accidentally deleted Usee's poll from this week, so we're out of 70 total. I'm just making a total mess of this thing. Here's the Week 9 Fan Poll.
1. Mount Union 70 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2. Wabash 61 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3)
3. John Carroll 58 pts (2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4. Wheaton 48 pts (4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5)
5. Witt 43 pts (4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5)
6. North Central 35 pts (6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6)
7. Chicago 21 pts (7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9)
8. Franklin 14 pts (7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9)
9. Heidelberg 11 pts (7, 8, 8, 10, -, -, -)
10. Trine 7 pts (9, 9, 9, 10, -, -, -)
ARV
DePauw 5 pts (10, 10, 10, 10, 10, -, -, -)
Adrian 2 pts (9, -, -, -, -, -, -)
The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Mr. Ypsi, Li'l Giant, and smedindy, NCF, FCGrizzliesGrad, wally_wabash, USee (whose ballot is not seen here, sorry!), and myself.
As Old Pal Wes mentioned, I'll be subbing for him the rest of the season, so PM the ballots to me ASAP.
For just the 2nd time all year, neither my #9 or #10 team lost. They were a combined 5-10 before this week :o
Been stuck on 7 ballots for about 24 hours now; I trust there are one or two more still out there?
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 10, 2014, 05:26:21 PM
Been stuck on 7 ballots for about 24 hours now; I trust there are one or two more still out there?
Mount, John Carroll, Wheaton, Witt, Bash, North Central, Franklin, Depauw, Heidleberg, Trine Adrian.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 10, 2014, 05:26:21 PM
Been stuck on 7 ballots for about 24 hours now; I trust there are one or two more still out there?
Well we have 8 voters so my guess is Wes hasn't done one.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 10, 2014, 06:16:57 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 10, 2014, 05:26:21 PM
Been stuck on 7 ballots for about 24 hours now; I trust there are one or two more still out there?
Well we have 8 voters so my guess is Wes hasn't done one.
You guessed right, and I'm not really expecting a ballot from him for the same reason that I'm subbing in. Though he always said if voters got ballots in by Tuesday, good; otherwise no poll until at least Thursday. So hopefully I'll get his ballot tomorrow.
How's the national balloting going? In the North, UMU is so far unanimously #1, with JCU unanimously #2. Wheaton and Witt are dead even at 3,4. Wabash has now pulled slightly ahead of NCC at 5,6. After that, chaos (though only 11 teams mentioned so far (one voter had Adrian Trine at #10, but I decided to call it Adrian - fortunately they will settle it on the field on Saturday).
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 10, 2014, 07:06:17 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 10, 2014, 06:16:57 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 10, 2014, 05:26:21 PM
Been stuck on 7 ballots for about 24 hours now; I trust there are one or two more still out there?
Well we have 8 voters so my guess is Wes hasn't done one.
You guessed right, and I'm not really expecting a ballot from him for the same reason that I'm subbing in. Though he always said if voters got ballots in by Tuesday, good; otherwise no poll until at least Thursday. So hopefully I'll get his ballot tomorrow.
How's the national balloting going? In the North, UMU is so far unanimously #1, with JCU unanimously #2. Wheaton and Witt are dead even at 3,4. Wabash has now pulled slightly ahead of NCC at 5,6. After that, chaos (though only 11 teams mentioned so far (one voter had Adrian Trine at #10, but I decided to call it Adrian - fortunately they will settle it on the field on Saturday).
National looks pretty similar. With one ballot outstanding, the top 5 north teams are on every ballot, 6th is missing on one... a certain someone will fail this week to singlehandedly get Heidelberg in the top 25, and Franklin has a single vote (not from me)
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 10, 2014, 08:01:53 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 10, 2014, 07:06:17 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 10, 2014, 06:16:57 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 10, 2014, 05:26:21 PM
Been stuck on 7 ballots for about 24 hours now; I trust there are one or two more still out there?
Well we have 8 voters so my guess is Wes hasn't done one.
You guessed right, and I'm not really expecting a ballot from him for the same reason that I'm subbing in. Though he always said if voters got ballots in by Tuesday, good; otherwise no poll until at least Thursday. So hopefully I'll get his ballot tomorrow.
How's the national balloting going? In the North, UMU is so far unanimously #1, with JCU unanimously #2. Wheaton and Witt are dead even at 3,4. Wabash has now pulled slightly ahead of NCC at 5,6. After that, chaos (though only 11 teams mentioned so far (one voter had Adrian Trine at #10, but I decided to call it Adrian - fortunately they will settle it on the field on Saturday).
National looks pretty similar. With one ballot outstanding, the top 5 north teams are on every ballot, 6th is missing on one... a certain someone will fail this week to singlehandedly get Heidelberg in the top 25, and Franklin has a single vote (not from me)
I'm well aware of where the single Franklin vote came from! ;D
Well I've received 8 ballots; any more in the pipeline? I haven't heard from Wes, so probably won't. If I don't hear from him or anyone else in the next hour or so, the poll will be posted early this evening.
NORTH REGION FAN POLL, Week Ten:
1. UMU 80 (unanimous #1)
2. JCU 72 (unanimous #2)
t3 Wheaton 60 (4 3s, 4 4s)
t4 Witt 60 (4 3s, 4 4s)
5. Wabash 45 (5 5s, 3 6s)
6. NCC 43 (3 5s, 5 6s)
7. Franklin 28 (5 7s, 2 8s, 1 9)
8. Chicago 21 (2 7s, 3 8s, 2 9s, -)
9. Heidi 16 (1 7, 2 8s, 3 9s, --)
10 DePauw 11 (1 8, 1 9, 6 10s)
ARV: Adrian 4 (1 9, 2 10s)
Voters: the usual suspects ;)
Ypsi,
You need to work on your presentation! The flavors are there and there is originality, just need to make the plate appetizing. :D
/watching way too much Food Network...
Quote from: smedindy on November 12, 2014, 12:54:23 PM
Ypsi,
You need to work on your presentation! The flavors are there and there is originality, just need to make the plate appetizing. :D
/watching way too much Food Network...
If you want it presented better, you'll have to find a new guy! HoFers have the power to modify other posters' posts - maybe you can draft Greg or Ralph to 'pretty it up'. :P (We've got a friend who is addicted to Food Network. The upside is that he sometimes feeds us! So, what time should I show up for dinner? ;D)
North Rankings are up!
NORTH
1 Mount Union 9-0 9-0
2 John Carroll 9-0 9-0
3 Wheaton (Ill.) 9-0 9-0
4 Wittenberg 8-0 8-1
5 Wabash 8-1 8-1
6 North Central (Ill.) 7-2 7-2
7 Franklin 7-2 7-2
8 Heidelberg 7-2 7-2
9 Chicago 7-1 7-1
10 Adrian 7-2 7-2
Just a reminder - we ARE doing a poll this week (then not again 'til after the Stagg). So where are the ballots??!! Last week by this time I think I had already received 4 or 5; this week (aside from my own) zero, zilch, nada!
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 16, 2014, 03:39:19 PM
Just a reminder - we ARE doing a poll this week (then not again 'til after the Stagg). So where are the ballots??!! Last week by this time I think I had already received 4 or 5; this week (aside from my own) zero, zilch, nada!
Just sent you mine.
Been stuck on 6 ballots for nearly 48 hours now - any more to come? If I don't hear from anyone in the next couple of hours, I'll post early this evening.
NORTH REGION FAN POLL, Week Eleven:
1. UMU 60 (unanimous #1)
2. JCU 53 (2,2,2,2,2,3)
3. Wheaton 46 (2,3,3,4,4,4)
4. Witt 45 (3,3,3,4,4,4)
5. Wabash 36 (unanimous #5)
6. NCC 30 (unanimous #6)
7. Franklin 22 (7,7,7,7,8,8)
8. Chicago 17 (7,8,8,8,9,9)
9. Heidi 12 (7,8,9,10,10,10)
10 Adrian 9 (9,9,9,10,10,10)
ARV: none
(Please come back after the Stagg Bowl for the final poll.)
Sorry I didn't get mine in this week. Been swamped.
FWIW my ballot would have been
1) Mount Union
2) John Carroll
3) Wittenberg
4) Wheaton
5) Wabash
6) North Central
7) Chicago
8) Heidelberg
9) Franklin
10) Mt St Joseph
11) Adrian
with the North Region now a final, I am going to avoid the christmas rush and submit my final poll tomorrow.
The playoffs have showed us just how strong the top two OAC teams are. Because of that, I think there should be some consideration for moving Heidelberg up and Ohio Northern in. Wittenberg on the other hand lost to Washington and Jeff who then got destroyed by Mount, therefore Witt should probably move down.
I'll get my final ballot in tomorrow. Little teaser- ONU won't be on my list.
I'll be sure to get my ballot in this time. Just have to figure out who moves where.
Quote from: Sir Battlescars on December 07, 2014, 10:50:34 PM
The playoffs have showed us just how strong the top two OAC teams are. Because of that, I think there should be some consideration for moving Heidelberg up and Ohio Northern in. Wittenberg on the other hand lost to Washington and Jeff who then got destroyed by Mount, therefore Witt should probably move down.
What exactly does the "top two OAC teams" have to do with Heidleberg and ONU? I am not sure that has any effect on my ballot. Also, all we know about the top two OAC teams is that our top 4 teams for most of the year are probably pretty accurate. It's the bottom half that's up for grabs and Mt Union/JCU's status has no impact on that in my view. ONU lost 62-0 at home to Mt Union. The Berg's disappearance in relevant games has long been documented.
My guess is that Battlescars meant that Berg or ONU getting beat up on shouldn't look as bad since it's pretty likely that Mount and JCU would have buried Witt and the like in very similar fashion. So saying they don't show up in big games would be able to be said about everyone from Witt on down.
I don't think Berg is that good. But I also don't think outside of 5 teams this region is good this year. I could see an argument for Berg at 6, but that's the ceiling IMO.
That's exactly what I was trying to say. Thanks Dr. Acula!
I agree with that. The toss up that is the bottom of this poll is really about the lesser of all evils for me. There are only 4 teams still playing so everybody has their warts at this point.
Since no one from the North is still playing except for UMU, 3 ballots have already been submitted. Feel free to send one early.
I sent mine too. Thanks, Mr. Ypsi for taking over at the end of the season. Your work is much appreciated. +k
Quote from: Sir Battlescars on December 07, 2014, 10:50:34 PM
The playoffs have showed us just how strong the top two OAC teams are. Because of that, I think there should be some consideration for moving Heidelberg up and Ohio Northern in. Wittenberg on the other hand lost to Washington and Jeff who then got destroyed by Mount, therefore Witt should probably move down.
I understand the sentiment here, but for me at least, that Heidelberg and ONU get to play Mount Union and JCU every year means that they get a little less reprieve from me for getting shredded in those games. They have a familiarity there that teams that see Mount Union in the first couple of rounds of the playoffs generally don't have. That familiarity means that they should show out a little better than teams seeing Mount Union for the first time or for the first time in a few years. Maybe that's not a fair way to look at it, but at a minimum, I have a hard time giving Heidelberg or ONU credit simply for being in that league with a great team (or two great teams this year). They should compete a little better there than they did.
We lambasted someone for the 'company you keep makes you good' sentiment over on the NCAC board. I'm not sold on ONU just because they're an OAC team. Nor BW. Nor Otterbein. I think the OAC's blah-ness hurt SJF's claim for a 2-loss playoff spot, as weird as that sounds.
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 08, 2014, 10:49:40 PM
Quote from: Sir Battlescars on December 07, 2014, 10:50:34 PM
The playoffs have showed us just how strong the top two OAC teams are. Because of that, I think there should be some consideration for moving Heidelberg up and Ohio Northern in. Wittenberg on the other hand lost to Washington and Jeff who then got destroyed by Mount, therefore Witt should probably move down.
I understand the sentiment here, but for me at least, that Heidelberg and ONU get to play Mount Union and JCU every year means that they get a little less reprieve from me for getting shredded in those games. They have a familiarity there that teams that see Mount Union in the first couple of rounds of the playoffs generally don't have. That familiarity means that they should show out a little better than teams seeing Mount Union for the first time or for the first time in a few years. Maybe that's not a fair way to look at it, but at a minimum, I have a hard time giving Heidelberg or ONU credit simply for being in that league with a great team (or two great teams this year). They should compete a little better there than they did.
Agree 100% - look at how some of the teams have showed out in the WIAC against Whitewater.
You guys make a compiler's life so easy - 7 ballots in, and just 11 teams mentioned! :o
Ypsi,
Whats out status on the final poll?
Quote from: USee on December 13, 2014, 11:39:54 AM
Ypsi,
Whats out status on the final poll?
Still stalled on seven ballots. I figure there may be voters who feel the results of the remaining three games may influence certain placements (e.g., Wabash was blown-out by UWW, while Franklin was downed by Wabash; what happens to UWW therefore could arguably affect both Wabash and Franklin), so I've held off in hopes more ballots will come in.
I'll probably go ahead and post what I've received by tomorrow evening. If more ballots come in after the Stagg, I'll post a revised poll.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 13, 2014, 12:12:43 PM
Quote from: USee on December 13, 2014, 11:39:54 AM
Ypsi,
Whats out status on the final poll?
Still stalled on seven ballots. I figure there may be voters who feel the results of the remaining three games may influence certain placements (e.g., Wabash was blown-out by UWW, while Franklin was downed by Wabash; what happens to UWW therefore could arguably affect both Wabash and Franklin), so I've held off in hopes more ballots will come in.
I'll probably go ahead and post what I've received by tomorrow evening. If more ballots come in after the Stagg, I'll post a revised poll.
I thought we only have 8 voters and you have 7 ballots?
Final* North Region Fan Poll:
1. UMU 70 (unanimous #1)
2. JCU 63 (unanimous #2)
3. Wheaton 56 (unanimous #3)
4. Wabash 45 (4,4,4,4,5,5,6)
5. Witt 42 (4,5,5,5,5,5,6)
6. NCC 39 (4,4,6,6,6,6,6)
7. Franklin 25 (7,7,7,7,7,8,9)
8. Chicago 22 (7,7,8,8,8,8,9)
9. Heidi 12 (8,8,9,9,10,10,-)
10 Adrian 7 (9,9,10,10,10,-,-)
(11) MSJ 4 (9,10,10,-,-,-,-)
*If any more ballots come in I will revise and post an updated poll
Quote from: smedindy on December 08, 2014, 11:03:46 PM
We lambasted someone for the 'company you keep makes you good' sentiment over on the NCAC board. I'm not sold on ONU just because they're an OAC team. Nor BW. Nor Otterbein. I think the OAC's blah-ness hurt SJF's claim for a 2-loss playoff spot, as weird as that sounds.
Outside of Mount and JCU, the OAC is not any good. ONU, BW and Otterbein are 'meh'. Average teams with NO speed at the skill positions. Zero chance at competing at a national, or even regional, level. Historically there are always a player or 2 on the bad teams that still stand out as someone that I would have really liked to have been on the Mount roster. Not so this year. Only guy at any of those teams with the talent to play at Mount is the DE (Luke Riemenscheider) from BW.
And Heidelberg is very talented on offense at the skill positions but they're mentally weak. Play great against the lesser teams and disagree against the good ones.
I have no problem what so ever with your final poll.
I am not sure what the possible justification is for Wabash ahead of Witt other than the preponderance of Wabash voters. That seems rather hypocritical after the discussions throughout this season on HTH results. ???
It's the Baylor/TCU situation.
Quote from: USee on December 14, 2014, 11:31:27 PM
I am not sure what the possible justification is for Wabash ahead of Witt other than the preponderance of Wabash voters. That seems rather hypocritical after the discussions throughout this season on HTH results. ???
We did have 3 Wabash voters (and none from Witt - I can't recall there ever even being a Witt poster!), but that accounted for only one point of the three point margin, since one of them kept Witt ahead. Personally I switched them on my ballot after Wabash decisively beat Franklin while Witt was losing decisively (at home) to a W&J team that I thought was no better than Franklin. I respect h-to-h results, but do not find them absolutely determinative (especially since Witt (at home) beat Wabash by less than a TD).
Now that I look over the results again, you and that one Wabash voter were the only ones who DID keep Witt ahead; the other five of us all went with Wabash.
I kept Witt ahead, barely. I don't have any quarrel with those who flipped them though.
I shouldn't have assumed it was all Wabash voters, that's not a fair assumption. I don't see how its anything like a TCU/Baylor discussion. There is a clear HTH result and everything else seems pretty similar to me.
Look, I don't have a problem putting teams above others when there is compelling reasons to do so. I am simply asking what that data is for the voters. I didn't come to that conclusion with Witt/Wabash as I believe the HTH trumped the other data (I did place Franklin ahead of IWU early this year despite the HTH because I thought Franklin was better....and I was lambasted over a couple pages for that).
Where is ExTartanPlayer when you need him.
Quote from: USee on December 14, 2014, 11:31:27 PM
I am not sure what the possible justification is for Wabash ahead of Witt other than the preponderance of Wabash voters. That seems rather hypocritical after the discussions throughout this season on HTH results. ???
I was one of those voters who had Franklin ahead of IWU in the H2H argument earlier in the season. So, even if I'm wrong I am at least being consistent.
Witt ended the season with two losses, losing at home in a close game to Butler, and a solid beating at home to W&J. Wabash lost a 6 point game on the road to Witt and got blasted by UWW. The UWW loss doesn't have as much weight to me because other than UMU who can actually beat UWW at the Perk (30-0 for Liepold in the playoffs at home!)? Witt would have gotten beat just like Wabash did. Had Witt beaten W&J they'd have gotten beat by UMU just like W&J did. Same thing with the loss to Butler, in my opinion. Wabash almost certainly loses that game too. To me that's a wash.
So the question is do the first round playoff results (Wabash over Franklin and W&J over Witt) show me enough to say as of today's date that Wabash is better? Yeah, I think they do. Witt laid an egg at home with a trip to Alliance on the line. Wabash beat Franklin in a game they pretty much controlled with a trip to Whitewater on the line. Those two results say something.
If Witt had beaten W&J (then lost to UMU in similar fashion as W&J) I would have considered the resumes equal such that the H2H result would have swayed me to put Witt ahead of Wabash. Same if both Wabash and Witt had lost their first round games.
But I think Wabash should get credit for being a 10-2 team with a home playoff win and be ranked over a 9-2 team with a home playoff loss. To me those resumes aren't equal enough that H2H enters the equation.
Obviously people will disagree with me but that was my rationale.
Quote from: USee on December 15, 2014, 11:30:37 AM
I shouldn't have assumed it was all Wabash voters, that's not a fair assumption. I don't see how its anything like a TCU/Baylor discussion. There is a clear HTH result and everything else seems pretty similar to me.
Look, I don't have a problem putting teams above others when there is compelling reasons to do so. I am simply asking what that data is for the voters. I didn't come to that conclusion with Witt/Wabash as I believe the HTH trumped the other data (I did place Franklin ahead of IWU early this year despite the HTH because I thought Franklin was better....and I was lambasted over a couple pages for that).
Where is ExTartanPlayer when you need him.
Have to get some work done here, but of course I have an opinion on this. I'll be back to share it later today.
I don't think it was a totally 'clear' result. It was a loss but Wabash really outplayed Witt in most aspects of the game, just lost. For us, I think it all depends on how to put the W&J / Witt game into perspective and if the W&J loss was a fluke as well to a good Waynesburg team after W&J already clinched. Lots of data points milling about. I don't think there's a clear right or wrong answer whether it's 4 or 5.
Quote from: USee on December 15, 2014, 11:30:37 AM
I shouldn't have assumed it was all Wabash voters, that's not a fair assumption. I don't see how its anything like a TCU/Baylor discussion. There is a clear HTH result and everything else seems pretty similar to me.
Look, I don't have a problem putting teams above others when there is compelling reasons to do so. I am simply asking what that data is for the voters. I didn't come to that conclusion with Witt/Wabash as I believe the HTH trumped the other data (I did place Franklin ahead of IWU early this year despite the HTH because I thought Franklin was better....and I was lambasted over a couple pages for that).
Where is ExTartanPlayer when you need him.
I think you can go down the line with Witt/Wabash and reasonably conclude that Wabash was the better side. Statistically in the NCAC (looking only at NCAC games since that's where we are apples to apples), Wabash grades out better in nearly every single statistical category- the exceptions being the volume passing categories where Witt would obviously have an advantage because they chose to throw a lot of passes and Wabash didn't.
Looking beyond the NCAC, Wabash defeated Hampden Sydney (conference champion, playoff participant) and Franklin (conference champion, playoff participant). Wittenberg lost to Butler (no comment...I'm just not sure what to make of those kinds of games given things like the Charlotte-Wesley-Mount Union chain of events) and they got beat up at home by W&J in a game where they threw
a literally unprecedented eight interceptions.
In 2013 and after a 35-17 result, there was no way to find yourself in a place where Wabash>Witt. Witt was better, there was no doubt. But the 2014 game didn't play out that way. Smed said it- Wabash outplayed Wittenberg. I agree. Of course, we have alma mater bias (even if we are capable of putting it in the drawer while we do these ballots, it's impossible to convince people of that), so you don't have to take our word for it. McMillan said the same thing in the ATN pod after the game and he's got no rooting interest.
So for me at least, it's the combination of a not-so-convincing win plus favorable performance vs. common opponents, plus quality wins out of the league that push Wabash back up over Witt at the end of the season. I took the sum total of Wabash's advantages over Wittenberg and decided that they were enough to rank Wabash ahead of Wittenberg.
Wally,
I will preface my comments by saying I have no issue with the logic of your analysis. I disagree a bit on the Witt/Wabash game but not enough to change the outcome of your analysis. In fact I can see myself arguing a similar point. I actually did come out early this year and rank Franklin ahead of IWU just 2 weeks after the HTH result w IWU. I think we would all declare Franklin a better team than IWU by the end of the season.
My surprise with your analysis isn't with the substance of your argument but really stems from your defense of HTH results in many other forums.
Wally is more than capable of speaking for himself, but since I think his view essentially parallels mine (and I have spoken vigorously on favor of H2H results)...
1) Many of my previous comments about H2H have referenced fairly early-season rankings when there is not much data available. Something that was lost in the conversation about UWSP-NCC and Franklin-IWU (both of which were arguments around week 4 or week 5) was that I, repeatedly, said that a H2H result could be overridden by some mitigating data - be that a loss to a team indisputably inferior team, or a season's worth of work suggesting that one team is better than the other (I'll explain this below in the Baylor/TCU section). With an entire season of results to consider, it's easier to mount a case for overriding h2h than it is after three games with zero common opponents.
Again, something I mentioned in the UWSP-NCC discussion at the time: if/when data presented itself that supported NCC over UWSP (ie UWP beating UWSP), I said that THEN it would be fine to rank NCC over UWSP despite the UWSP-over-NCC result. What I found stupid was people ranking NCC ahead of UWSP in anticipation of that happening.
2) a few words on the TCU/Baylor situation: I don't actually have a problem with TCU ranked ahead of Baylor despite a H2H loss, but I think the media were focused on the wrong way to compare the teams.
Much of the speculation was based on the idea that TCU had played a tougher nonconference slate, as though beating "Minnesota and two tomato cans" meant more than beating "three tomato cans" when it comes to ranking teams in the top ten in the country. Bull. What they SHOULD have been focused on was a) the game between the two was a three-point win for the home team that required a 21-point comeback - not exactly conclusive evidence that one team is demonstrably better than the other and b) failing a decisive result, the remainder of the season could be used to help decide - ALL of the season, not just "TCU beat Minnesota in a noncoference game, and they're better than anyone Baylor played nonconference."
So that includes looking at how they performed against similar opponents. Baylor gave up a lot of points in a lot of games and had a couple of close calls (including a two-point win over Texas Tech and a two-touchdown loss at WVU). TCU had a few close calls of their own but, notably, was more decisive in their victory against league #3 Kansas State and won at Milan-Puskar against WVU where Baylor had been vanquished. I think stacking the resumes side by side, one could make the argument that TCU was sufficiently impressive against the rest of their schedule to override the H2H result (which is about as close to a toss up as a game can be) - with the most important data point of that bunch being that TCU won at West Virginia and Baylor lost at West Virginia. Ironically enough, the best thing for TCU would have been West Virginia running the table in their other games an making this a three way discussion, because they'd have the most decisive score in the triangle.
I don't have a serious problem with Baylor-over-TCU, but it's worth explaining that I do see a reasonable argument for TCU-over-Baylor despite H2H at season's end.
3) bringing us back around to Wabash and Witt. The Wabash-Witt game fits the profile of a game that you leave saying "I'm not conclusively certain Team A is better than Team B" - a one score road game in which the losing side (per stats) seems to have gotten the better of game action for much of the day.
Now, surely, turnovers and special teams are part of the game an it is fair to point that out. We're splitting hairs here. Forgive me.
So, we move to the tale of the rest of the schedule. I leave it to the voters to judge whether Wabash was more impressive over the duration of the season than Witt. Honestly - I don't think so. I know Wabash has better statistical rankings in many categories but the results across the duration of the season aren't much different - I'm not going to differentiate between 41-0 and 52-10 wins. Both teams only had one or two real competitive NCAC games - you could argue that Wabash dispatched DePauw and Denison, two of that "next bunch after the big two" teams, more easily than Witt did - but that's not REALLY compelling evidence to me that Wabash is better than Wittenberg (at least not the way the WVU result is informative to the Baylor/TCU chatter).
I suspect the ranking ended up this way because Wabash won a playoff game and Witt didn't and by this point the rankings tend to fall in the order of "whoever is playing the longest ends up ranked the highest" - but that's not a great way of doing business because advancing in the playoffs is often dictated by luck of the first round draw (is anyone going to have MIT ranked over Witt at season's end?)
It's close. Wabash was probably a bit more dominant in conference play and had two signature OOC wins (HSC and Franklin are both playoff teams) whereas Witt had none, so there is an argument to be made that might supersede the close H2H result for some people. As I am trying to clarify, some of the earlier vigorous discussions of H2H occurred in week 3 or week 4 when there was no such data.
*Edited to fix iPhone typos.
It took an entire season's worth of data, plus a couple of extra weeks in November, to reach a spot where I ranked Wabash ahead of Wittenberg. And even then, it wasn't an easy decision. After the Week 10 result between Wabash and Wittenberg, I certainly had Wabash below Wittenberg, despite many of the things I mentioned already being known (Wabash's statistical advantages in league play, the game play between Wabash and Witt, the non-league game against HSC). It really took those playoff weeks to give a slight edge to Wabash in my mind. I don't think any of us will be surprised when Wabash is ranked ahead of Wittenberg in the final top 25 of this season.
The Franklin/IWU thing was a little different because it was so early in the season and I don't believe there was enough evidence available to overrule that h2h result. Certainly, when teams play out a full season and teams start to lose more than once, then nuance and analysis like the one I went through when ranking Wabash/Witt come into play. I guess it depends on how voters view their ballot, particularly early on the season- is it a snapshot of what we know of teams to this point or is it intended to be a predictor of future results?
Re: TCU/Baylor...I think TCU is the better side. They gave it up in Waco because sports. It happens. If a poll wants to rank TCU, after the entire season, ahead of Baylor, I can get that. But for any conference championship purposes and for any purpose where special gifts are allocated to a conference champion, all of that has to go to Baylor. They played a round robin, finished with the same record, and Baylor beat TCU h2h. They can be co-champions and that's fine (we've had shared league championships in the NCAC before), but whereas entrance to a tournament is involved, Baylor had to get preference. They earned that much, even if they weren't the sexier team all year.
I think the Witt/Wabash scenario is a bit like the TCU/Baylor scenario.
If TCU wins their bowl game and Baylor loses theirs I think it becomes relatively easy to say TCU is better and should be ranked higher. The resumes become more unequal at that point.
Which is analogous to using the 1st round playoff game results of Wabash and Witt as support for ranking Wabash higher.
Is this fan poll going to happen this year? I hope so. I know there were some issues last year, but it did spark some good conversation.
Seconded. I always appreciated it too. The voters did their homework and it made for good debate.
Agreed, though for twenty+ years only spots 2-10 have been open! ;D
I'm interested!
I checked in our old pal Wes last night and it sounds like he's going to be a bit too busy to be the NRFP hub for 2015. It's definitely a thing I'd like to keep going (I think these fan polls are great surrogate regional rankings for at-large analysis before November). I could compile ballots this fall, but would be happy to defer to one of the other voters if they want to.
Regardless of who is compiling (Thanks, Wally) I would like to return as a voter.
Quote from: Li'l Giant on August 28, 2015, 11:39:09 AM
Regardless of who is compiling (Thanks, Wally) I would like to return as a voter.
I am interested to be a voter.
I'm back and better than ever. ;)
Almost there- I think I've got a couple of ballots outstanding. Hopefully we'll be ready to put out a poll tonight.
In the meantime, do we know if Chicago is in fact a North region team in 2015?
My guess would be no but we won't know for sure until the second or third version of the championships handbook comes out. :)
Fair assumption. I say Chicago is fair game in the NRFP until the NCAA tells us otherwise. Should make for a fun shakeup in week 4-5. :)
Sorry, I'm out. I'll be less frequent here since work has me churning out new metrics and reports, and we're upgrading to a new alumni and online giving site that has a lot of implications for the data I use. Have fun!
Preseason NRFP!
1- Mount Union 70 points (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2- Wheaton 62 points (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3- Wabash 50 points (3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 6)
4- John Carroll 48 points (2, 3, 3, 4, 5, 6, 6)
5- North Central 43 points (4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6)
6- Wittenberg 42 points (3, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6)
7- Franklin 20 points (7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, x)
8- Heidelberg 14 points (7, 7, 8, 10, 10, 10, x)
9- Illinois Wesleyan 7 points (7, 8, x, x, x, x, x)
10- Adrian 6 points (8, 9, 10, x, x, x, x)
ORV:
Albion 4 points (8, 10, x, x, x, x, x)
Chicago 4 points (9, 9, x, x, x, x, x)
Ohio Northern 4 points (7, x, x, x, x, x, x)
DePauw 3 points (9, 10, x, x, x, x, x)
Olivet 3 points (9, 10, x, x, x, x, x)
Benedictine 3 points (8, x, x, x, x, x, x)
Mt. St. Joseph 2 points (9, x, x, x, x, x, x)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi (abstained this week), NCF, and wally wabash...and USee :)
Based on the links on the schedule page it certainly looks like a nice chunk of these teams will have video available Saturday.
12:00 pm: Berg
1:00 pm: Wabash
1:30 pm: Witt, Mount (PPV), IWU vs. Franklin
2:00: Wheaton
5:00 pm: Adrian
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 02, 2015, 07:08:24 PM
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi (abstained this week), NCF, and wally wabash.
Hmmmmm? I count 7 voters with one abstention. Someone is missing. Must be someon really important!
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 02, 2015, 09:26:05 PM
Based on the links on the schedule page it certainly looks like a nice chunk of these teams will have video available Saturday.
12:00 pm: Berg
1:00 pm: Wabash
1:30 pm: Witt, Mount (PPV), IWU vs. Franklin
2:00: Wheaton
5:00 pm: Adrian
Thankfully most schools do it now. Live internet video streams has to be the best thing to ever come along for division 3 athletics... Other than the development of these websites of course. ;)
Yes, it really is a huge addition to D3 athletics. While I would love for Mount to offer a free, high quality stream similar to Wabash's top notch one, I must admit that I don't mind paying to watch Mount games. If they wanted to charge $9 (the price of a ticket) I'd pay it every game. I just want them to broadcast all home games not just the ones being televised! End of rant.
Not sure what to make of the Benedictine over Central (in Pella) and Albion over UWSP results. Despite that, my ballot is in.
No need to sit on this until tomorrow...here is your North Region Fan Poll thru Week 1:
1- Mount Union 80 points (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2- Wheaton 72 points (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3- Wabash 63 points (3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4- John Carroll 54 points (3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5)
5- North Central 50 points (4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6)
6- Wittenberg 39 points (5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 8)
7- Illinois Wesleyan 28 points (6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 8, x)
8- Albion 14 points (7, 7, 8, 10, 10, 10, x, x)
9- Adrian 11 points (8, 8, 9, 9, 10, x, x, x)
10- Benedictine 8 points (8, 9, 10, 10, 10, x, x, x)
ORV:
Ohio Northern 7 points (7, 8, x, x, x, x, x, x)
Franklin 5 points (9, 9, 10, x, x, x, x, x)
Olivet 5 points (8, 9, x, x, x, x, x, x)
DePauw 2 points (9, x, x, x, x, x, x, x)
Wisconsin Lutheran 2 points (9, x, x, x, x, x, x, x)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, USee, and wally wabash.
Not sure why Benedictine is getting the major hype even after a solid win over a Central team (then again the IIAC did not have a good week one all together). IMO thought WLC coming back from a 21 point deficit and beating a solid Lake Forest team was a tad better.
Central is a better team than Lake Forest. Also Central was picked to finish 2nd in the IIAC behind only Wartburg and coming off an 8-2 season. Lake Forest was picked to finish 4th in the MWC South coming off a 4-6 season.
I'm interested to see how BU does their next two games... they've won @ Central, next they have Carroll and @ Adrian. That's a tough slate, but they certainly have a chance to win.
I wouldn't call it "major hype" around Benedictine. But winning at Central and doing it w defense, is more impressive than Albion over UWSP or any other North Region result. They deserve to be in the top 10.
I agree. It was a nice win for the NACC and a good week for the league overall. I should stop trying to post after 12:30 in the morning lol.
IMO the BU-Carroll game lost some luster after Lakeland beat Carroll in overtime but it should be a good game for the Eagles. WLC has NAIA member Trinity International next up. I want to see if the Warriors can put two halves together unlike last year.
Quote from: USee on September 08, 2015, 07:27:10 AM
I wouldn't call it "major hype" around Benedictine. But winning at Central and doing it w defense, is more impressive than Albion over UWSP or any other North Region result. They deserve to be in the top 10.
For me, the most impressive result was IWU going on the road and beating Franklin who I think is the best team anybody else in the region beat this week. But IWU won that game last year as well and a couple of weeks later scored three points against Simpson, so you never can tell how these things project.
Close second was Benedictine beating Central. That's a great win for that team and a great win for the NACC.
Albion was also impressive. You have to hold your nose a little bit at the 50+ conceded there, but after 60 minutes they beat a not-really-bad team from the WIAC...that beat North Central just a year ago. That's worth something.
On the other end of the spectrum, it wasn't a particularly great week for the OAC teams that we've recognized here. Heidelberg lost and John Carroll was in the fine-but-not-super-impressive arena. Also, Wittenberg giving up a ton of points and yards to Capital wasn't a great sign with two tough games left in September for them. Not a lot of time to get a lot better before things get serious around Wittenberg.
The MIAA is going to be an intriguing league to watch. Here in the NRFP, we've got three different MIAA teams on ballots and the league went 5-2 against one of the better schedules played by a league. I'm interested to see how the CCIW/MIAA battle royal shakes out this weekend. Some interesting games on the agenda there.
The ballots are in! Movement at #1? Probably not, but find out tonight at (roughly) 6:00. :)
The suspense is killing me
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 15, 2015, 08:49:03 AM
The ballots are in! Movement at #1? Probably not, but find out tonight at (roughly) 6:00. :)
I don't see how Mount can stay #1 this week... they didn't even manage to win on Saturday ;D
And here is your North Region Fan Poll through Week 2:
1- Mount Union (1-0) 80 points (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2- Wheaton (2-0) 72 points (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3- Wabash (1-0) 63 points (3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4- John Carroll (1-0) 53 points (3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5)
5- North Central (1-0) 51 points (4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6)
6- Wittenberg (1-0) 39 points (5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 8)
7- Illinois Wesleyan (2-0) 31 points (6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 9)
8- Albion (2-0) 24 points (7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9)
9- DePauw (1-0) 8 points (8, 9, 10, 10, 10, x, x, x)
10- Olivet (2-0) 7 points (8, 9, 9, x, x, x, x)
10- ONU (1-0) 7 points (8, 9, 9, x, x, x, x)
ORV:
Franklin (0-2) 2 points (10, 10, x, x, x, x, x, x)
Adrian (1-1) 1 point (10, x, x, x, x, x, x, x)
Chicago (1-0) 1 points (10, x, x, x, x, x, x, x)
Rose Hulman (2-0) 1 point (10, x, x, x, x, x, x, x)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, USee, and wally wabash.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 15, 2015, 06:28:43 PM
Chicago (2-0) 1 points (10, x, x, x, x, x, x, x)
FYI: Chicago has only played 1 game :P
Hard to argue with much here. Will take a little bit for the MIAA teams to shake out, as well as learn whether we can take ONU (10/3 vs. JCU, maybe?) and IWU seriously.
If they are back to their usual standards after last year's poor season, Illinois Wesleyan has a pretty easy path to 7-0. But given that they started last year fairly similarly to this one and then dropped 4 of the next 5 games against Simpson (who didn't win another game), Carthage, Augustana, and Elmhurst before even playing the CCIW's Big Two, color me a little surprised that IWU has already been getting this much poll love. I suppose it's hard to identify any clearly superior options, but still...
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 15, 2015, 06:38:03 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 15, 2015, 06:28:43 PM
Chicago (2-0) 1 points (10, x, x, x, x, x, x, x)
FYI: Chicago has only played 1 game :P
Hard to argue with much here. Will take a little bit for the MIAA teams to shake out, as well as learn whether we can take ONU (10/3 vs. JCU, maybe?) and IWU seriously.
If they are back to their usual standards after last year's poor season, Illinois Wesleyan has a pretty easy path to 7-0. But given that they started last year fairly similarly to this one and then dropped 4 of the next 5 games against Simpson (who didn't win another game), Carthage, Augustana, and Elmhurst before even playing the CCIW's Big Two, color me a little surprised that IWU has already been getting this much poll love. I suppose it's hard to identify any clearly superior options, but still...
IWU's season was wrecked by Jack Warner getting mono. (He played against Simpson, but in retrospect I can't help wondering if he was already sick - we should have won that game by several TDs, and instead scored 3 points.) By game six or seven, we were playing our 4th QB. Jack is back, and so is IWU. ;D
Of the ranked teams, the so far truly unknown quantities are the bottom three: DePauw's only game is the annihilation of Earlham (which is only a shade better than annihilating Finlandia ::)); Olivet has also destroyed Earlham and beat Carthage (seemingly destined for last in the CCIW) by 10; ONU beat Utica at home by a single TD, but it has yet to be determined whether that is much of an accomplishment. (For the record, I had ONU at #8, did not rank either of the others, though they are definitely on my radar. ONU's ranking was due to Kickoff, since the in-season evidence is so far so incomplete. My #10 was Adrian's only point - if Wheaton is as good as I think they are (I have them #5 in the national poll), getting blown out by the Thunder is not a deal-breaker to me.)
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 15, 2015, 06:38:03 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 15, 2015, 06:28:43 PM
Chicago (2-0) 1 points (10, x, x, x, x, x, x, x)
FYI: Chicago has only played 1 game :P
Hard to argue with much here. Will take a little bit for the MIAA teams to shake out, as well as learn whether we can take ONU (10/3 vs. JCU, maybe?) and IWU seriously.
If they are back to their usual standards after last year's poor season, Illinois Wesleyan has a pretty easy path to 7-0. But given that they started last year fairly similarly to this one and then dropped 4 of the next 5 games against Simpson (who didn't win another game), Carthage, Augustana, and Elmhurst before even playing the CCIW's Big Two, color me a little surprised that IWU has already been getting this much poll love. I suppose it's hard to identify any clearly superior options, but still...
1-0, 2-0...Chicago probably isn't a North Region team in any case. :)
RE: IWU - I still think IWU's win at Franklin is probably the best result in the region so far. So while we're still guessing with many of the teams after #6, IWU is the only one really that has a really good result (honorable mention to Albion's shootouts).
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 15, 2015, 07:11:22 PM
Of the ranked teams, the so far truly unknown quantities are the bottom three: DePauw's only game is the annihilation of Earlham (which is only a shade better than annihilating Finlandia ::));
Earlham vs. Finlandia might be a pick 'em if I were putting a line on it. Might even have the Lions lay a field goal.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 15, 2015, 08:46:11 PM
Earlham vs. Finlandia might be a pick 'em if I were putting a line on it. Might even have the Lions lay a field goal.
I would have to watch that if it were on a stream. I wouldn't be able to look away.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 15, 2015, 08:46:11 PM
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 15, 2015, 06:38:03 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 15, 2015, 06:28:43 PM
Chicago (2-0) 1 points (10, x, x, x, x, x, x, x)
FYI: Chicago has only played 1 game :P
Hard to argue with much here. Will take a little bit for the MIAA teams to shake out, as well as learn whether we can take ONU (10/3 vs. JCU, maybe?) and IWU seriously.
If they are back to their usual standards after last year's poor season, Illinois Wesleyan has a pretty easy path to 7-0. But given that they started last year fairly similarly to this one and then dropped 4 of the next 5 games against Simpson (who didn't win another game), Carthage, Augustana, and Elmhurst before even playing the CCIW's Big Two, color me a little surprised that IWU has already been getting this much poll love. I suppose it's hard to identify any clearly superior options, but still...
1-0, 2-0...Chicago probably isn't a North Region team in any case. :)
RE: IWU - I still think IWU's win at Franklin is probably the best result in the region so far. So while we're still guessing with many of the teams after #6, IWU is the only one really that has a really good result (honorable mention to Albion's shootouts).
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 15, 2015, 07:11:22 PM
Of the ranked teams, the so far truly unknown quantities are the bottom three: DePauw's only game is the annihilation of Earlham (which is only a shade better than annihilating Finlandia ::));
Earlham vs. Finlandia might be a pick 'em if I were putting a line on it. Might even have the Lions lay a field goal.
Per Kickoff, Earlham would cremate Finlandia: #234 vs. #246! (I can't believe that Finlandia is not last, but Maranatha Baptist is behind them - if that is true, despite the difference between college men and high school boys, Maranatha would not only lose to many HS teams, they would lose to some HS JV teams! :o)
With a fair amount of confidence, I predict that Finlandia will start the season 0-4, with 0 points scored (their next two games are UWSP and UWW - who should have the decency to leave their first TWO teams at home to study!) After that they play NOBODY, and will probably score, but are so bad they will probably still go winless.
I'm rooting like crazy for Finlandia (formerly Suomi College) to break through soon, but I have my doubts that that is possible. Finland is (except for my native country) probably my favorite country on earth (I admire the hell out of their doomed fight against 'Uncle Joe' even though it caused them to be lumped in with the Nazis - one of the most unfair 'lumpings' in world history). They are one of the most remote d3 outcroppings, with a very low local population, and the number of 'Finnish-Americans' in the UP can be easily exaggerated. I fear they may never be even decently mediocre, but I'm sure rooting for 'em.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 15, 2015, 09:19:34 PM
Per Kickoff, Earlham would cremate Finlandia: #234 vs. #246! (I can't believe that Finlandia is not last, but Maranatha Baptist is behind them - if that is true, despite the difference between college men and high school boys, Maranatha would not only lose to many HS teams, they would lose to some HS JV teams! :o)
With a fair amount of confidence, I predict that Finlandia will start the season 0-4, with 0 points scored (their next two games are UWSP and UWW - who should have the decency to leave their first TWO teams at home to study!) After that they play NOBODY, and will probably score, but are so bad they will probably still go winless.
October 3rd: Maranatha Baptist @ Finlandia... that one will probably be on my National Pickem slate. They also face off on Halloween in Wisconsin. Talk about a frightening sight.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 15, 2015, 09:29:26 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 15, 2015, 09:19:34 PM
Per Kickoff, Earlham would cremate Finlandia: #234 vs. #246! (I can't believe that Finlandia is not last, but Maranatha Baptist is behind them - if that is true, despite the difference between college men and high school boys, Maranatha would not only lose to many HS teams, they would lose to some HS JV teams! :o)
With a fair amount of confidence, I predict that Finlandia will start the season 0-4, with 0 points scored (their next two games are UWSP and UWW - who should have the decency to leave their first TWO teams at home to study!) After that they play NOBODY, and will probably score, but are so bad they will probably still go winless.
October 3rd: Maranatha Baptist @ Finlandia... that one will probably be on my National Pickem slate. They also face off on Halloween in Wisconsin. Talk about a frightening sight.
Sadly, I may use the matchup too (They play twice this year).....Kinda scary how a Lawrence team that was dominated by Rockford came out and dominated Maranatha.
Regarding Maranatha, at least they got some more players out for the team. Their namesake high school (Maranatha Academy) football team plays 8-man football....Ouch.
Quote from: Captain_Joe08 on September 15, 2015, 09:43:17 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 15, 2015, 09:29:26 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 15, 2015, 09:19:34 PM
Per Kickoff, Earlham would cremate Finlandia: #234 vs. #246! (I can't believe that Finlandia is not last, but Maranatha Baptist is behind them - if that is true, despite the difference between college men and high school boys, Maranatha would not only lose to many HS teams, they would lose to some HS JV teams! :o)
With a fair amount of confidence, I predict that Finlandia will start the season 0-4, with 0 points scored (their next two games are UWSP and UWW - who should have the decency to leave their first TWO teams at home to study!) After that they play NOBODY, and will probably score, but are so bad they will probably still go winless.
October 3rd: Maranatha Baptist @ Finlandia... that one will probably be on my National Pickem slate. They also face off on Halloween in Wisconsin. Talk about a frightening sight.
Sadly, I may use the matchup too (They play twice this year).....Kinda scary how a Lawrence team that was dominated by Rockford came out and dominated Maranatha.
Regarding Maranatha, at least they got some more players out for the team. Their namesake high school (Maranatha Academy) football team plays 8-man football....Ouch.
WOW!! That's gonna be some ugly football! I suspect I may have to watch it, kinda like how everyone slows to watch a major car crash. ::)
If Finlandia and Maranatha are playing twice in the regular season, why can't UWW and UMU play twice before the Stagg Bowl??!! ;D
Two things on IWU: First, keeping them lower this year based on last year's collaps makes no sense. As Wally points out they have a real,result against a fairly well known opponent. Judge it for what it is. 18 returning starters and a team with a cause. Second, Ypsi you are delusional if you think IWUs only problem last year was Mono. That doesn't explain horrific defense and your team captain being suspended for "unknown" reasons. I am a believer that IWU has righted the ship but last year was much more than just Jack Warner with mono.
I voted Olivet ahead of Albion.
Quote from: USee on September 15, 2015, 11:00:26 PM
Two things on IWU: First, keeping them lower this year based on last year's collaps makes no sense. As Wally points out they have a real,result against a fairly well known opponent. Judge it for what it is. 18 returning starters and a team with a cause. Second, Ypsi you are delusional if you think IWUs only problem last year was Mono. That doesn't explain horrific defense and your team captain being suspended for "unknown" reasons. I am a believer that IWU has righted the ship but last year was much more than just Jack Warner with mono.
I voted Olivet ahead of Albion.
I'm the 6 for IWU after having them unranked prior to week 1. Winning at Franklin is no joke. List of teams that have won at Franklin since 2007 (when Franklin started owning the HCAC): UW-Whitewater, Butler, Mount Union, MSJ (once in 4 tries), Wheaton, North Central...and now IWU. So yeah, it's a pretty big deal.
Quote from: USee on September 15, 2015, 11:00:26 PM
Two things on IWU: First, keeping them lower this year based on last year's collaps makes no sense. As Wally points out they have a real,result against a fairly well known opponent. Judge it for what it is. 18 returning starters and a team with a cause. Second, Ypsi you are delusional if you think IWUs only problem last year was Mono. That doesn't explain horrific defense and your team captain being suspended for "unknown" reasons. I am a believer that IWU has righted the ship but last year was much more than just Jack Warner with mono.
I voted Olivet ahead of Albion.
I never thought IWU's ONLY problem last season was Jack's mono, but I still believe that was the trigger (especially if I am correct that he already had it against Simpson but it had not yet been diagnosed). The defense failed
partially because there was no QB to keep them off the field enough to catch their breath.
Olivet has beaten Earlham and Carthage. Albion has beaten UWSP and Augie. Olivet is on my radar, but I think I'll take Albion! ;D
USee - I beg to differ with a couple of points in your post.
IWU's "horrific" defense from last season that you referenced was the #2 scoring defense in the CCIW (behind Wheaton and ahead of North Central). They held your Wheaton squad to their lowest point total of the regular season.
Secondly, last year's IWU captains were Jeff Jerome, Connor Klein, Niall Mulcahy and John Worley. None of them have ever been suspended for any circumstances.
Quote from: Green Jello Shots on September 16, 2015, 07:31:55 AM
USee - I beg to differ with a couple of points in your post.
IWU's "horrific" defense from last season that you referenced was the #2 scoring defense in the CCIW (behind Wheaton and ahead of North Central). They held your Wheaton squad to their lowest point total of the regular season.
Secondly, last year's IWU captains were Jeff Jerome, Connor Klein, Niall Mulcahy and John Worley. None of them have ever been suspended for any circumstances.
My mistake. I should not have said "captain". He was one of the best players on the team without question though. And you are right, the defense wasn't in the "horrific" category but they were last in the league in defensive 3rd down stops, in the bottom half in run defense and last in penalties. None of those things were on the QB. And as far as the QB and keeping the defense off the field, IWU faced 729 plays last year. Wheaton, the league's #1 defense, faced 799 plays. IWU's defense was in the middle of the pack in # of plays defended.
There were clearly chemistry problems on the IWU team last year. They were much, much more talented than their record indicated. The team that beat Franklin was not the same team that lost to Augie, Elmhurst, NCC and Wheaton in back to back weeks. It seems they have righted the ship thus far.
Quote from: USee on September 16, 2015, 08:53:03 AM
Quote from: Green Jello Shots on September 16, 2015, 07:31:55 AM
USee - I beg to differ with a couple of points in your post.
IWU's "horrific" defense from last season that you referenced was the #2 scoring defense in the CCIW (behind Wheaton and ahead of North Central). They held your Wheaton squad to their lowest point total of the regular season.
Secondly, last year's IWU captains were Jeff Jerome, Connor Klein, Niall Mulcahy and John Worley. None of them have ever been suspended for any circumstances.
My mistake. I should not have said "captain". He was one of the best players on the team without question though. And you are right, the defense wasn't in the "horrific" category but they were last in the league in defensive 3rd down stops, in the bottom half in run defense and last in penalties. None of those things were on the QB. And as far as the QB and keeping the defense off the field, IWU faced 729 plays last year. Wheaton, the league's #1 defense, faced 799 plays. IWU's defense was in the middle of the pack in # of plays defended.
There were clearly chemistry problems on the IWU team last year. They were much, much more talented than their record indicated. The team that beat Franklin was not the same team that lost to Augie, Elmhurst, NCC and Wheaton in back to back weeks. It seems they have righted the ship thus far.
USee - I don't know if there were chemistry issues (I feel this was a pretty close-knit and hard working team actually), as much as just some snake-bitten circumstances that included a lot injuries/illnesses, with quarterback being at the top of the list. When Warner was named the starting QB, the #2 QB Tyler Hook; quit the team and left school, when Warner developed mono and couldn't play, they then handed the reigns to #3 QB Ty Bolden, who then was hospitalized for an emergency appendectomy, so they turned the reigns over to #4 QB Donovan Laible, who was playing well in relief, but then tore his ACL. Somewhere there was clearly someone sticking pins in a Norm Eash voodoo doll.
Even at full strength this probably wasn't a play-off team, but their strong opening to the season was probably more indicative of this team's talent than their disappointing losses after their players starting dropping like flies.
Finally, I'm sorry to beat a dead horse, but here is what you said on the CCIW Board about IWU's defense last year following the Wheaton game:
"IWU played a great game. Their defense was impressive. I knew Worley and Venhuizen were good but the IWU LB's didn't miss many tackles. Klein, Roth and Garvey were outstanding today in limiting a potent Wheaton attack to just 13 points.". Before pinning last year's disappointing season on the defense (and there were certainly games like the NC and Elmhurst games where the D could have performed much better), keep in mind that 3 of their losses last year were by scores of 7-2, 13-3 and 13-7.
I'm not sure if this year's team will have any better luck, since they've already lost 1st Team All-CCIW standout Kyle Venhuizen to a season ending injury, but I do think this year's team has more overall depth than last year's, which should help them as the season progresses.
I did say those things about that game. On here were are talking about an entire season and, while IWU's defense had some great stretches, they couldn't get off the field on 3rd down and weren't very good against the run for a whole season. The offense had 4 different QB's because of various reasons. Jack Warner did play against Wheaton and they scored 7 points.
IWU had a lot of things go wrong last year. It's a new day and they have it going right now. The CCIW as a whole is much better than a year ago in my estimation.
Quote from: Green Jello Shots on September 16, 2015, 10:58:38 AM
Quote from: USee on September 16, 2015, 08:53:03 AM
Quote from: Green Jello Shots on September 16, 2015, 07:31:55 AM
USee - I beg to differ with a couple of points in your post.
IWU's "horrific" defense from last season that you referenced was the #2 scoring defense in the CCIW (behind Wheaton and ahead of North Central). They held your Wheaton squad to their lowest point total of the regular season.
Secondly, last year's IWU captains were Jeff Jerome, Connor Klein, Niall Mulcahy and John Worley. None of them have ever been suspended for any circumstances.
My mistake. I should not have said "captain". He was one of the best players on the team without question though. And you are right, the defense wasn't in the "horrific" category but they were last in the league in defensive 3rd down stops, in the bottom half in run defense and last in penalties. None of those things were on the QB. And as far as the QB and keeping the defense off the field, IWU faced 729 plays last year. Wheaton, the league's #1 defense, faced 799 plays. IWU's defense was in the middle of the pack in # of plays defended.
There were clearly chemistry problems on the IWU team last year. They were much, much more talented than their record indicated. The team that beat Franklin was not the same team that lost to Augie, Elmhurst, NCC and Wheaton in back to back weeks. It seems they have righted the ship thus far.
USee - I don't know if there were chemistry issues (I feel this was a pretty close-knit and hard working team actually), as much as just some snake-bitten circumstances that included a lot injuries/illnesses, with quarterback being at the top of the list. When Warner was named the starting QB, the #2 QB Tyler Hook; quit the team and left school, when Warner developed mono and couldn't play, they then handed the reigns to #3 QB Ty Bolden, who then was hospitalized for an emergency appendectomy, so they turned the reigns over to #4 QB Donovan Laible, who was playing well in relief, but then tore his ACL. Somewhere there was clearly someone sticking pins in a Norm Eash voodoo doll.
Even at full strength this probably wasn't a play-off team, but their strong opening to the season was probably more indicative of this team's talent than their disappointing losses after their players starting dropping like flies.
Finally, I'm sorry to beat a dead horse, but here is what you said on the CCIW Board about IWU's defense last year following the Wheaton game: "IWU played a great game. Their defense was impressive. I knew Worley and Venhuizen were good but the IWU LB's didn't miss many tackles. Klein, Roth and Garvey were outstanding today in limiting a potent Wheaton attack to just 13 points.". Before pinning last year's disappointing season on the defense (and there were certainly games like the NC and Elmhurst games where the D could have performed much better), keep in mind that 3 of their losses last year were by scores of 7-2, 13-3 and 13-7.
I'm not sure if this year's team will have any better luck, since they've already lost 1st Team All-CCIW standout Kyle Venhuizen to a season ending injury, but I do think this year's team has more overall depth than last year's, which should help them as the season progresses.
I feel like there is some version of the game "Clue" that could be adapted to find out whom showcasing the 10 IWU opponents from last year.
Quote from: Green Jello Shots on September 16, 2015, 10:58:38 AMwhen Warner developed mono and couldn't play, they then handed the reigns to #3 QB Ty Bolden
... and by handing the reins of the offense to Bolden, Norm Eash thereby weakened his defense by depriving it of a two-time All-CCIW defensive back. Bolden, who was arguably the best DB in the CCIW, didn't play both ways when he was re-converted to a QB by Eash.
Quote from: New Tradition on September 16, 2015, 11:34:55 AM
I feel like there is some version of the game "Clue" that could be adapted to find out whom showcasing the 10 IWU opponents from last year.
Given the general regard for Norm Eash around the CCIW, I'm sure that any Eash voodoo doll looks like a pincushion at this point -- and that the pins are various hues of blue
and red. ;)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 16, 2015, 12:37:38 AM
Quote from: USee on September 15, 2015, 11:00:26 PM
Two things on IWU: First, keeping them lower this year based on last year's collaps makes no sense. As Wally points out they have a real,result against a fairly well known opponent. Judge it for what it is. 18 returning starters and a team with a cause. Second, Ypsi you are delusional if you think IWUs only problem last year was Mono. That doesn't explain horrific defense and your team captain being suspended for "unknown" reasons. I am a believer that IWU has righted the ship but last year was much more than just Jack Warner with mono.
I voted Olivet ahead of Albion.
Olivet has beaten Earlham and Carthage. Albion has beaten UWSP and Augie. Olivet is on my radar, but I think I'll take Albion! ;D
I have watched both Olivet and Albion on tape. I am pretty comfortable with my ranking. I believe Albion @Olivet on 10/31 will be for the AQ.
Quote from: USee on September 16, 2015, 09:46:12 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 16, 2015, 12:37:38 AM
Quote from: USee on September 15, 2015, 11:00:26 PM
Two things on IWU: First, keeping them lower this year based on last year's collaps makes no sense. As Wally points out they have a real,result against a fairly well known opponent. Judge it for what it is. 18 returning starters and a team with a cause. Second, Ypsi you are delusional if you think IWUs only problem last year was Mono. That doesn't explain horrific defense and your team captain being suspended for "unknown" reasons. I am a believer that IWU has righted the ship but last year was much more than just Jack Warner with mono.
I voted Olivet ahead of Albion.
Olivet has beaten Earlham and Carthage. Albion has beaten UWSP and Augie. Olivet is on my radar, but I think I'll take Albion! ;D
I have watched both Olivet and Albion on tape. I am pretty comfortable with my ranking. I believe Albion @Olivet on 10/31 will be for the AQ.
Maybe. Adrian is at Olivet on 10-3. My gut hunch is that Adrian @ Albion on 10-17 is the game for the AQ.
I watched Adrian last Saturday. They are not a good team right now . Lots of young players. Some talent but they don't have near the experience of Olivet or Albion in my opinion.
The Augie loss to Loras (while scoring 52pts and giving up 56) takes a little of the luster off the Albion win @Augie for me.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 16, 2015, 10:01:22 PM
Quote from: USee on September 16, 2015, 09:46:12 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 16, 2015, 12:37:38 AM
Quote from: USee on September 15, 2015, 11:00:26 PM
Two things on IWU: First, keeping them lower this year based on last year's collaps makes no sense. As Wally points out they have a real,result against a fairly well known opponent. Judge it for what it is. 18 returning starters and a team with a cause. Second, Ypsi you are delusional if you think IWUs only problem last year was Mono. That doesn't explain horrific defense and your team captain being suspended for "unknown" reasons. I am a believer that IWU has righted the ship but last year was much more than just Jack Warner with mono.
I voted Olivet ahead of Albion.
Olivet has beaten Earlham and Carthage. Albion has beaten UWSP and Augie. Olivet is on my radar, but I think I'll take Albion! ;D
I have watched both Olivet and Albion on tape. I am pretty comfortable with my ranking. I believe Albion @Olivet on 10/31 will be for the AQ.
Maybe. Adrian is at Olivet on 10-3. My gut hunch is that Adrian @ Albion on 10-17 is the game for the AQ.
Albion plays Hope also on 10/3, which is a home game for us. Once I see how Albion looks in person and if Olivet beats Adrian on that same day (the latter which is not that far fetched- it has happened in recent years), then it should give us a little better idea as to how the Olivet/Albion game might be. If that scenario occurs, then the Ablion/Olivet game might possibly be the key game for the AQ, however, I would not count out Trine as yet. You all know how volatile the MIAA race can be. ;)
And here is your North Region Fan Poll through Week 3:
1- Mount Union (2-0) 80 points (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2- Wheaton (3-0) 72 points (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3- Wabash (2-0) 63 points (3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4)
4- John Carroll (2-0) 52 points (3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 6, 7)
5- Wittenberg (2-0) 48 points (4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6)
6- North Central (1-1) 39 points (5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, x)
7- Illinois Wesleyan (3-0) 29 points (6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 8, x)
8- Albion (3-0) 24 points (7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 10)
9- DePauw (2-0) 15 points (7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9, x, x)
10- Olivet (3-0) 6 points (8, 9, 10, x, x, x, x, x)
ORV:
Rose Hulman (3-0) 4 points (9, 10, 10, x, x, x, x, x)
Franklin (1-2) 3 points (10, 10, 10, x, x, x, x, x)
Heidelberg (0-2) 3 points (9, 10, x, x, x, x, x, x)
Adrian (2-1) 2 points (9, x, x, x, x, x, x, x)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, USee, and wally wabash.
Confession- about the only reason I haven't put Denison on my ballot is because I balk at putting four NCAC teams in the top 10. That shouldn't matter, but it is. I might be able to resist next week regardless of what they do to Wooster. I might not be able to if they also lay waste to OWU in two weeks.
These are my top 10, though not exactly in the same order. I have John Carroll a little lower and Olivet ahead of Albion for previously stated reasons. I definitely have my eye on Denison. I have no problem ranking 4 teams from a conference. The last 3 on here are pretty fungible.
I am surprised someone thinks North Central is not a top 10 North team. Would love to hear the rationale for that. Also was surprised at IWU not being ranked and Franklin still in someone's top 10. Heidleberg is 0-2 and, though they played JCU pretty tough and arguably should have won that game, they are 0-2.
Good stuff.
Quote from: USee on September 22, 2015, 10:02:12 AM
These are my top 10, though not exactly in the same order. I have John Carroll a little lower and Olivet ahead of Albion for previously stated reasons. I definitely have my eye on Denison. I have no problem ranking 4 teams from a conference. The last 3 on here are pretty fungible.
I am surprised someone thinks North Central is not a top 10 North team. Would love to hear the rationale for that. Also was surprised at IWU not being ranked and Franklin still in someone's top 10. Heidleberg is 0-2 and, though they played JCU pretty tough and arguably should have won that game, they are 0-2.
Good stuff.
What's interesting to me about Heidelberg this week is that last week nobody voted for the SPs at all. This week they blow a game to John Carroll and they pop back up on a couple of ballots. I'm way down on John Carroll compared to the rest of the voters (here and in the top 25...I just don't think JCU is THAT team again in 2015), but even if some folks do think John Carroll is really, really good, I was surprised that Heidelberg got votes after losing to them. We've had years in the north region recently where you have to search around to fill out those last couple of slots but so far 2015 isn't that year. There's a lot of quality football being played around the region.
I have JCU at 6 in my poll. You must be the 7. I am with you on them. And there are much better options than Heidi in the region, true that.
Quote from: USee on September 22, 2015, 10:31:21 AM
I have JCU at 6 in my poll. You must be the 7. I am with you on them. And there are much better options than Heidi in the region, true that.
I am. I found it strange in a week where I kind of penalized JCU (not kind of, I did) for not beating up on Heidelberg, a couple of our voters actually brought Heidelberg up for not getting beaten up by JCU. Strange dichotomy there. I think I will predict though that JCU is going to lose to someone else other than UMU. I don't know if it'll be B-W or ONU, but I think they're going to get picked off somewhere else along the line.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 22, 2015, 10:25:12 AM
I'm way down on John Carroll compared to the rest of the voters (here and in the top 25...I just don't think JCU is THAT team again in 2015), but even if some folks do think John Carroll is really, really good, I was surprised that Heidelberg got votes after losing to them. We've had years in the north region recently where you have to search around to fill out those last couple of slots but so far 2015 isn't that year.
I think this is equally divided between 1) reluctance to accept that a really good JCU team last year has turned into a not-as-good team this year and 2) uncertainty about who is
definitely better than they are. Looking towards the bottom of the poll, I think some voters probably find it hard to believe (based on history, not this year's results, a problem that we have discussed many times on these boards) that teams like Illinois Wesleyan, Albion, etc could have taken such a giant step forward to catch a JCU team that would have obliterated them last year. This is dumb, because the Blue Streaks from this year are not the Blu Streaks from last year, but undeniably that's the reason JCU remains high in the poll. St. Vincent just lost 49-14 to Case Western (and trailed 49-0), so I'm not buying the idea that it was a close game because St. Vincent has improved that much. Based on the first two weeks, JCU is just another good-ish team, certainly not a national player.
But you know what? I thought the same thing about Wheaton for about the first five or six weeks of last season: ranked highly based on their undefeated record and perception of them as a power program, rather than any real quality wins. Then Johnny Peltz put on the Superman cape and holy ****, we're cooking with gas. So maybe JCU is just feeling out a few new pieces that are going to come together and turn the Streaks back into last year's juggernaut. But through two weeks last year, they had completely blitzed the same two opponents that they just played a couple of "meh" games against.
I, like USee, am baffled that someone dropped North Central entirely from the poll after losing to UWP. We know that the Pioneers are a strong program (playoffs in 2013, 7-3 in 2014 with losses to three acknowledged powerful teams) and, again...does someone really think that NCC would lose to (DePauw / Olivet / Rose-Hulman / whomever they have at 9 and 10 in place of NCC) because the Cardinals fell apart on the road in the fourth quarter against a team that would beat all of those guys by a couple scores - and lost in overtime? This, again, represents the value of the "win" instead of "quality of result" which gets me so torqued up.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 22, 2015, 10:54:24 AM
But you know what? I thought the same thing about Wheaton for about the first five or six weeks of last season: ranked highly based on their undefeated record and perception of them as a power program, rather than any real quality wins. Then Johnny Peltz put on the Superman cape and holy ****, we're cooking with gas. So maybe JCU is just feeling out a few new pieces that are going to come together and turn the Streaks back into last year's juggernaut. But through two weeks last year, they had completely blitzed the same two opponents that they just played a couple of "meh" games against.
I think you were right about Wheaton through that point of the season last year. Something was missing. Then Peltz elevated Wheaton into that top 10 team that was lurking beneath the early season's pedestrian results.
John Carroll might find that missing something between now and the end of the season, but right now I just don't see them as a top 10 team nationally. And it's not just the drop in offensive output. That was always going to happen. Their defense has given up about twice as many yards in these same two games as they did in 2014 (there's a 94-yard Cartel Brook TD run from last year that happened late in the 4th quarter that disguises just how dominant JCU's defense was in the game). This is a lesser team right now in all areas than it was 2014.
Quote from: USee on September 22, 2015, 10:02:12 AM
These are my top 10, though not exactly in the same order. I have John Carroll a little lower and Olivet ahead of Albion for previously stated reasons. I definitely have my eye on Denison. I have no problem ranking 4 teams from a conference. The last 3 on here are pretty fungible.
I am surprised someone thinks North Central is not a top 10 North team. Would love to hear the rationale for that. Also was surprised at IWU not being ranked and Franklin still in someone's top 10. Heidleberg is 0-2 and, though they played JCU pretty tough and arguably should have won that game, they are 0-2.
Good stuff.
I was thinking the same thing. That same person also ranked Albion over NCC.
Great poll guys, keep it up.
I happened to watch the whole John Carroll/Heidelberg game on Saturday, but obviously very few other folks took the time to tune in. JCU looked really bad for much of the game and if Heidelberg could have been more consistent on offense they would have won by two or three touchdowns. It was Heidelberg's inexperience/mistakes on offense and special teams that kept them from winning the game. It seemed like every time JCU got the ball they were in Heidelberg's territory and they could do very little with it until finally their last two possession of the game. From what I saw John Carroll is not a top 10 team in the country, I don't even think they are a playoff team, and I too think they will lose to another team this year besides Mount.
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 22, 2015, 12:14:11 PM
Quote from: USee on September 22, 2015, 10:02:12 AM
These are my top 10, though not exactly in the same order. I have John Carroll a little lower and Olivet ahead of Albion for previously stated reasons. I definitely have my eye on Denison. I have no problem ranking 4 teams from a conference. The last 3 on here are pretty fungible.
I am surprised someone thinks North Central is not a top 10 North team. Would love to hear the rationale for that. Also was surprised at IWU not being ranked and Franklin still in someone's top 10. Heidleberg is 0-2 and, though they played JCU pretty tough and arguably should have won that game, they are 0-2.
Good stuff.
I was thinking the same thing. That same person also ranked Albion over NCC.
Great poll guys, keep it up.
I'm not the NCC non-voter...BUT. I mean, do we know for sure that Albion wouldn't beat North Central? North Central has a new coach (1-1), they have an unsettled quarterback situation, and an injured star running back. Do we really know that Platteville is very good? If somebody wants to take a week off from North Central, I don't think that's insane.
I watched the JCU game too. That's why I voiced my concern over on the OAC page about Mount being pushed at all in the regular season. Neither of those offenses impressed me.
As for NCC, last week everyone had them somewhere between 4-6. I too was surprised to see them left off of someone's ballot this week.
I was also surprised to see JCU still getting a 3rd place vote. My assumption there is someone started them there and hasn't moved them since they won their games.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 22, 2015, 02:10:32 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 22, 2015, 12:14:11 PM
Quote from: USee on September 22, 2015, 10:02:12 AM
These are my top 10, though not exactly in the same order. I have John Carroll a little lower and Olivet ahead of Albion for previously stated reasons. I definitely have my eye on Denison. I have no problem ranking 4 teams from a conference. The last 3 on here are pretty fungible.
I am surprised someone thinks North Central is not a top 10 North team. Would love to hear the rationale for that. Also was surprised at IWU not being ranked and Franklin still in someone's top 10. Heidleberg is 0-2 and, though they played JCU pretty tough and arguably should have won that game, they are 0-2.
Good stuff.
I was thinking the same thing. That same person also ranked Albion over NCC.
Great poll guys, keep it up.
I'm not the NCC non-voter...BUT. I mean, do we know for sure that Albion wouldn't beat North Central? North Central has a new coach (1-1), they have an unsettled quarterback situation, and an injured star running back. Do we really know that Platteville is very good? If somebody wants to take a week off from North Central, I don't think that's insane.
A week off isn't insane. We all saw IWU fall off a cliff last year after a great win vs Franklin and then losing to Simpson. But when NCC was ranked 4th or 5th by everyone (with one 6th) and then disappears, that requires some rationale don't you think? Franklin is getting ranked by some folks at 1-2 having lost at home to IWU (who one person didn't have in their top 10). Heidleberg is ranked 10th at 0-2. NCC lost to a top 25 team on the road in OT. Everyone who had them 4th or 5th now ranks them 6ths or 7th. That seems reasonable.
Quote from: USee on September 22, 2015, 03:14:40 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 22, 2015, 02:10:32 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on September 22, 2015, 12:14:11 PM
Quote from: USee on September 22, 2015, 10:02:12 AM
These are my top 10, though not exactly in the same order. I have John Carroll a little lower and Olivet ahead of Albion for previously stated reasons. I definitely have my eye on Denison. I have no problem ranking 4 teams from a conference. The last 3 on here are pretty fungible.
I am surprised someone thinks North Central is not a top 10 North team. Would love to hear the rationale for that. Also was surprised at IWU not being ranked and Franklin still in someone's top 10. Heidleberg is 0-2 and, though they played JCU pretty tough and arguably should have won that game, they are 0-2.
Good stuff.
I was thinking the same thing. That same person also ranked Albion over NCC.
Great poll guys, keep it up.
I'm not the NCC non-voter...BUT. I mean, do we know for sure that Albion wouldn't beat North Central? North Central has a new coach (1-1), they have an unsettled quarterback situation, and an injured star running back. Do we really know that Platteville is very good? If somebody wants to take a week off from North Central, I don't think that's insane.
A week off isn't insane. We all saw IWU fall off a cliff last year after a great win vs Franklin and then losing to Simpson. But when NCC was ranked 4th or 5th by everyone (with one 6th) and then disappears, that requires some rationale don't you think? Franklin is getting ranked by some folks at 1-2 having lost at home to IWU (who one person didn't have in their top 10). Heidleberg is ranked 10th at 0-2. NCC lost to a top 25 team on the road in OT. Everyone who had them 4th or 5th now ranks them 6ths or 7th. That seems reasonable.
That's why we have eight opinions, I think. We get a good cross section from all perspectives (and perhaps this perspective is one that doesn't buy that North Central is really good just because they have been or doesn't think that you get a mulligan for losing to Platteville). In the end, North Central is 6th in our poll. Had they picked up another 5th or 6th place vote, they'd still be 6th overall. It all works out.
I'll admit to being the voter that didn't rank NCC. I didn't like the loss. They have a new coach and uncertainty at QB and then they lost. I'm not sure they are in the top 10 right now. I hesitated. I thought about it a good deal. But, that's it. That's my rationale.
I also had them ranked at 6 the week before. Is 6 to 11 (in my mind they were 11) that big of a fall after a loss this early in the season? I don't think so but clearly I'm the only one that does.
And yes, someone may be voting Franklin in the top 10 at 1-2 but I will also tell you it wasn't me. There aren't any teams with a loss in my 10. Again, I'm sure there are plenty who don't like that rationale but with some teams only playing 2 games so far, I don't think it's crazy given the dearth of data. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
There is nothing wrong with any of this. We all get to think what we want and vote how we want. I just think it's fun to talk about it and hear how other people vote and their reasons. Remember I am the one who voted Franklin ahead of IWU last year AFTER Franklin's loss to IWU. So what's obvious to some isn't so to others. As Wally said, that's why we have 8 voters.
Quote from: USee on September 22, 2015, 05:15:53 PM
There is nothing wrong with any of this. We all get to think what we want and vote how we want. I just think it's fun to talk about it and hear how other people vote and their reasons. Remember I am the one who voted Franklin ahead of IWU last year AFTER Franklin's loss to IWU. So what's obvious to some isn't so to others. As Wally said, that's why we have 8 voters.
And LATER you were proven correct. :o
In a decade or two I may even forgive you for dissing my Titans! ;D
(I don't think the miscreant who left them off their ballot this week had yet come forward.)
Since several ballots have been revealed... Mount Union, Wheaton, Wabash, John Carroll, North Central, Wittenberg, Albion, Illinois Wesleyan, DePauw, Rose-Hulman
I was the only one for Rose last week, nice to see a couple others have joined. Hopefully Franklin has those butterfingers fixed by the time they play in Terre Haute next month. They lost 8 fumbles against IWU and Butler, thankfully none against Anderson.
My ballot mirrored the poll exactly this week. I'm boring. ;D
My ballot: UMU, Wheaton, Wabash, JCU, Witt, NCC, IWU, Albion, Adrian, Franklin.
I admit that I DO go somewhat by 'reputation' (if that is the proper word) this early in the season. Teams like Olivet, DePauw, and Denison need more good results than they so far have to get my vote. While Franklin is 1-2, they were expected to lose both of those (at least by Kickoff and me ;)) and utterly destroyed Anderson (only slightly more impressive than Olivet and DePauw's destruction of Earlham). Occasionally a very good team falls totally down after a 'miracle' class graduates, but much more often good teams remain good and bad teams remain bad, with only gradual changes - the players change, but the coaching, institutional support, etc., change much more slowly. (And it cuts both ways - 'reputation' is the only thing that kept NCC above my Titans this week [though I think some people may be underestimating how good Platteville is].)
I love this thread. Carry on.
I am very familiar with North Central....saw the whole game...they did not shut the door and made a couple bad penalties at the end...but also Platteville must be reckoned with for sure...Platteville gave Whitewater a heck of a game last year and they look even better now...this was a very different game than the NC /Platteville game last year
Ypsi, If you are actually using the kickoff rankings at this point in the season to rank teams and predict outcomes then we should vote you out of this thread. As Wally said, Franklin may end up ranked but there are too many other good results to choose from for a 1-2 team to be ranked. Please tell me you actually read the team profiles in kickoff and don't just look at the rankings? :P
On my first pass this week I had IWU ahead of NCC and then I changed it up before submitting my ballot. I really struggled with how I should weigh IWU's great result (road win vs. Franklin) with whether or not I feel North Central is the better team. Fortunately we'll figure that out for sure a little later on, but for right now, I'd still favor North Central in that game. I may think differently if they get squashed by Wesley on Saturday (possible).
I'm also one of the 10s for Franklin. 1-2 is their record, but the Butler result gets tossed from my evaluation (I'm not sure anybody in the region beats Butler tbh) and the one loss was to a team I have fairly highly ranked. My hunch is that Franklin is going to cruise through the HCAC (even through RHIT), but I'll certainly revisit my thinking on Franklin if they aren't impressive each week from here on out.
Quote from: USee on September 22, 2015, 09:49:24 PM
Ypsi, If you are actually using the kickoff rankings at this point in the season to rank teams and predict outcomes then we should vote you out of this thread. As Wally said, Franklin may end up ranked but there are too many other good results to choose from for a 1-2 team to be ranked. Please tell me you actually read the team profiles in kickoff and don't just look at the rankings? :P
Yes, I read the profiles. But this is still WAY early in the season to get a handle on many teams. Olivet has beaten Earlham, Carthage, and Aurora - as would probably 150+ teams. DePauw has beaten Earlham, Wooster, and lost to (but not been destroyed by) Witt, which hardly qualifies them as world-beaters. Denison has beaten 0-2 Marietta and 1-2 Oberlin - not exactly impressive credentials. I certainly switch to actual results over 'reputation' at some point, but those are NOT yet results that get my attention. SO FAR I will take Franklin's record (and past history) over any of those three.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 22, 2015, 10:41:54 PM
On my first pass this week I had IWU ahead of NCC and then I changed it up before submitting my ballot. I really struggled with how I should weigh IWU's great result (road win vs. Franklin) with whether or not I feel North Central is the better team. Fortunately we'll figure that out for sure a little later on, but for right now, I'd still favor North Central in that game. I may think differently if they get squashed by Wesley on Saturday (possible).
I'm also one of the 10s for Franklin. 1-2 is their record, but the Butler result gets tossed from my evaluation (I'm not sure anybody in the region beats Butler tbh) and the one loss was to a team I have fairly highly ranked. My hunch is that Franklin is going to cruise through the HCAC (even through RHIT), but I'll certainly revisit my thinking on Franklin if they aren't impressive each week from here on out.
Similar to my thinking on every point. I'm still thinking 8-2 as IWU's final record, but now have hope of 9-1 and a Pool C bid - I don't think anyone is taking down Wheaton in the CCIW. We DO get both NCC and Wheaton in Bloomington this year. MAYBE enough to beat NCC; barring far more injuries in Wheaton than B'town, probably not enough to beat the Wheaties.
And I would be shocked if Franklin didn't end up 8-2 and having the HCAC AQ.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 22, 2015, 10:52:13 PM
Quote from: USee on September 22, 2015, 09:49:24 PM
Ypsi, If you are actually using the kickoff rankings at this point in the season to rank teams and predict outcomes then we should vote you out of this thread. As Wally said, Franklin may end up ranked but there are too many other good results to choose from for a 1-2 team to be ranked. Please tell me you actually read the team profiles in kickoff and don't just look at the rankings? :P
Yes, I read the profiles. But this is still WAY early in the season to get a handle on many teams. Olivet has beaten Earlham, Carthage, and Aurora - as would probably 150+ teams. DePauw has beaten Earlham, Wooster, and lost to (but not been destroyed by) Witt, which hardly qualifies them as world-beaters. Denison has beaten 0-2 Marietta and 1-2 Oberlin - not exactly impressive credentials. I certainly switch to actual results over 'reputation' at some point, but those are NOT yet results that get my attention. SO FAR I will take Franklin's record (and past history) over any of those three.
Ypsi,
Be careful here. It is a dangerous path to use a term like "...but not been destroyed by" when ranking teams. I don't know how credible it is to compare a 29 pt loss with a 50 pt loss, especially when ranking teams. Remember UWW has beaten 2 teams with a combined 0-5 record, but we are pretty sure they are going to be decent. Why? Because they have some good players coming back and those players had success against a schedule last year that looks similar this year. Mt Union's 2 wins by a combined score of 103-0 are 1-4.
That's part of the reason I pick Olivet over Albion. Olivet lost 4 games last year by a combined 19 pts including a 2 pt loss @albion (Olivet beat Adrian last). Olivet has 22 returning starters including a senior QB and they got a stud RB they didn't have last year. Albion has 13 returning starters (8 on offense with a senior QB and 5 on defense). Olivet hosts Albion and Adrian this year. Adrian? 10 returning starters w only 3 back on defense. Experience matters, as do injuries. One of the reason's I am pretty high on IWU this year is because they have so much returning experience and a favorable schedule. It's not just about looking at early season results (though that certainly matters) it's about weighing multiple factors that contribute to success and/or failure.
Ranking these teams is part art and part science. I read Phil Steele's college football preview every year and he is the best in the business as predicting team outcomes. His track record is undeniable. In 2013 he picked Florida State as his #1 surprise team and they won the National Title. In 2002 his #1 surprise team was Ohio State...National Title. In the last 6 years he has ranked the AP top 10 for the next season in February after the previous year and he has hit on 56 of 60 teams. He has a very complex system of ranking teams including 9 sets of rankings that he explains in his publication. It's very interesting stuff and he is about as good as it gets in predicting outcomes.
All that to say, there are a lot of factors that determine a team's success or failure and none of us have 9 sets of power rankings. You guys have said last year the key to Wheaton's success was the Johnny Peltz addition at QB. His own coaches had moved him to WR the week before his first start at QB. Only an injury forced him back into duty at QB. I would argue there were other very significant factors that contributed to Wheaton's success. Ben Pettway, a freshman OT, beat out a senior OT and had a dominant year (that happened after 3 games or so), Logan McRae, who was voted 1st team All CCIW as an LB, missed the first couple games and wasn't at 100% until about week 4, Hollinger beat our a senior to start at guard but not until week 3 or 4. These are all key factors that led to Wheaton's development later in the year.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 22, 2015, 10:52:13 PM
Quote from: USee on September 22, 2015, 09:49:24 PM
Ypsi, If you are actually using the kickoff rankings at this point in the season to rank teams and predict outcomes then we should vote you out of this thread. As Wally said, Franklin may end up ranked but there are too many other good results to choose from for a 1-2 team to be ranked. Please tell me you actually read the team profiles in kickoff and don't just look at the rankings? :P
Yes, I read the profiles. But this is still WAY early in the season to get a handle on many teams. Olivet has beaten Earlham, Carthage, and Aurora - as would probably 150+ teams. DePauw has beaten Earlham, Wooster, and lost to (but not been destroyed by) Witt, which hardly qualifies them as world-beaters. Denison has beaten 0-2 Marietta and 1-2 Oberlin - not exactly impressive credentials. I certainly switch to actual results over 'reputation' at some point, but those are NOT yet results that get my attention. SO FAR I will take Franklin's record (and past history) over any of those three.
When did this happen? I must have missed it, unless you are referring to last year. I'm still hoping a Bell game may determine the conference champion!
Quote from: wabashcpa on September 23, 2015, 12:55:30 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 22, 2015, 10:52:13 PM
Quote from: USee on September 22, 2015, 09:49:24 PM
Ypsi, If you are actually using the kickoff rankings at this point in the season to rank teams and predict outcomes then we should vote you out of this thread. As Wally said, Franklin may end up ranked but there are too many other good results to choose from for a 1-2 team to be ranked. Please tell me you actually read the team profiles in kickoff and don't just look at the rankings? :P
Yes, I read the profiles. But this is still WAY early in the season to get a handle on many teams. Olivet has beaten Earlham, Carthage, and Aurora - as would probably 150+ teams. DePauw has beaten Earlham, Wooster, and lost to (but not been destroyed by) Witt, which hardly qualifies them as world-beaters. Denison has beaten 0-2 Marietta and 1-2 Oberlin - not exactly impressive credentials. I certainly switch to actual results over 'reputation' at some point, but those are NOT yet results that get my attention. SO FAR I will take Franklin's record (and past history) over any of those three.
When did this happen? I must have missed it, unless you are referring to last year. I'm still hoping a Bell game may determine the conference champion!
Lol, I'm glad someone else noticed that. I was trying to figure out how I could have missed the DePauw-Witt game, figured that the Wabash crowd would have had a lot more chatter about that game if it had already happened...
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 23, 2015, 01:02:47 PM
Quote from: wabashcpa on September 23, 2015, 12:55:30 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 22, 2015, 10:52:13 PM
Quote from: USee on September 22, 2015, 09:49:24 PM
Ypsi, If you are actually using the kickoff rankings at this point in the season to rank teams and predict outcomes then we should vote you out of this thread. As Wally said, Franklin may end up ranked but there are too many other good results to choose from for a 1-2 team to be ranked. Please tell me you actually read the team profiles in kickoff and don't just look at the rankings? :P
Yes, I read the profiles. But this is still WAY early in the season to get a handle on many teams. Olivet has beaten Earlham, Carthage, and Aurora - as would probably 150+ teams. DePauw has beaten Earlham, Wooster, and lost to (but not been destroyed by) Witt, which hardly qualifies them as world-beaters. Denison has beaten 0-2 Marietta and 1-2 Oberlin - not exactly impressive credentials. I certainly switch to actual results over 'reputation' at some point, but those are NOT yet results that get my attention. SO FAR I will take Franklin's record (and past history) over any of those three.
When did this happen? I must have missed it, unless you are referring to last year. I'm still hoping a Bell game may determine the conference champion!
Lol, I'm glad someone else noticed that. I was trying to figure out how I could have missed the DePauw-Witt game, figured that the Wabash crowd would have had a lot more chatter about that game if it had already happened...
OOPS!! :-[ On my notes I had both OWU AND DePauw losing 21-42 to Witt!
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 23, 2015, 01:02:47 PM
Quote from: wabashcpa on September 23, 2015, 12:55:30 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 22, 2015, 10:52:13 PM
Quote from: USee on September 22, 2015, 09:49:24 PM
Ypsi, If you are actually using the kickoff rankings at this point in the season to rank teams and predict outcomes then we should vote you out of this thread. As Wally said, Franklin may end up ranked but there are too many other good results to choose from for a 1-2 team to be ranked. Please tell me you actually read the team profiles in kickoff and don't just look at the rankings? :P
Yes, I read the profiles. But this is still WAY early in the season to get a handle on many teams. Olivet has beaten Earlham, Carthage, and Aurora - as would probably 150+ teams. DePauw has beaten Earlham, Wooster, and lost to (but not been destroyed by) Witt, which hardly qualifies them as world-beaters. Denison has beaten 0-2 Marietta and 1-2 Oberlin - not exactly impressive credentials. I certainly switch to actual results over 'reputation' at some point, but those are NOT yet results that get my attention. SO FAR I will take Franklin's record (and past history) over any of those three.
When did this happen? I must have missed it, unless you are referring to last year. I'm still hoping a Bell game may determine the conference champion!
Lol, I'm glad someone else noticed that. I was trying to figure out how I could have missed the DePauw-Witt game, figured that the Wabash crowd would have had a lot more chatter about that game if it had already happened...
He is talking about the hypothetical match up based on Kickoff rankings!
Nice!
Quote from: wabashcpa on September 23, 2015, 12:55:30 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 22, 2015, 10:52:13 PM
Quote from: USee on September 22, 2015, 09:49:24 PM
Ypsi, If you are actually using the kickoff rankings at this point in the season to rank teams and predict outcomes then we should vote you out of this thread. As Wally said, Franklin may end up ranked but there are too many other good results to choose from for a 1-2 team to be ranked. Please tell me you actually read the team profiles in kickoff and don't just look at the rankings? :P
Yes, I read the profiles. But this is still WAY early in the season to get a handle on many teams. Olivet has beaten Earlham, Carthage, and Aurora - as would probably 150+ teams. DePauw has beaten Earlham, Wooster, and lost to (but not been destroyed by) Witt, which hardly qualifies them as world-beaters. Denison has beaten 0-2 Marietta and 1-2 Oberlin - not exactly impressive credentials. I certainly switch to actual results over 'reputation' at some point, but those are NOT yet results that get my attention. SO FAR I will take Franklin's record (and past history) over any of those three.
When did this happen? I must have missed it, unless you are referring to last year. I'm still hoping a Bell game may determine the conference champion!
10/10 for Witt @ DePauw by the way. Depending on this weekend's outcome and the outcome of that game, Monon Bell Saturday could be for all the marbles.
Of course, all of these teams also still have to beat Denison (he says only half-jokingly).
This is hard this week. I have no idea what to do after my top 3.
It was rough. I struggled with how to handle JCU and NCC specifically this week.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 27, 2015, 02:29:41 PM
This is hard this week. I have no idea what to do after my top 3.
5-10 was an issue for me.
Since Chicago is now up to (#26) on the d3football.com poll, and is still listed in the North region team pages, we need a definitive ruling: IS Chicago eligible for the North Region Fan Poll (despite being a member of a South region conference)?
I was out-of-town this weekend until about an hour ago and am just catching up, but I notice they have gone to 3-0 (including beating formerly #21 Centre), and might crack the bottom of my ballot IF they are considered eligible. IF they keep winning, the poll could be skewed if some vote for them but others don't only because they assume them to be a South team.
Sorry to put you on the spot, Wally, but you IS the referee this season! ;) [Once regional rankings come out we can know for sure, but we have several polls between now and then.]
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 27, 2015, 10:02:42 PM
Since Chicago is now up to (#26) on the d3football.com poll, and is still listed in the North region team pages, we need a definitive ruling: IS Chicago eligible for the North Region Fan Poll (despite being a member of a South region conference)?
I was out-of-town this weekend until about an hour ago and am just catching up, but I notice they have gone to 3-0 (including beating formerly #21 Centre), and might crack the bottom of my ballot IF they are considered eligible. IF they keep winning, the poll could be skewed if some vote for them but others don't only because they assume them to be a South team.
Sorry to put you on the spot, Wally, but you IS the referee this season! ;) [Once regional rankings come out we can know for sure, but we have several polls between now and then.]
I think I'm saying no to Chicago as a North Region team. When the UAA was it's own thing, the teams were scattered in three different regions, but the UAA also didn't award an AQ. Every other conference that has had some weird things going on geographically has always just included those weird teams in the predominant geographical region (DPU and RHIT were South teams when they were in the SCAC, Wesley, CNU, and SoVA have switched from south to east, etc.). I think Chicago is a South team for the next season and a half.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 27, 2015, 10:08:04 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 27, 2015, 10:02:42 PM
Since Chicago is now up to (#26) on the d3football.com poll, and is still listed in the North region team pages, we need a definitive ruling: IS Chicago eligible for the North Region Fan Poll (despite being a member of a South region conference)?
I was out-of-town this weekend until about an hour ago and am just catching up, but I notice they have gone to 3-0 (including beating formerly #21 Centre), and might crack the bottom of my ballot IF they are considered eligible. IF they keep winning, the poll could be skewed if some vote for them but others don't only because they assume them to be a South team.
Sorry to put you on the spot, Wally, but you IS the referee this season! ;) [Once regional rankings come out we can know for sure, but we have several polls between now and then.]
I think I'm saying no to Chicago as a North Region team. When the UAA was it's own thing, the teams were scattered in three different regions, but the UAA also didn't award an AQ. Every other conference that has had some weird things going on geographically has always just included those weird teams in the predominant geographical region (DPU and RHIT were South teams when they were in the SCAC, Wesley, CNU, and SoVA have switched from south to east, etc.). I think Chicago is a South team for the next season and a half.
Thanks for the quick reply, Wally. That cuts my candidates for the final 5-6 spots by one!
Couldn't find a link to the Handbook, but if memory serves CWRU (PAC) was moved to South last season, so one would think Chicago would this season.
Had a hard time picking my ballot since there was three losses among ranked and receiving votes and nearly half the teams did not play this weekend.
I think everybody is in. I'll have the poll up this evening. You guys are crushing it with the promptness this season. +k's around!
And here is your North Region Fan Poll through Week 4:
1- Mount Union (3-0) 80 points (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2- Wheaton (3-0) 71 points (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3- Wabash (3-0) 65 points (2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4- John Carroll (3-0) 47 points (4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 9)
5- North Central (1-2) 44 points (4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, x)
6- Illinois Wesleyan (3-0) 40 points (4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8)
7- Wittenberg (2-1) 29 points (6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 10)
8- Albion (3-0) 26 points (5, 6, 7, 8, 8, 8, 10, 10)
9- DePauw (3-0) 19 points (6, 6, 8, 9, 9, 9, x, x)
10- Olivet (3-0) 8 points (8, 8, 10, 10, x, x, x, x)
ORV:
Ohio Northern (2-1) 4 points (9, 9, x, x, x, x, x, x)
Rose Hulman (3-0) 3 points (9, 10, x, x, x, x, x, x)
Franklin (2-2) 2 points (10, 10, x, x, x, x, x, x)
Adrian (2-1) 2 points (9, x, x, x, x, x, x, x)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, USee, and wally wabash.
Two comments:
I'm the most green-blooded voter here, so I was pleasantly shocked that IWU beat out Witt by such a big margin for 6th. (In fact, Witt's #6 vote is me; I'm one of IWU's #7 votes.) The margin of Wabash's win over Witt (IN C'ville) was only a mild surprise to me - I fully expected the LG's to win by 2+ TDs. Still, I'm not prepared to say that IWU would be favored on a neutral field over Witt - though I'd love to see that game!
The voter who completely left NCC off his ballot needs to be less dogmatic about early season losses! They lost in OT AT the #14 team in the country, and lost by ONE point to the #5 team. And they have a gifted freshman QB (plus plenty of other very young players) - I'm guessing they might have won both games if they were later in the season. (They led both games entering the 4th Q; one problem with inexperience is being unable to hang on to leads in the clutch.) They will probably not make it to the postseason (I can't see them beating both Wheaton and IWU), but they are a legitimate top 25 team, and certainly a top ten in the North Region.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 28, 2015, 08:43:31 PMThey will probably not make it to the postseason (I can't see them beating both Wheaton and IWU), but they are a legitimate top 25 team, and certainly a top ten in the North Region.
That's my ballot.
I agree with the above (where I have supplied emphasis). And if that prediction holds then NCC is a team that will end up with 4 losses having lost to all of the best teams they played. What does that really say?
I understand the
theory behind a "quality loss" but at some point you have to win games. If a team scheduled their 10 games against UWW, Mount, Linfield, UMHB, Wesley, Wartburg, Wheaton, Wabash, St. Thomas, and JHU and lost them all by small margins, does that
really mean they're the 11th best team in the country? With no wins but a bunch of "quality" losses?
I think they need to win a game against someone better than Trine (and upcoming Millikin, North Park and Carthage).
Oh, and I had IWU 5th. ;)
I had a tough time with this this week. Particularly with North Central and John Carroll. On my first pass, I had North Central down at 9, but further scrutiny slid them all the way up to 6. Ultimately, I couldn't keep Witt ahead of North Central (Witt's got a pretty significant offensive balance problem) and the more I thought about John Carroll the more I can't really keep giving them the benefit of the doubt. If JCU wasn't in a quarterfinal last year and were somebody like Otterbein with the exact same results, there's no way they'd be ranked in this top 10 (to say nothing of the national top 10). So I'm the 9 for JCU. They're one more 17-14 game away from getting tossed. That's just not really a good team, IMO.
And then as promised last week, Franklin sort of needed to be super impressive from here on out to stay in and they weren't vs. Bluffton. So Franklin out, Olivet in for me.
And I also moved Wabash up to 2 ahead of Wheaton. These are pretty even teams in my mind, but Wabash now has a really strong win in region (best result in region to date) so they jump up one.
I moved North Central up from 5 to 4th because I beleive they are the 4th best team and I can easily see them winning out. IWU was 5 and Witt 6. Olivet Depauw Albion at the bottom. No change for me.
My order this week... Mount Union, Wheaton, Wabash, North Central, John Carroll, Albion, Illinois Wesleyan, Wittenberg, DePauw, Rose-Hulman.
On my top 25 ballot I have Wheaton 7 and Wabash 8 and are quite close so it's possible I could flip them at some point.
My number 11 didn't get a single vote... I have Elmhurst there this week.
I have Wheaton and Wabash close as well. But they do have a HTH result that I witnessed. And, while it was a scrimmage and only a half of real game for the starters, Wabash got zero first downs against the Wheaton D. The LG d was also dominant but the Thunder managed 3-4 first downs and 7 pts with a short field. It's not much and these teams are close, but it's enough for me to keep Wheaton ahead by a smidge as I have real concerns about the Wabash O. Their D is the real deal.
My ballot was the same as the poll again this week I believe. The issue JCU is going to present is that if they beat ONU this week they're coasting into Ott at 8-0. In all likelihood they're waltzing into the Mount game 9-0. So if everyone's suspicions about JCU are true we aren't going to find out until the bitter end.
h/t to wabndy for posting the link first...
We've been ahead of the official word here, but officially according to the NCAA prechampionship manual for 2015 (http://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/Prechamps_DIII_Football_2015.pdf) Chicago is definitely a South region team this year (and next presumably).
Well, the U of C is on the South Side of Chicago, after all. ;)
Looks like the games to watch today are Olivet/Adrian and JCU/ONU. Those appear to be the best match ups on paper. Not our region, but I'm excited to watch the W&J/TMC game too. That could be a track meet.
Oy vey! This week I think I'll vote UMU, Wheaton, and Wabash to the first three slots, then drop to about 8th! JCU loses, IWU should have lost to what will probably be the last-place CCIW team (they were down 8 w/ 1:20 to play, got a TD, missed the 2-point conversion, succeeded on the onside kick, scored the winning TD w/ about 8 seconds remaining), and NCC is having all sorts of trouble with a sub-mediocre Millikin team! (Witt won decisively, but c'mon - it was Woo!) I've got a lot of investigating to do after the top three.
But to those who tried to convince me that Olivet was better than Adrian (I think it was USee who spear-headed the effort), mea culpa! I stand convinced. (In fact with the trouble Albion had beating Hope, I'll now slot Olivet as #1 in the MIAA.)
The weather (specifically the wind) played a major role in games across the country today. Some strange scores that I would take with a grain of salt.
Quote from: USee on October 03, 2015, 10:01:04 PM
The weather (specifically the wind) played a major role in games across the country today. Some strange scores that I would take with a grain of salt.
That NCC score is a little deceptive as well.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 03, 2015, 10:14:08 PM
Quote from: USee on October 03, 2015, 10:01:04 PM
The weather (specifically the wind) played a major role in games across the country today. Some strange scores that I would take with a grain of salt.
That NCC score is a little deceptive as well.
Well, it is and it isn't. NCC dominated all the stats except for the only one that ultimately counts throughout the game. Finally in the fourth, the ultimate stat came to them as well.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 03, 2015, 10:26:30 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 03, 2015, 10:14:08 PM
Quote from: USee on October 03, 2015, 10:01:04 PM
The weather (specifically the wind) played a major role in games across the country today. Some strange scores that I would take with a grain of salt.
That NCC score is a little deceptive as well.
Well, it is and it isn't. NCC dominated all the stats except for the only one that ultimately counts throughout the game. Finally in the fourth, the ultimate stat came to them as well.
What's interesting about the NCC Millikin game is that the NCC coaches finally realized the freshman, Hunniford, didn't have it today (in part because of the wind) and when they went with Warden, they dominated. Last week vs Wesley it was the opposite, Warden put the ball on the ground and killed momentum while Hunniford was lightning in a bottle.
crickets.......
Got the last ballot in this morning...I'll have the poll up in about 2.5 hours. Some really interesting stuff this week. Should make for some good discussion.
And here is your North Region Fan Poll through Week 5:
1- Mount Union (4-0) 80 points (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2- Wheaton (4-0) 71 points (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3)
3- Wabash (4-0) 65 points (2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4- North Central (2-2) 48 points (4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 6, 10)
5- Illinois Wesleyan (4-0) 42 points (4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 8)
6- Wittenberg (3-1) 32 points (5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 9, x)
7- Albion (4-0) 25 points (4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, x, x)
8- Olivet (4-0) 22 points (7, 7, 7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10)
9- DePauw (4-0) 21 points (5, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, x, x)
10- Ohio Northern (3-1) 14 points (5, 6, 9, 10, x, x, x, x)
ORV:
John Carroll (3-1) 9 points (6, 7, x, x, x, x, x, x)
Rose Hulman (4-0) 7 points (8, 9, 10, 10, x, x, x, x)
Franklin (3-2) 3 points (9, 10, x, x, x, x, x, x)
Denison (4-0) 1 point (10, x, x, x, x, x, x, x)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, USee, and wally wabash.
I'd better watch it or they'll take away my Green card - I was the 8 for IWU. :P I may have overreacted to that abomination against Carthage. After all, bottom line, they DID win.
I'm still one of the non-votes for DePauw. They have 4 blowout wins, but the opponents have a total of three wins amongst them. :o There are probably AT LEAST 100 D3 teams that would be 4-0 against Earlham, Wooster, Hiram, and Kenyon! This week they finally get the chance to prove themselves one way or the other. If they beat Witt, or even give them a tight game, they'll (probably) finally be on my ballot.
The spread of vote positions for Albion is one of the most extreme I can recall for mid-season.
wally, you've been talkin' up Denison - is their vote yours? Their 4-0 record isn't QUITE as lame a DePauw's, but the opponents still have totalled only five wins (and the next opponent is Hiram), so I'll also await their Witt game in two weeks before rendering judgment.
I am indeed the Denison vote. DuShawn Brown is a monster and Denison is playing some high level defense. With John Carroll losing and dropping out, I had a spot open for probably either Franklin, ONU, or Denison and I opted for the team with best defense there.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 06, 2015, 10:00:56 PM
I am indeed the Denison vote. DuShawn Brown is a monster and Denison is playing some high level defense. With John Carroll losing and dropping out, I had a spot open for probably either Franklin, ONU, or Denison and I opted for the team with best defense there.
Yeah, that's a defensible ;) approach (though I'd take both ONU and Franklin over Denison's achievements so far).
Rose Hulman is another 4-0 team about whom there is little there there (their opponents have a total of four wins). Franklin at least goes ambitious in the non-con games. I find their 3-2 way more impressive than RHIT's 4-0. The HCAC is otherwise so pathetic that the only measuring sticks for Franklin and RHIT are non-con games and each other (Oct 24 this season) - and Rose took a pass on the non-con schedule.
Bottom line for those with perfect (but unimpressive) records IMO: DePauw I find out this week, Denison next week, and Rose Hulman (AND Franklin, who fell off my ballot this week) the following week
You can't just say "they played Earlham, Wooster, Hiram and Kenyon" and "there are 100 teams that could beat those guys". As Wally would say that's lazy voting. Part of the responsibility of voting (ok this is pretend voting) is to look beyond just a simple set of data like who they played. Voting and ranking teams is like a jigsaw puzzle. We have imperfect pieces of the puzzle in the form of data and we have to try and make decisions based on limited information and imperfect comparison's.
Depauw's case is simple. While they are 4-0 against the weak sisters of the blind, they are clearly a good team. 19 starters are back from a 7-3 team including all 5 offensive linemen, their top 3 RB's and a two year starter at QB. They are good, they are going to be good. I think they may just beat Witt this weekend. Regardless, they are a top 10 region team. With that, here is my ballot and some color:
1. UMU-Their opponents have a combined 5 wins (I have heard this argument before), they must suck so I thought about dropping them off my ballot because they haven't played anyone.
2. Wheaton-4 key starters have sat out one of the last two and their depth keeps them rolling. No sign of weakness yet
3. Wabash-Fear the flock. They have the quality Witt win and they keep rolling. No let up in sight
4. North Central-new rb, rotating qb's, no playmakers on defense yet they are literally 2 plays from being 4-0 against arguably the best schedule in the country. Are we still not convinced UWP and Wesley are any good?
5. IWU-games like Carthage this team lost last year. They found a way to win in tough conditions, on the road when their frosh qb wasn't playing well.
6. Wittenberg-This seems like a top 25 team to me. I will be watching them closely this week against the Tigers from Greendingle
7.Olivet-This is the best team in the MIAA and now has a quality win over the league favorite. Wasn't hard to see, 20 returning starters from a team that lost 4 games by a total of 19 pts last year. They will be the AQ from MIAA
8. Depauw-see comments for #1
9. Albion-house of cards. Talk about zero quality wins? Combine that with bad defense and a team that struggled against Hope. This team will lose and probably more than once
10. Rose Hulman-4-0 against the powder puff girls but 18 starters, including their QB, from a 7-3 team and they have my eye. next three weeks will tell us a lot.
Next group in:
ONU-The synthetic Bluffton loss is troubling
Denison-I like their style. Could make a splash
JCU-yuck.
Quote from: USee on October 07, 2015, 01:07:29 AM
You can't just say "they played Earlham, Wooster, Hiram and Kenyon" and "there are 100 teams that could beat those guys". As Wally would say that's lazy voting. Part of the responsibility of voting (ok this is pretend voting) is to look beyond just a simple set of data like who they played. Voting and ranking teams is like a jigsaw puzzle. We have imperfect pieces of the puzzle in the form of data and we have to try and make decisions based on limited information and imperfect comparison's.
Depauw's case is simple. While they are 4-0 against the weak sisters of the blind, they are clearly a good team. 19 starters are back from a 7-3 team including all 5 offensive linemen, their top 3 RB's and a two year starter at QB. They are good, they are going to be good. I think they may just beat Witt this weekend. Regardless, they are a top 10 region team. With that, here is my ballot and some color:
1. UMU-Their opponents have a combined 5 wins (I have heard this argument before), they must suck so I thought about dropping them off my ballot because they haven't played anyone.
2. Wheaton-4 key starters have sat out one of the last two and their depth keeps them rolling. No sign of weakness yet
3. Wabash-Fear the flock. They have the quality Witt win and they keep rolling. No let up in sight
4. North Central-new rb, rotating qb's, no playmakers on defense yet they are literally 2 plays from being 4-0 against arguably the best schedule in the country. Are we still not convinced UWP and Wesley are any good?
5. IWU-games like Carthage this team lost last year. They found a way to win in tough conditions, on the road when their frosh qb wasn't playing well.
6. Wittenberg-This seems like a top 25 team to me. I will be watching them closely this week against the Tigers from Greendingle
7.Olivet-This is the best team in the MIAA and now has a quality win over the league favorite. Wasn't hard to see, 20 returning starters from a team that lost 4 games by a total of 19 pts last year. They will be the AQ from MIAA
8. Depauw-see comments for #1
9. Albion-house of cards. Talk about zero quality wins? Combine that with bad defense and a team that struggled against Hope. This team will lose and probably more than once
10. Rose Hulman-4-0 against the powder puff girls but 18 starters, including their QB, from a 7-3 team and they have my eye. next three weeks will tell us a lot.
Next group in:
ONU-The synthetic Bluffton loss is troubling
Denison-I like their style. Could make a splash
JCU-yuck.
Comments on some of the teams.
UMU has played nobody yet this year, but we have 30 years of evidence that they are probably pretty damn good; much less on anyone else.
IWU - true (though their qb is a sophomore, not a freshman - pretty sure he had too much playing last year to be a medical redshirt).
Olivet's opponents are 5-12; I had obviously overrated Adrian, so not sure they have a
quality win (Earlham, Carthage, Aurora, Adrian).
Albion gave UWSP their only loss so far; their opponents are 8-8 (therefore 8-4 against anyone besides Albion).
RHIT was 7-3 last year, but in the HCAC does that really mean anything - they lost to Bluffton and MSJ for heaven's sake! (And ONU's loss to Bluffton apparently kept you from ranking them.)
Synthetic Bluffton loss? Is that because ONU lost to BW who lost to Bluffton? Because if so why not go one step further and add in that Bluffton lost to Wilmington :D
Quote from: USee on October 07, 2015, 01:07:29 AM
You can't just say "they played Earlham, Wooster, Hiram and Kenyon" and "there are 100 teams that could beat those guys". As Wally would say that's lazy voting. Part of the responsibility of voting (ok this is pretend voting) is to look beyond just a simple set of data like who they played. Voting and ranking teams is like a jigsaw puzzle. We have imperfect pieces of the puzzle in the form of data and we have to try and make decisions based on limited information and imperfect comparison's.
Depauw's case is simple. While they are 4-0 against the weak sisters of the blind, they are clearly a good team. 19 starters are back from a 7-3 team including all 5 offensive linemen, their top 3 RB's and a two year starter at QB. They are good, they are going to be good. I think they may just beat Witt this weekend. Regardless, they are a top 10 region team. With that, here is my ballot and some color:
Agreed. We take our prior beliefs, update them with what we see throughout the season.
I'm fine with holding off on DePauw as one of the region's elite (top 4-5), but sticking with an arbitrary construct that you won't rank them at all just because they have opened with four weak sisters is kind of a cop-out. They haven't exactly struggled to win any of those games. I don't think they're ranked by most people just because they have "4-0" next to them in the standings, but rather because coming into the season it was reasonable to expect that they would be pretty good (for the reasons USee has stated) and to date they have looked the part against bad teams, just like they're supposed to.
Thing is, beyond the top 3-4 teams, nobody is perfect. Everybody has a flaw. Some are undefeated against what we perceive as a weak schedule, some have a loss to a good team...these are all judgement calls, and having a couple different voices in the room is what makes it fun.
Of course, Mr. Ypsi, you are correct that we will get answers for these teams in short order.
*Comment on Albion: it's been a couple of weeks and maybe the more recent results matter the most (Week 1 results can always be head-scratchers in hindsight) but are we really so quick to dismiss that win over UWSP (referring to Usee's "zero quality wins" statement, which might be tongue in cheek). Is that really so different from IWU's win over Franklin? I do agree that the #4 vote for them seems almost shockingly high (and probably would have them 8th or 9th in my own poll), so I don't disagree with Usee's positioning of them, just surprised that they also get the no-quality-wins treatment when they beat a UWSP team that is currently 3-1 (and coming off a 7-3 season last year that included a win over North Central).
**I also think we should take a moment just to admire the turnaround job at Olivet, who went 2-48 from 2008-2012 (three winless seasons in five years). Their current seniors went 0-10 as freshmen. This year they sit 4-0 with a chance (not a lock, but a chance...given the way the MIAA has shaken out the last few years, someone may pick them off) to run the table. Impressive stuff, regardless of where they end up in the RR's.
Good comments. A few replies/additional notes:
Ypsi,
Re:
-UMU and 30 years....be careful here. You are coming dangerously close to ringing Wally's bell. I was making a different point with my analogy.
-Olivet: You and the coaches in the MIAA apparently overrated Adrian. They were the pick to win the MIAA. I would say on a relative scale that's a quality win. More so than Depauw to date.
-Check you math on UWSP Mr. Stats professor. Their opponents, sans Albion, are 3-9 so I have my doubts about UWSP. I am not sure that Albion's victory over UWSP is such a quality win. But sith 17 returning starters (for UWSP) from the team that beat NCC and finished 7-3 I gave Albion the benefit of the doubt for that win. I may be adjusting it later. For now, Albion is in my top 10
-RHIT's last year record with 18 returning starters doesn't mean anything other than they should be better than last year, which is good enough for spot #10 for now. ONU's on my radar but the Bluffton thing and general performance of the OAC below UMU gives me pause. I don't have a strong axe to grind here.
ExTartan, You described Depauw better than I could, I agree.
As for your "nobody's perfect" comment, I disagree. Wally and me are perfect except when we disagree, then it's just me.
Quote from: USee on October 07, 2015, 01:07:29 AM
You can't just say "they played Earlham, Wooster, Hiram and Kenyon" and "there are 100 teams that could beat those guys". As Wally would say that's lazy voting. Part of the responsibility of voting (ok this is pretend voting) is to look beyond just a simple set of data like who they played. Voting and ranking teams is like a jigsaw puzzle. We have imperfect pieces of the puzzle in the form of data and we have to try and make decisions based on limited information and imperfect comparison's.
No, I think there's a difference between taking a wait-and-see approach with DePauw (or Denison) and slotting teams in a ballot based on what league they play in. If somebody were to say that they vote by slotting Mount Union #1, the best CCIW team #2, the second best OAC team #3, second best CCIW #4 and then cite some nonsense about
league performance in past tournaments (nevermind that entire leagues never play in the tournament) being the end-all guidance for where to rank
teams, then my eye twitches and I might say that that somebody were lazy about evaluating and ranking teams. We all go about ranking teams differently...looking at the data through different lenses with different focuses. That's all well and good and, in fact, I think it gives us a really balanced, informed poll. But the methodology that I can't get behind is the one that says a team belongs ranked at a certain place because of their league affiliation. That's garbage.
Yes but he isn't just taking a "wait and see approach" he is saying "100 other teams can beat those teams so I won't rank them", which is lazy. The same way you are saying slotting a conference into a ranking is lazy. Do the work, check the facts. If you look deeper you can see Depauw is good. It would shock me if they get blown out by Witt. It wouldn't be a surprise to me to see them win this weekend or keep it very close. CCIW winner is #7 nationally, that means this year, which means Wheaton currently. If Wheaton loses and IWU is the leader/winner, maybe CCIW winner/leader is #14?
Quote from: USee on October 07, 2015, 02:52:53 PM
Yes but he isn't just taking a "wait and see approach" he is saying "100 other teams can beat those teams so I won't rank them", which is lazy. The same way you are saying slotting a conference into a ranking is lazy. Do the work, check the facts. If you look deeper you can see Depauw is good. It would shock me if they get blown out by Witt. It wouldn't be a surprise to me to see them win this weekend or keep it very close. CCIW winner is #7 nationally, that means this year, which means Wheaton currently. If Wheaton loses and IWU is the leader/winner, maybe CCIW winner/leader is #14?
If they didn't have a chance to prove themselves in the very next game, I might have dug deeper. But with a program that had a losing record as recently as 2013 (and therefore doesn't get the benefit of the doubt that some teams who have also so far played no one do), why not just wait one week for much clearer evidence than I could probably find by digging?
Quote from: USee on October 07, 2015, 02:52:53 PM
Yes but he isn't just taking a "wait and see approach" he is saying "100 other teams can beat those teams so I won't rank them", which is lazy. The same way you are saying slotting a conference into a ranking is lazy. Do the work, check the facts. If you look deeper you can see Depauw is good. It would shock me if they get blown out by Witt. It wouldn't be a surprise to me to see them win this weekend or keep it very close. CCIW winner is #7 nationally, that means this year, which means Wheaton currently. If Wheaton loses and IWU is the leader/winner, maybe CCIW winner/leader is #14?
The way I interpreted the "100 other teams can beat those teams" is that you can't really buy a whole lot into their stats at this point. There's definitely an element of faith that you have to have in DePauw through the first month of the season. I'm with you, USee- I think DePauw is probably pretty good this year (finally) and I think they have a shot to win on Saturday. But I wouldn't be at all surprised if they lose by 30 either. I don't really know what they are because their September schedule was so awful. I have DePauw in my top 10, but I can understand anybody who wants to see them play a real game and validate their performance before putting them in.
This definitely isn't as egregious as John Carroll being ranked ahead of ONU in any place at the moment, which is a thing that is happening (not in our poll, thank goodness).
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 07, 2015, 06:07:49 AM**I also think we should take a moment just to admire the turnaround job at Olivet, who went 2-48 from 2008-2012 (three winless seasons in five years). Their current seniors went 0-10 as freshmen. This year they sit 4-0 with a chance (not a lock, but a chance...given the way the MIAA has shaken out the last few years, someone may pick them off) to run the table. Impressive stuff, regardless of where they end up in the RR's.
I saw the Comets play in 2012 and 2013 (the freshman and sophomore seasons of the current seniors), as Olivet had a home-and-home with North Park for those two seasons. NPU won in Olivet the first year, Olivet returned the favor in Chicago the second year. I could tell both times that I saw the Comets that that class of 2015 that Dan Pifer had recruited was really special. It was all a matter of retention, and he kept almost all of the really good players from that class (and has added some more since), so it's paying dividends for him now.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 07, 2015, 03:22:19 PM
Quote from: USee on October 07, 2015, 02:52:53 PM
Yes but he isn't just taking a "wait and see approach" he is saying "100 other teams can beat those teams so I won't rank them", which is lazy. The same way you are saying slotting a conference into a ranking is lazy. Do the work, check the facts. If you look deeper you can see Depauw is good. It would shock me if they get blown out by Witt. It wouldn't be a surprise to me to see them win this weekend or keep it very close. CCIW winner is #7 nationally, that means this year, which means Wheaton currently. If Wheaton loses and IWU is the leader/winner, maybe CCIW winner/leader is #14?
The way I interpreted the "100 other teams can beat those teams" is that you can't really buy a whole lot into their stats at this point. There's definitely an element of faith that you have to have in DePauw through the first month of the season. I'm with you, USee- I think DePauw is probably pretty good this year (finally) and I think they have a shot to win on Saturday. But I wouldn't be at all surprised if they lose by 30 either. I don't really know what they are because their September schedule was so awful. I have DePauw in my top 10, but I can understand anybody who wants to see them play a real game and validate their performance before putting them in.
This definitely isn't as egregious as John Carroll being ranked ahead of ONU in any place at the moment, which is a thing that is happening (not in our poll, thank goodness).
Thanks, wally. Yeah, I too suspect DePauw is pretty good this year, but with a losing record as recently as 2013, that would be a leap of faith unjustified by anything in the record this season. (With the tomato cans they have played so far, what evidence am I supposed to be looking for by 'digging deeper'?) Since it is only a week (now 3 days) until the first REAL evidence of the year comes in, and since I had ten teams I was satisfied with already (and even had to drop Franklin to hold it to ten), I felt good about holding off 'til next poll.
I was not as harsh as most with JCU - I'm their 7 vote. (Fear not, ONU was my 6 vote, thus dropping my own Titans to #8. :o) I'll be predisposed to knocking them further down (like most all of the rest of you), but they may not be tested again 'til November. ::)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 07, 2015, 08:12:27 PM
Thanks, wally. Yeah, I too suspect DePauw is pretty good this year, but with a losing record as recently as 2013, that would be a leap of faith unjustified by anything in the record this season. (With the tomato cans they have played so far, what evidence am I supposed to be looking for by 'digging deeper'?) Since it is only a week (now 3 days) until the first REAL evidence of the year comes in, and since I had ten teams I was satisfied with already (and even had to drop Franklin to hold it to ten), I felt good about holding off 'til next poll.
I was not as harsh as most with JCU - I'm their 7 vote. (Fear not, ONU was my 6 vote, thus dropping my own Titans to #8. :o) I'll be predisposed to knocking them further down (like most all of the rest of you), but they may not be tested again 'til November. ::)
You are ignoring facts. It's not a leap of faith to uncover 2013 was Bill Lynchs first year (he inherited a bad team), he went 4-6, then 7-3. He has 19 starters back from a team that went 7-3 last year and was ranked in the North region top ten. Why is it a leap of faith to think that same team might be better this year, particularly when they have done what they are supposed to do so far this season? Dig deeper means look at the team as it is constituted. It takes no work to rank Depauw after they beat Witt. Heck why don't you just wait til December and submit your final poll then. That would be genius.
Why is a losing record in 2013 relevant to rankings five full weeks into the 2015 season? I can live with a little carryover from last year, maybe, while we are still shaking things out with limited data, but there's no reason that two seasons ago has any real relevance to this year's rankings.
Quote from: USee on October 07, 2015, 09:23:45 AM
Their opponents, sans Albion, are 3-9 so I have my doubts about UWSP.
Their opponents, sans Finlandia, are 6-6. Depends on how you nitpick their schedule, I suppose.
The point is that they have NO relevant data for this year. (It would not surprise me if their SOS for games played so far is among the bottom 5 in all of D3.) A losing record in 2013 is relevant only in that they don't get the 'benefit of the doubt' that some programs receive. As I said, I 'suspect' that they are top ten, but you guys protest when I go on 'suspicions' rather than data. So far there is NO data. Jeez, can't you wait TWO MORE days?!
USee, I found your final sentences to be highly offensive. I'm waiting ONE f'kin' week, not December. And you probably recall what happened to IWU last year when most expected 7-3 or 8-2. Injuries (or mono) can change things pretty damned fast. (And yes, I vote on what is, not what might be, but so far we have NO clue what is for DePauw. I repeat that there are AT LEAST 100 teams that would be 4-0 against their schedule.)
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 07, 2015, 11:41:19 PM
Quote from: USee on October 07, 2015, 09:23:45 AM
Their opponents, sans Albion, are 3-9 so I have my doubts about UWSP.
Their opponents, sans Finlandia, are 6-6. Depends on how you nitpick their schedule, I suppose.
Thanks, Pat. I was going to chastise USee for arbitrarily dropping 25% of their schedule (Albion), but arbitrarily dropping Finlandia works just as well!
Either way, their schedule is about as 'average' as you can get!
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 07, 2015, 11:41:19 PM
Quote from: USee on October 07, 2015, 09:23:45 AM
Their opponents, sans Albion, are 3-9 so I have my doubts about UWSP.
Their opponents, sans Finlandia, are 6-6. Depends on how you nitpick their schedule, I suppose.
No. It matters very specifically since the Albion win at home over UWSP is the one in question. I wonder if that's a quality win since outside of that game UWSP has beaten 2-2 Coe at home by 3, 1-3 Finlandia on the road by 71, and 0-4 Eu Claire by 10 at home. If UWSP had wins over winning teams then Albions victory could be considered higher quality. That may yet happen it just hasnt so far.
Quote from: USee on October 08, 2015, 12:07:36 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 07, 2015, 11:41:19 PM
Quote from: USee on October 07, 2015, 09:23:45 AM
Their opponents, sans Albion, are 3-9 so I have my doubts about UWSP.
Their opponents, sans Finlandia, are 6-6. Depends on how you nitpick their schedule, I suppose.
No. It matters very specifically since the Albion win at home over UWSP is the one in question. I wonder if that's a quality win since outside of that game UWSP has beaten 2-2 Coe at home by 3, 1-3 Finlandia on the road by 71, and 0-4 Eu Claire by 10 at home. If UWSP had wins over winning teams then Albions victory could be considered higher quality. That may yet happen it just hasnt so far.
So if UWSP had wins over 3-1 Ripon, 3-2 Westminster (MO), and 3-2 Minnesota-Morris then it'd be better than wins over 1-3 St John Fisher, 1-2 Redlands, and 1-3 Montclair St or their current schedule?
I just like playing devils advocate... I'm not actually taking a side ;D
Mr Ypsi,
I am sorry for my comments that you clearly took personally. I meant it as a general "you" concerning frustration with the methodology of ranking (which is not specific to just you). I could have written those words better.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 08, 2015, 12:54:17 AM
Quote from: USee on October 08, 2015, 12:07:36 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 07, 2015, 11:41:19 PM
Quote from: USee on October 07, 2015, 09:23:45 AM
Their opponents, sans Albion, are 3-9 so I have my doubts about UWSP.
Their opponents, sans Finlandia, are 6-6. Depends on how you nitpick their schedule, I suppose.
No. It matters very specifically since the Albion win at home over UWSP is the one in question. I wonder if that's a quality win since outside of that game UWSP has beaten 2-2 Coe at home by 3, 1-3 Finlandia on the road by 71, and 0-4 Eu Claire by 10 at home. If UWSP had wins over winning teams then Albions victory could be considered higher quality. That may yet happen it just hasnt so far.
So if UWSP had wins over 3-1 Ripon, 3-2 Westminster (MO), and 3-2 Minnesota-Morris then it'd be better than wins over 1-3 St John Fisher, 1-2 Redlands, and 1-3 Montclair St or their current schedule?
I just like playing devils advocate... I'm not actually taking a side ;D
Fair example and good point. But this is semantics. My point is we don't yet know if UWSP was a quality win for Albion and your example highlights the same thing, we could have opponents opponents who have good records but aren't very good. UWSP hasn't beaten anyone eye popping so we don't know about them and thus I question Albion. This last weekend's game against Hope did nothing to give me anymore confidence in Albion. As I said weeks ago, I am pretty sure Olivet is better. In the same vein, Wally asked the question a couple weeks ago "Do we really know Albion wouldn't beat North Central" and while, back then, many would assume (due to history) the answer is "no" we actually didn't have much data to inform us one way or another. North Central had lost to UWP in OT and we didn't know if UWP was any good. Now we have much more information (UWP v UWW, NCC v Wesley, UWSP questionable, Augie v Loras, Albion v Hope, etc). North Central is 2 plays away from being 4-0 against one of the top schedules in the country and Albion was a failed 2pt conversion away from losing to a middle of the pack Hope team. This doesn't answer Wally's question but it certainly informs us. I would be willing to wager there are very few outside of Sprankle-Sprandel Stadium that would make a big bet on Albion over North Central if they played this weekend.
Similarly, how do we know Wabash is any good? They beat up on helpless NCAC teams by 50 and have what we think is a quality win against a top 25 Witt team. What if Witt ends up as the IWU of 2015? What if Depauw beats Witt by 30 this weekend? Does that raise Depauw and/or lower Wabash as a result? How do we know know how good this years Mt Union is good? 2014 UMU beat Wesley by 70 and then got handled by UWW in the 'ship. With the OAC struggling we don't know if we have 2012 UMU or 2014 UMU on our hands. Fortunately for us we have "30 years of history" that suggests we won't have to worry about this until the semi's or later.
None of this is exact science as we saw last year. There are no shortage of examples from 2014: Wheaton was winning by 14 and 12 over bad Coe and Kalamzoo teams many rightfully questioned how good they were. They evolved into a top 10 team. IWU was top 15 quality early and then fell off a cliff. Finally, when UWW needed a TD in the last 28 seconds to beat a 3-7 River Falls team in the last week of the regular season some of their own questioned their chances in the post season. Who knew?
The gymnastics that people do to shoehorn North Central into a tier of D3 that they almost have the credentials to be in is endlessly entertaining.
I don't know how many people would bet on Albion in an Albion vs. NCC game. I am certain that NCC would be grossly overvalued in that game because most people believe that North Central is something that they are not.
You seem to have an axe to grind with NCC? I don't over value NCC. They are ranked 4th in the region and that seems fair. They have a losing record to Wheaton in the Thorne era which suits me just fine. I really don't see any more pumping of NCC than I do of Wabash, Wheaton, or JCU for that matter. What have any of those teams done to deserve merit?
North Central is who we thought they were.
I can't speak for wally but there's a difference between saying that NCC is knocking the door on the tier with the purple powers and giving them the benefit of the doubt that the purple powers get; that is being a favorite for showing up.
Quote from: Li'l Giant on October 08, 2015, 10:37:16 AM
I can't speak for wally but there's a difference between saying that NCC is knocking the door on the tier with the purple powers and giving them the benefit of the doubt that the purple powers get; that is being a favorite for showing up.
And who on here is saying either of those things?? You guys are making stuff up.
You're saying that North Central is two plays away from being 4-0. I disagree. It took a lot more than two plays for North Central to gag away the game against Platteville and it took a lot more than two plays to blow their late lead against Wesley also. If North Central is the team that so many people make them out to be, they win those games. They win against Stevens Point last year. They win against Redlands. This team ALWAYS loses games that they shouldn't be losing if they are actually in the strata of D3 that we plop them down into year after year. And this goes back to what irked me on the other board and the guy with his CCIW #1, MIAC #1, WIAC #2 ranking system- just because North Central won the CCIW a bunch of times in a row doesn't make them awesome. But that's the perception with that team. I don't get it.
North Central vs. Albion is probably a pretty good game. I wouldn't be surprised at all if Albion won in large part because North Central makes a habit out of losing to teams that most people incorrectly think they are much better than.
I like the Wally who looks at data more than the one who gets irked by mythical perceptions. Disagree all you want, the data doesn't lie.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 08, 2015, 11:17:58 AM
You're saying that North Central is two plays away from being 4-0. I disagree. It took a lot more than two plays for North Central to gag away the game against Platteville and it took a lot more than two plays to blow their late lead against Wesley also. If North Central is the team that so many people make them out to be, they win those games. They win against Stevens Point last year. They win against Redlands. This team ALWAYS loses games that they shouldn't be losing if they are actually in the strata of D3 that we plop them down into year after year. And this goes back to what irked me on the other board and the guy with his CCIW #1, MIAC #1, WIAC #2 ranking system- just because North Central won the CCIW a bunch of times in a row doesn't make them awesome. But that's the perception with that team. I don't get it.
This is the exact opposite of how Heidelberg was treated in this poll last year. They made a habit of losing the tougher games on their schedule in the last few seasons and people quit giving them the benefit of the doubt.
Quote from: USee on October 08, 2015, 11:38:18 AM
I like the Wally who looks at data more than the one who gets irked by mythical perceptions. Disagree all you want, the data doesn't lie.
The data tell me that North Central isn't special. They're fine. They're just not special. They get treated like D3 royalty though. That's the disconnect that irks me.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 08, 2015, 12:02:48 PM
Quote from: USee on October 08, 2015, 11:38:18 AM
I like the Wally who looks at data more than the one who gets irked by mythical perceptions. Disagree all you want, the data doesn't lie.
The data tell me that North Central isn't special. They're fine. They're just not special. They get treated like D3 royalty though. That's the disconnect that irks me.
And so where you and I disagree is that perception. I agree with your first 3 statements and not your 4th statement. To be clear, I strongly dislike North Central. I hope they lose every game they play. I hope North Park pounds them into oblivion this Saturday. But they have built a solid program from the ashes of what was nothing through the 80's and 90's. I agree they have hit a ceiling and lose too many games they shouldn't. I believe they are foolish to schedule games like UWP and Wesley (and I have been pummeled by NCC faithful for this opinion). They should win those games you listed if they are that good. Totally agree. But that's a different issue than the fact that they lost by 1 play to UWW and Wesley. They didn't lose by 20, they lost by 1 play. That data tells me they are at that level and can play with the best (they have played just about all the top teams in D3 close, but they still lost). It means they aren't special and certainly not d3 royalty. I have never thought nor sensed that. And that's what I don't get with you reaction.
Quote from: USee on October 08, 2015, 12:24:04 PM
But that's a different issue than the fact that they lost by 1 play to UWW and Wesley. They didn't lose by 20, they lost by 1 play. That data tells me they are at that level and can play with the best (they have played just about all the top teams in D3 close, but they still lost).
This is exactly what I'm talking about. "They lost by 1 play..." is the perspective they get, by default now, by most people- apparently up to and including those people that want to see them lose all of the time. I don't see those games as North Central having lost by 1 play. I see those games as North Central having choked away a three-TD lead in the fourth quarter and having given up a 50-burger which is never excusable for a top flight team. I don't see those results and see North Central having been in a tooth-and-nail battle of the best and aw shucks they just came up short. I see those results as North Central having found a way to lose games that they ought to have won IF they were actually really great.
True, but Wally, if they make one play in that game, or one play in the Wesley game, they win. They made a lot of mistakes to get themselves to that point but if they buckle down and make the one play it's still a W in the books. That's why it's looked at that way -- because that's the way it happened.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 08, 2015, 04:19:04 PM
True, but Wally, if they make one play in that game, or one play in the Wesley game, they win. They made a lot of mistakes to get themselves to that point but if they buckle down and make the one play it's still a W in the books. That's why it's looked at that way -- because that's the way it happened.
I'm not saying that "they lost by one play" is inaccurate. USee and yourself are both right when you say that. I'm just saying that "they lost by one play" is a really forgiving, lenient way to treat those results.
Ok, how about this:
North Central sucked by one play more than UWP and Wesley? You have me convinced Wally. I am being way too lenient on the pile of suck from the south. I will not refer to them by name and will generally avoid mentioning them until they defeat a top 25 team.
Correct me if I am reading this wrong but don't you then feel the same way about Wesley? They are considered "top tier" (reading Ryan Tipps ATN this week) but gave up 70 burger to UMU.
NCC doesn't have any playoff wins against anyone that'd catch your eye, IMO. Their most impressive results historically are probably a close loss to a bad Mount Union team and a competitive loss to UWW. Wesley, I believe, has a little more meat on their resume than that.
p.s. "Bad" Mount team meaning by their standards, obviously. The 2013 team walked a tightrope all year because of arguably the worst defense Mount has had in 20+ years. Only Burke's heroics saved them, including in that NCC game.
Wesley is not top tier.
Quote from: USee on October 08, 2015, 05:57:09 PM
Ok, how about this:
North Central sucked by one play more than UWP and Wesley? You have me convinced Wally. I am being way too lenient on the pile of suck from the south. I will not refer to them by name and will generally avoid mentioning them until they defeat a top 25 team.
Correct me if I am reading this wrong but don't you then feel the same way about Wesley? They are considered "top tier" (reading Ryan Tipps ATN this week) but gave up 70 burger to UMU.
I do not think that Wesley is top shelf, no.
My thing with North Central is that they have a gaudy reputation built on a foundation that I don't agree with. They won the CCIW a bunch of times in a row during a time when people were tripping over one another to exalt the CCIW as a really great conference. And why wouldn't we? The CCIW routinely posted stellar non-league win/loss records and many times their champion would have nice playoff runs that would end at the hands of Mount Union, and who can fault them for that, right? All well and good, except that I found that the CCIW's non-league record was made up largely by wailing on teams from the IBC/NACC, MWC, UMAC, and MIAA. Yes, there were a few nice results against decent teams from the IIAC and MIAC mixed in very sporadically, but by and large the CCIW picked on bad teams from bad leagues. So in my view, North Central winning the CCIW a bunch of times meant less than it meant to most others. And I'm not saying that winning the league was easy- they have to go through Wheaton every year which is never easy and occasionally IWU is pretty good. But the CCIW isn't the week-in-week-out meat grinder people think it was. At least in my opinion.
So I think North Central gets a pass where a lot of other teams don't based on an incorrect perception of how good the CCIW is/was. I don't think North Central is "a pile of suck". They're a fine team. Top 25 caliber for sure. But instead of treating those UWP and Wesley games as de facto wins but if for just one play, I think it's fair to question why they can't ever win one of those games if they're supposed to be knocking on Mr. Stagg's door.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 08, 2015, 07:32:45 PM
Quote from: USee on October 08, 2015, 05:57:09 PM
Ok, how about this:
North Central sucked by one play more than UWP and Wesley? You have me convinced Wally. I am being way too lenient on the pile of suck from the south. I will not refer to them by name and will generally avoid mentioning them until they defeat a top 25 team.
Correct me if I am reading this wrong but don't you then feel the same way about Wesley? They are considered "top tier" (reading Ryan Tipps ATN this week) but gave up 70 burger to UMU.
I do not think that Wesley is top shelf, no.
My thing with North Central is that they have a gaudy reputation built on a foundation that I don't agree with. They won the CCIW a bunch of times in a row during a time when people were tripping over one another to exalt the CCIW as a really great conference. And why wouldn't we? The CCIW routinely posted stellar non-league win/loss records and many times their champion would have nice playoff runs that would end at the hands of Mount Union, and who can fault them for that, right? All well and good, except that I found that the CCIW's non-league record was made up largely by wailing on teams from the IBC/NACC, MWC, UMAC, and MIAA. Yes, there were a few nice results against decent teams from the IIAC and MIAC mixed in very sporadically, but by and large the CCIW picked on bad teams from bad leagues. So in my view, North Central winning the CCIW a bunch of times meant less than it meant to most others. And I'm not saying that winning the league was easy- they have to go through Wheaton every year which is never easy and occasionally IWU is pretty good. But the CCIW isn't the week-in-week-out meat grinder people think it was. At least in my opinion.
So I think North Central gets a pass where a lot of other teams don't based on an incorrect perception of how good the CCIW is/was. I don't think North Central is "a pile of suck". They're a fine team. Top 25 caliber for sure. But instead of treating those UWP and Wesley games as de facto wins but if for just one play, I think it's fair to question why they can't ever win one of those games if they're supposed to be knocking on Mr. Stagg's door.
Wally, I think you are fighting a 'straw man' here. I can't recall anyone here giving NCC a 'pass' for their losses, treating the close losses as
de facto wins (they did drop quite a bit nationally), or thinking they are all-that-close to a Stagg Bowl berth. I DO give them more of a pass than say a DePauw or Denison because they have proven they can go toe-to-toe with anyone in the country (though it is also fair to ask why they can't ever actually WIN those games ::)).
Quote from: USee on October 08, 2015, 08:36:58 AM
Mr Ypsi,
I am sorry for my comments that you clearly took personally. I meant it as a general "you" concerning frustration with the methodology of ranking (which is not specific to just you). I could have written those words better.
It is sometimes unfortunate that English does not distinguish pronouns between the general (plural) you and the specific (singular) you. I've also (unintentionally) insulted people when I meant the generic and they took it personally. I accept your explanation, and am no longer offended! ;D
I believe that a vast majority of the time teams change over the years only somewhat gradually, and past performance IS a primary component of future performance. (Exceptions include an unusual rate of illness/injury [e.g., IWU 2014], a 'miracle recruiting class' [e.g., Monmouth with Tanney, etc., or Trine with Watt, etc.], or a coaching change [DePauw? so far incomplete data]). I therefore DO give much more latitude to teams with a proven track record than to those without such a record (hence the delay in voting for DePauw). Other voters may disagree, but that is the good thing about a poll as opposed to an 'expert'! ;)
Much as I like football, I like basketball and baseball seasons better. Too friggin' much down time in football - six days of nothing then a whole bunch of games you'd like to follow all at the same time! :P With basketball and baseball there are interesting and regionally or nationally relevant games virtually every day of the season!
On the other hand, football season can be glorious weather-wise - basketball season is too damn cold!!
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 09, 2015, 09:49:12 PM
On the other hand, football season can be glorious weather-wise - basketball season is too damn cold!!
Not in Texas....
Quote from: Li'l Giant on October 09, 2015, 11:07:27 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 09, 2015, 09:49:12 PM
On the other hand, football season can be glorious weather-wise - basketball season is too damn cold!!
Not in Texas....
Michigan is not Texas. Weather-wise (PART of the year) that is unfortunate; in most ways, Thank God! ;D
I'm jealous of your fall. I'm gonna tailgate in 90+ degree weather today. 65 degree days in January I would prefer to keep, however.
C'mon now, LG... you get your one week of fall near Uvalde searching for lost maples (any color but brown, please...). As one who spent extensive years in both locales (and is engaged in a spousal battle over retirement destinations currently), I'd side with Mr Ypsi for Michigan but only if Lansing traded the area bordered by US 23, 26 Mile Road, and the OH-MI border skirmish line (inc. Toledo) to Ontario for future draft picks. ;D. Now back to the subject at hand...
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 09, 2015, 09:49:12 PM
On the other hand, football season can be glorious weather-wise - basketball season is too damn cold!!
And so is baseball season around these parts.
Denison is only up 14-6 on Hiram in the 4th? Not overly impressive.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 10, 2015, 08:55:07 PM
Denison is only up 14-6 on Hiram in the 4th? Not overly impressive.
I've already submitted my NR ballot (since Denison would not have been on it no matter what they did to the puppies), but this kinda confirms why I haven't jumped on their bandwagon until they actual beat someone.
Quote from: USee on October 07, 2015, 09:23:45 AM
Good comments. A few replies/additional notes:
Ypsi,
Re:
-UMU and 30 years....be careful here. You are coming dangerously close to ringing Wally's bell. I was making a different point with my analogy.
-Olivet: You and the coaches in the MIAA apparently overrated Adrian. They were the pick to win the MIAA. I would say on a relative scale that's a quality win. More so than Depauw to date.
-Check you math on UWSP Mr. Stats professor. Their opponents, sans Albion, are 3-9 so I have my doubts about UWSP. I am not sure that Albion's victory over UWSP is such a quality win. But sith 17 returning starters (for UWSP) from the team that beat NCC and finished 7-3 I gave Albion the benefit of the doubt for that win. I may be adjusting it later. For now, Albion is in my top 10
-RHIT's last year record with 18 returning starters doesn't mean anything other than they should be better than last year, which is good enough for spot #10 for now. ONU's on my radar but the Bluffton thing and general performance of the OAC below UMU gives me pause. I don't have a strong axe to grind here.
ExTartan, You described Depauw better than I could, I agree.
As for your "nobody's perfect" comment, I disagree. Wally and me are perfect except when we disagree, then it's just me.
UWSP came within a whisker of downing UW-Platteville today - still have doubts? :D
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 10, 2015, 09:19:44 PM
Quote from: USee on October 07, 2015, 09:23:45 AM
Good comments. A few replies/additional notes:
Ypsi,
Re:
-UMU and 30 years....be careful here. You are coming dangerously close to ringing Wally's bell. I was making a different point with my analogy.
-Olivet: You and the coaches in the MIAA apparently overrated Adrian. They were the pick to win the MIAA. I would say on a relative scale that's a quality win. More so than Depauw to date.
-Check you math on UWSP Mr. Stats professor. Their opponents, sans Albion, are 3-9 so I have my doubts about UWSP. I am not sure that Albion's victory over UWSP is such a quality win. But sith 17 returning starters (for UWSP) from the team that beat NCC and finished 7-3 I gave Albion the benefit of the doubt for that win. I may be adjusting it later. For now, Albion is in my top 10
-RHIT's last year record with 18 returning starters doesn't mean anything other than they should be better than last year, which is good enough for spot #10 for now. ONU's on my radar but the Bluffton thing and general performance of the OAC below UMU gives me pause. I don't have a strong axe to grind here.
ExTartan, You described Depauw better than I could, I agree.
As for your "nobody's perfect" comment, I disagree. Wally and me are perfect except when we disagree, then it's just me.
UWSP came within a whisker of downing UW-Platteville today - still have doubts? :D
Nope. But UWPs best player is also out and may have made a difference last week.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 10, 2015, 08:55:07 PM
Denison is only up 14-6 on Hiram in the 4th? Not overly impressive.
Denison has the longest active win streak in D3*. Just sayin'. :)
*unless you count Amherst, which I don't
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 10, 2015, 10:41:41 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 10, 2015, 08:55:07 PM
Denison is only up 14-6 on Hiram in the 4th? Not overly impressive.
Denison has the longest active win streak in D3*. Just sayin'. :)
*unless you count Amherst, which I don't
I'm glad you don't count the intramural team from Amherst. ;)
Denison just barely beats out Olivet and Albion (haven't checked non-playoff teams from other regions), but they still haven't beaten squat THIS season. They have three chances in the next four weeks to rectify that deficiency. Until then, they are on my radar, but not on my ballot.
I haven't started on my 10 yet, but I'm thinking Denison may have lost support this week. That's a pair of pretty uninspiring games from them in the last two weeks. And now they're doing weird things with their quarterback. Their defense is solid, but they've lost their offense which will catch up with them next week.
All of the ballots are in- poll up tonight around 6 EDT. :)
And here is your North Region Fan Poll through Week 6:
1- Mount Union (5-0) 80 points (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2- Wheaton (5-0) 69 points (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3)
3- Wabash (5-0) 67 points (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4- North Central (3-2) 50 points (4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 6, 8)
5- Illinois Wesleyan (5-0) 48 points (4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6)
6- DePauw (5-0) 35 points (5, 5, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 8)
7- Olivet (5-0) 34 points (6, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8)
8- Albion (5-0) 28 points (5, 6, 7, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9)
9- John Carroll (4-1) 9 points (5, 9, 10, x, x, x, x, x)
10- Wittenberg (3-2) 6 points (8, 9, 10, x, x, x, x, x)
10- Rose Hulman (5-0) 6 points (9, 9, 10, 10, x, x, x, x)
10- Franklin (4-2) 6 points (9, 9, 10, 10, x, x, x, x)
ORV:
Ohio Northern (3-2) 1 point (10, x, x, x, x, x, x, x)
Denison (5-0) 1 point (10, x, x, x, x, x, x, x)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, USee, and wally wabash.
Just one vote really jumped out at me - who still has JCU at #5, and why? :o I'm the sole vote for ONU - they did beat JCU (AT JCU).
Haven't shared my ballot yet this year; here it is:
1. UMU (duh!)
2. Wheaton
3. Wabash (could easily be 2a and 2b)
4. NCC
5. IWU (I had bent over backwards to not be a homer, but have finally been won over; in fact, I now think they will beat NCC, but haven't had the guts to move them ahead yet))
6. Olivet
7. DePauw (my 6 v 7 would make for a helluva first-round game!)
8. Witt
9. Albion
10 ONU
Denison and RHIT are both still too untested for my taste - at 5-0 they've both done everything they could but against NOBODY. Franklin is absolutely killing the nobodies of the world, but lost their only two 'real' games. Fortunately, Denison will get tested soon, and Franklin and RHIT will eventually settle the HCAC.
Ypsi;
Not that I'm trying to ridicule your ballot (I think most of it looks pretty good), but what is the logic of putting Witt all the way up at 8, or for that matter, ONU at 10, while leaving JCU off all together?
I know JCU isn't necessarily top 5 material, but fact of the matter is that they have one loss, while both those teams have 2. Before ONU lost to Mount, I fully agreed that they should be ranked ahead. But once they got that second loss, they should have dropped. Based on overall body of work, shouldn't JCU be ahead of ONU? Not to draw a comparison to DI, but that would be like putting Ole Miss ahead of Bama (despite Ole Miss being blown out by Florida) strictly because Ole Miss happened to beat Bama. Can anyone really argue that Ole Miss is overall the better team based on one game, in light of what happened after? (also, lets not forget that Witt was blown away by bash, and ONU also lost to BW, who JCU was able to beat).
Again, I don't mean to criticize.
I moved Denison off this week. I really like the defense they are playing, but the Big Red offense has really stalled out. Having a defense that can win a game against Witt or DePauw or Wabash by 10-9 or 17-6 scores is one thing, doing it against OWU and Hiram is another. I do think their defense will pose problems for those three, but right now I'm not sure where the points come from against the better teams. So, Denison goes back into the prove it pile for me.
I also moved Albion down quite a bit. The Britons have been very impressive offensively, but their defense is one of the worst statistically in D3 through half of a season. That's enough to know that this is just kind of what they are and you just can't give up 500 yards and 35 points every game and keep winning. Reckoning day is coming for Albion I believe.
Kind of bummed that we have JCU ahead of ONU. JCU has zero quality results in their 2015 portfolio while ONU beat them h2h and has a win over Utica which looks better every week. I know they got smashed by UMU, but that fate is coming to everybody in the OAC. I'm just not seeing a logical reason to rank JCU ahead of ONU at this point (I'm ranking neither personally).
Quote from: bluestreak66 on October 13, 2015, 07:31:35 PM
Ypsi;
Not that I'm trying to ridicule your ballot (I think most of it looks pretty good), but what is the logic of putting Witt all the way up at 8, or for that matter, ONU at 10, while leaving JCU off all together?
I know JCU isn't necessarily top 5 material, but fact of the matter is that they have one loss, while both those teams have 2. Before ONU lost to Mount, I fully agreed that they should be ranked ahead. But once they got that second loss, they should have dropped. Based on overall body of work, shouldn't JCU be ahead of ONU? Not to draw a comparison to DI, but that would be like putting Ole Miss ahead of Bama (despite Ole Miss being blown out by Florida) strictly because Ole Miss happened to beat Bama. Can anyone really argue that Ole Miss is overall the better team based on one game, in light of what happened after? (also, lets not forget that Witt was blown away by bash, and ONU also lost to BW, who JCU was able to beat).
Again, I don't mean to criticize.
H-t-h is to me a definitive factor (especially if on the road) unless there is
compelling reason elsewhere in the resume. (Unlike the d3.com poll, or even the consensus of the national fan poll, my national ballot had UWW remaining higher than UWO because, while I can't evaluate NAIA teams, I trust the NAIA voters to do so, and they have the team UWW BEAT ranked higher than the team UWO LOST to; since the conventional wisdom is that home field is worth about 3 points, I count UWW's loss AT UWO by 3 to be
de facto a tie.) The BW games were long enough ago to lose some of their clout, and ONU lost by 1, JCU won by 3; not to me a 'compelling' factor. I therefore was definitely inclined to keep ONU just ahead of JCU (who would be either 11th or 12th behind Franklin); the total wipeout UMU gave to ONU therefore lowered them both significantly on my ballot.
As to Witt, both their losses were to teams higher on my ballot, and I suspect (obviously don't know) that they would beat the teams below them. To paraphrase wally_wabash: where is it written that the NCAC can't have THREE good teams at the same time? Wabash and DePauw are both better, but Witt can still be good.
Quote from: bluestreak66 on October 13, 2015, 07:31:35 PM
...for that matter, ONU at 10, while leaving JCU off all together?
I know JCU isn't necessarily top 5 material, but fact of the matter is that they have one loss, while both those teams have 2. Before ONU lost to Mount, I fully agreed that they should be ranked ahead. But once they got that second loss, they should have dropped.
This is flawed thinking though ("once they got that second loss") because it ignores the effect that schedule sequence has on when a team picks up a "second" loss. ONU just beat John Carroll head-to-head at John Carroll last week. It's a simple fluke that they played Mount Union the next week and picked up their second loss. If John Carroll had played Mount Union this week, instead they would have two losses. Just counting the number of losses is a lazy way to rank teams. ONU beat them head to head. Their resumes are otherwise comparable, and ONU has a better win (Utica) than any win from JCU to date; ONU has a second loss only because they happened to play Mount before JCU plays Mount.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 13, 2015, 08:03:13 PM
(Unlike the d3.com poll, or even the consensus of the national fan poll, my national ballot had UWW remaining higher than UWO because, while I can't evaluate NAIA teams, I trust the NAIA voters to do so, and they have the team UWW BEAT ranked higher than the team UWO LOST to; since the conventional wisdom is that home field is worth about 3 points, I count UWW's loss AT UWO by 3 to be de facto a tie.)
Where were you a couple years ago when I put North Central ahead of Mount Union in the final poll after NCC lost in the semifinals at Mount by 1 point (and then Mount got blown out by UWW 52-14)?
This week I voted
Mount
Wabash, Wheaton
...
NCC
...
Albion, IWU
DePauw, Olivet
...
..
Rose
...
Denison
Basically I don't think anyone is really worthy of #10 right now (and Rose-Hulman is slipping down towards that territory too) but Denison has taken care of business so far (and no one has an impressive win) so they get the spot over Franklin, John Carroll, ONU and the rest for the moment. Now after they most likely lose to Witt this week someone else will be lucky that I have to have a 10th team.
My ballot
UMU-suck like RHIT but they won a few titles a couple generations ago
Wabash- flipped them w Wheaton because thunder are not at full strength
Wheaton- defense is really good
Pile of Suck- Wesley and UWP clearly better
IWU - they are good but haven't beaten anyone good in my view so we wait
Olivet- who knew?
Depauw- I called the Witt win
Albion-UWSP looks better but holy Swiss cheese!
Witt- no way I can rank the others ahead of this team, flaws included
Derrick Rose Hulman- they get the best of the rest title for now.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 13, 2015, 10:25:25 PM
Quote from: bluestreak66 on October 13, 2015, 07:31:35 PM
...for that matter, ONU at 10, while leaving JCU off all together?
I know JCU isn't necessarily top 5 material, but fact of the matter is that they have one loss, while both those teams have 2. Before ONU lost to Mount, I fully agreed that they should be ranked ahead. But once they got that second loss, they should have dropped.
This is flawed thinking though ("once they got that second loss") because it ignores the effect that schedule sequence has on when a team picks up a "second" loss. ONU just beat John Carroll head-to-head at John Carroll last week. It's a simple fluke that they played Mount Union the next week and picked up their second loss. If John Carroll had played Mount Union this week, instead they would have two losses. Just counting the number of losses is a lazy way to rank teams. ONU beat them head to head. Their resumes are otherwise comparable, and ONU has a better win (Utica) than any win from JCU to date; ONU has a second loss only because they happened to play Mount before JCU plays Mount.
I understand that logic, but the point is, JCU didn't play mount. ONU did. While I agree teams shouldn't be ranked strictly on win/loss (Denison), it also isn't really fair to penalize a team for a loss they don't even have yet. JCU will likely lose to Mount, but they shouldn't be held down in the rankings based on that assumption
Quote from: bluestreak66 on October 14, 2015, 05:42:55 PM
JCU didn't play mount. ONU did.
...
it also isn't really fair to penalize a team for a loss they don't even have yet.
You know who else ONU played? John Carroll. Who won that game again?
ONU's loss to Mount Union is pretty much irrelevant in the discussion of "Who is better, ONU vs. JCU?" when they actually played each other, and Ohio Northern won, on the road.
Seriously, this is like arguing that Charles Barkley is taller than LeBron James, even though they stood next to each other and LeBron was taller, because the next day LeBron stood next to Shaq and lost the height battle.
*Editing to add: you do realize the logical inconsistencies in your argument, right? You want to rank 1-loss JCU > 2-loss ONU while disregarding the quality-of-opponent-who-gave-said-losses, but then you won't extend that favor to ranking 0-loss Denison > 1-loss JCU because Denison hasn't played anyone who passes your test. It can't be both ways. Either the quality of opponents doesn't matter, or it does.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 14, 2015, 06:21:55 PM
Quote from: bluestreak66 on October 14, 2015, 05:42:55 PM
JCU didn't play mount. ONU did.
...
it also isn't really fair to penalize a team for a loss they don't even have yet.
You know who else ONU played? John Carroll. Who won that game again?
ONU's loss to Mount Union is pretty much irrelevant in the discussion of "Who is better, ONU vs. JCU?" when they actually played each other, and Ohio Northern won, on the road.
Seriously, this is like arguing that Charles Barkley is taller than LeBron James, even though they stood next to each other and LeBron was taller, because the next day LeBron stood next to Shaq and lost the height battle.
Ex, this analogy of yours is A #1. Well done.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 14, 2015, 06:21:55 PM
ONU's loss to Mount Union is pretty much irrelevant in the discussion of "Who is better, ONU vs. JCU?" when they actually played each other, and Ohio Northern won, on the road.
Seriously, this is like arguing that Charles Barkley is taller than LeBron James, even though they stood next to each other and LeBron was taller, because the next day LeBron stood next to Shaq and lost the height battle.
LOL. +K. That's fabulous
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 14, 2015, 06:21:55 PMSeriously, this is like arguing that Charles Barkley is taller than LeBron James, even though they stood next to each other and LeBron was taller, because the next day LeBron stood next to Shaq and lost the height battle.
+k from me for this as well
Glad I could deliver the chuckles, folks. The runner-up in my analogy contest for this was:
"This is like arguing that the number 2 is actually more than the number 3, because the next week, we counted higher and learned that the number 3 is less than the number 100."
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 15, 2015, 12:49:37 PM
Glad I could deliver the chuckles, folks. The runner-up in my analogy contest for this was:
"This is like arguing that the number 2 is actually more than the number 3, because the next week, we counted higher and learned that the number 3 is less than the number 100."
Stick with your A material. You dated yourself with the Barkley and Shaq references, but otherwise it was great. The number version didn't have the same visual appeal... ;D
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 15, 2015, 12:49:37 PM
Glad I could deliver the chuckles, folks. The runner-up in my analogy contest for this was:
"This is like arguing that the number 2 is actually more than the number 3, because the next week, we counted higher and learned that the number 3 is less than the number 100."
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.pandawhale.com%2F157430-Chevy-Chase-Gerald-Ford-SNL-me-U9FM.jpeg&hash=3d2db8933fc8a8e19ac93865844b39a56593c5aa)
New poll up tonight. I'm not expecting much movement as all twelve teams in last week's top ten won on Saturday. Might see some shake up next week though.
And here is your North Region Fan Poll through Week 6:
1- Mount Union (6-0) 80 points (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2- Wheaton (6-0) 69 points (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3)
3- Wabash (6-0) 67 points (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4- Illinois Wesleyan (6-0) 50 points (4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5)
4- North Central (4-2) 50 points (4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 6, 8)
6- DePauw (6-0) 39 points (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7)
7- Olivet (6-0) 34 points (6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 8)
8- Albion (6-0) 26 points (6, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9)
9- Franklin (5-2) 9 points (9, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, x, x)
10- Rose Hulman (6-0) 7 points (9, 9, 10, 10, 10, x, x, x)
10- Wittenberg (4-2) 7 points (8, 9, 10, 10, x, x, x, x)
ORV:
John Carroll (5-1) 2 points (9, x, x, x, x, x, x, x)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, USee, and wally wabash.
I was a little surprised that a 4-2 Witt was on several ballots while a 4-2 ONU is absent from all of ours. If I was slotting those two I would have had ONU ahead of Witt personally.
While I love seeing IWU tied for 4th (and may see them all alone there next week if Wheaton does what I think they will do to NCC), who in the world voted NCC EIGHTH?! (Unless your team is UMU, Wheaton, Wabash, or perhaps IWU - and I'm the only IWU voter ;) - I dare say that NCC would tear your team limb-from-limb!)
While I HOPE (and suspect) IWU will down NCC, I've still got NCC 4th, IWU 5th; I can't even imagine what other THREE teams that voter had above NCC. (Actually, I cannot only imagine it, I know it, since Franklin, RHIT, Witt, and JCU got no votes above 8: the voter had IWU, DePauw, Olivet, and Albion [in whatever order] ALL above NCC. One or two, fine. All of them, no. These are rankings, not standings. The fact that all four teams are 6-0 while NCC is 4-2 is not the crucial fact (if it were, why didn't you have NCC 9th behind 6-0 RHIT?)
I can't believe I am so vociferously defending NCC - I think I'll go shower now! ;D
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 20, 2015, 10:22:30 PM
I was a little surprised that a 4-2 Witt was on several ballots while a 4-2 ONU is absent from all of ours. If I was slotting those two I would have had ONU ahead of Witt personally.
Witt's win over previously undefeated Denison was more impressive than ONU's win over Cap. My #10 last week was ONU; this week I went with Franklin instead. I thought the magnitude of their victory over a once-good MSJ was also more impressive than the Cap win. To me there is a pretty clear top five: UMU, Wheaton, Wabash, NCC/IWU; after that the next nine or ten are almost a 'flavor of the week'.
I would also add that Witt's two losses are to a pair of undefeated and going-to-be regionally ranked teams on the road (regardless of what we might think of DePauw's SOS). ONU has that stink job from Baldwin Wallace which is more difficult to justify.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 20, 2015, 10:23:33 PM
While I love seeing IWU tied for 4th (and may see them all alone there next week if Wheaton does what I think they will do to NCC), who in the world voted NCC EIGHTH?! (Unless your team is UMU, Wheaton, Wabash, or perhaps IWU - and I'm the only IWU voter ;) - I dare say that NCC would tear your team limb-from-limb!)
While I HOPE (and suspect) IWU will down NCC, I've still got NCC 4th, IWU 5th; I can't even imagine what other THREE teams that voter had above NCC. (Actually, I cannot only imagine it, I know it, since Franklin, RHIT, Witt, and JCU got no votes above 8: the voter had IWU, DePauw, Olivet, and Albion [in whatever order] ALL above NCC. One or two, fine. All of them, no. These are rankings, not standings. The fact that all four teams are 6-0 while NCC is 4-2 is not the crucial fact (if it were, why didn't you have NCC 9th behind 6-0 RHIT?)
We've spent plenty of air on this and other boards talking about North Central and their valiant 2 losses this and whether they should get a Pool C bid if they end up 7-3 (the answer is no), so I'll not rehash the entire discussion here.
I'll concede I've used the "these are rankings, not standings" line myself plenty of times and agree that teams should not be ranked by record alone, but you said it yourself: the fact that all four teams are 6-0 is not the crucial fact because they are ranked ahead of another 6-0 team. So the voter obviously does understand that. In their estimation, the three 6-0 teams that they did slot about North Central are currently more deserving of the ranking. I don't know for sure who would win, but I don't think North Central is the clear-cut favorite in those games that you're assuming they are.
For example, Albion opened the season with a win over UW-Stevens Point. UWSP has, in the last two weeks, taken UW-Platteville to overtime and led UW-Oshkosh (the might vanquishers of UWW) in the second half before falling 21-10. That name UW-Platteville rings a bell...oh, right, they/re one of those teams who beat North Central.
It's a convoluted comparison that goes through several common opponents, and you can absolutely wring that the other way by looking at other isolated results on the schedules (i.e. Albion struggling to get by an Adrian team that Wheaton handled easily) but it's really not
that much of a stretch to think Albion and NCC are comparable. Albion beat a team (UWSP) that took one of NCC's losses (UWP) to overtime, and has remained unbeaten.
I think you're overestimating the overall quality of the CCIW and underestimating the overall quality of the MIAA. North Central has blown out three of the CCIW's lesser lights, two of whom are played MIAA teams and
lost (Millikin lost to Kalamazoo, Carthage lost to Olivet), so let's not pretend that equals tearing the MIAA's best limb from limb just yet. North Central blew out Trine in their opener, but Olivet just blew Trine out last week; I'm not sure that's a mic-drop win for CCIW > MIAA either. NCC can certainly win their way back up the rankings with wins over IWU and Wheaton, but I'm fine with someone in the poll not just assuming that North Central will tear the other 6-0 teams limb from limb just because they played close games with two other really, really good teams and "poor North Central, the boys fought so hard" in those games. I'm fine with someone not assuming that the CCIW automatically has three teams better than the entire MIAA.
One additional point I want to toss out there:
Let's pretend North Central beat Stevens Point 65-52 in the opener and Albion lost to UW-Platteville 35-28. Would anyone in here be predicting that Albion would tear the teams ranked below them limb from limb? Or would the talk be that Albion had a chance to prove themselves a good team, but just couldn't quite get it done, ergo they have to stay a bit lower in the poll?
If Albion had that same exact result against UWP, no way would it be used in their favor by most voters, especially not to justify a ranking at #4 or #5. It would be something like "Albion did show respectably against UWP, so I'll give them the benefit of the doubt even though they play in the lousy MIAA and rank them 8th." But somehow North Central gets a point for that loss, and gets it used not just to show that they play well against good competition, but that they would tear Olivet, Albion, and DePauw limb from limb!
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 21, 2015, 05:46:51 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 20, 2015, 10:23:33 PM
While I love seeing IWU tied for 4th (and may see them all alone there next week if Wheaton does what I think they will do to NCC), who in the world voted NCC EIGHTH?! (Unless your team is UMU, Wheaton, Wabash, or perhaps IWU - and I'm the only IWU voter ;) - I dare say that NCC would tear your team limb-from-limb!)
While I HOPE (and suspect) IWU will down NCC, I've still got NCC 4th, IWU 5th; I can't even imagine what other THREE teams that voter had above NCC. (Actually, I cannot only imagine it, I know it, since Franklin, RHIT, Witt, and JCU got no votes above 8: the voter had IWU, DePauw, Olivet, and Albion [in whatever order] ALL above NCC. One or two, fine. All of them, no. These are rankings, not standings. The fact that all four teams are 6-0 while NCC is 4-2 is not the crucial fact (if it were, why didn't you have NCC 9th behind 6-0 RHIT?)
We've spent plenty of air on this and other boards talking about North Central and their valiant 2 losses this and whether they should get a Pool C bid if they end up 7-3 (the answer is no), so I'll not rehash the entire discussion here.
I'll concede I've used the "these are rankings, not standings" line myself plenty of times and agree that teams should not be ranked by record alone, but you said it yourself: the fact that all four teams are 6-0 is not the crucial fact because they are ranked ahead of another 6-0 team. So the voter obviously does understand that. In their estimation, the three 6-0 teams that they did slot about North Central are currently more deserving of the ranking. I don't know for sure who would win, but I don't think North Central is the clear-cut favorite in those games that you're assuming they are.
For example, Albion opened the season with a win over UW-Stevens Point. UWSP has, in the last two weeks, taken UW-Platteville to overtime and led UW-Oshkosh (the might vanquishers of UWW) in the second half before falling 21-10. That name UW-Platteville rings a bell...oh, right, they/re one of those teams who beat North Central.
It's a convoluted comparison that goes through several common opponents, and you can absolutely wring that the other way by looking at other isolated results on the schedules (i.e. Albion struggling to get by an Adrian team that Wheaton handled easily) but it's really not that much of a stretch to think Albion and NCC are comparable. Albion beat a team (UWSP) that took one of NCC's losses (UWP) to overtime, and has remained unbeaten.
I think you're overestimating the overall quality of the CCIW and underestimating the overall quality of the MIAA. North Central has blown out three of the CCIW's lesser lights, two of whom are played MIAA teams and lost (Millikin lost to Kalamazoo, Carthage lost to Olivet), so let's not pretend that equals tearing the MIAA's best limb from limb just yet. North Central blew out Trine in their opener, but Olivet just blew Trine out last week; I'm not sure that's a mic-drop win for CCIW > MIAA either. NCC can certainly win their way back up the rankings with wins over IWU and Wheaton, but I'm fine with someone in the poll not just assuming that North Central will tear the other 6-0 teams limb from limb just because they played close games with two other really, really good teams and "poor North Central, the boys fought so hard" in those games. I'm fine with someone not assuming that the CCIW automatically has three teams better than the entire MIAA.
Outside of your personal opinion, which by definition is quite subjective, this is a pretty fair synopsis of both sides of the discussion. We do know that the top 3 CCIW teams are better than the top 3 MIAA teams because they all played each other this year. The midddle and bottom, not so much. And the fact that a team or two from each conference went from middle to top and bottom to middle this year muddy's the water a little on this discussion. This is a microcosm of why it is so hard to compare conferences. We have actual head to head results of CCIW v MIAA and there are different interpretations of the actual results.
As far as the Pile of Suck from the South, I don't know what to make of them. Do I think they would blow out Albion this year based on what we have seen? No way. P.O.S.S. defense has given up way too many points to think Albion couldn't score and score a lot. But P.O.S.S. is also scoring on virtually everybody so it could be a Wesley style shoot out. I wouldn't be surprised if P.O.S.S. loses badly to Wheaton and IWU and disappears from our radars nor would it surprise me if they beat both teams and most of us elevate them in the rankings and they end up deep in the playoffs via Pool A. They are en enigma. Will the team that led Wesley and UWP by 21 pts in the 2nd half and scored 30 in a quarter @Millkin show up? Or will it be the team that gave up 28 and 46 late to UWP and Wesley and trailed Millikin by 7 in the 2nd half? Don't know. I do know that if you disappear for long stretches of games (on offense and/or defense) against really good teams you are going to lose, and maybe lose badly.
If they win this week I will keep them high in my poll. If they lose, and it does depend on how badly, I will significantly drop them.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 21, 2015, 05:46:51 AMNCC can certainly win their way back up the rankings with wins over IWU and Wheaton, but I'm fine with someone in the poll not just assuming that North Central will tear the other 6-0 teams limb from limb just because they played close games with two other really, really good teams and "poor North Central, the boys fought so hard" in those games.
I'm the voter that had them 8 and this is pretty close to my thought process.
I don't have a problem with the concept of a "quality loss". Or using those quality losses to differentiate teams of equal record. So if a 4-2 Team A loses to UMU and Wheaton and 4-2 Team B loses to Millikin and Wooster, I think you can say "well, Team A has higher quality losses and they should be ranked higher".
I *do* have a problem with Team A losing to UMU and Wheaton and saying they should be ranked higher than Team B which is undefeated when Team A hasn't beaten anyone that Team B couldn't beat either.
I think Albion/DePauw/Olivet would all lose to Wesley and Platteville, sure. But who has NCC *beaten* those 3 could not? Sure, you can say that NCC would be 6-0 with Albion/Olivet/DePauw's schedules but I think those 3 teams would be 4-2 with NCC's schedule, too.
Now, if NCC beats Wheaton this week they'll have a win better than any of those 3 and now there's something to differentiate them besides losing a game those 3 would have lost too.
And maybe y'all are right and NCC would beat the brakes off those 3 teams H2H but I don't *know* that and none of the games that NCC has *won* tells me that.
Quote from: Li'l Giant on October 21, 2015, 01:38:30 PM
I think Albion/DePauw/Olivet would all lose to Wesley and Platteville, sure....And maybe y'all are right and NCC would beat the brakes off those 3 teams H2H but I don't *know* that and none of the games that NCC has *won* tells me that.
This seems inconsistent to me. You say A/D/O would all lose to Wesley and Platteville. But then you claim to have no idea if the Pile of Suck from the South would do the same? While "none of the games that P.O.S.S. has *won* tells you that, 2 of the games they lost definitely tell you something! If you want to tow the line and say P.O.S.S. doesn't get credit for a loss and so you don't want to rank them that's one thing, but to say Wesley and Platteville would "Surely" beat Albion/Depauw/Olivet but you have no idea about P.O.S.S., when there are literally 2 plays separating those teams, seems incompatible.
To be clear, I am not treating a 4-2 team like D3 royalty here, I am much more focused on the notion that Wesley and Platteville would "surely" beat Albion/Depauw/Olivet. That's not a jump you can make in your line of reasoning.
I think Albion would beat Platteville 73-69.
57-52 in a basketball game though.
Quote from: USee on October 21, 2015, 02:06:54 PM
This seems inconsistent to me. You say A/D/O would all lose to Wesley and Platteville. But then you claim to have no idea if the Pile of Suck from the South would do the same? While "none of the games that P.O.S.S. has *won* tells you that, 2 of the games they lost definitely tell you something! If you want to tow the line and say P.O.S.S. doesn't get credit for a loss and so you don't want to rank them that's one thing, but to say Wesley and Platteville would "Surely" beat Albion/Depauw/Olivet but you have no idea about P.O.S.S., when there are literally 2 plays separating those teams, seems incompatible.
To be clear, I am not treating a 4-2 team like D3 royalty here, I am much more focused on the notion that Wesley and Platteville would "surely" beat Albion/Depauw/Olivet. That's not a jump you can make in your line of reasoning.
First, I don't get the P.O.S.S. thing. I've never claimed they suck. I have them at the 8th best team in a region of how many teams?
Second, I don't see how it is an inconsistent leap to say I think A/DP/O would lose to Wesley and Platteville. If they're that easy to beat then how is it such a quality loss for NCC? I'm *assuming* that for the sake of giving NCC credit for the loss. Otherwise, I'm giving them no credit for the loss. We have all (I think) agreed that not all losses are equal. Lots of teams would lose to Wesley and Platteville.
But if we're playing hypothetical games then there has to be some assumption. No, I don't *know* that A/D/O would lose those 2 games. I'm willing to assume that for purposes of saying that if they swapped schedules I think they'd all be the same record. And I'm willing to give A/D/O the edge because they haven't lost any games.
I'm not sure that's a jump. But if it is, how's that any more of a jump to say that you believe NCC would beat A/D/O head to head so let's discount the losses?
It's not. I think we all have reasonable arguments for how we rank NCC relative to these 3 teams.
LG, USee wasn't suggesting that YOU think NCC sucks. This is "Bell Week" and P.O.S.S is a phrase HE uses for NCC this week (since he is allergic to actually voicing their name)!
P.O.S.S... just spit H20 all over my monitor.
Quote from: Li'l Giant on October 21, 2015, 03:17:45 PM
Quote from: USee on October 21, 2015, 02:06:54 PM
This seems inconsistent to me. You say A/D/O would all lose to Wesley and Platteville. But then you claim to have no idea if the Pile of Suck from the South would do the same? While "none of the games that P.O.S.S. has *won* tells you that, 2 of the games they lost definitely tell you something! If you want to tow the line and say P.O.S.S. doesn't get credit for a loss and so you don't want to rank them that's one thing, but to say Wesley and Platteville would "Surely" beat Albion/Depauw/Olivet but you have no idea about P.O.S.S., when there are literally 2 plays separating those teams, seems incompatible.
To be clear, I am not treating a 4-2 team like D3 royalty here, I am much more focused on the notion that Wesley and Platteville would "surely" beat Albion/Depauw/Olivet. That's not a jump you can make in your line of reasoning.
I'm not sure that's a jump. But if it is, how's that any more of a jump to say that you believe NCC would beat A/D/O head to head so let's discount the losses?
It's not. I think we all have reasonable arguments for how we rank NCC relative to these 3 teams.
I have no problem with your ranking P.O.S.S. 8th and I have them 4th with A/D/O some version of 8th/7th/6th. I thought you leaving them off your ballot altogether a few weeks back was interesting but you have tempered your thinking. I was just reacting to the notion that Wesley/UWP would "surely" beat A/D/O but P.O.S.S. was not "sure". I don't think both those things can be true based on what we know. For the record, I don't know that A/D/O would fare any better or worse against Wesley/UWP, but my rankings tell you who I think is the better team right now.
My claim that NCC would "tear limb-from-limb" if playing DePauw, Olivet, or Albion was obviously over-the-top hyperbole, and I withdraw it. But I DO still think NCC would be a heavy favorite against any of them. I just can't get my head around any of them very nearly beating Platteville or Wesley. I could be wrong about that (and odds are we will never know), but that is how I see it and why I reacted so vociferously. Now I'll be rooting for Wheaton to fairly decisively best P.O.S.S (say 'thank you', USee :D) to justify my season-long placement of Wheaton above Wesley on my national fan ballot. ;)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 21, 2015, 04:00:50 PM
LG, USee wasn't suggesting that YOU think NCC sucks. This is "Bell Week" and P.O.S.S is a phrase HE uses for NCC this week (since he is allergic to actually voicing their name)!
That is partly true. It is certainly seasonal but the origination is from a discussion we have been having that included Wally and I came around to his side of things. Namely that if the close losses to Wesley/UWP really mean something, we will see it over the course of the season. They were losses, showing real weakness, and should be counted as such. I agree with that and my penchant for extremes made me include the new moniker in place of their name until they earn their real name back with some quality wins.
I have NCC at 6, just ahead of Olivet and Albion, but I think LG's reasoning is sound. Void of any good wins, North Central hasn't really distinguished themselves from those two MIAA teams or DePauw (depending on what you think of DePauw's result against Wittenberg). If the idea is the A/O/D wouldn't have lost by the same margins to Wesley or Platteville, I think that's just a guess and we're giving NCC credit for past success that A/O/D don't have. Which is fine if that's how a voter wants to do it.
I think if I have a disagreement with poll positions it's NCC ranked ahead of IWU. In our final tally, they are tied, but in my mind IWU has a quality win (Franklin on the road) that NCC does not. NCC can do one better on Saturday, which I'm sure would move them ahead of IWU in our poll (if not on my personal ballot).
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 21, 2015, 06:45:43 PM
I have NCC at 6, just ahead of Olivet and Albion, but I think LG's reasoning is sound. Void of any good wins, North Central hasn't really distinguished themselves from those two MIAA teams or DePauw (depending on what you think of DePauw's result against Wittenberg). If the idea is the A/O/D wouldn't have lost by the same margins to Wesley or Platteville, I think that's just a guess and we're giving NCC credit for past success that A/O/D don't have. Which is fine if that's how a voter wants to do it.
I think if I have a disagreement with poll positions it's NCC ranked ahead of IWU. In our final tally, they are tied, but in my mind IWU has a quality win (Franklin on the road) that NCC does not. NCC can do one better on Saturday, which I'm sure would move them ahead of IWU in our poll (if not on my personal ballot).
IWU also has a quality win that Wheaton does not... their best win so far is 3-3 Adrian. But I haven't seen anyone complaining about Wheaton being ahead of IWU or Wabash who has wins over Hampden-Sydney and Witt.
I understand the reasoning of the majority who think past success should be ignored, and only this year factored in. To a degree I agree with the old cliche: "It's the Jimmy's and Joe's, not the X's and Os". Athlete turnover IS fairly rapid, and some teams quickly return to at least relative mediocrity after a 'miracle class' graduates (see, Trine after Watt and Monmouth after Tanney). But I think this view undervalues coaching, trainers, training facilities, and institutional support, all of which are (usually) only very slow to change. I DO count past success as a (fairly) significant factor, because history tells me that 'history DOES repeat itself' (not always, and not to the exclusion of other perhaps more important factors, but that usually it does). That is why, despite no significant wins, but a couple of very impressively close losses, I still have NCC above IWU (and above DePauw, Albion, and Olivet); in the recent past they have significantly out-performed any of the others.
I do count only the recent past. Albion is the only one of the group with a Stagg Bowl win, but those players are now halfway between college and Medicare eligibility (and it is doubtful they have any of the same coaches, trainers, etc., still around either)! ;)
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 21, 2015, 07:46:07 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 21, 2015, 06:45:43 PM
I have NCC at 6, just ahead of Olivet and Albion, but I think LG's reasoning is sound. Void of any good wins, North Central hasn't really distinguished themselves from those two MIAA teams or DePauw (depending on what you think of DePauw's result against Wittenberg). If the idea is the A/O/D wouldn't have lost by the same margins to Wesley or Platteville, I think that's just a guess and we're giving NCC credit for past success that A/O/D don't have. Which is fine if that's how a voter wants to do it.
I think if I have a disagreement with poll positions it's NCC ranked ahead of IWU. In our final tally, they are tied, but in my mind IWU has a quality win (Franklin on the road) that NCC does not. NCC can do one better on Saturday, which I'm sure would move them ahead of IWU in our poll (if not on my personal ballot).
IWU also has a quality win that Wheaton does not... their best win so far is 3-3 Adrian. But I haven't seen anyone complaining about Wheaton being ahead of IWU or Wabash who has wins over Hampden-Sydney and Witt.
These are great points. We have seen the Wheaton/Wabash split for the #2 spot tighten up (Wheaton leads just 5-3 there now). I moved Wabash ahead of Wheaton on my ballot after that delicious lambasting of Wittenberg. So why Wheaton still ahead of IWU? I think you could definitely justify reversing that ranking. For me, I really liked what Wheaton returned for 2015, they've been solid despite some adversity (yes, against not-so-great competition). IWU does have the Franklin result which is very nice. They also have that Houdini job against Carthage that can make you think twice about a big move up.
While we're being honest here, my personal confidence in Wheaton has been shaken a bit due to the uncertain availability of Peltz (and others). They aren't the same squad without Peltz and all bets are off on Saturday if he can't go. And Wheaton doesn't want to lose this game. For obvious rivalry reasons, but, and we'll deal with this more next week if the Thunder do lose, but there are very real scenarios in play that might make Wheaton's path to the 32 difficult.
I moved Wabash ahead of Wheaton for the reasons Wally cited. I keep them ahead of IWU because they have 19 returning starters from a 11-1 team and that's better than IWU. I can't fault them, just like I can't fault UMU for the timing of their schedule.
These three CCIW teams all return 18+ starters so factoring in their results against each other last yea is not unreasonable in my view. We will know more soon enough.
Incidentally, my ranking of Olivet (they have been in my top 10 since day one) is largely based off the return of 20 starters from their team a year ago. I said in week two the MIAA would come down to the Albion v Olivet game and that is on track.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 21, 2015, 05:59:05 PM
I just can't get my head around any of them very nearly beating Platteville or Wesley.
Can't get your head around Albion nearly beating Platteville? Here, I'll help.
Albion beat UW-Stevens Point 65-52.
UW-Platteville beat UW-Stevens Point 30-27 in overtime.
Why is it still so hard to believe that Albion could play with UW-Platteville?
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 21, 2015, 10:21:33 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 21, 2015, 05:59:05 PM
I just can't get my head around any of them very nearly beating Platteville or Wesley.
Can't get your head around Albion nearly beating Platteville? Here, I'll help.
Albion beat UW-Stevens Point 65-52.
UW-Platteville beat UW-Stevens Point 30-27 in overtime.
Why is it still so hard to believe that Albion could play with UW-Platteville?
Wilmington beat Bluffton 14-10
Baldwin-Wallace lost to Bluffton 38-26
So Wilmington is 16 points better than BW right?
Baldwin-Wallace beat Wilmington 21-14
A full 23 points off the previous results.
I think the main point of the Albion/Stevens Point/Platteville/NCC train is that common opponent results suggest that Albion may not be the heavy underdog in the hypothetical Albion/NCC game. Not that Albion is obviously better than NCC. The thing that happens here is that it is easy to brush the Albion/UWSP result away as not being representative because Albion doesn't have cred. That result isn't repeatable and they just got one over on the Pointers because sports. On the NCC side of the coin, we take those games with Platteville and Wesley and assume they're representative or even semi-fluky against NCC- that NCC wins those games more often than they wouldn't.
Maybe Albion couldn't repeat that result against Stevens Point. I don't know. I also don't know if North Central could repeat what they did against Wesley or Platteville. Maybe NCC was lucky to even be in those games? Who knows. But it isn't unreasonable to the take the results we do have, take them as representative, and come to a conclusion that Albion might be in the same neighborhood as North Central in 2015. That's not crazy, right?
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 21, 2015, 11:19:25 PM
I think the main point of the Albion/Stevens Point/Platteville/NCC train is that common opponent results suggest that Albion may not be the heavy underdog in the hypothetical Albion/NCC game. Not that Albion is obviously better than NCC. The thing that happens here is that it is easy to brush the Albion/UWSP result away as not being representative because Albion doesn't have cred. That result isn't repeatable and they just got one over on the Pointers because sports. On the NCC side of the coin, we take those games with Platteville and Wesley and assume they're representative or even semi-fluky against NCC- that NCC wins those games more often than they wouldn't.
Maybe Albion couldn't repeat that result against Stevens Point. I don't know. I also don't know if North Central could repeat what they did against Wesley or Platteville. Maybe NCC was lucky to even be in those games? Who knows. But it isn't unreasonable to the take the results we do have, take them as representative, and come to a conclusion that Albion might be in the same neighborhood as North Central in 2015. That's not crazy, right?
I totally buy the Albion/Platteville scenario. I don't buy the Albion/Wesley scenario. I do buy the NCC beats one or the other in a replay scenario. I don't buy the DePauw, Albion, Olivet beats NCC scenario. I'm all in for the IWU beats NCC scenario! ;D I think I'm all in for scenarios, and basically just all in. Good night, Gracie. ;)
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 21, 2015, 11:19:25 PM
I think the main point of the Albion/Stevens Point/Platteville/NCC train is that common opponent results suggest that Albion may not be the heavy underdog in the hypothetical Albion/NCC game. Not that Albion is obviously better than NCC. The thing that happens here is that it is easy to brush the Albion/UWSP result away as not being representative because Albion doesn't have cred. That result isn't repeatable and they just got one over on the Pointers because sports. On the NCC side of the coin, we take those games with Platteville and Wesley and assume they're representative or even semi-fluky against NCC- that NCC wins those games more often than they wouldn't.
Maybe Albion couldn't repeat that result against Stevens Point. I don't know. I also don't know if North Central could repeat what they did against Wesley or Platteville. Maybe NCC was lucky to even be in those games? Who knows. But it isn't unreasonable to the take the results we do have, take them as representative, and come to a conclusion that Albion might be in the same neighborhood as North Central in 2015. That's not crazy, right?
Exactly.
FCGG, I totally understand your point. You can always find results that don't jibe. Football is a game of matchups. Results definitely aren't linear and it's not always A > B and B > C so A > C.
That said, wally perfectly encapsulated what I was trying to get at here. Ypsi has several times expressed varying degrees of disbelief at the notion that Albion could be the equal of North Central, they of the close loss to UWP and Wesley. He even said he just "can't wrap his brain around Albion nearly beating Platteville" (direct quote).
However, looking at one of the only shared data points that they have, that doesn't seem very reasonable. Albion beat Stevens Point. Stevens Point took Platteville to overtime. It seems pretty reasonable to infer that Albion could at least compete with Platteville, maybe even beat them. But somehow, this gets twisted to the point that North Central gets bonus points for scheduling tough and losing a close one to UWP, while after beating UWSP, Albion gets told "Yeah, I still don't think you can compete with Platteville, sorry. I know the team you did beat took them to overtime, but, well, I just don't buy it. Better luck next year!"
This discussion compels me to bring out one of my favorite websites. For anyone who doesn't believe it, here is the "proof" that Allegheny is better than Ohio State. (http://myteamisbetterthanyourteam.com/default.asp?sport=CFB&winner=Allegheny&loser=Ohio+St&year=2015&method=2)
@wabndy, thanks for posting. I added a few new things to the site this year, but nothing makes me prouder than the new "Six Degrees of Kenyon Bacone" pages:
http://www.myteamisbetterthanyourteam.com/default.asp?sport=CFB&winner=Kenyon&loser=Bacone&year=2013&method=2 (http://www.myteamisbetterthanyourteam.com/default.asp?sport=CFB&winner=Kenyon&loser=Bacone&year=2013&method=2)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 21, 2015, 11:35:11 PMI totally buy the Albion/Platteville scenario. I don't buy the Albion/Wesley scenario. I do buy the NCC beats one or the other in a replay scenario. I don't buy the DePauw, Albion, Olivet beats NCC scenario.
Chuck, are you by any chance doing online trading to supplement your retirement income?
Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 22, 2015, 02:33:19 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 21, 2015, 11:35:11 PMI totally buy the Albion/Platteville scenario. I don't buy the Albion/Wesley scenario. I do buy the NCC beats one or the other in a replay scenario. I don't buy the DePauw, Albion, Olivet beats NCC scenario.
Chuck, are you by any chance doing online trading to supplement your retirement income?
Only figuratively. I leave actual online trading to Mrs. Y. ;)
Tell her that when North Central gets to $1.75 per share, sell. ;)
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 22, 2015, 12:02:55 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 21, 2015, 11:19:25 PM
I think the main point of the Albion/Stevens Point/Platteville/NCC train is that common opponent results suggest that Albion may not be the heavy underdog in the hypothetical Albion/NCC game. Not that Albion is obviously better than NCC. The thing that happens here is that it is easy to brush the Albion/UWSP result away as not being representative because Albion doesn't have cred. That result isn't repeatable and they just got one over on the Pointers because sports. On the NCC side of the coin, we take those games with Platteville and Wesley and assume they're representative or even semi-fluky against NCC- that NCC wins those games more often than they wouldn't.
Maybe Albion couldn't repeat that result against Stevens Point. I don't know. I also don't know if North Central could repeat what they did against Wesley or Platteville. Maybe NCC was lucky to even be in those games? Who knows. But it isn't unreasonable to the take the results we do have, take them as representative, and come to a conclusion that Albion might be in the same neighborhood as North Central in 2015. That's not crazy, right?
Exactly.
FCGG, I totally understand your point. You can always find results that don't jibe. Football is a game of matchups. Results definitely aren't linear and it's not always A > B and B > C so A > C.
That said, wally perfectly encapsulated what I was trying to get at here. Ypsi has several times expressed varying degrees of disbelief at the notion that Albion could be the equal of North Central, they of the close loss to UWP and Wesley. He even said he just "can't wrap his brain around Albion nearly beating Platteville" (direct quote).
However, looking at one of the only shared data points that they have, that doesn't seem very reasonable. Albion beat Stevens Point. Stevens Point took Platteville to overtime. It seems pretty reasonable to infer that Albion could at least compete with Platteville, maybe even beat them. But somehow, this gets twisted to the point that North Central gets bonus points for scheduling tough and losing a close one to UWP, while after beating UWSP, Albion gets told "Yeah, I still don't think you can compete with Platteville, sorry. I know the team you did beat took them to overtime, but, well, I just don't buy it. Better luck next year!"
This discussion comes back to those that feel recent history should be included in the review of the present and those that feel the present stands on its own. Pretty clear that minds aren't going to be changed.
I look at the MIAA leader and see that they actually have been "torn from limb to limb" in the first round of the playoffs the last four consecutive years. I ask myself, how do I justify giving them the benefit of the doubt if they face a team like NCC, who, despite losing several big games over the years, has been extremely competitive in every game they've played against the top teams in the nation? The same teams that tore the MIAA leaders limb from limb. If I were a betting man, the answer would be simple. The expert odds makers come on sports radio and give predictions based upon historical performance- how this team is 9-2 against the spread over the last X number of years blah, blah, blah. They surely see value in historic performance.
That said, I understand your point of view. How can you penalize 2015 Albion for the poor performances of the MIAA?
For me -You earn the benefit of the doubt by proving yourself over time. Hopefully the MIAA will prove themselves come playoff time.
Quote from: mitchp on October 22, 2015, 11:26:38 AM
@wabndy, thanks for posting. I added a few new things to the site this year, but nothing makes me prouder than the new "Six Degrees of Kenyon Bacone" pages:
http://www.myteamisbetterthanyourteam.com/default.asp?sport=CFB&winner=Kenyon&loser=Bacone&year=2013&method=2 (http://www.myteamisbetterthanyourteam.com/default.asp?sport=CFB&winner=Kenyon&loser=Bacone&year=2013&method=2)
Favorite part is that not even Ohio State can be proven better than UMU.
Interesting happenings early on in Terre Haute.
In addition to RHIT leading Franklin 21-0 another score of note is OWU 17-16 over DePauw at half.
Well this week will be fun trying to figure out. North Central loses again... Rose-Hulman, DePauw, and Albion all with their first losses.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 24, 2015, 06:11:38 PM
Well this week will be fun trying to figure out. North Central loses again... Rose-Hulman, DePauw, and Albion all with their first losses.
Well, if you don't count that one of Wheaton's touchdowns was on a hail mary at the end of the first half and Dylan Warden throwng a buh-rutal interception in the end zone in the fourth quarter, North Central probably would have won. So I'm thinking they should move up.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 24, 2015, 07:32:09 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 24, 2015, 06:11:38 PM
Well this week will be fun trying to figure out. North Central loses again... Rose-Hulman, DePauw, and Albion all with their first losses.
Well, if you don't count that one of Wheaton's touchdowns was on a hail mary at the end of the first half and Dylan Warden throwng a buh-rutal interception in the end zone in the fourth quarter, North Central probably would have won. So I'm thinking they should move up.
You're finally getting it Wally :)
Wally,
I know you are being sarcastic and it is timely. It was not a Hail Mary at the end of the half. It was a 43 yd pass play and the kid made an incredible effort to catch it and then muscle his way to the end zone.
Oh, I saw the play. It was a whale of play by Thorsen, probably play of the week material it was so good. Heaving the ball toward the end zone with no time left in the half makes it a hail mary.
Zach Zindquist (6'4" 240 TE) actually made the play, but yeah, definitely a Hail Mary play. I think the QB threw it as far as he could and that's the only reason it didn't come down in the end zone.
I actually remember a Wabash tight end making a similar play in the Monon Bell game at the end? Was that Jake Knott era?
Quote from: izzy stradlin on October 24, 2015, 10:55:50 PM
Zach Zindquist (6'4" 240 TE) actually made the play, but yeah, definitely a Hail Mary play. I think the QB threw it as far as he could and that's the only reason it didn't come down in the end zone.
That's my bad, with an assist to the NCC broadcast crew who misidentified the receiver as "that Nordic monstrosity", which I laughed about. I imagine it's hard to stay 100% straight laced during the big rivalry game. :)
Quote from: USee on October 24, 2015, 10:59:33 PM
I actually remember a Wabash tight end making a similar play in the Monon Bell game at the end? Was that Jake Knott era?
Absolutely it was. 2001. Knott rolled out, TE Ryan Short knocked the ball back into the end zone where WR Kurt Casper caught it for the winning score. But I don't do the play justice. Go ahead and watch it a dozen times right here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9b_-31wwtE).
Aaaah yes. I remember it now. That was awesome.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 24, 2015, 10:59:47 PM
Quote from: izzy stradlin on October 24, 2015, 10:55:50 PM
Zach Zindquist (6'4" 240 TE) actually made the play, but yeah, definitely a Hail Mary play. I think the QB threw it as far as he could and that's the only reason it didn't come down in the end zone.
That's my bad, with an assist to the NCC broadcast crew who misidentified the receiver as "that Nordic monstrosity", which I laughed about. I imagine it's hard to stay 100% straight laced during the big rivalry game. :)
Yeah we misidentified. Sorry about that. Apologies to Lindquist. HECK of a play.
Quote from: New Tradition on October 25, 2015, 12:18:31 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 24, 2015, 10:59:47 PM
Quote from: izzy stradlin on October 24, 2015, 10:55:50 PM
Zach Zindquist (6'4" 240 TE) actually made the play, but yeah, definitely a Hail Mary play. I think the QB threw it as far as he could and that's the only reason it didn't come down in the end zone.
That's my bad, with an assist to the NCC broadcast crew who misidentified the receiver as "that Nordic monstrosity", which I laughed about. I imagine it's hard to stay 100% straight laced during the big rivalry game. :)
Yeah we misidentified. Sorry about that. Apologies to Lindquist. HECK of a play.
No worries. That was my first NCC broadcast- really good production. You guys do a great job.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 25, 2015, 12:27:49 PM
Quote from: New Tradition on October 25, 2015, 12:18:31 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 24, 2015, 10:59:47 PM
Quote from: izzy stradlin on October 24, 2015, 10:55:50 PM
Zach Zindquist (6'4" 240 TE) actually made the play, but yeah, definitely a Hail Mary play. I think the QB threw it as far as he could and that's the only reason it didn't come down in the end zone.
That's my bad, with an assist to the NCC broadcast crew who misidentified the receiver as "that Nordic monstrosity", which I laughed about. I imagine it's hard to stay 100% straight laced during the big rivalry game. :)
Yeah we misidentified. Sorry about that. Apologies to Lindquist. HECK of a play.
No worries. That was my first NCC broadcast- really good production. You guys do a great job.
Thanks! :)
I enjoyed the NCC broadcast as well. I didn't get to that game until the 2nd half but it was high quality.
Quote from: New Tradition on October 25, 2015, 12:18:31 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 24, 2015, 10:59:47 PM
Quote from: izzy stradlin on October 24, 2015, 10:55:50 PM
Zach Zindquist (6'4" 240 TE) actually made the play, but yeah, definitely a Hail Mary play. I think the QB threw it as far as he could and that's the only reason it didn't come down in the end zone.
That's my bad, with an assist to the NCC broadcast crew who misidentified the receiver as "that Nordic monstrosity", which I laughed about. I imagine it's hard to stay 100% straight laced during the big rivalry game. :)
Yeah we misidentified. Sorry about that. Apologies to Lindquist. HECK of a play.
Hardly a misidentification if that's what you called Thorson, because Lindquist is a Nordic name as well. ;)
I just submitted my ballot. Man, what a mess the bottom half of the top 10 is now. I had trouble talking myself into at least 4 of my top 10. I hope the rest of you have better luck than I did!
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 25, 2015, 06:08:37 PM
I just submitted my ballot. Man, what a mess the bottom half of the top 10 is now. I had trouble talking myself into at least 4 of my top 10. I hope the rest of you have better luck than I did!
Same here. Tough week to grade these teams.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 25, 2015, 06:08:37 PM
I just submitted my ballot. Man, what a mess the bottom half of the top 10 is now. I had trouble talking myself into at least 4 of my top 10. I hope the rest of you have better luck than I did!
I had a real hard time beyond the top 4.
I made 4 different drafts and must have sounded crazy to Mrs. L'il Giant talking to myself.
Albion and North Central now have a direct common opponent, which informs us a little better than the transitive comparison we have been attempting. Both of them played Trine at home.
Trine 7
North Central 41
Trine 55
Albion 51
Quote from: USee on October 25, 2015, 06:25:28 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 25, 2015, 06:08:37 PM
I just submitted my ballot. Man, what a mess the bottom half of the top 10 is now. I had trouble talking myself into at least 4 of my top 10. I hope the rest of you have better luck than I did!
Same here. Tough week to grade these teams.
Lotta fun action there. Figuring out my SRFP as well...also, when you look at the D3 Top 25 and the others receiving votes section from last week, a whole bunch of those teams lost.
My ballot wrote itself thru the top 6 - after that it got really hard. :P
Sneak preview of the bottom half of my ballot:
\_(ツ)_/¯
And here is your North Region Fan Poll through Week 8:
1- Mount Union (7-0) 80 points (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2- Wheaton (7-0) 69 points (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3)
3- Wabash (7-0) 67 points (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4- Illinois Wesleyan (7-0) 56 points (4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4)
5- Olivet (7-0) 45 points (5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6)
6- Franklin (6-2) 37 points (5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7)
7- North Central (4-3) 29 points (5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 9, 10, x)
8- Wittenberg (5-2) 13 points (8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10, x, x)
9- DePauw (6-1) 12 points (8, 8, 9, 9, 9, x, x, x)
10- Rose Hulman (6-1) 10 points (7, 8, 10, 10, 10, x, x, x)
ORV:
Ohio Northern (5-2) 9 points (7, 8, 9, x, x, x, x, x)
John Carroll (6-1) 8 points (7, 8, 10, x, x, x, x, x)
Albion (6-1) 4 points (8, 10, x, x, x, x, x, x)
Baldwin-Wallace (5-2) 1 point (10, x, x, x, x, x, x, x)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, USee, and wally wabash.
Looks like a pretty common solution to the bottom half of the poll mess was to 1-insert Franklin and 2-avoid the OAC.
I am not the voter who had North Central unranked this time. I had them at 10.
Quote from: USee on October 27, 2015, 06:55:39 PM
Looks like a pretty common solution to the bottom half of the poll mess was to 1-insert Franklin and 2-avoid the OAC.
I had ONU and JCU both in my top 10 now. I earned my OAC representative salary this week.
My poll
1. UMU
2. Wabash
3. Wheaton
4. IWU
5. Olivet
6. North Central
7. Franklin
8. Wittenberg
9. Ohio Northern
10. Rose Hulman
I almost switched Wheaton and Wabash but Wheaton is missing some guys on offense that kept me from that just yet. Franklin has one real loss to IWU who is moving up and Rose hung tough w Franklin. Olivet feels high but we will sort that out soon enough. For the OAC I assumed all three teams will lose to Mt Union so no one got credit for not having played them yet. In that case ONU had the best resume of the three IMO. I can't justify Depauw with the atrocious loss to OWU.
I would be interested to know from the 2 voters who voted for Albion, where did you have North Central? Also, for those who had the OAC in their top ten, how did you sort out who to rank where? Am I the only one who thinks Olivet has benefitted from attrition? I am the one who blew their horn from day one but this feels aggressive.
Quote from: USee on October 28, 2015, 10:26:56 AM
I would be interested to know from the 2 voters who voted for Albion, where did you have North Central? Also, for those who had the OAC in their top ten, how did you sort out who to rank where? Am I the only one who thinks Olivet has benefitted from attrition? I am the one who blew their horn from day one but this feels aggressive.
I did not vote for Albion but I did have Ohio Northern on my ballot. I had them ahead of JCU because of the H2H result coupled with the the belief that even though JCU has only 1 loss, it's only because they haven't lost to UMU
yet. However, if my ballot went to 11 I would have put JCU there.
I had ONU at 7 and JCU at 10 (barely). It was based on H2H plus the fact that I think Utica is still a better win than any of JCU's wins to date.
And I agree about Olivet, USee. They've moved up my ballot based partly on just not losing.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 28, 2015, 07:14:59 PM
I had ONU at 7 and JCU at 10 (barely). It was based on H2H plus the fact that I think Utica is still a better win than any of JCU's wins to date.
And I agree about Olivet, USee. They've moved up my ballot based partly on just not losing.
That's not a bad thing. Anybody who manages to just not lose 15 times wins a championship. Olivet is halfway there. :)
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 28, 2015, 07:57:15 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 28, 2015, 07:14:59 PM
I had ONU at 7 and JCU at 10 (barely). It was based on H2H plus the fact that I think Utica is still a better win than any of JCU's wins to date.
And I agree about Olivet, USee. They've moved up my ballot based partly on just not losing.
That's not a bad thing. Anybody who manages to just not lose 15 times wins a championship. Olivet is halfway there. :)
Reminds me of the woman the Seattle Mariners honored on her 108th birthday by making her the oldest person to ever throw out the first pitch. Asked the inevitable "To what to attribute your longevity?", she didn't give any of that palaver about eating right or exercising or whatever. She said "It's simple; don't stop having birthdays." Gotta love a woman like that! ;D
North Region Fan Poll through Week 9:
1- Mount Union (8-0) 80 points (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2- Wheaton (8-0) 70 points (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3)
3- Wabash (8-0) 66 points (2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4- North Central (5-3) 52 points (4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6)
5- Franklin (6-2) 45 points (4, 4, 4, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7)
6- Illinois Wesleyan (7-1) 38 points (5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 10)
7- Wittenberg (6-2) 24 points (6, 7, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9)
8- Albion (7-1) 22 points (5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 10, x)
9- DePauw (7-1) 17 points (7, 7, 8, 8, 8, x, x, x)
10- Rose Hulman (7-1) 11 points (5, 9, 10, 10, 10, x, x, x)
ORV:
Ohio Northern (6-2) 8 points (7, 8, 10, x, x, x, x, x)
John Carroll (7-1) 4 points (9, 9, x, x, x, x, x, x)
Olivet (7-1) 3 points (9, 10, x, x, x, x, x, x)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, USee, and wally wabash.
IWU all the way down at #10 on one ballot seems harsh. Especially since the lowest ranking for Franklin is #7, that means someone is ranking the Titans several spots behind a team that they beat by 10 on the road...and it's not like much has happened since then to suggest that was a fluke. Don't even get me started on the absurdity of Rose-Hulman, who is 7-1 (the same record as IWU) with an unfavorable common opponent, somehow ranked ahead of IWU on that ballot. Or DePauw, proud carriers of a loss to Ohio Freaking Wesleyan, and Wittenberg, also both (probably) ranked ahead of IWU on that ballot.
Actually, wait a minute, now that I look closer I'm even more puzzled; it looks like Franklin is ahead of IWU on almost every ballot, if not every ballot. Guys! IWU beat Franklin to open the season, by 10 points, at Franklin! Since then, Franklin has done its usual job running over most of the HCAC, but IWU has held the fort just fine in the CCIW. What's changed the tune on IWU > Franklin? It's not like IWU is carrying a bad loss; while North Central doesn't deserve any special Pool C sympathy, they're deservedly ranked between 4 and 6 on every ballot here. Unless IWU beats Wheaton this week (favoring IWU) or IWU goes on to lose to somebody worse, don't you pretty much have to stick to Wheaton > North Central > IWU > Franklin when rating those teams vs. one another?
Aw, XTartan, you're so cute when you're logical! ;D
I assure you that Franklin was not ahead of IWU on EVERY ballot! I had IWU 5th, Albion 6th, and Franklin 7th. (RHIT, 1-TD victors over mighty Manchester, was NOT on my ballot - yeah, that #5 vote stuck out like a sore thumb on this week's tally. :P)
Not everybody has Franklin over IWU, but most do. I'm one of them. I struggled with that choice, but the Artie Checchin situation has to change the way you look at IWU, I think. It definitely does for me.
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 03, 2015, 08:33:25 PM
Not everybody has Franklin over IWU, but most do. I'm one of them. I struggled with that choice, but the Artie Checchin situation has to change the way you look at IWU, I think. It definitely does for me.
Let's not jump the gun. While it didn't look good for Artie (truly a shame if it IS season-ending, since that would also be career-ending), I've heard nothing for sure just yet. To write off IWU because of one (unconfirmed) injury would be like writing off Mt. Union the season Nate Kmic suddenly became the starter due to injury and had approximately a gazillion yards rushing in the playoffs! (And no, I not comparing either Checchin to Kmic or IWU to The Mount, but you get the idea. ;))
I'm not selling out on IWU until (God forbid) Checchin can't go on Saturday and Wheaton absolutely demolishes them. With or without Artie, if they can play Wheaton close (with their defense, I'm hopeful) or somehow even manage a win, they will not fall (at least not far) on my ballot, and will remain above the team they beat by 10 on the opponent's home field.
And unless I run out of alternatives, RHIT will still not be on my ballot! ;D
I'm going by what you guys are talking about on the CCIW board. You guys generally don't peddle wolf tickets on this sort of stuff, so if it's out there there's a more than reasonable chance it is legit. If Checchin goes this weekend and/or IWU shows out well, I'll readjust the IWU/Franklin thing. :)
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 03, 2015, 09:15:34 PM
I'm going by what you guys are talking about on the CCIW board. You guys generally don't peddle wolf tickets on this sort of stuff, so if it's out there there's a more than reasonable chance it is legit. If Checchin goes this weekend and/or IWU shows out well, I'll readjust the IWU/Franklin thing. :)
Fair enough. I really fear that Artie is kaput; I just don't like projecting disasters that haven't yet been confirmed. And, while I doubt it, who knows but what we might have at least a Kmic-Lite lurking in the shadows! ;)
And just for full disclosure, I'm a 6 on IWU. I didn't bus them all the way down to 10 on the injury news.
I thought this was a hard week. I went 4) NCC, 5) IWU, 6) Grizz.
I thought dropping Olivet completely out may be unpopular, but it looks like most were thinking the same thing.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on November 03, 2015, 08:22:32 PMdon't you pretty much have to stick to Wheaton > North Central > IWU > Franklin when rating those teams vs. one another?
Franklin's loss 8 weeks ago to a regionally ranked team is a permanent anchor but even *before* NCC beat IWU we were being told not to hold their losses against them?
Why do we even bother voting if all we "have to" do is slot them?
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 03, 2015, 08:33:25 PM
Not everybody has Franklin over IWU, but most do. I'm one of them. I struggled with that choice, but the Artie Checchin situation has to change the way you look at IWU, I think. It definitely does for me.
This influenced my vote as well.
I had IWU ahead of Franklin as well.
Here is Head Coach Norm Eash quoted in the paper after the NCC game on Checchin
He's our leader," said IWU coach Norm Eash of Checchin. "I thought we closed the gap and got it within eight points. It's probably going to be an injury that keeps him out the rest of the year
As far as the IWU-Franklin issue... don't look at me. My ballot was Mount, Wabash, Wheaton, NCC, IWU, Franklin, Witt, Albion, Olivet, Rose.
All I know about IWU is that they're currently 7-1 and beat Franklin. Maybe they fall apart the rest of the season with the injury but until they do I'm ranking them based on what they've done so far.
My Ballot
1. Mount Union
2. Wheaton
3. Wabash
4. Franklin
5. North Central
6. Wittenberg
7. Illinois Wesleyan
8. DePauw
9. Albion
10. Rose-Hulman
It was a jumbled mess after #3 for me. I could not push myself to put North Central team at #4 (with three losses to very strong competition). IWU has to face Wheaton yet so let's see where the injury to Checchin affects them. The bigger issue is how the MIAA is going to sort out with a three way tie between Trine, Olivet, and Albion.
If the regional committee agrees with the voters on this board and we accept the common wisdom that NCC has no chance at Pool C, then North Central is going to block all the Pool C candidates in the North.
Quote from: ncc_fan on November 04, 2015, 09:01:04 AM
If the regional committee agrees with the voters on this board and we accept the common wisdom that NCC has no chance at Pool C, then North Central is going to block all the Pool C candidates in the North.
Apparently most of the fan voters here are basically discounting past victories this season because the
quarterback wide receiver that lead their team to those victories is probably not going to be available for the season. Nothing wrong with that - its a fan poll. If so - then they aren't applying the same criteria that the RAC will be applying and these results will look nothing like what the RAC comes out with this afternoon.
Quote from: wabndy on November 04, 2015, 09:10:41 AM
Quote from: ncc_fan on November 04, 2015, 09:01:04 AM
If the regional committee agrees with the voters on this board and we accept the common wisdom that NCC has no chance at Pool C, then North Central is going to block all the Pool C candidates in the North.
Apparently most of the fan voters here are basically discounting past victories this season because the quarterback that lead their team to those victories is probably not going to be available for the season. Nothing wrong with that - its a fan poll. If so - then they aren't applying the same criteria that the RAC will be applying and these results will look nothing like what the RAC comes out with this afternoon.
I'm confused- which quarterback are we talking about?
I don't think that the regional rankings will look like our poll. My guess is that North Central checks in at 9 or 10. Maybe 8. They probably shouldn't be higher than that. I also don't think North Central will be blocking anybody. If the committee decides that North Central is the best non-league champion in the North, then the North has more or less blocked itself, which may well happen if Wheaton beats IWU on Saturday.
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 04, 2015, 09:38:51 AM
I'm confused- which quarterback are we talking about?
My mistake.
Quarterback Wide Receiver.
How do the rankings (I'm most curious about 7-3 NCC) fall if we get the following:
8-2 IWU
8-2 ONU
8-2 JCU
8-2 Witt
8-2 DePauw
7-3 NCC
MIAA runner up
8-2 RHIT (for the sake of the exercise they lose to MSJ)
Which isn't an impossible outcome...
We have talked about the WR from IWU, Artie Checchin, who has been their MVP this season but no one has mentioned anyone on the NCC team that is responsible for their results. Maybe I misunderstood your point?
Quote from: Neverwas on November 04, 2015, 10:01:48 AM
How do the rankings (I'm most curious about 7-3 NCC) fall if we get the following:
8-2 IWU
8-2 ONU
8-2 JCU
8-2 Witt
8-2 DePauw
7-3 NCC
MIAA runner up
8-2 RHIT (for the sake of the exercise they lose to MSJ)
Which isn't an impossible outcome...
I think the big question mark there is how JCU gets to 8-2. Do they get to 8-2 with a 50 point beatemdown or do they get to 8-2 with a one score nailbiter?
In any case I'm not sure it will matter how the regional committee orders those teams because I don't think any of those teams with those records are Pool C material.
The only question on that list is the MIAA runnerup, who may well be a 1 loss team. That stands out from the crowd and would require some consideration. But I agree with Wally the rankings on these teams only matter for RR results
Quote from: ncc_fan on November 04, 2015, 09:01:04 AM
If the regional committee agrees with the voters on this board and we accept the common wisdom that NCC has no chance at Pool C, then North Central is going to block all the Pool C candidates in the North.
Or not ranked at all as is the case.
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 04, 2015, 12:32:44 PM
Quote from: ncc_fan on November 04, 2015, 09:01:04 AM
If the regional committee agrees with the voters on this board and we accept the common wisdom that NCC has no chance at Pool C, then North Central is going to block all the Pool C candidates in the North.
Or not ranked at all as is the case.
I thought they had to be ranked above IWU?! :o
Quote from: Li'l Giant on November 04, 2015, 12:44:04 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 04, 2015, 12:32:44 PM
Quote from: ncc_fan on November 04, 2015, 09:01:04 AM
If the regional committee agrees with the voters on this board and we accept the common wisdom that NCC has no chance at Pool C, then North Central is going to block all the Pool C candidates in the North.
Or not ranked at all as is the case.
I thought they had to be ranked above IWU?! :o
No, that's Franklin. 8-)
What would have to happen to for Wheaton to be a #1 seed?
It seems only moving Mount to the East (There is precedence there) would allow UD or UWW to move from West to North though I am not sure that helps the West much. I would think Wheaton's resume would look similar to Wesley's with maybe an extra win against RRO and (A biased take) a better win against a common opponent and a slightly worse SOS? So, it isn't a huge slight to Wesley and makes an easier path for the, presumed, overall number one seed (Mount).
There seems to be an overwhelming amount of solid teams in the West so maybe it isn't fair for Wheaton to host three games should they win them... Maybe it is more likely UWO is the North #1 allowing Linfield to be #2 in the West. Is UWO within 500 miles of most North teams making the field? If not the West 2nd round games will be real tough... not abnormal I guess.
Quote from: Neverwas on November 05, 2015, 12:55:30 PM
What would have to happen to for Wheaton to be a #1 seed?
It seems only moving Mount to the East (There is precedence there) would allow UD or UWW to move from West to North though I am not sure that helps the West much. I would think Wheaton's resume would look similar to Wesley's with maybe an extra win against RRO and (A biased take) a better win against a common opponent and a slightly worse SOS? So, it isn't a huge slight to Wesley and makes an easier path for the, presumed, overall number one seed (Mount).
There seems to be an overwhelming amount of solid teams in the West so maybe it isn't fair for Wheaton to host three games should they win them... Maybe it is more likely UWO is the North #1 allowing Linfield to be #2 in the West. Is UWO within 500 miles of most North teams making the field? If not the West 2nd round games will be real tough... not abnormal I guess.
In addition to what you said, I, too, could see Mount getting shipped east because that still seems to be the weakest region even with Wesley in it. The north and west are pretty stacked.
Then again, the NCAA could always go the convenient route of keeping Wesley the #1 seed in the east because they are Wesley and they are in the east now instead of the South.
Guys, we really have to stop talking about playoffs by region. That just isn't how it works any more. You pick the four #1 seeds, then build the brackets around them. Mount doesn't get "shipped East" or UWO doesn't get "sent" to the North bracket. There is no "leave Wesley the #1 seed in the East" or "ship Mount to the East bracket and make Wheaton the #1 seed in the North." The four top seeds are picked, then they figure out how to get the schools on islands a matchup that they can drive to (or however needed to minimize flights), and things move from there.
Wally did a breakdown last year or the year before of the number of teams in each playoff grouping by region. I'll try to find it.
Thanks for the reminder. Would it be better to say Mount playing North region teams or East region teams? I guess I was wondering what it would take for Wheaton to host 3 games and it sounds like that can't happen unless two of the 5 unbeaten teams ahead of them lose...
I just tried to move Mount to play East teams and it blows a lot of stuff up. If you do that, with the North only getting one pool C (at the moment) it leaves the North with only 6 teams. Which likely means UD and a UW school play North teams. And leaves the East with 9 teams. Then you have to move one East team to play South teams which causes more problems.
Seems like Mount playing North region teams is the easiest right now. But if UWP gets to the board with Albright... and the east never gets a pool C, I think it could happen. Right now it seems unlikely Mount gets moved, IMO.
Quote from: Neverwas on November 05, 2015, 01:21:29 PM
I guess I was wondering what it would take for Wheaton to host 3 games
Be one of the four #1 seeds. That's it. They pick the top seeds first.
Then they figure out who's playing where.
You can mix and match pretty much in unlimited ways teams from the Midwest to the Mid-Atlantic, which is most of the field. Berry can drive to a few teams that you might not realize they can drive to. 500 miles is a pretty long way as it turns out. So, to echo ETP, we shouldn't think about brackets in regional terms because when it's all done here in 10 days, you'll have teams from 3 or even all 4 regions in each quadrant of the bracket.
Quote from: Neverwas on November 05, 2015, 01:21:29 PM
I guess I was wondering what it would take for Wheaton to host 3 games and it sounds like that can't happen unless two of the 5 unbeaten teams ahead of them lose...
This is basically correct. And while Wheaton might have a profile that is similar to Wesley, Wesley went to the semis last year which is pretty much the hammer here. Wheaton is not really in play for a #1 seed right now.
(sad trombone)
Quote from: Neverwas on November 05, 2015, 12:55:30 PM
What would have to happen to for Wheaton to be a #1 seed?
It seems only moving Mount to the East (There is precedence there) would allow UD or UWW to move from West to North though I am not sure that helps the West much. I would think Wheaton's resume would look similar to Wesley's with maybe an extra win against RRO and (A biased take) a better win against a common opponent and a slightly worse SOS? So, it isn't a huge slight to Wesley and makes an easier path for the, presumed, overall number one seed (Mount).
There seems to be an overwhelming amount of solid teams in the West so maybe it isn't fair for Wheaton to host three games should they win them... Maybe it is more likely UWO is the North #1 allowing Linfield to be #2 in the West. Is UWO within 500 miles of most North teams making the field? If not the West 2nd round games will be real tough... not abnormal I guess.
In the past the committee basically picks the top four teams in the country and then fluidly works to group 7 other teams around them with an eye toward keeping teams within 500 miles of each other - especially in the first and to a lesser extent second round.
That being said - I think this may be the year where the national selection committee picks one from each region to be the top seed. Wesley and Mount Union are undoubtedly going to be in the top 4 (and probably the top 2 with the right to host a semi-final game). I think the only real chance for one region to get two of the top seeds is if Hardin Simmons draws a loss against East Texas Baptist on Saturday. All the top seeded West teams have games that they should win in their sleep. Even if that happens, I think your assumption that a fourth top seed is going to go West.
Both Wheaton and Wabash are hurt by the fact that assuming they come through the regular season clean, they are not going to have any victories against a top 5 regionally ranked opponent. While its true that Mount doesn't either - thems the breaks for playing in too many stagg bowls. Even if North Central ends up back in the rankings, they will be limping in at the bottom after some losses shake out above. A Wheaton win against IWU likewise pushes the Titans down the list. Wabash is in the same boat - with the chance for DePauw, Wittenberg, and Hampden Sydney to all be in the final regional rankings or none of them.
If I were to change the national selection process in any way it would be to ask each RAC to rank 12-15 teams instead of 10 so that we could get a better comparison of quality wins among the top teams. There are just so few games that it is nearly impossible for most any team to schedule, at best, 2 games against regionally ranked opponents.
Were I to pick the top four seeds right now I would pick, in order:
Mount Union
Wesley
St. Thomas
UW-Oshkosh
I personally would pick Linfield in front of Oshkosh here, but the West RAC made that choice for me.
My next four?
Linfield
Hardin-Simmons
Johns Hopkins
Wheaton
Wesley at two, in front of UST, due to 2014 semi's appearance?
Quote from: Neverwas on November 05, 2015, 02:27:18 PM
Wesley at two, in front of UST, due to 2014 semi's appearance?
Yeah, that's my thinking at the moment, but I don't think it would be wrong to place St. Thomas ahead of Wesley. Eventually I think Rowan sneaks into the East rankings though, which probably keeps Wesley ahead of St. Thomas.
Hmmmm. So UWO and HSU were not in the playoffs last year and St Thomas lost in round 1. Why would they be picked as #1 seeds over unbeaten Linfield? Is it because the West RAC ranked them that way? are the top teams in each RAC used to pick #1 seeds? If "regions" don't matter why wouldn't Linfield, and for that matter Wheaton and Wabash be considered ahead of UWO and St Thomas since they all had better playoff records last year (all else being equal)
Quote from: USee on November 05, 2015, 03:24:10 PM
Hmmmm. So UWO and HSU were not in the playoffs last year and St Thomas lost in round 1. Why would they be picked as #1 seeds over unbeaten Linfield? Is it because the West RAC ranked them that way? are the top teams in each RAC used to pick #1 seeds? If "regions" don't matter why wouldn't Linfield, and for that matter Wheaton and Wabash be considered ahead of UWO and St Thomas since they all had better playoff records last year (all else being equal)
Yes- I can pick Linfield in front of Hardin-Simmons because I have that latitude. I don't have the latitude to pick Linfield over Oshkosh or St. Thomas because the West RAC already put them in an order that I'm (as the national committee) reluctant to undo. My personal opinion here is that the West RAC has goofed. I think Linfield should be #1 in that region.
As far as Wheaton and Wabash go, I don't think all else is equal. Wheaton and Wabash have poor SOS's and have no results vs. RROs. They're just kind of there, undefeated and without much else to crow about at the moment.
Quote from: USee on November 05, 2015, 03:24:10 PM
Is it because the West RAC ranked them that way? are the top teams in each RAC used to pick #1 seeds? If "regions" don't matter why wouldn't Linfield, and for that matter Wheaton and Wabash be considered ahead of UWO and St Thomas since they all had better playoff records last year (all else being equal)
The regions don't matter in the sense that there isn't a "West" / "East" / "North" / "South" bracket but the regional rankings do matter in determining the top seeds. If the national committee thought the top 4 seeds all came from the West, they can do that. What they can't do is make the West #2 a top seed without making the West #1 a top seed.
But if Wheaton or Wabash end up with 2 wins v RRO's, does that change the equation?
Quote from: USee on November 05, 2015, 04:19:35 PM
But if Wheaton or Wabash end up with 2 wins v RRO's, does that change the equation?
Certainly. I don't think that puts either into the top 4 overall, but it makes for an interesting conversation.
I just want one of them to get into the zip code of UWO/HSU/St Thomas and see what the committee does with the "past tournament performance" thing.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on November 05, 2015, 03:55:14 PM
Quote from: USee on November 05, 2015, 03:24:10 PM
Is it because the West RAC ranked them that way? are the top teams in each RAC used to pick #1 seeds? If "regions" don't matter why wouldn't Linfield, and for that matter Wheaton and Wabash be considered ahead of UWO and St Thomas since they all had better playoff records last year (all else being equal)
The regions don't matter in the sense that there isn't a "West" / "East" / "North" / "South" bracket but the regional rankings do matter in determining the top seeds. If the national committee thought the top 4 seeds all came from the West, they can do that. What they can't do is make the West #2 a top seed without making the West #1 a top seed.
But if my understanding is correct, the national committee DOES have the authority to flip-flop the #1 and #2 seeds in a region - problem solved. ;)
Could Rose-Hulman possibly get to the table? Obviously first they have to win out. But ahead of them IWU, John Carroll, and DePauw all have potential 2nd losses still coming and if Olivet loses one of their final games (which isn't as likely) would it be possible that Rose rises up above everyone to be the first C discussed or would IWU still be ahead with the superior SoS?
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 05, 2015, 10:08:35 PM
Could Rose-Hulman possibly get to the table? Obviously first they have to win out. But ahead of them IWU, John Carroll, and DePauw all have potential 2nd losses still coming and if Olivet loses one of their final games (which isn't as likely) would it be possible that Rose rises up above everyone to be the first C discussed or would IWU still be ahead with the superior SoS?
Possible, but moot. IWU is gonna whup Wheaton by 29+! ;D
(With Artie Checchin apparently
hors de combat, Wheaton, who was already a significant favorite, becomes an almost prohibitive favorite. But that didn't keep me from giving the highest pick to IWU in the pickems - I need a 'Hail Mary' to get to the top half [this probably will instead guarantee last among those who picked all the weeks]. I specified 29+ because a win by 1-27 [28 would be unknown territory] would give the AQ to NCC; 29+ and IWU would be the AQ. :))
Attaboy Ypsi - go big or go home!
North Region Fan Poll through Week 10:
1- Mount Union (9-0) 80 points (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2- Wheaton (9-0) 70 points (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3)
3- Wabash (9-0) 66 points (2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4- North Central (6-3) 55 points (4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5)
5- Franklin (7-2) 42 points (4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7)
6- Illinois Wesleyan (7-2) 33 points (5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 10, x)
7- Albion (8-1) 29 points (5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 9, 10, 10)
8- DePauw (8-1) 23 points (6, 7, 7, 8, 8, 9, 9, x)
9- Wittenberg (7-2) 16 points (6, 8, 8, 9, 9, 10, x, x)
10- John Carroll (8-1) 9 points (8, 9, 9, 10, 10, x, x, x)
ORV:
Ohio Northern (7-2) 8 points (8, 8, 10, 10, x, x, x, x)
Olivet (8-1) 5 points (8, 9, x, x, x, x, x, x)
Rose Hulman (7-2) 4 points (7, x, x, x, x, x, x, x)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, USee, and wally wabash.
Week one was a long time ago, but still disappointed to see Franklin above IWU. Dontcha think the Titans could have squashed that lineup of tomato cans as solidly as Franklin did? Personally I did move Albion above IWU, but they do have only one loss (to a decent Trine team), while IWU has two losses (though to MUCH tougher teams). I suspect that Albion vs. IWU would be a helluva game, and although I suspect IWU would win, I'm gonna respect 8-1 vs. 7-2.
And what the heck is with the #7 vote for RHIT??!! Good grief, they are not even on my top 15 list for the North any more.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 10, 2015, 12:21:05 AM
Week one was a long time ago, but still disappointed to see Franklin above IWU. Dontcha think the Titans could have squashed that lineup of tomato cans as solidly as Franklin did? Personally I did move Albion above IWU, but they do have only one loss (to a decent Trine team), while IWU has two losses (though to MUCH tougher teams). I suspect that Albion vs. IWU would be a helluva game, and although I suspect IWU would win, I'm gonna respect 8-1 vs. 7-2.
And what the heck is with the #7 vote for RHIT??!! Good grief, they are not even on my top 15 list for the North any more.
Franklin and IWU aren't even that close in this poll. It must be because of the only comparative data we have from when Franklin won at IWU to start the season. Their schedules aren't comparable even though their records are similar and IWU lost to two teams that aren't very good.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 10, 2015, 12:21:05 AM
Week one was a long time ago, but still disappointed to see Franklin above IWU. Dontcha think the Titans could have squashed that lineup of tomato cans as solidly as Franklin did? Personally I did move Albion above IWU, but they do have only one loss (to a decent Trine team), while IWU has two losses (though to MUCH tougher teams). I suspect that Albion vs. IWU would be a helluva game, and although I suspect IWU would win, I'm gonna respect 8-1 vs. 7-2.
And what the heck is with the #7 vote for RHIT??!! Good grief, they are not even on my top 15 list for the North any more.
While I agree that 7 is too high for Rose... I'd still have them at 13.
My order was Mount, Wabash, Wheaton, North Central, Illinois Wesleyan, Franklin, Albion, Olivet, Wittenberg, John Carroll... but after 4th it's tough
Unfortunately, Franklin can't help they play in a league which isn't the strongest league out there for football. The Grizzlies have benefitted from having their losses early on and sadly IWU picked up two losses in the last two weeks (albeit against strong competition). I want to see where they end up in the next batch of regional rankings with these two losses to Wheaton and North Central.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 10, 2015, 12:21:05 AM
Week one was a long time ago, but still disappointed to see Franklin above IWU. Dontcha think the Titans could have squashed that lineup of tomato cans as solidly as Franklin did? Personally I did move Albion above IWU, but they do have only one loss (to a decent Trine team), while IWU has two losses (though to MUCH tougher teams). I suspect that Albion vs. IWU would be a helluva game, and although I suspect IWU would win, I'm gonna respect 8-1 vs. 7-2.
And what the heck is with the #7 vote for RHIT??!! Good grief, they are not even on my top 15 list for the North any more.
Yes, but that's not the sum total of the exercise. I left IWU behind Franklin this week. Just not the same club without the guy that might have been the CCIW's best offensive player in 2015.
I also left IWU behind Franklin. Checchin is gone and that's a big deal. But Franklin is 7-1 by D3 standards and IWU is 7-2. Teams also morph and Franklin is playing well right now. Those things caused me to rank Franklin slightly higher despite the head to head that happened 8 weeks ago.
I don't understand how anyone has John Carroll ahead of ONU?
Quote from: USee on November 10, 2015, 10:26:56 AM
I don't understand how anyone has John Carroll ahead of ONU?
It's a mystery. JCU has slithered back up into the top 15 nationally while ONU is receiving just a smattering of votes.
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 10, 2015, 10:31:32 AM
Quote from: USee on November 10, 2015, 10:26:56 AM
I don't understand how anyone has John Carroll ahead of ONU?
It's a mystery. JCU has slithered back up into the top 15 nationally while ONU is receiving just a smattering of votes.
I know ONU beat JCU - but that 2nd loss for ONU hurts them in the voting. It has to - only explanation I have. When JCU gets their 2nd loss (which had better be this weekend) I think the poll position will sort itself out. Not that it matters - neither is getting into the playoffs with 2 losses.
Quote from: desertraider on November 10, 2015, 02:23:33 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 10, 2015, 10:31:32 AM
Quote from: USee on November 10, 2015, 10:26:56 AM
I don't understand how anyone has John Carroll ahead of ONU?
It's a mystery. JCU has slithered back up into the top 15 nationally while ONU is receiving just a smattering of votes.
I know ONU beat JCU - but that 2nd loss for ONU hurts them in the voting. It has to - only explanation I have. When JCU gets their 2nd loss (which had better be this weekend) I think the poll position will sort itself out. Not that it matters - neither is getting into the playoffs with 2 losses.
I'm not sure it will, actually. John Carroll hasn't played like a top 25 team from jump street this year and yet here we are in Week 11 and they're #15. It's 100% a result of their having been ranked in the top 10 to start with (which was erroneous) and enough voters won't let go of "John Carroll, 2014 Quarterfinalist" to adjust properly. JCU will lose, probably by a bunch, but I doubt it costs them a top 25 position. The poll is pretty lenient on teams that get squashed by Mount Union.
Hey gang, just in case there is confusion we'll do a poll this week and then one final poll once the dust settles in the tournament.
North Region Fan Poll through Week 11:
1- Mount Union (10-0) 80 points (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2- Wheaton (10-0) 70 points (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3)
3- Wabash (10-0) 66 points (2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4- North Central (7-3) 53 points (4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6)
5- Franklin (8-2) 47 points (4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6)
6- Albion (9-1) 42 points (5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7)
7- Ohio Northern (8-2) 29 points (6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 9, 10)
8- Wittenberg (8-2) 17 points (7, 8, 8, 8, 9, 10, 10, x)
9- John Carroll (8-2) 14 points (8, 8, 8, 8, 9, x, x, x)
10- Olivet (9-1) 12 points (7, 8, 9, 10, 10, 10, x, x)
ORV:
DePauw (8-2) 7 points (9, 9, 9, 10, x, x, x, x)
Lakeland (8-2) 3 points (9, 10, x, x, x, x, x, x)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, USee, and wally wabash.
North Park took care of one of the main sticking points of last week (left IWU on the sent ballot before finding out the result of the game). Top 5 were the easiest to pick (again). Still spots 6-10 were tough.
I sent in my final ballot. Thanks to Wally for herding the cats this season.
Final 2015 North Region Fan Poll:
1- Mount Union (15-0) 80 points (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2- Wabash (12-1) 69 points (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3)
3- Wheaton (11-1) 67 points (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4- Ohio Northern (9-3) 47 points (4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 7, 8)
5- Albion (9-2) 41 points (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7)
6- Franklin (8-3) 39 points (5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7)
7- North Central (7-3) 38 points (4, 4, 4, 4, 6, 6, x, x)
8- John Carroll (8-2) 24 points (5, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9, x)
9- Olivet (9-1) 13 points (7, 8, 9, 10, 10, 10, 10, x)
10- Wittenberg (8-2) 9 points (9, 9, 9, 9, 10, x, x, x)
10- DePauw (8-2) 9 points (8, 8, 9, 10, x, x, x, x)
ORV:
Lakeland (8-3) 4 points (9, 10, 10, x, x, x, x, x)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, USee, and wally wabash.
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 23, 2015, 12:25:23 PM
Final 2015 North Region Fan Poll:
1- Mount Union (15-0) 80 points (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2- Wabash (12-1) 69 points (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3)
3- Wheaton (11-1) 67 points (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4- Ohio Northern (9-3) 47 points (4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 7, 8)
5- Albion (9-2) 41 points (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7)
6- Franklin (8-3) 39 points (5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7)
7- North Central (7-3) 38 points (4, 4, 4, 4, 6, 6, x, x)
8- John Carroll (8-2) 24 points (5, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9, x)
9- Olivet (9-1) 13 points (7, 8, 9, 10, 10, 10, 10, x)
10- Wittenberg (8-2) 9 points (9, 9, 9, 9, 10, x, x, x)
10- DePauw (8-2) 9 points (8, 8, 9, 10, x, x, x, x)
ORV:
Lakeland (8-3) 4 points (9, 10, 10, x, x, x, x, x)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, USee, and wally wabash.
Interesting. Curious why people moved Ohio Northern, Albion, and Franklin ahead of NCC vs. the Week 11 poll. NCC didn't make the playoffs, but only one of those teams made it past the first round only to get smeared by Oshkosh in the second. Especially curious about the rationale of those voters who had them 5th and 6th at worst after Week 11 but dropped them out of the rankings completely for the final.
Quote from: New Tradition on December 23, 2015, 01:54:11 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 23, 2015, 12:25:23 PM
Final 2015 North Region Fan Poll:
1- Mount Union (15-0) 80 points (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2- Wabash (12-1) 69 points (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3)
3- Wheaton (11-1) 67 points (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4- Ohio Northern (9-3) 47 points (4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 7, 8)
5- Albion (9-2) 41 points (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7)
6- Franklin (8-3) 39 points (5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7)
7- North Central (7-3) 38 points (4, 4, 4, 4, 6, 6, x, x)
8- John Carroll (8-2) 24 points (5, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9, x)
9- Olivet (9-1) 13 points (7, 8, 9, 10, 10, 10, 10, x)
10- Wittenberg (8-2) 9 points (9, 9, 9, 9, 10, x, x, x)
10- DePauw (8-2) 9 points (8, 8, 9, 10, x, x, x, x)
ORV:
Lakeland (8-3) 4 points (9, 10, 10, x, x, x, x, x)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, USee, and wally wabash.
Interesting. Curious why people moved Ohio Northern, Albion, and Franklin ahead of NCC vs. the Week 11 poll. NCC didn't make the playoffs, but only one of those teams made it past the first round only to get smeared by Oshkosh in the second. Especially curious about the rationale of those voters who had them 5th and 6th at worst after Week 11 but dropped them out of the rankings completely for the final.
NT,
Lakeland was pretty impressive!
Interesting. Curious why people moved Ohio Northern, Albion, and Franklin ahead of NCC vs. the Week 11 poll. NCC didn't make the playoffs, but only one of those teams made it past the first round only to get smeared by Oshkosh in the second. Especially curious about the rationale of those voters who had them 5th and 6th at worst after Week 11 but dropped them out of the rankings completely for the final.
NT,
speaking only on Ohio Northern which got "smeared" by Oshkosh. They might be looking at what Oshkosh also did to Platteville (63-28) who beat NCC. No offense but NCC crapped the bed vs every quality opponent on their schedule. Playing teams close is only going to get you so high in the rankings eventually you have to win some of those games. Had they been put behind John Carroll another team that lost to every quality team on their schedule then I would seriously question it. Since NCC basically had both the Platteville and Wesley games won but found some way to lose.This is not to say that NCC is a bad team they just didnt put it all together in the games that mattered. Or it could just be something as simple as the voters felt that simply making the playoffs was enough to put Albion Franklin and Ohio Northern ahead of NCC.
jhahn, I'm fine with a voter moving ONU ahead of NCC (though I had NCC 4, ONU 5), but the two voters who completely dropped NCC (after having them at least 6th) are CLEARLY guilty of both lazy and inconsistent voting. Lazy to automatically rank ANY postseason team higher than any who didn't get in, and inconsistent in that they elevated at least three NON-tourney teams above NCC (the North only had 7 teams in the tourney).
I move that wally withhold those voters' checks! ;D
Quote from: jhahn201 on December 23, 2015, 09:37:22 PM
Interesting. Curious why people moved Ohio Northern, Albion, and Franklin ahead of NCC vs. the Week 11 poll. NCC didn't make the playoffs, but only one of those teams made it past the first round only to get smeared by Oshkosh in the second. Especially curious about the rationale of those voters who had them 5th and 6th at worst after Week 11 but dropped them out of the rankings completely for the final.
NT,
speaking only on Ohio Northern which got "smeared" by Oshkosh. They might be looking at what Oshkosh also did to Platteville (63-28) who beat NCC. No offense but NCC crapped the bed vs every quality opponent on their schedule. Playing teams close is only going to get you so high in the rankings eventually you have to win some of those games. Had they been put behind John Carroll another team that lost to every quality team on their schedule then I would seriously question it. Since NCC basically had both the Platteville and Wesley games won but found some way to lose.This is not to say that NCC is a bad team they just didnt put it all together in the games that mattered. Or it could just be something as simple as the voters felt that simply making the playoffs was enough to put Albion Franklin and Ohio Northern ahead of NCC.
Hmmm. Using your logic they may have not been looking at what NCC did to IWU who beat Franklin? And what "quality" wins did Franklin, Olivet, Depauw, Witt, Lakeland or even ONU have that were better than NCC? It's not that simple. There is no logic that has Lakeland ranked ahead of NCC. That has at least a direct common opponent (Wheaton). NCC and Franklin also have a direct common opponent. I think there is some serious NCC hatred on here. I am more than happy to be the president of that club but my logic had me rannk NCC 4th.
Quote from: jhahn201 on December 23, 2015, 09:37:22 PM
Interesting. Curious why people moved Ohio Northern, Albion, and Franklin ahead of NCC vs. the Week 11 poll. NCC didn't make the playoffs, but only one of those teams made it past the first round only to get smeared by Oshkosh in the second. Especially curious about the rationale of those voters who had them 5th and 6th at worst after Week 11 but dropped them out of the rankings completely for the final.
NT,
speaking only on Ohio Northern which got "smeared" by Oshkosh. They might be looking at what Oshkosh also did to Platteville (63-28) who beat NCC. No offense but NCC crapped the bed vs every quality opponent on their schedule. Playing teams close is only going to get you so high in the rankings eventually you have to win some of those games. Had they been put behind John Carroll another team that lost to every quality team on their schedule then I would seriously question it. Since NCC basically had both the Platteville and Wesley games won but found some way to lose.This is not to say that NCC is a bad team they just didnt put it all together in the games that mattered. Or it could just be something as simple as the voters felt that simply making the playoffs was enough to put Albion Franklin and Ohio Northern ahead of NCC.
Not true. IWU was not a particularly quality opponent by the end of the season (after losing Artie Checchin to injury), but they were ranked #15 (at 7-0) when they played NCC. NCC was already ahead when Checchin left with a season (and career) ending injury. I dare say that qualifies as a better win than any of the teams ranked above NCC had.
OMG, I'm defending NCC - I need to go shower! ;D
But wally, seriously, those two voters who left NCC entirely off their ballot should be encouraged to retire. :(
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 23, 2015, 12:25:23 PM
Final 2015 North Region Fan Poll:
1- Mount Union (15-0) 80 points (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2- Wabash (12-1) 69 points (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3)
3- Wheaton (11-1) 67 points (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4- Ohio Northern (9-3) 47 points (4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 7, 8)
5- Albion (9-2) 41 points (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7)
6- Franklin (8-3) 39 points (5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7)
7- North Central (7-3) 38 points (4, 4, 4, 4, 6, 6, x, x)
8- John Carroll (8-2) 24 points (5, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9, x)
9- Olivet (9-1) 13 points (7, 8, 9, 10, 10, 10, 10, x)
10- Wittenberg (8-2) 9 points (9, 9, 9, 9, 10, x, x, x)
10- DePauw (8-2) 9 points (8, 8, 9, 10, x, x, x, x)
ORV:
Lakeland (8-3) 4 points (9, 10, 10, x, x, x, x, x)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, USee, and wally wabash.
My ballot didn't change much. Only 4 teams managed a single win (and three of them were already my top 3) and just my top 2 managed multiple wins. Only difference from my pre-tournament ballot was ONU moved up to #8 knocking down Witt and Lakeland to 9 and 10. JCU would have been #11.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 23, 2015, 10:07:03 PM
jhahn, I'm fine with a voter moving ONU ahead of NCC (though I had NCC 4, ONU 5), but the two voters who completely dropped NCC (after having them at least 6th) are CLEARLY guilty of both lazy and inconsistent voting. Lazy to automatically rank ANY postseason team higher than any who didn't get in, and inconsistent in that they elevated at least three NON-tourney teams above NCC (the North only had 7 teams in the tourney).
I move that wally withhold those voters' checks! ;D
Thanks, Ypsi. This is more my point. Thanks for putting it more eloquently. I'm also ok with ONU ahead of NCC, but those other 2 don't have a leg to stand on except for the fact that they made the tournament (with weaker schedules than NCC...NCC 8, Albion 18, Franklin 155, ONU 159) and NCC didn't. When looking at NCC's body of work, there is a plethora evidence to suggest that they would have handled themselves better than Franklin and Albion. And to rank those teams that finished 8-10 over them? I'm extremely curious to hear the rationale there. What's the thought process? Maybe there is something I'm not seeing?
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 23, 2015, 12:25:23 PM
Final 2015 North Region Fan Poll:
1- Mount Union (15-0) 80 points (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2- Wabash (12-1) 69 points (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3)
3- Wheaton (11-1) 67 points (2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
4- Ohio Northern (9-3) 47 points (4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 7, 8)
5- Albion (9-2) 41 points (5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7)
6- Franklin (8-3) 39 points (5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7)
7- North Central (7-3) 38 points (4, 4, 4, 4, 6, 6, x, x)
8- John Carroll (8-2) 24 points (5, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9, x)
9- Olivet (9-1) 13 points (7, 8, 9, 10, 10, 10, 10, x)
10- Wittenberg (8-2) 9 points (9, 9, 9, 9, 10, x, x, x)
10- DePauw (8-2) 9 points (8, 8, 9, 10, x, x, x, x)
ORV:
Lakeland (8-3) 4 points (9, 10, 10, x, x, x, x, x)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, USee, and wally wabash.
Looking back there was a definite top 4 but after that IMO, I had a hard time putting together the rest of the top ten. There were a few teams that were left out that were better than some of the Playoff Qualifiers but juggled them both in my list.
The defacto north region top teams from the D3 top 25 are;
1. UMU
2. Wabash
3. Wheaton
4. North Central
5. Ohio Northern
6. John Carroll
7. Franklin
8. Albion
9. Depauw
Their 10th is likely Witt or Olivet
For the record, I had NCC 6th.
They played 5 games against teams that ended the season with winning records. They won 2: Trine and IWU. I agree that IWU was a quality opponent at the time NCC beat them. Trine? Meh.
NCC played 4 quality teams and they only beat 1 of them. I don't think it's "lazy" voting if someone chose to put them out of the top 10 because they lost to 3 of the 4 best teams they played. I think it is a defensible position to say there's a limit to the number of "quality losses" a team can sustain before they fall out.
I don't think it's "hatred" for NCC either. I can see voters holding the lofty expectations of NCC against them when they don't live up. Not sure that's hatred, but that may not be fair either.
Quote from: Li'l Giant on December 26, 2015, 12:46:22 AM
For the record, I had NCC 6th.
They played 5 games against teams that ended the season with winning records. They won 2: Trine and IWU. I agree that IWU was a quality opponent at the time NCC beat them. Trine? Meh.
NCC played 4 quality teams and they only beat 1 of them. I don't think it's "lazy" voting if someone chose to put them out of the top 10 because they lost to 3 of the 4 best teams they played. I think it is a defensible position to say there's a limit to the number of "quality losses" a team can sustain before they fall out.
I don't think it's "hatred" for NCC either. I can see voters holding the lofty expectations of NCC against them when they don't live up. Not sure that's hatred, but that may not be fair either.
I really don't want to belabor the points with NCC. I don't think it really matters where they rank in the NRFP at this point. They got what they played for. But for process sake, I would be very careful with this kind of analysis. It's a Pandora's box. By way of example, Ohio Northern played 5 teams with winning records and won 2. John Carroll and Franklin. Not exactly awe inspiring competition, especially when you can easily make a case for NCC over Franklin via common opponent. And the common opponent NCC has with Albion and Olivet is meh Trine. So no case for them over NCC either. Your analysis also involves losses in a vacuum. If you are going to say they had 3 losses and that's too many to be ranked, then ONU, Franklin, and Lakeland had the same number of losses. If you want to not rank all of those teams because they had 3 losses then so be it. But it's hard to justify ranking one three loss team over another without looking at the games played (wins and losses) of those teams. NCC ranks pretty closely with Ohio Northern but decidedly better than Franklin and Lakeland via the common opponent analysis. Common opponents with Albion and Olivet make for easy comparison as well. I would be interested in a rationale for putting any of those 4 teams ahead of NCC in the region. So 4th to 6th is completely fair. I am even fine with putting Depauw and Witt ahead of NCC if someone thinks their season's were arguably better. But unranked for NCC? I don't see a fair reason for that other than strong dislike for the "royalty" tag that has been placed on them (which I think is petty).
Overall, it's hard to rank teams with the limited data we have. Most of the guys on here are thoughtful and reasonable in their approach. We usually only point out inconsistencies in rationale and those debates makes for entertaining discussions and lively banter. I have enjoyed the process this year and hope to do it again next fall. There's some good data and views on these boards that consistently make it worthwhile to engage. I for one appreciate the passion and the discussion. Happy Holidays.
I think the most difficult thing to do is rate teams with more losses than expected, or more quality losses (close losses to excellent teams) than others. Yes, it's who you beat, but realistically a 5-5 team could be a Top 25 team because of their schedule, luck and happenstance. No one will vote for them, though.
I think the hardest thing to do is to roll through your conference undefeated (Mt. Union is a special case, well, you know why). Someone is always gunning for you, and making the game against you THE game of their season. So I don' t think voting an undefeated MIAA team (for example) ahead of a 7-3 CCIW team is that bad of a call. But a 9-1 MIAA team (with a conference loss) against a CCIW team that's 7-3. Dealer's choice, I guess.
I hopefully will be back to voting next year. My project at work has been delayed (vendor issues) and the winter's gonna be fun. (Hah...)
I can understand not having North Central all the way up at 4th where I had them, but I don't see how you can say with a straight face that there were 10 teams in the north that would beat them on a neutral field. It's not like they lost 3 games in the HCAC or something... they were the 2nd best team in the CCIW and only lost to teams that finished ranked in the top 14 in the country.
I'm curious had NCC beaten Finlandia and Earlham by 50 points instead of playing Wesley and Platteville would they have appeared on the ballots that left them off?
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on December 26, 2015, 05:13:08 PM
I can understand not having North Central all the way up at 4th where I had them, but I don't see how you can say with a straight face that there were 10 teams in the north that would beat them on a neutral field. It's not like they lost 3 games in the HCAC or something... they were the 2nd best team in the CCIW and only lost to teams that finished ranked in the top 14 in the country.
I'm curious had NCC beaten Finlandia and Earlham by 50 points instead of playing Wesley and Platteville would they have appeared on the ballots that left them off?
At that point they would have been 9-1 and in the tourney. So I think it is safe to say they would have been on all the ballots (unless they lost in the first round to a 5-5 team by 200 points)! :o ;D
My earlier post that it was 'lazy' voting was due to them having been at least sixth on the final regular-season ballots of those who left them off entirely - what did they do in their premature off-season to drop so far? ::)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 26, 2015, 05:36:22 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on December 26, 2015, 05:13:08 PM
I can understand not having North Central all the way up at 4th where I had them, but I don't see how you can say with a straight face that there were 10 teams in the north that would beat them on a neutral field. It's not like they lost 3 games in the HCAC or something... they were the 2nd best team in the CCIW and only lost to teams that finished ranked in the top 14 in the country.
I'm curious had NCC beaten Finlandia and Earlham by 50 points instead of playing Wesley and Platteville would they have appeared on the ballots that left them off?
At that point they would have been 9-1 and in the tourney. So I think it is safe to say they would have been on all the ballots (unless they lost in the first round to a 5-5 team by 200 points)! :o ;D
My earlier post that it was 'lazy' voting was due to them having been at least sixth on the final regular-season ballots of those who left them off entirely - what did they do in their premature off-season to drop so far? ::)
There is 0 reason for them to have dropped from 6 to off because of no playoffs but I'm playing devil's advocate here trying to figure out what is going through some people's heads.
Forget making the playoffs, just have those two changes be the only difference for NCC. So 9-1 (and no playoffs) instead of 7-3 but replacing two close losses to top 14 teams with easy wins over bottomfeeders. That can't possibly make a difference because how could beating Earlham and Finlandia be a better result than losing by 1 to Wesley or going OT with Platteville?
Are we saying beating up on weak teams to pad the record is a better result than going to OT or having a single score game with great teams? What is this, the SEC with their midseason cupcake games? ::)
Smed
I agree with your comments with a caveat. It can't be "dealers choice" when the MIAA teams one loss is to a team 7-3 team beat soundly. That's blackjack.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on December 26, 2015, 05:13:08 PM
I'm curious had NCC beaten Finlandia and Earlham by 50 points instead of playing Wesley and Platteville would they have appeared on the ballots that left them off?
9-1 NCC would have likely been in the tourney (instead of ONU?). Even if they lost that hypothetical first round game (against Franklin perhaps?) my guess is they would be ranked on all final NRFP ballots. Which takes me back to the idea that there is a limit to the number of "quality losses" a team can sustain.
An 8-2 NCC probably would be in over 8-2 ONU.
Quote from: New Tradition on December 24, 2015, 08:55:38 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 23, 2015, 10:07:03 PM
jhahn, I'm fine with a voter moving ONU ahead of NCC (though I had NCC 4, ONU 5), but the two voters who completely dropped NCC (after having them at least 6th) are CLEARLY guilty of both lazy and inconsistent voting. Lazy to automatically rank ANY postseason team higher than any who didn't get in, and inconsistent in that they elevated at least three NON-tourney teams above NCC (the North only had 7 teams in the tourney).
I move that wally withhold those voters' checks! ;D
Thanks, Ypsi. This is more my point. Thanks for putting it more eloquently. I'm also ok with ONU ahead of NCC, but those other 2 don't have a leg to stand on except for the fact that they made the tournament (with weaker schedules than NCC...NCC 8, Albion 18, Franklin 155, ONU 159) and NCC didn't. When looking at NCC's body of work, there is a plethora evidence to suggest that they would have handled themselves better than Franklin and Albion. And to rank those teams that finished 8-10 over them? I'm extremely curious to hear the rationale there. What's the thought process? Maybe there is something I'm not seeing?
I'm not one of those that moved NCC out entirely (I was a 6 for the Cardinals), but I think it's hard to pin those ballots down as being lazy. We're still just kind of taking it on faith that North Central is obviously better than Albion or Franklin (or even DePauw or Wittenberg, frankly). I know there are common opponent results in play there, but the further those games are from one another, the less you can really draw from them- in a polling sense. In a regional rankings context, I think you kind of strip that time variable away, but here I think it's ok for somebody to see that IWU beat Franklin in Week 1 and lost to North Central two months later and not think those two results are all that comparable. The problem here really arises in that North Central's three "best" results are all games that they lost. That's a really hard thing to deal with (particularly if we're going to overreact to a 56-35 LOSS by Wesley in the quarterfinals...something that I've been shaking my head over for three weeks now, tbh).
I think the best single sentence in the conversation is this one:
Quote from: Li'l Giant on December 27, 2015, 12:48:28 PM
Which takes me back to the idea that there is a limit to the number of "quality losses" a team can sustain.
In all honesty, the one team that I gave the most consideration to moving up more was JCU. After the way the playoffs unfolded I was forced to reassess the Streaks a little. That game was 10-3 at half and JCU had, IMO, the 2nd best defense Mount saw all year behind UWW.
And for the record, I think I had NCC at 4 in the final poll. Possibly high, but my logic was I had ONU at 5 and I watched a few of NCC's games and I thought they would beat ONU on a neutral field so I left them ahead of the Bears.
Wally,
I am not sure how one can dismiss losses to common opponents by Albion and Franklin early in the season and at the same time count losses by North Central to top 10 teams over that same time period. Those games happened. It's a lot easier (though imperfect) to use common opponent games to compare NCC to Albion and Franklin than to compare NCC to ONU, Depauw or Witt. Dismissing that data for any reason isn't credible, especially when we don't have enough data to begin with.
Again, ONU, Franklin and Lakeland also had 3 losses.
Franklin has exactly zero quality wins on its resume and 3 "quality losses". Better or worse than NCC?
NCC beat a 7-0 and 12th ranked IWU exactly 3 weeks before Franklin lost to ONU at home in the playoffs. Are we going to say IWU at 7-0 was somehow worse than the team that beat Franklin on 9/5 @Franklin? It's not hard to say NCC has at least 1 quality win late in their season and Franklin had none at any point in their season.
Quote from: USee on December 28, 2015, 12:40:28 PM
NCC beat a 7-0 and 12th ranked IWU exactly 3 weeks before Franklin lost to ONU at home in the playoffs. Are we going to say IWU at 7-0 was somehow worse than the team that beat Franklin on 9/5 @Franklin? It's not hard to say NCC has at least 1 quality win late in their season and Franklin had none at any point in their season.
I think you can absolutely say this. In fact, I don't think it is disputable to say that the IWU that beat Franklin was not the same IWU that got beat by NCC.
But I don't want to get too much farther down this rabbit hole. I only chimed in here to defend those ballots that did not rank North Central as at least reasonable. I think it's reasonable to look at what North Central did in 2015 and decide that there are 10 better teams in the region. Most (self included) will disagree, but it's reasonable. They lost a lot of games. They didn't win a league. Their best win came against a team who lost their best player at a point in the game when having the best player on the field still mattered. There are a lot of ways to digest the 2015 North Central season and the range of spots where you can rank them reasonably is pretty wide.
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 28, 2015, 01:05:50 PM
There are a lot of ways to digest the 2015 North Central season and the range of spots where you can rank them reasonably is pretty wide.
Anywhere from 4 to 11 is defensible, in my humble opinion.
Wally,
First I want to again recognize you are not the one who didn't rank NCC and you and I probably agree on NCC and their season more than we disagree. So we are really just taking the opposite sides of the argument to flesh out the process we all take.
If you are going to take the position that IWU lost it's best player at a key moment, you have to admit NCC lost it's best player before Wesley and Wheaton games. And they lost their QB before they played IWU and still won the game. That works both ways.
And if your premise is that NCC lost a lot of games it's not consistent to then rank teams ahead of them that lost the same amount of games, nor is it consistent to say an early loss or win by a team (In this case Franklin and IWU) doesn't matter but early losses by NCC do matter. That's not credible.
Quote from: USee on December 28, 2015, 02:36:01 PM
And if your premise is that NCC lost a lot of games it's not consistent to then rank teams ahead of them that lost the same amount of games, nor is it consistent to say an early loss or win by a team (In this case Franklin and IWU) doesn't matter but early losses by NCC do matter. That's not credible.
I may have been unclear- I don't think that those early games don't count for something. Certainly they do. When it comes to common opponents, I think the added value of the common opponent game diminishes as a function of increasing time- to the point where IWU/Franklin in Week 1 and IWU/NCC in Week 9 isn't much more useful in helping me sort out Franklin and NCC in a poll situation than if they didn't have that common opponent. That's not as clean a comparison as we'd like.
Quote from: Li'l Giant on December 28, 2015, 01:10:14 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 28, 2015, 01:05:50 PM
There are a lot of ways to digest the 2015 North Central season and the range of spots where you can rank them reasonably is pretty wide.
Anywhere from 4 to 11 is defensible, in my humble opinion.
I wouldn't dispute this. NCC was hard to rank. I also thought Franklin was difficult for some of the same reasons.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on December 28, 2015, 11:24:56 AM
In all honesty, the one team that I gave the most consideration to moving up more was JCU. After the way the playoffs unfolded I was forced to reassess the Streaks a little. That game was 10-3 at half and JCU had, IMO, the 2nd best defense Mount saw all year behind UWW.
And for the record, I think I had NCC at 4 in the final poll. Possibly high, but my logic was I had ONU at 5 and I watched a few of NCC's games and I thought they would beat ONU on a neutral field so I left them ahead of the Bears.
+K I think JCU's defense proved to be the best defense in the conference, behind Mount of course, and that the playoffs showed this. I do think JCU could have won at least one game in the playoffs, I understand why they were not taken.
This is happening again this year. Waiting on a few more ballots which I hope to have in the next day or two so that we can get a preseason poll out early this week for everyone's debating pleasure. Would also love to get an MIAA regular to round out the group, but so far, no takers.
Quote from: wally_wabash on August 28, 2016, 07:15:46 PM
This is happening again this year. Waiting on a few more ballots which I hope to have in the next day or two so that we can get a preseason poll out early this week for everyone's debating pleasure. Would also love to get an MIAA regular to round out the group, but so far, no takers.
Wally,
Why don't you just go ahead and project the 32 team playoff bracket off of the pre-season regional polls. We all know you have a secret burning desire to start bracketology ASAP.
Quote from: wabndy on August 29, 2016, 10:41:53 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on August 28, 2016, 07:15:46 PM
This is happening again this year. Waiting on a few more ballots which I hope to have in the next day or two so that we can get a preseason poll out early this week for everyone's debating pleasure. Would also love to get an MIAA regular to round out the group, but so far, no takers.
Wally,
Why don't you just go ahead and project the 32 team playoff bracket off of the pre-season regional polls. We all know you have a secret burning desire to start bracketology ASAP.
So much fun. I think Keith does a projection in his Super Sleepers feature in Kickoff, so there's something akin to this out there.
Here we go...first poll of the year. A little different presentation this year...little easier on me. Feedback is welcome.
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F3cqKGdt.png&hash=f9eeb41dbece55b3fd14ce424b0a1b0bb215214b)
Click to embiggen.
I love this thread. Have at it gang!
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash. And hopefully an MIAA regular before too long. The invitation remains open. :)
Anywhere from 2 to 6...the uncertainty with how to handle NCC continued!
Also, I'm a little surprised JCU got a 10. But it's preseason. You can't really argue when there are no results yet!
Here is my poll
1. Mt Union
2. North Central
3. Wheaton
4. Wabash
5. John Carroll
6. Ohio Northern
7. Wittenberg
8. Depauw
9. Baldwin Wallace
10. Carthage
I have been on record as saying NCC and Wheaton are very close and I give the edge to NCC because of what they have returning. I also think Carthage/Augie and IWU are all very close and based on my analysis Carthage is the best team of the three but its very close.
I think the CCIW below Wheaton and North Central are going to knock each other out. I put Albion in because I think their offensive scheme will be troublesome. I put in RHIT because I think they'll beat out Franklin. And we'll all find out Saturday!
- We nearly have a consensus top 4. Just the single 6 vote for North Central prevents that scenario.
- I'm the 9 on JCU. I'm missing something about the Streaks I think. They get Oshkosh on Saturday, so we're going to see pretty quick what's up there.
- I thought we'd get more points for DePauw. They're really good.
For example, IWU moved it's third team RB to the starting cornerback role to replace a 3 year starter. That just doesn't pass my sniff test as a top 25 team. Carthage has 2 young, athletic corners returning, one of who was all conference as a freshman. Augie has 10 starters back on a defense (9 starters back on Offense) that yielded just 14 pts a game in the league over the last 5 weeks including games against IWU and North Central. IWU has the best LB group in the CCIW as a whole and one of the best Running backs, but I have questions about their depth and playmaking abilities.
If JCU loses to Oshkosh by 10 or less, then I think we have our answer on John Carroll.
A loss of about 14, at Oshkosh, does that answer any questions?
Quote from: smedindy on August 30, 2016, 01:07:35 PM
If JCU loses to Oshkosh by 10 or less, then I think we have our answer on John Carroll.
A loss of about 14, at Oshkosh, does that answer any questions?
How do you get to 10 or 14 point margin? I think that matters. A 35-7 game can turn into a 35-21 game in the final 6 minutes and really obscure what happened. Or a 21-21 game can turn into a 35-21 game in those same 6 minutes. Same scores, but they should prompt very different reactions from voters.
Quote from: wally_wabash on August 30, 2016, 01:18:43 PM
Quote from: smedindy on August 30, 2016, 01:07:35 PM
If JCU loses to Oshkosh by 10 or less, then I think we have our answer on John Carroll.
A loss of about 14, at Oshkosh, does that answer any questions?
How do you get to 10 or 14 point margin? I think that matters. A 35-7 game can turn into a 35-21 game in the final 6 minutes and really obscure what happened. Or a 21-21 game can turn into a 35-21 game in those same 6 minutes. Same scores, but they should prompt very different reactions from voters.
Unless of course your team is North Central, then it doesn't matter to some voters how you lost, it only matters that you lost! I'm sorry to go there before the season even starts.....forgive me 8-)
Quote from: USee on August 30, 2016, 01:27:43 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on August 30, 2016, 01:18:43 PM
Quote from: smedindy on August 30, 2016, 01:07:35 PM
If JCU loses to Oshkosh by 10 or less, then I think we have our answer on John Carroll.
A loss of about 14, at Oshkosh, does that answer any questions?
How do you get to 10 or 14 point margin? I think that matters. A 35-7 game can turn into a 35-21 game in the final 6 minutes and really obscure what happened. Or a 21-21 game can turn into a 35-21 game in those same 6 minutes. Same scores, but they should prompt very different reactions from voters.
Unless of course your team is North Central, then it doesn't matter to some voters how you lost, it only matters that you lost! I'm sorry to go there before the season even starts.....forgive me 8-)
It matters when you lose and lose and lose again.
Quote from: wally_wabash on August 30, 2016, 01:18:43 PM
Quote from: smedindy on August 30, 2016, 01:07:35 PM
If JCU loses to Oshkosh by 10 or less, then I think we have our answer on John Carroll.
A loss of about 14, at Oshkosh, does that answer any questions?
How do you get to 10 or 14 point margin? I think that matters. A 35-7 game can turn into a 35-21 game in the final 6 minutes and really obscure what happened. Or a 21-21 game can turn into a 35-21 game in those same 6 minutes. Same scores, but they should prompt very different reactions from voters.
I'll concede that. If it's close most or all the game, the that says JCU is worthy of a high ranking.
I would have put RHIT in and Franklin out, personally.
I would have no clue on 2-5. Seems awfully interchangeable to me at the moment.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on August 30, 2016, 11:00:20 PM
I would have put RHIT in and Franklin out, personally.
I would have no clue on 2-5. Seems awfully interchangeable to me at the moment.
Looks like I'm driving the RHIT bus as the preseason highwater vote for the 'Neers. No way that's going to look silly in 8 weeks.
I have RHIT on my short list and I did not rank Franklin in my top 10. Both have too many questions at this point.
Looks like Wally and me are the only 2 who put Wheaton at #3, albeit for very different reasons.
I was down to RHIT, Witt and IWU for my 9/10 spots. I thought RHIT had as good a case for those spots as the other two, but ultimately I chose to leave them just outside the top 10. If we went beyond 10 they would have been 11 on mine.
Did anyone else struggle with BW? I mulled them over quite a bit. In the end I just don't trust them though.
I think RHIT has a decent shot at winning the conference this year. They were up 21-0 on Franklin last year and led in the 4th quarter. After that loss they just weren't the same the rest of the season.
Looking at the schedule leading up to the game... Rose is @ MSJ and home vs Manchester. Franklin is home vs Earlham then a bye week. Will Franklin be rested and healthy or will they be rusty?
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on August 31, 2016, 12:35:10 PM
Looking at the schedule leading up to the game... Rose is @ MSJ and home vs Manchester. Franklin is home vs Earlham then a bye week. Will Franklin be rested and healthy or will they be rusty?
Having spent several seasons trying to figure out how the one or two preceding weeks might help/hurt a given team in a big matchup, what I think I've found is that for annual opponents (conference teams, essentially), there's not a lot there to chew on. Some years Wabash has played Wittenberg the week before the Monon Bell game and gone on to squash DePauw and in other years Wabash precedes the Bell game with some other non-Witt NCAC team and still squashes DePauw the following week. Different lead ups, same results. :)
I assume Franklin understands the lay of the land in the HCAC and they'll know what the level of play is going to be against RHIT. They'll be ready. If I had to pick one or the other, I'd say it's probably a bonus that Franklin gets a bye week before this game. Mike Leonard with an extra week of preparation is probably an advantage.
Plus looking at the schedule that bye is week 7. By that point in the season I'd gladly take the extra week to heal up at the expense of what little rust it may cause.
This is going to be an interesting poll... Franklin beating Thomas More... Wabash and Albion going OT... John Carroll losing 33-7 before a late TD... meanwhile Ohio Northern and DePauw didn't play. I think there might end up being less consensus now than there was last week with no data ???
Quote from: wally_wabash on August 31, 2016, 10:28:28 AM
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on August 30, 2016, 11:00:20 PM
I would have put RHIT in and Franklin out, personally.
I would have no clue on 2-5. Seems awfully interchangeable to me at the moment.
Looks like I'm driving the RHIT bus as the preseason highwater vote for the 'Neers. No way that's going to look silly in 8 weeks.
Didn't take 8 weeks.
With all due respect, RHIT is solid but most likely isn't anywhere near dethroning the GRIZ.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 04, 2016, 12:18:59 AM
I think there might end up being less consensus now than there was last week with no data ???
I expect the distribution to be really weird this week. We'll see how this goes.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 04, 2016, 12:18:59 AM
This is going to be an interesting poll... Franklin beating Thomas More... Wabash and Albion going OT... John Carroll losing 33-7 before a late TD... meanwhile Ohio Northern and DePauw didn't play. I think there might end up being less consensus now than there was last week with no data ???
(https://media.giphy.com/media/exhjgGPD55KSI/giphy.gif)
Everybody is in. We'll have the Week 1 poll up tonight.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 06, 2016, 12:46:24 PM
Everybody is in. We'll have the Week 1 poll up tonight.
Fingers crossed. Maybe the Griz will be ahead of RHIT. ::)
Quote from: GRIZ_BACKER on September 06, 2016, 03:20:42 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 06, 2016, 12:46:24 PM
Everybody is in. We'll have the Week 1 poll up tonight.
Fingers crossed. Maybe the Griz will be ahead of RHIT. ::)
You know what- win a big game, get a free NRFP teaser. I can confirm that Franklin is ahead of RHIT this week. They were also ahead of RHIT last week, so I'm not sure where the anxiety comes from, but we're not here to judge.
Actually, now that I think about it, that's exactly what we're doing here.
Alright here we go. Week 1 NRFP:
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FbzpZxR4.png&hash=7c7c99f6d55e03ff394aba45e6802a970eeed9c8)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
We thought it might get weird. It did.
- half of our top 10 doesn't have a win
- Franklin ranges from as high as 4 to unranked
- half of the OAC is receiving votes
All bulleted points register as weird iyam. But it's interesting. Should be good conversation here this week.
Wally, is each column a voter's ballot? It appears so. So someone has BW ranked 9 and Franklin unranked?
Also, I like the stones on the person that threw Berg a vote. If Cortland is indeed as good as their ranking suggests then Berg was impressive even in defeat. They had the ball with a chance to take the lead late in the 4th.
I'm interested in the four people who have Wabash in the top 5 and Albion off their ballot... Wabash scored a TD with 12 seconds left to force OT. I just don't see how there's that large of a gap between the two.
And to the person who left Franklin off... I'm not mad, just disappointed in you :(
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 06, 2016, 05:59:09 PM
Alright here we go. Week 1 NRFP:
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FbzpZxR4.png&hash=7c7c99f6d55e03ff394aba45e6802a970eeed9c8)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
Just taking the liberty at getting a shot in at RHIT. LOL ;D
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 06, 2016, 06:17:27 PM
Wally, is each column a voter's ballot? It appears so. So someone has BW ranked 9 and Franklin unranked?
Also, I like the stones on the person that threw Berg a vote. If Cortland is indeed as good as their ranking suggests then Berg was impressive even in defeat. They had the ball with a chance to take the lead late in the 4th.
Your read of the table is correct. If the format isn't secret enough for our balloters, I can mix it up more going forward.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 06, 2016, 07:14:41 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 06, 2016, 06:17:27 PM
Wally, is each column a voter's ballot? It appears so. So someone has BW ranked 9 and Franklin unranked?
Also, I like the stones on the person that threw Berg a vote. If Cortland is indeed as good as their ranking suggests then Berg was impressive even in defeat. They had the ball with a chance to take the lead late in the 4th.
Your read of the table is correct. If the format isn't secret enough for our balloters, I can mix it up more going forward.
Labeling who was which column would be violating confidentiality, but I see no problem with this format. And for those who don't mind revealing their ballot, it saves typing! This week I was column one. ;)
The Wabash/Albion result cost Wabash one spot on my ballot, but one game was not quite enough to get Albion on to mine (they'd probably be my #11 team). They graduated a ton of talent, and Kickoff only had them at #69; if they keep looking impressive (remember, they DID still lose ;)), they'll get there sooner or later. I try to always have an MIAA team on my ballot, but I'm not sure any of them are 'ready for prime time' this season.
I am column 3. I have experienced the knee jerk shuffle too many times so Ibtook a more conservative route. We know a lot more than we did last week but not enough more to be convinced. I don't know if Albion is that good or Wabash has dipped a little under a new staff and coordinators. I don't know if Franklin was way under rated or Thomas More was way over rated. I am not sure most teams in this poll wouldn't have had a similar result @Oshkosh. My rankings reveal my leanings but I am holding off on wholesale changes until I know more. 2 or 3 games in will make a big difference I think. I kept the same 10 teams and moved Wabash down 1 spot and JCU down 2 spots. Albion moved up a lot in my rankings just not enough to break in yet.
I'm the 3rd column from the right. I avoided what USee termed "the knee jerk shuffle". My only change was replacing my #10 from last week with Lakeland and I almost put Albion in that #10 spot.
I moved Franklin from 10 to 4. At the risk of overreacting, I'm not sure we're going to see a better non-league result in the region this year. OWU and JCU had chances this week and weren't close. Oddly enough, Franklin has a chance to do one better this weekend. But unless TMC goes in the tank, that's about as good a result as anybody is going to get in the North region this year. That's a high value chip for Franklin and I moved them accordingly.
I did move Wabash down from 2 to 3, although I'm not really sure what to do with 2-4. Wheaton was fine, but they stay keeping their best player on the bench which is confusing. I feel like these ho-hum results by Wheaton in September are a regular thing. But I moved them up anyway. I didn't move Wabash down below Franklin (4) or North Central (5) because I'm holding firm that getting that win on the road in Week 1 was a really good win. Albion is better than we thought.
I moved Albion into my 10 at 7. They did lose the game, but they were 12 seconds away from winning. I can't really justify a ton of space between Wabash and Albion at this point. Their game with UWSP will be a valuable data point next week.
ONU and IWU moved down a couple, but really only because other teams did something noteworthy while they were idle. IWU did play a game of some sort, but I have no idea what to do with that, and I'm not recording it as a result in the poll record. Kind of the same deal with NCC...although that game counts in the WL record, I don't know what winning against Robert Morris means. NAIA ORV doesn't really move the needle for me.
There was a lot to chew on this week for sure.
Whoever Column 5 is... that is certainly one way to order it.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 06, 2016, 11:55:36 PM
Whoever Column 5 is... that is certainly one way to order it.
Since that is the only voter who left DePauw off, I'm gonna assume your post is a complaint. But, of course, it is also a statement of obvious fact. After all, 1. Hope, 2. Wilmington, 3. Defiance, etc., is also 'one way to order it'! ;D
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 06, 2016, 11:55:36 PM
Whoever Column 5 is... that is certainly one way to order it.
I was the middle column... I'm surprised I ended up so close to the overall result.
Here's a what if. What if this week's top 10 were a conference, full round robin schedule. Does Mount Union go undefeated? 9 straight weeks against those 9 teams- would they get all 9?
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 07, 2016, 12:46:35 AM
Here's a what if. What if this week's top 10 were a conference, full round robin schedule. Does Mount Union go undefeated? 9 straight weeks against those 9 teams- would they get all 9?
I'm gonna guess they probably would, but too early to say for sure. If they are really MOUNT UNION, then yes. If they are 'merely' Mount Union, then a gantlet of Wheaton, NCC, Wabash, Franklin, JCU, etc., might present a stumble somewhere.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 07, 2016, 12:08:16 AM
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 06, 2016, 11:55:36 PM
Whoever Column 5 is... that is certainly one way to order it.
Since that is the only voter who left DePauw off, I'm gonna assume your post is a complaint. But, of course, it is also a statement of obvious fact. After all, 1. Hope, 2. Wilmington, 3. Defiance, etc., is also 'one way to order it'! ;D
I am surprised they aren't in everybody's poll, but it's not really a complaint. Just curious on a method.
I don't think Franklin is better than Wabash, although as the resident President of the Mike Leonard Fan Club, I was pleasantly surprised they won on Saturday. Albion deserves to be in, I think. If Wabash is really that good, then Albion is also good.
All bias aside, I can't really see Witt being ahead of DePauw at this point. I personally don't know what Witt has done to reverse the result from last year.
Like I said, just curious. And trying to be humorous, which I'm not always great at.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 07, 2016, 12:46:35 AM
Here's a what if. What if this week's top 10 were a conference, full round robin schedule. Does Mount Union go undefeated? 9 straight weeks against those 9 teams- would they get all 9?
I say yes, and maybe only challenged once or twice in the process.
I'm column 6. I moved Franklin up to 5 because I tend to agree with Wally...that will probably be the best OOC win anyone has this year. I rewarded accordingly.
I dropped IWU out and put Albion in because I was quite honestly expecting Albion to lose by 3 scores. I'll give them credit there. I debated dropping Wabash a spot, but opted not to.
I dropped JCU from 5 to 8, but I wanted to keep them ahead of ONU because that's the order I see unfolding in the OAC. I was disappointed with JCU's effort Saturday, but I didn't think it was a total disaster. I expected them to lose by a score of something like 28-14.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 07, 2016, 01:34:09 AM
All bias aside, I can't really see Witt being ahead of DePauw at this point. I personally don't know what Witt has done to reverse the result from last year.
Agree with this. Wittenberg has two chances in the front half of the season to earn a spot in my 10. Beating Capital doesn't snap me into "Witt is back!" mode.
Also, result in Belton notwithstanding, I think OWU is going to push Witt in two weeks for Ye Olde Skull. It's the playing for pride game! Maybe even more so now for OWU.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 07, 2016, 01:34:35 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 07, 2016, 12:46:35 AM
Here's a what if. What if this week's top 10 were a conference, full round robin schedule. Does Mount Union go undefeated? 9 straight weeks against those 9 teams- would they get all 9?
I say yes, and maybe only challenged once or twice in the process.
My knee jerk is to agree with this, but I am bracing for a 2013 type season this year. NCC would have beat Mount that year in Alliance if not for Burke willing them to the win. Burke isn't around this year. In fact, it may be a freshman starting at QB this year. That being said, I don't know how the current NCC stacks up to Stanek et al so maybe neither team is as good as 2013.
Again, I chose a less-informed, less opinionated route for my rankings this week. I don't think I can fairly say I don't know anything about a win over Robert Morris and then say I definitely know Albion and Franklin are good. I also don't think predicting the quality of a non conference win in region into the future is solid logic for moving Franklin up. If Thomas More goes 5-5 would we hold to that thinking? If Albion finishes 5th in the MIAA our thoughts might change. But Albion could win this week and I will have much more information to work with. Until then, I am avoiding the "knee jerk shuffle" in the first couple of weeks. Once teams get 2-3 games under their belt I will make some stronger revisions.
Said another way, my original thesis on each of these teams is intact, but under attack.
That's all fair, USee. I think volatility is ok early on. If Albion and TMC go in the tank from this point on, certainly you view those week 1 results differently. If TMC winds up losing a bunch of games, my thinking on this probably shifts from "that's the best non-league result in the region this year" to "why on Earth did FC need a giant comeback to beat that team". But I don't think Thomas More is such an unknown quantity that and of that seems likely. TMC is good. I'm comfortable saying that.
Re: RMU vs. Franklin/Albion...I think I can make sound judgements on the latter pair. They're familiar entities. Robert Morris not so much. The benchmarks I have for NAIA schools are pretty slim. Morningside is one of the best NAIA teams and they played a pretty tight game with Whitewater last year so the tippy top of NAIA is pretty good. But there are all but 86 NAIA football teams. So the gradient from #1-ORV is pretty steep. If RMU is ORV31 out of a total of 86 teams in the division, on a percentile basis that puts them in the 80s of D3. So we're talking about Trine/Coe/Montclair St./Carthage level teams. But I don't know how well that NAIA-to-D3 conversion works. Maybe RMU is a little better than where that projection puts them. Maybe not. I have no clue. I know they're not Morningside or Marian and if they aren't that, then I don't know what I'm supposed to do with North Central 35, RMU 21. I treated that result as not good, not bad...just expected. This week's opponent is basically the same rankings wise for NCC, so we aren't going to learn much about the Cardinals this week either.
I have no problem with that logic. I am also pointing out the information imbalance. You are a lot more comfortable with TMC and Franklin, you saw TMC last year live and are regularly looking at Franklin. I saw NCC live last year and I know exactly what they have back so I am probably more comfortable with them (and Carthage) as a team than most voters so the Robbie Morris result was in the range for my expectation. I have seen Wabash and I am very familiar with their personnel. I don't know if Albion is any good or not but my concerns with the new coaching staff at Wabash coming in to the season are not abating and giving up 300 yds in a half to almost anyone in D3, let alone an MIAA team (that may turn out to be vastly under rated) concerns me. I don't see the BJ hammer aggressiveness on D. We all know our own teams better than most other teams. Look, we all may be wrong and some of us certainly will be. Nothing wrong with differing approaches. What's clear from the results and the discussions on here is I have some more work to do.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 07, 2016, 11:59:23 AM
That's all fair, USee. I think volatility is ok early on. If Albion and TMC go in the tank from this point on, certainly you view those week 1 results differently. If TMC winds up losing a bunch of games, my thinking on this probably shifts from "that's the best non-league result in the region this year" to "why on Earth did FC need a giant comeback to beat that team". But I don't think Thomas More is such an unknown quantity that and of that seems likely. TMC is good. I'm comfortable saying that.
Re: RMU vs. Franklin/Albion...I think I can make sound judgements on the latter pair. They're familiar entities. Robert Morris not so much. The benchmarks I have for NAIA schools are pretty slim. Morningside is one of the best NAIA teams and they played a pretty tight game with Whitewater last year so the tippy top of NAIA is pretty good. But there are all but 86 NAIA football teams. So the gradient from #1-ORV is pretty steep. If RMU is ORV31 out of a total of 86 teams in the division, on a percentile basis that puts them in the 80s of D3. So we're talking about Trine/Coe/Montclair St./Carthage level teams. But I don't know how well that NAIA-to-D3 conversion works. Maybe RMU is a little better than where that projection puts them. Maybe not. I have no clue. I know they're not Morningside or Marian and if they aren't that, then I don't know what I'm supposed to do with North Central 35, RMU 21. I treated that result as not good, not bad...just expected. This week's opponent is basically the same rankings wise for NCC, so we aren't going to learn much about the Cardinals this week either.
hopefully folks wont punish FC for playing Butler and losing (Butler wasn't embarrassed last week at Indiana State). Like always, FC could take an easier route. This could be our year. We have beaten Butler in the past. Butler off the schedule starting next season Benedictine will be our second game after a trip to TM. TM may end up being an annual affair.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 07, 2016, 10:06:22 AM
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 07, 2016, 01:34:35 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 07, 2016, 12:46:35 AM
Here's a what if. What if this week's top 10 were a conference, full round robin schedule. Does Mount Union go undefeated? 9 straight weeks against those 9 teams- would they get all 9?
I say yes, and maybe only challenged once or twice in the process.
My knee jerk is to agree with this, but I am bracing for a 2013 type season this year. NCC would have beat Mount that year in Alliance if not for Burke willing them to the win. Burke isn't around this year. In fact, it may be a freshman starting at QB this year. That being said, I don't know how the current NCC stacks up to Stanek et al so maybe neither team is as good as 2013.
Franklin had Mount on the run late in 2013 in the opener in Alliance. 30-27 final.
Quote from: GRIZ_BACKER on September 07, 2016, 12:44:09 PM
hopefully folks wont punish FC for playing Butler and losing (Butler wasn't embarrassed last week at Indiana State). Like always, FC could take an easier route. This could be our year. We have beaten Butler in the past. Butler off the schedule starting next season Benedictine will be our second game after a trip to TM. TM may end up being an annual affair.
I won't. Franklin can lose that game by 90 and I don't really care. I think Franklin can only improve their position on my ballot with this game. No penalty for losing. I'm also really glad that this game is going away.
Quote from: USee on September 07, 2016, 12:13:47 PM
I have no problem with that logic. I am also pointing out the information imbalance. You are a lot more comfortable with TMC and Franklin, you saw TMC last year live and are regularly looking at Franklin. I saw NCC live last year and I know exactly what they have back so I am probably more comfortable with them (and Carthage) as a team than most voters so the Robbie Morris result was in the range for my expectation. I have seen Wabash and I am very familiar with their personnel. I don't know if Albion is any good or not but my concerns with the new coaching staff at Wabash coming in to the season are not abating and giving up 300 yds in a half to almost anyone in D3, let alone an MIAA team (that may turn out to be vastly under rated) concerns me. I don't see the BJ hammer aggressiveness on D. We all know our own teams better than most other teams. Look, we all may be wrong and some of us certainly will be. Nothing wrong with differing approaches. What's clear from the results and the discussions on here is I have some more work to do.
I think people get too caught up in that 34 points against here. Wabash allowed fewer yards against 18 more plays last week than they did against Albion in the tournament last season. Also, pretty ideal conditions for offensive football as opposed to the mess they tried to operate in last November. The biggest thing missing from the defense this time around? Five turnovers forced last year, zero this time around. Three of those five were INTs thrown by Albion in their last three possessions when they were forced to chase. On Saturday, Wabash forced a fumble that bounced right to an Albion receiver running to the end zone. It's the ultimate disguise...not only does Wabash not get credit for a turnover, but they give up a score on the loose ball situation. Just all kinds of bad luck there. If you can let yourself not get bogged by 34 points against, Wabash's defense may have actually been better Saturday than they were last November against this team. It also helps if we don't disqualify a team from being good because they play in the MIAA. Albion has been a nightmare to defend for a while now...in 2015 the Brits were 2nd in total offense, 6th in scoring...2014 5th in total offense, 9th in scoring offense. They're tough to deal with.
Quote from: GRIZ_BACKER on September 07, 2016, 01:13:39 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 07, 2016, 10:06:22 AM
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 07, 2016, 01:34:35 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 07, 2016, 12:46:35 AM
Here's a what if. What if this week's top 10 were a conference, full round robin schedule. Does Mount Union go undefeated? 9 straight weeks against those 9 teams- would they get all 9?
I say yes, and maybe only challenged once or twice in the process.
My knee jerk is to agree with this, but I am bracing for a 2013 type season this year. NCC would have beat Mount that year in Alliance if not for Burke willing them to the win. Burke isn't around this year. In fact, it may be a freshman starting at QB this year. That being said, I don't know how the current NCC stacks up to Stanek et al so maybe neither team is as good as 2013.
Franklin had Mount on the run late in 2013 in the opener in Alliance. 30-27 final.
Absolutely. That 2013 Mount team in hindsight was a testament to how great Kevin Burke was. That team had no business being 14-1 and playing in Salem. I am probably crying wolf a little saying I'm bracing for a 2013 type season. But they do replace a lot of starters this year.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 07, 2016, 01:31:43 PM
Quote from: GRIZ_BACKER on September 07, 2016, 12:44:09 PM
hopefully folks wont punish FC for playing Butler and losing (Butler wasn't embarrassed last week at Indiana State). Like always, FC could take an easier route. This could be our year. We have beaten Butler in the past. Butler off the schedule starting next season Benedictine will be our second game after a trip to TM. TM may end up being an annual affair.
I won't. Franklin can lose that game by 90 and I don't really care. I think Franklin can only improve their position on my ballot with this game. No penalty for losing. I'm also really glad that this game is going away.
Quote from: USee on September 07, 2016, 12:13:47 PM
I have no problem with that logic. I am also pointing out the information imbalance. You are a lot more comfortable with TMC and Franklin, you saw TMC last year live and are regularly looking at Franklin. I saw NCC live last year and I know exactly what they have back so I am probably more comfortable with them (and Carthage) as a team than most voters so the Robbie Morris result was in the range for my expectation. I have seen Wabash and I am very familiar with their personnel. I don't know if Albion is any good or not but my concerns with the new coaching staff at Wabash coming in to the season are not abating and giving up 300 yds in a half to almost anyone in D3, let alone an MIAA team (that may turn out to be vastly under rated) concerns me. I don't see the BJ hammer aggressiveness on D. We all know our own teams better than most other teams. Look, we all may be wrong and some of us certainly will be. Nothing wrong with differing approaches. What's clear from the results and the discussions on here is I have some more work to do.
I think people get too caught up in that 34 points against here. Wabash allowed fewer yards against 18 more plays last week than they did against Albion in the tournament last season. Also, pretty ideal conditions for offensive football as opposed to the mess they tried to operate in last November. The biggest thing missing from the defense this time around? Five turnovers forced last year, zero this time around. Three of those five were INTs thrown by Albion in their last three possessions when they were forced to chase. On Saturday, Wabash forced a fumble that bounced right to an Albion receiver running to the end zone. It's the ultimate disguise...not only does Wabash not get credit for a turnover, but they give up a score on the loose ball situation. Just all kinds of bad luck there. If you can let yourself not get bogged by 34 points against, Wabash's defense may have actually been better Saturday than they were last November against this team. It also helps if we don't disqualify a team from being good because they play in the MIAA. Albion has been a nightmare to defend for a while now...in 2015 the Brits were 2nd in total offense, 6th in scoring...2014 5th in total offense, 9th in scoring offense. They're tough to deal with.
I don't care about the points. I care about 324 yds in a half. That's a lot of yards no matter who it is. And averaging it with the 14 yards in the first half makes it look ok for the game but it's still 324 yds in one half. It's not too big a data point or too small. I don't disqualify them from being good because they play in the MIAA. But the fact that the quality of play in that conference has been poor for a couple decades also doesn't mean I decide they are good because they almost beat a pre-season top 15 team. They may be a top 10 team and we will find out soon enough. I haven't made any judgements on Albion (or Wabash) but my antenna is definitely up.
Quote from: USee on September 07, 2016, 04:02:43 PM
I don't care about the points. I care about 324 yds in a half. That's a lot of yards no matter who it is. And averaging it with the 14 yards in the first half makes it look ok for the game but it's still 324 yds in one half. It's not too big a data point or too small. I don't disqualify them from being good because they play in the MIAA. But the fact that the quality of play in that conference has been poor for a couple decades also doesn't mean I decide they are good because they almost beat a pre-season top 15 team. They may be a top 10 team and we will find out soon enough. I haven't made any judgements on Albion (or Wabash) but my antenna is definitely up.
It's also still 14 yards for a half. For a team that has averaged over 500 yards per game each of the last two years and looks like they're plenty capable of doing it again.
Fourteen yards. This works both ways, right?
If we're playing the "good half/bad half" thing I think I'd rather have the 324 yards be the first half and then after some sweet adjustments and a verbal tirade at halftime 14 yards in the 2nd half. A wake up call if you will.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 07, 2016, 05:19:56 PM
Quote from: USee on September 07, 2016, 04:02:43 PM
I don't care about the points. I care about 324 yds in a half. That's a lot of yards no matter who it is. And averaging it with the 14 yards in the first half makes it look ok for the game but it's still 324 yds in one half. It's not too big a data point or too small. I don't disqualify them from being good because they play in the MIAA. But the fact that the quality of play in that conference has been poor for a couple decades also doesn't mean I decide they are good because they almost beat a pre-season top 15 team. They may be a top 10 team and we will find out soon enough. I haven't made any judgements on Albion (or Wabash) but my antenna is definitely up.
It's also still 14 yards for a half. For a team that has averaged over 500 yards per game each of the last two years and looks like they're plenty capable of doing it again. Fourteen yards. This works both ways, right?
Actually no, it doesn't. It is extremely rare to see a team go 14/324 for 2 halves. Dominant defenses don't give up 300 yards in a half to anyone, except maybe to the National Champion in the Stagg but they do throttle good and bad offenses to numbers that appear ridiculous. Albion may win the national title this year and I'll come back and eat crow. Last year Wabash had a dominant defense. The most they gave up was around 200 in a half to St Thomas and TMC, both first halves and then the dominant defense locks in. Albion had about 180 yds each half last year against Wabash. I don't know yet if they do this year but the 2nd half of Albion isn't a great sign. But it could be a sign that their defensive philosophy is changing, it could be some simple fix that Albion found and exploited, or it could have just been some bad halftime oranges, so I'll wait and see.
For what it's worth to this discussion, both Wabash starting safeties were out in the second half; one of them is an all-region player and Wabash's leading tackler a year ago. One of the corners was dinged and not playing at anywhere near 100%. Most of the Albion yardage in the second half was through the air. Just saying.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 07, 2016, 01:34:35 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 07, 2016, 12:46:35 AM
Here's a what if. What if this week's top 10 were a conference, full round robin schedule. Does Mount Union go undefeated? 9 straight weeks against those 9 teams- would they get all 9?
I say yes, and maybe only challenged once or twice in the process.
Here's the other thing. The next best team in this scenario is probably, at best, 7-3 or 6-4.
Quote from: USee on September 07, 2016, 06:05:13 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 07, 2016, 05:19:56 PM
Quote from: USee on September 07, 2016, 04:02:43 PM
I don't care about the points. I care about 324 yds in a half. That's a lot of yards no matter who it is. And averaging it with the 14 yards in the first half makes it look ok for the game but it's still 324 yds in one half. It's not too big a data point or too small. I don't disqualify them from being good because they play in the MIAA. But the fact that the quality of play in that conference has been poor for a couple decades also doesn't mean I decide they are good because they almost beat a pre-season top 15 team. They may be a top 10 team and we will find out soon enough. I haven't made any judgements on Albion (or Wabash) but my antenna is definitely up.
It's also still 14 yards for a half. For a team that has averaged over 500 yards per game each of the last two years and looks like they're plenty capable of doing it again. Fourteen yards. This works both ways, right?
Actually no, it doesn't. It is extremely rare to see a team go 14/324 for 2 halves. Dominant defenses don't give up 300 yards in a half to anyone, except maybe to the National Champion in the Stagg but they do throttle good and bad offenses to numbers that appear ridiculous. Albion may win the national title this year and I'll come back and eat crow. Last year Wabash had a dominant defense. The most they gave up was around 200 in a half to St Thomas and TMC, both first halves and then the dominant defense locks in. Albion had about 180 yds each half last year against Wabash. I don't know yet if they do this year but the 2nd half of Albion isn't a great sign. But it could be a sign that their defensive philosophy is changing, it could be some simple fix that Albion found and exploited, or it could have just been some bad halftime oranges, so I'll wait and see.
That's a totally fair standard to hold them, and by association their opponents, to. Because that's the threshold for what makes a good team. Stagg Bowl or trash. No in-betweens.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 08, 2016, 12:57:04 AM
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 07, 2016, 01:34:35 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 07, 2016, 12:46:35 AM
Here's a what if. What if this week's top 10 were a conference, full round robin schedule. Does Mount Union go undefeated? 9 straight weeks against those 9 teams- would they get all 9?
I say yes, and maybe only challenged once or twice in the process.
Here's the other thing. The next best team in this scenario is probably, at best, 7-3 or 6-4.
No doubt. Everybody else playing that same round robin gets chewed up by it. I was just wondering out loud if Mount Union is so far ahead that they could run that 9-game gauntlet undefeated and if other people here thought that they would obviously do it. We need one of the analytics guys to bounce that around and give us a 9-0 probability for Mount Union vs. those teams.
I think what we're really asking is if they can run through the other 4 teams in the top half of the NRFP. After that I just don't see much chance of a close game.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 08, 2016, 09:45:56 AM
Quote from: USee on September 07, 2016, 06:05:13 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 07, 2016, 05:19:56 PM
Quote from: USee on September 07, 2016, 04:02:43 PM
I don't care about the points. I care about 324 yds in a half. That's a lot of yards no matter who it is. And averaging it with the 14 yards in the first half makes it look ok for the game but it's still 324 yds in one half. It's not too big a data point or too small. I don't disqualify them from being good because they play in the MIAA. But the fact that the quality of play in that conference has been poor for a couple decades also doesn't mean I decide they are good because they almost beat a pre-season top 15 team. They may be a top 10 team and we will find out soon enough. I haven't made any judgements on Albion (or Wabash) but my antenna is definitely up.
It's also still 14 yards for a half. For a team that has averaged over 500 yards per game each of the last two years and looks like they're plenty capable of doing it again. Fourteen yards. This works both ways, right?
Actually no, it doesn't. It is extremely rare to see a team go 14/324 for 2 halves. Dominant defenses don't give up 300 yards in a half to anyone, except maybe to the National Champion in the Stagg but they do throttle good and bad offenses to numbers that appear ridiculous. Albion may win the national title this year and I'll come back and eat crow. Last year Wabash had a dominant defense. The most they gave up was around 200 in a half to St Thomas and TMC, both first halves and then the dominant defense locks in. Albion had about 180 yds each half last year against Wabash. I don't know yet if they do this year but the 2nd half of Albion isn't a great sign. But it could be a sign that their defensive philosophy is changing, it could be some simple fix that Albion found and exploited, or it could have just been some bad halftime oranges, so I'll wait and see.
That's a totally fair standard to hold them, and by association their opponents, to. Because that's the threshold for what makes a good team. Stagg Bowl or trash. No in-betweens.
Whatever fits your narrative and makes you feel better Wally. Good for you.
Quote from: USee on September 08, 2016, 11:17:25 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 08, 2016, 09:45:56 AM
Quote from: USee on September 07, 2016, 06:05:13 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 07, 2016, 05:19:56 PM
Quote from: USee on September 07, 2016, 04:02:43 PM
I don't care about the points. I care about 324 yds in a half. That's a lot of yards no matter who it is. And averaging it with the 14 yards in the first half makes it look ok for the game but it's still 324 yds in one half. It's not too big a data point or too small. I don't disqualify them from being good because they play in the MIAA. But the fact that the quality of play in that conference has been poor for a couple decades also doesn't mean I decide they are good because they almost beat a pre-season top 15 team. They may be a top 10 team and we will find out soon enough. I haven't made any judgements on Albion (or Wabash) but my antenna is definitely up.
It's also still 14 yards for a half. For a team that has averaged over 500 yards per game each of the last two years and looks like they're plenty capable of doing it again. Fourteen yards. This works both ways, right?
Actually no, it doesn't. It is extremely rare to see a team go 14/324 for 2 halves. Dominant defenses don't give up 300 yards in a half to anyone, except maybe to the National Champion in the Stagg but they do throttle good and bad offenses to numbers that appear ridiculous. Albion may win the national title this year and I'll come back and eat crow. Last year Wabash had a dominant defense. The most they gave up was around 200 in a half to St Thomas and TMC, both first halves and then the dominant defense locks in. Albion had about 180 yds each half last year against Wabash. I don't know yet if they do this year but the 2nd half of Albion isn't a great sign. But it could be a sign that their defensive philosophy is changing, it could be some simple fix that Albion found and exploited, or it could have just been some bad halftime oranges, so I'll wait and see.
That's a totally fair standard to hold them, and by association their opponents, to. Because that's the threshold for what makes a good team. Stagg Bowl or trash. No in-betweens.
Whatever fits your narrative and makes you feel better Wally. Good for you.
Says the guy who selectively ignores half of an entire game. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 08, 2016, 11:21:14 AM
Quote from: USee on September 08, 2016, 11:17:25 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 08, 2016, 09:45:56 AM
Quote from: USee on September 07, 2016, 06:05:13 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 07, 2016, 05:19:56 PM
Quote from: USee on September 07, 2016, 04:02:43 PM
I don't care about the points. I care about 324 yds in a half. That's a lot of yards no matter who it is. And averaging it with the 14 yards in the first half makes it look ok for the game but it's still 324 yds in one half. It's not too big a data point or too small. I don't disqualify them from being good because they play in the MIAA. But the fact that the quality of play in that conference has been poor for a couple decades also doesn't mean I decide they are good because they almost beat a pre-season top 15 team. They may be a top 10 team and we will find out soon enough. I haven't made any judgements on Albion (or Wabash) but my antenna is definitely up.
It's also still 14 yards for a half. For a team that has averaged over 500 yards per game each of the last two years and looks like they're plenty capable of doing it again. Fourteen yards. This works both ways, right?
Actually no, it doesn't. It is extremely rare to see a team go 14/324 for 2 halves. Dominant defenses don't give up 300 yards in a half to anyone, except maybe to the National Champion in the Stagg but they do throttle good and bad offenses to numbers that appear ridiculous. Albion may win the national title this year and I'll come back and eat crow. Last year Wabash had a dominant defense. The most they gave up was around 200 in a half to St Thomas and TMC, both first halves and then the dominant defense locks in. Albion had about 180 yds each half last year against Wabash. I don't know yet if they do this year but the 2nd half of Albion isn't a great sign. But it could be a sign that their defensive philosophy is changing, it could be some simple fix that Albion found and exploited, or it could have just been some bad halftime oranges, so I'll wait and see.
That's a totally fair standard to hold them, and by association their opponents, to. Because that's the threshold for what makes a good team. Stagg Bowl or trash. No in-betweens.
Whatever fits your narrative and makes you feel better Wally. Good for you.
Says the guy who selectively ignores half of an entire game. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Right. That's what I did. Ignored the data.
Take almost any team, even one on the upper tiers of D3, and make them play with two second stringers and a third stringer as three of their four regular DBs (and probably lower on the depth chart when they go nickle or dime), and see how they do against a pass-wacky team.
Go ahead...
I think if we have the 'Gauntlet' conference, it's probably inevitable that Mt. Union will lose at least once thanks to injuries and fatigue.
Every team has 'breathers' on their schedule, where the team they play is quite below them in talent level and experience. So, subs get to play more, and less snaps for first team players mean less chance of injury for them - be it dings or catastrophic. Even in the best D-3 conferences, there are teams struggling to be competitive.
Playing the Gauntlet, even if Mt. Union is playing the #8 team, I don't think they'll have much of a breather. It's got to wear you out.
Quote from: smedindy on September 08, 2016, 01:43:13 PM
I think if we have the 'Gauntlet' conference, it's probably inevitable that Mt. Union will lose at least once thanks to injuries and fatigue.
Every team has 'breathers' on their schedule, where the team they play is quite below them in talent level and experience. So, subs get to play more, and less snaps for first team players mean less chance of injury for them - be it dings or catastrophic. Even in the best D-3 conferences, there are teams struggling to be competitive.
Playing the Gauntlet, even if Mt. Union is playing the #8 team, I don't think they'll have much of a breather. It's got to wear you out.
Playing devils advocate here but if the top 10 were a conference (this top 10) I see teams 6-10 as being "breather teams" against Mount. Sorry - but I have seen too many 2nd and 3rds playing in the second half against ONU and JCU recently. I don't see Witt or the others being markedly better than ONU or JC. Ok. Let the beating begin!
Quote from: smedindy on September 08, 2016, 01:39:53 PM
Take almost any team, even one on the upper tiers of D3, and make them play with two second stringers and a third stringer as three of their four regular DBs (and probably lower on the depth chart when they go nickle or dime), and see how they do against a pass-wacky team.
Go ahead...
In that case scenario, I predict Mount, UWW, Linfield or St. Thomas would win 55-10. Mainly because their front 6 or 7 will provide enough pressure.
That gauntlet idea is interesting as is Smed's take on attrition.
Mt certainly seems talented enough to win each game, but can they hold up to a season full of strong teams? Who knows.
The other side to that is the benefits that come from playing many strong teams in the season. I'm not suggesting UWW has played a gauntlet regular season, but I do think they've played a strong regular season schedule and a near gauntlet post season prior to facing Mt in the Stagg. Is it possible Mt would be even more dominant if they played a stronger schedule?
Quote from: emma17 on September 08, 2016, 02:58:09 PM
That gauntlet idea is interesting as is Smed's take on attrition.
Mt certainly seems talented enough to win each game, but can they hold up to a season full of strong teams? Who knows.
The other side to that is the benefits that come from playing many strong teams in the season. I'm not suggesting UWW has played a gauntlet regular season, but I do think they've played a strong regular season schedule and a near gauntlet post season prior to facing Mt in the Stagg. Is it possible Mt would be even more dominant if they played a stronger schedule?
I believe that. I believe that's what made UWW stronger than Mount more times than not over the past 10 years. They play in a much tougher conference, and have a tougher road through the playoffs.
(In fact I know this debate has been had before...many times)
^^^ Agreed. It's always concerning to me when the OAC is down. It's always better to get pushed in the regular season or earlier in the playoffs so you can learn what your weaknesses are (and hopefully fix them) before you run into a UWW. By then it may be too late. Unfortunately, I don't know that the OAC will be much of a test in 2016.
The better Mount teams wouldn't have much trouble. Most of the time the Mount JV team is the 2nd best team in the OAC and better than the typical playoff opponent before the regional finals. The Mount depth is crazy and has been since the late 90's.
Hurry up, Saturday. So that we can get to Monday/Tuesday for a new poll and a whole new set of debates! ;D
I find the debates more entertaining than most of the actual games! ;)
(As to the 'Gauntlet' Conference, it might depend on the order of the schedule. UMU might well find some of the lower teams 'breathers' (though not quite like a Wilma), but if they had several consecutive weeks against the top of the Top Ten, they might get beaten down enough for a loss. And I remain convinced that NCC would've won in 2013 under reasonable weather conditions. ;D)
It would be intriguing if we had a European soccer type setup for each region, with advancement and relegation...and then a playoff for the top 2 of each region or so.
NRFP #6 ONU falls at Utica 34-30. Wild last minute of that game. ONU led this game 30-13 in the 4th quarter.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 08, 2016, 11:35:03 PM
Hurry up, Saturday. So that we can get to Monday/Tuesday for a new poll and a whole new set of debates! ;D
I find the debates more entertaining than most of the actual games! ;)
(As to the 'Gauntlet' Conference, it might depend on the order of the schedule. UMU might well find some of the lower teams 'breathers' (though not quite like a Wilma), but if they had several consecutive weeks against the top of the Top Ten, they might get beaten down enough for a loss. And I remain convinced that NCC would've won in 2013 under reasonable weather conditions. ;D)
And I remain convinced it would have been a 2 TD win by Mount if the field was dry.
Just submitted my ballot. Man, those last few spots were tough to determine this week. Not exactly filet mignon down there.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 11, 2016, 11:09:32 AM
Just submitted my ballot. Man, those last few spots were tough to determine this week. Not exactly filet mignon down there.
I feel your pain. My #9 and #10 teams were schools I don't ever recall having on my ballot before!
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 12, 2016, 07:42:45 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 11, 2016, 11:09:32 AM
Just submitted my ballot. Man, those last few spots were tough to determine this week. Not exactly filet mignon down there.
I feel your pain. My #9 and #10 teams were schools I don't ever recall having on my ballot before!
You're not the only one. With one ballot to go, we've got about 1/3 of the region represented in this week's poll.
YOU get a vote! And YOU get a vote!! Everybody gets a vote!! Week 2 NRFP!!
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FGwvrm6F.png&hash=89289c25de6058baeab391b3c03095de5e883f2d)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
Well, the ORV situation should get straightened out Saturday! Albion is at Lakeland, and Benedictine is at Adrian. Also: BW @ JCU and ONU @ Heidi!
I have little faith that IWU can upset NCC (our top QB is on the DL :(), but just hope they can keep it respectable enough to actually gain votes in defeat rather than drop out completely.
BTW, I'm second column from the right this week. With Albion getting blown out by UWSP, I kinda wanted to drop Wabash another slot, but Franklin lost worse than I expected, JCU was idle, and ONU lost after leading a probably not very good Utica team by 17 with 6.5 minutes left in the game - who could I move up to 4th?! ;)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 13, 2016, 07:55:48 PM
Well, the ORV situation should get straightened out Saturday! Albion is at Lakeland, and Benedictine is at Adrian. Also: BW @ JCU and ONU @ Heidi!
If it doesn't, it'll have plenty of chances to in October as well: Adrian and Albion open conference play against each other on the 1st, and Lakeland meets the Bulldogs and then Benedictine the two weeks after that (after having hosted Platteville in between).
I'm the column that has NCC #2. I ended up talking myself into Adrian for the 10th spot. I felt that going on the road to Pacific and winning is pretty solid. Yes, Pacific is 0-2, but I think Dubuque is pretty good as well.
I was trying to get there with ONU, but that ending left such a bad taste in my mouth. You just cannot blow that game.
I've been putting the curse on some team every week so far this year. First it was RHIT- hey, this is the year of the elephant! Loss. Then it was Albion- hey, they almost beat Wabash! 50-13. So, sorry Carthage fans, it's your turn. I was able to watch a bit of their game in Arden Hills on Saturday and came away very impressed. So impressed that I jumped them all the way up to #7. That also means they are probably about to lose by 40.
Next week, I'll use this power for good and put Witt at #2.
No movement in my top 6 (UMU, Wheaton, Wabash, Franklin, NCC, DPU). Kept my promise about not moving Franklin. Other than Franklin lost, I don't even know what the score of that game was. It's not important. Beyond the top 6, Carthage is in, then Lakeland, Adrian, and Witt. The last couple of spots here were really tough. I can't get behind JCU or ONU (or B-W or Heidelberg for that matter) at the moment. Benedictine is interesting, but I have to wonder what their score vs. Wheaton would have looked like if Peltz takes 60 snaps (my hunch- Wheaton scores much more than 27 or whatever it was). Also moved IWU out this week- I don't have a good feel for what that result against NWU means until I see NWU get some more D3 results in their portfolio, but no Jack Warner is a big enough deal that an adjustment was necessary. Certainly IWU can get back in my 10 on merit this weekend.
In m ballot (3rd from right) I had some movement in my top ten but 9 of the 10 remained the same. I moved Wheaton up to 2 and bumped NCC to 3 because Wheaton has settled most of my questions about their defense and WR positions. I still think they may not have receivers that can get separation from the best DB's and the size of their DB's will hurt them against bigger WR. But I put them back to 2 this week. I had ONU at 4 and with the loss I moved them to 6. I avoided a knee jerk reaction to dropping them more but I am watching this closely. I wanted to drop Wabash based on the Albion result but 1-didn't want to over react their either and 2-Ultimately I don't see another team better at #4. Although I think Wabash will have some growing pains early here as they adjust to new coaches it is likely just a blip on the radar and they will prevail in the NCAC IMO. I avoided moving Franklin into my top 10 last week and certainly wasn't going to do it after their loss but I suspect they will gravitate up as they move forward. I wanted to put Benedictine in my top 10 and if they beat Adrian this week they likely will be. I am eager to see the OAC play another week and I will sort out that mess that is the bottom of my bracket. With Depauw's win I corrected my ballot putting them back ahead of Witt also. Carthage was the team that moved in for me (also at 7). I think their win at Bethel is as good or better than the Wabash win @Albion in terms of great in(tra) regional results. They are no joke and I expect a good game in Kenosha this Saturday.
Quote from: USee on September 14, 2016, 02:47:42 PM
I think their win at Bethel is as good or better than the Wabash win @Albion in terms of great in(tra) regional results. They are no joke and I expect a good game in Kenosha this Saturday.
Is it? Is this 2012? Bethel is not
that Bethel at the moment. They haven't been for a couple of years now.
Should be a fun CCIW opener. I guess my question is will Swider elect to keep it interesting by anchoring his best player to the sideline, or is he going to let his team be a quarterfinal-or-better caliber squad? Let the mystery continue! I may start fluctuating Wheaton between 2 and 5 depending on who Swider starts at QB because I don't think those are interchangeable parts.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 14, 2016, 04:02:58 PM
Quote from: USee on September 14, 2016, 02:47:42 PM
I think their win at Bethel is as good or better than the Wabash win @Albion in terms of great in(tra) regional results. They are no joke and I expect a good game in Kenosha this Saturday.
Is it? Is this 2012? Bethel is not that Bethel at the moment. They haven't been for a couple of years now.
Should be a fun CCIW opener. I guess my question is will Swider elect to keep it interesting by anchoring his best player to the sideline, or is he going to let his team be a quarterfinal-or-better caliber squad? Let the mystery continue! I may start fluctuating Wheaton between 2 and 5 depending on who Swider starts at QB because I don't think those are interchangeable parts.
I don't think 2012 Bethel is in the equation. The question I would pose is a win @Bethel (0-2) better than a win @Albion (0-2). Carthage was ranked 90th in Kickoff (probably too low) and Bethel was ranked 26th (too high). Albion was ranked 68th and Wabash 14th. Kickoff isn't the rule of law but it's a starting point. Bethel doesn't have to be 2012 good for this to be as good a win for Carthage as a win @Albion. They only have to be better than Albion and that remains to be seen.
As far as the Wheaton QB question, we have two that have led their teams to undefeated seasons and NCAA playoffs. Bowers does some things that you can't teach as does Peltz. If I were coaching on that staff I would find a way to get them both on the field at the same time. That's what Josiah Sears tried to do last year at the end of the season before Peltz got hurt.
I just think it's interesting that so many teams in the Top 10 were missing on at least one ballot. Parity? Or something else?
Quote from: USee on September 14, 2016, 05:49:08 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 14, 2016, 04:02:58 PM
Quote from: USee on September 14, 2016, 02:47:42 PM
I think their win at Bethel is as good or better than the Wabash win @Albion in terms of great in(tra) regional results. They are no joke and I expect a good game in Kenosha this Saturday.
Is it? Is this 2012? Bethel is not that Bethel at the moment. They haven't been for a couple of years now.
Should be a fun CCIW opener. I guess my question is will Swider elect to keep it interesting by anchoring his best player to the sideline, or is he going to let his team be a quarterfinal-or-better caliber squad? Let the mystery continue! I may start fluctuating Wheaton between 2 and 5 depending on who Swider starts at QB because I don't think those are interchangeable parts.
I don't think 2012 Bethel is in the equation. The question I would pose is a win @Bethel (0-2) better than a win @Albion (0-2). Carthage was ranked 90th in Kickoff (probably too low) and Bethel was ranked 26th (too high). Albion was ranked 68th and Wabash 14th. Kickoff isn't the rule of law but it's a starting point. Bethel doesn't have to be 2012 good for this to be as good a win for Carthage as a win @Albion. They only have to be better than Albion and that remains to be seen.
Similar. I think the optics make Carthage over Bethel looks "better" because of the significant difference in expectations, but I don't think it's better. Bethel is a 6-win team this year. Maybe 5.
Quote from: USee on September 14, 2016, 05:49:08 PM
As far as the Wheaton QB question, we have two that have led their teams to undefeated seasons and NCAA playoffs. Bowers does some things that you can't teach as does Peltz. If I were coaching on that staff I would find a way to get them both on the field at the same time. That's what Josiah Sears tried to do last year at the end of the season before Peltz got hurt.
The sticky part about quarterback is that there can be only one at a time. And even though Wheaton has two very good quarterbacks, one is better. Maybe i'm wrong about which one is better, but I think you have to play the best one. Bowers has that undefeated season on his resume, but Wheaton's deal isn't about winning 10 games or winning the CCIW. They've cleared that hurdle. It's about winning the games after that. Peltz, I think, gives a Wheaton a puncher's chance in those games that I'm talking about. Bowers much less so.
Quote from: smedindy on September 14, 2016, 07:15:14 PM
I just think it's interesting that so many teams in the Top 10 were missing on at least one ballot. Parity? Or something else?
I think its a lack of data. 11 of the 17 teams getting votes have played only one game. North Central, IWU, Franklin have played non D3 opponents up to now and several other teams have either new coaches or graduate a ton of players so we don't know that much about them. I would think over the next couple weeks we settle into about 10-11 teams that make up the top 10 and a majority are on everyone's ballot is some way.
Quote from: USee on September 15, 2016, 11:31:11 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 14, 2016, 07:15:14 PM
I just think it's interesting that so many teams in the Top 10 were missing on at least one ballot. Parity? Or something else?
I think its a lack of data. 11 of the 17 teams getting votes have played only one game. North Central, IWU, Franklin have played non D3 opponents up to now and several other teams have either new coaches or graduate a ton of players so we don't know that much about them. I would think over the next couple weeks we settle into about 10-11 teams that make up the top 10 and a majority are on everyone's ballot is some way.
I certainly respect your logic re: Franklin. Other than Mount they are the only other near "sure thing" to win out the rest of the season. 9-0 against D3 and 8-0 in the region will garner more than outside the top 10. I think that 4-5 slot is more in line with reality. Could go higher as many of these teams still have to play each other. Going to be a fun season. Depauw entering the picture this year may change the pecking order. My take is they are more stout than Albion. NCAC has some good games lined up.
Quote from: GRIZ_BACKER on September 16, 2016, 08:43:25 AM
Quote from: USee on September 15, 2016, 11:31:11 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 14, 2016, 07:15:14 PM
I just think it's interesting that so many teams in the Top 10 were missing on at least one ballot. Parity? Or something else?
I think its a lack of data. 11 of the 17 teams getting votes have played only one game. North Central, IWU, Franklin have played non D3 opponents up to now and several other teams have either new coaches or graduate a ton of players so we don't know that much about them. I would think over the next couple weeks we settle into about 10-11 teams that make up the top 10 and a majority are on everyone's ballot is some way.
I certainly respect your logic re: Franklin. Other than Mount they are the only other near "sure thing" to win out the rest of the season. 9-0 against D3 and 8-0 in the region will garner more than outside the top 10. I think that 4-5 slot is more in line with reality. Could go higher as many of these teams still have to play each other. Going to be a fun season. Depauw entering the picture this year may change the pecking order. My take is they are more stout than Albion. NCAC has some good games lined up.
DePauw is a better side than Albion. I don't think that's really disputable.
wally, I'm eager to see the NRFP! Time to start pistol-whipping the voters! ;D
While I had 4-5 teams JUST outside the Top 10, I didn't find this week's vote very hard. (Though I may have lost my 'Titan Nation' card - they're gone. :()
Still a couple to go, Mr. Y. Should have everything in tomorrow. Teaser- we won't have 17 teams get votes this week. :)
Another teaser--I only voted for 10
Quote from: USee on September 19, 2016, 09:35:22 PM
Another teaser--I only voted for 10
What an amazing coincidence - so did I! ;D
I guess since we're all doing teasers... I may have gone with Mount Union at #1 :o
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 19, 2016, 10:26:19 PM
I guess since we're all doing teasers... I may have gone with Mount Union at #1 :o
You heathen - I had Franklin as #1! ;D
Sorry for holding everyone up. I finally got my ballot in.
Quote from: Li'l Giant on September 20, 2016, 12:01:52 AM
Sorry for holding everyone up. I finally got my ballot in.
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/kKJdY1Q820U/maxresdefault.jpg)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 19, 2016, 11:06:42 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 19, 2016, 10:26:19 PM
I guess since we're all doing teasers... I may have gone with Mount Union at #1 :o
You heathen - I had Franklin as #1! ;D
That "struggle" with the Defiance Yellowjackets carried more weight than I thought. :)
Modify message
Week 3 NRFP- Things have calmed down a bit here after last weekend's key games in the CCIW and OAC.
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FEjoK8n5.png&hash=ecdd44aa859cd58c3ccf77ce1b3b1981a57d582c)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
Three (mild) surprises to me:
Someone still voted for IWU - and it wasn't me! (And that that same voter still had Wheaton above NCC.)
The collapse of support for JCU. It may not have been an impressive win over BW, but it WAS a win. ;)
That Olivet received ZERO votes (I'd have them #11). Yes, they were destroyed AT St. John Fisher, but that just might be a top 15 team.
Lakeland and Benedictine are better than anyone in the MIAA, I believe.
Beating BW gave me a sense JCU just let the Oshkosh game get away from them. I think an 8-2 second place OAC team probably will sit out this year.
Wally mixed up the rankings this time...
I am quite surprised by Franklin at 2 with a non competitive loss (albeit to Butler). I don't have a problem with them anywhere from 4-10 but higher than that seems steep.
I lost all faith in the OAC below Mount. I kept JCU in at the bottom as glimmer of promise. Looking forward to Witt/Wabash to help sort the NCAC.
I'm the 2 for Franklin. TMC validated Franklin in a major, major way. The Butler game doesn't register at all. That's not a level playing field and I'm not dinging Franklin for that. I'm not sure who, aside from Mount Union, does any better in that game. Teams that I have below Franklin have a chance to jump Franklin as they play major games against ranked teams in their leagues while Franklin mows through the HCAC, but as of today, Franklin has done more with one game than anybody else in the region has done with three.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 21, 2016, 12:25:03 AM
I'm the 2 for Franklin. TMC validated Franklin in a major, major way. The Butler game doesn't register at all. That's not a level playing field and I'm not dinging Franklin for that. I'm not sure who, aside from Mount Union, does any better in that game. Teams that I have below Franklin have a chance to jump Franklin as they play major games against ranked teams in their leagues while Franklin mows through the HCAC, but as of today, Franklin has done more with one game than anybody else in the region has done with three.
Well, according the opinion of 8 other voters on this poll Wheaton, NCC and Wabash (7 other voters) would do better. And another large group of informed voters thing there are 16 other teams that would do as well or better in that game. But we all get to have our opinion.
Quote from: USee on September 21, 2016, 12:42:30 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 21, 2016, 12:25:03 AM
I'm the 2 for Franklin. TMC validated Franklin in a major, major way. The Butler game doesn't register at all. That's not a level playing field and I'm not dinging Franklin for that. I'm not sure who, aside from Mount Union, does any better in that game. Teams that I have below Franklin have a chance to jump Franklin as they play major games against ranked teams in their leagues while Franklin mows through the HCAC, but as of today, Franklin has done more with one game than anybody else in the region has done with three.
Well, according the opinion of 8 other voters on this poll Wheaton, NCC and Wabash (7 other voters) would do better. And another large group of informed voters thing there are 16 other teams that would do as well or better in that game. But we all get to have our opinion.
Everybody is an expert on Butler Bulldog football now and how their level of play correlates to D-III? Or is Franklin just not one of the teams that voters supply with bottomless amounts of benefit of the doubt capital? Franklin beat TMC who totally dismantled W&J- and all of these things happened in a 14 day window. I've seen Wheaton play patty cake with two teams that they should have beaten easily if Wheaton is the thing that I thought they were. We're getting far enough into this now that it's probably ok to judge teams based on what they're actually doing and not on what our preseason notions about them were.
Quote from: USee on September 21, 2016, 12:02:11 AM
I am quite surprised by Franklin at 2 with a non competitive loss (albeit to Butler). I don't have a problem with them anywhere from 4-10 but higher than that seems steep.
I lost all faith in the OAC below Mount. I kept JCU in at the bottom as glimmer of promise. Looking forward to Witt/Wabash to help sort the NCAC.
You're 100% correct. Outside of Mount the OAC is nothing this year. There have been years where the 2nd and 3rd place teams were top 20 quality, but 2016 is not one of those years.
Mount should sleep walk thru the regular season which looks even worse when this is one of the least experienced Mount team in decades. Good Lord, they're rotating 2 freshmen QB's trying to figure out who should be the guy.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 21, 2016, 09:56:48 AM
Quote from: USee on September 21, 2016, 12:42:30 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 21, 2016, 12:25:03 AM
I'm the 2 for Franklin. TMC validated Franklin in a major, major way. The Butler game doesn't register at all. That's not a level playing field and I'm not dinging Franklin for that. I'm not sure who, aside from Mount Union, does any better in that game. Teams that I have below Franklin have a chance to jump Franklin as they play major games against ranked teams in their leagues while Franklin mows through the HCAC, but as of today, Franklin has done more with one game than anybody else in the region has done with three.
Well, according the opinion of 8 other voters on this poll Wheaton, NCC and Wabash (7 other voters) would do better. And another large group of informed voters thing there are 16 other teams that would do as well or better in that game. But we all get to have our opinion.
Everybody is an expert on Butler Bulldog football now and how their level of play correlates to D-III? Or is Franklin just not one of the teams that voters supply with bottomless amounts of benefit of the doubt capital? Franklin beat TMC who totally dismantled W&J- and all of these things happened in a 14 day window. I've seen Wheaton play patty cake with two teams that they should have beaten easily if Wheaton is the thing that I thought they were. We're getting far enough into this now that it's probably ok to judge teams based on what they're actually doing and not on what our preseason notions about them were.
I have attended all the Griz vs Butler games and I can assure except for the Purple Power type teams, most D3 would get run. Butler while non-scholarship still plays a national schedule and recruits good football players. Glad Franklin is no longer scheduling. Next year the GRIZ start on the road at Thomas More and then play Bendictine (solid team in its own right). The GRIZ are definitely a top 4/5 team in the North. We will see how Wabash fares with Witt this week. My guess is they will win.
The thing that I don't get is that two people have both Carthage and Benedictine on their ballots, yet have Wheaton -- which beat both the Red Men and the Eagles -- ranked #3, below North Central.
Quote from: Gregory Sager on September 21, 2016, 11:31:07 PM
The thing that I don't get is that two people have both Carthage and Benedictine on their ballots, yet have Wheaton -- which beat both the Red Men and the Eagles -- ranked #3, below North Central.
I'm one of those two. I had Wheaton above NCC until this week, but thought NCC's demolition job in Bloomington more impressive than Wheaton's 5 point win in Kenosha. (Until this week I also had IWU above Carthage, though that is no longer true.)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 21, 2016, 11:49:37 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on September 21, 2016, 11:31:07 PM
The thing that I don't get is that two people have both Carthage and Benedictine on their ballots, yet have Wheaton -- which beat both the Red Men and the Eagles -- ranked #3, below North Central.
I'm one of those two. I had Wheaton above NCC until this week, but thought NCC's demolition job in Bloomington more impressive than Wheaton's 5 point win in Kenosha. (Until this week I also had IWU above Carthage, though that is no longer true.)
Well I was very tempted to drop Wheaton down a spot on my ballot. While they shut down BU, they did not exactly get an easy win. IMO I think Carthage is showing that they are a much better team than in past years. Will be interesting when North Central and Wheaton play each other how it shakes out.
On another note, it's nice seeing the NACC having two quality teams at the top of the league this year (CUW isn't far behind either).
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 13, 2016, 06:46:16 PM
YOU get a vote! And YOU get a vote!! Everybody gets a vote!! Week 2 NRFP!!
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FGwvrm6F.png&hash=89289c25de6058baeab391b3c03095de5e883f2d)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
Wally, any idea why I can not see the fan poll on the post? I am technology challenged, but do have an up to date computer.
Are you not getting the image at all or is it just too small to read? If it's too small to read, click on the picture and it should blow up.
I was interested to see how people would rank Carthage. I'm the one who had them at 6. I watched that game and basically my thinking was if I think Wheaton is the 3rd best team then Carthage must be pretty darn good because they played the Thunder tough. I was impressed with Carthage.
Also, the OAC is a hot mess this year. Outside of Mount losing I don't think much of anything else would shock me. I definitely raised an eyebrow at Berg's dismantling of ONU. I voted them 9 this week. They have a good offense. As always the question is can they stop anyone.
Quote from: wesleydad on September 22, 2016, 09:32:19 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 13, 2016, 06:46:16 PM
YOU get a vote! And YOU get a vote!! Everybody gets a vote!! Week 2 NRFP!!
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FGwvrm6F.png&hash=89289c25de6058baeab391b3c03095de5e883f2d)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
Wally, any idea why I can not see the fan poll on the post? I am technology challenged, but do have an up to date computer.
Wally, all I am seeing is what is in the quote, no image at all.
Quote from: wesleydad on September 22, 2016, 12:02:51 PM
Quote from: wesleydad on September 22, 2016, 09:32:19 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 13, 2016, 06:46:16 PM
YOU get a vote! And YOU get a vote!! Everybody gets a vote!! Week 2 NRFP!!
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FGwvrm6F.png&hash=89289c25de6058baeab391b3c03095de5e883f2d)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
Wally, any idea why I can not see the fan poll on the post? I am technology challenged, but do have an up to date computer.
Wally, all I am seeing is what is in the quote, no image at all.
Alright, that's weird because I see the image in your quote. Probably a browser setting somewhere that's blocking the image.
Try the direct link:
http://i.imgur.com/Gwvrm6F.png
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 22, 2016, 12:06:59 PM
Quote from: wesleydad on September 22, 2016, 12:02:51 PM
Quote from: wesleydad on September 22, 2016, 09:32:19 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 13, 2016, 06:46:16 PM
YOU get a vote! And YOU get a vote!! Everybody gets a vote!! Week 2 NRFP!!
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FGwvrm6F.png&hash=89289c25de6058baeab391b3c03095de5e883f2d)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
Wally, any idea why I can not see the fan poll on the post? I am technology challenged, but do have an up to date computer.
Wally, all I am seeing is what is in the quote, no image at all.
Alright, that's weird because I see the image in your quote. Probably a browser setting somewhere that's blocking the image.
Try the direct link:
http://i.imgur.com/Gwvrm6F.png
Now that I think about it I am at school and it blocks everything not education related. I will check it at home. Always like to see what is up in the north after Mount.
Quote from: wesleydad on September 22, 2016, 02:38:47 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 22, 2016, 12:06:59 PM
Quote from: wesleydad on September 22, 2016, 12:02:51 PM
Quote from: wesleydad on September 22, 2016, 09:32:19 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 13, 2016, 06:46:16 PM
YOU get a vote! And YOU get a vote!! Everybody gets a vote!! Week 2 NRFP!!
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FGwvrm6F.png&hash=89289c25de6058baeab391b3c03095de5e883f2d)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
Wally, any idea why I can not see the fan poll on the post? I am technology challenged, but do have an up to date computer.
Wally, all I am seeing is what is in the quote, no image at all.
Alright, that's weird because I see the image in your quote. Probably a browser setting somewhere that's blocking the image.
Try the direct link:
http://i.imgur.com/Gwvrm6F.png
Now that I think about it I am at school and it blocks everything not education related. I will check it at home. Always like to see what is up in the north after Mount.
Wesley Dad my guess is that the photo service that Wally is using, also has people that post questionable content ;) I cannot imagine any School allowing access to it.
Quote from: Captain_Joe08 on September 22, 2016, 12:58:06 AM
Well I was very tempted to drop Wheaton down a spot on my ballot. While they shut down BU, they did not exactly get an easy win. IMO I think Carthage is showing that they are a much better team than in past years. Will be interesting when North Central and Wheaton play each other how it shakes out.
On another note, it's nice seeing the NACC having two quality teams at the top of the league this year (CUW isn't far behind either).
NACC is definitely getting better. The top two in the NACC beating the top two teams in the MIAA last weekend was a big deal I think. Really huge opportunity for Lakeland this weekend.
Sorry folks, I have been out of reach most of the week this week so no time to respond. I have many thoughts and will elaborate over the coming days but I think:
Witt v Wabash is going to be very intersting. I think it's closer than many think
Carthage is going to win 8-9 games and be a factor in Pool C
Benedictine has a good chance to go 9-1 if they stay healthy
I am waffling between Wheaton and NCC at 2/3. I have switched this 3x.
Wheaton has a great defense, which I thought would be their weakness coming into the season. They have been dominant in every game
The OAC gives us zero read on MUC and JCU is perilously close to rendering the conference irrelevant.
Lakeland v UWSP is a great crossover game as Wally has said
Franklin, if they are #2 in the region must also be top 10 in the nation, which based on what we know now is generous
I am going to watch the entire St Thomas @ St Johns game today...very interested in this one. Split screen with Witt v Wabash actually
Have a fun weekend!
Not a good half for me or anyone else who voted for Berg. 21-0 JCU and Berg has 53 yds of offense at half.
Quote from: USee on September 24, 2016, 11:04:20 AM
Sorry folks, I have been out of reach most of the week this week so no time to respond. I have many thoughts and will elaborate over the coming days but I think:
Witt v Wabash is going to be very intersting. I think it's closer than many think
Carthage is going to win 8-9 games and be a factor in Pool C
Benedictine has a good chance to go 9-1 if they stay healthy
I am waffling between Wheaton and NCC at 2/3. I have switched this 3x.
Wheaton has a great defense, which I thought would be their weakness coming into the season. They have been dominant in every game
The OAC gives us zero read on MUC and JCU is perilously close to rendering the conference irrelevant.
Lakeland v UWSP is a great crossover game as Wally has said
Franklin, if they are #2 in the region must also be top 10 in the nation, which based on what we know now is generous
I am going to watch the entire St Thomas @ St Johns game today...very interested in this one. Split screen with Witt v Wabash actually
Have a fun weekend!
If that was a great crossover game, I'd hate to see what a 'slaughter' was like! :o
Lakeland was never high on my NRFP watch list, but UWP DID move up a spot on my national ballot.
A great crossover game doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the result. It was an opportunity to collect a data point of two teams from two different leagues that don't often play each other.
Same ten teams on my ballot this week, but Witt made a huge jump from 8 to 4. If Wheaton keeps sputtering again this week (since my Titans are their opponent, I'm hoping! ;D), they have a good shot at #3.
Shufflin' shufflin' shufflin'.
Weak results from a couple and strong results from others caused a shuffle from 2 through 9 and a new #10.
Some interesting ballots this week. NRFP Week 4:
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F3bvfiJC.png&hash=e7eb0a082bd88765c2317999c3e83f010c7a07f8)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
Hey guys, I've been following the discussion in here closely. Would it be possible for someone to post the results of the ballots each week? Thanks in advance everyone.
LOL! Thanks Wally, good timing
thunderdog, I'll post the ballot up each week as the balloting completes. Based on schedule patterns through one month of the season, it looks like you can count on it Tuesday evenings. :)
We seem to be reasonably on the same page, except for DePauw - anywhere from 3rd to off the ballot! Probably not surprising, since they are 3-0, but against opponents who are cumulatively 3-8. We MAY learn something this week when they battle 3-1 Denison; we'll definitely learn more the next Saturday when they face Witt.
BTW, wally has me back in the first column this week. (We should set up a new contest: guess which voter is which column! ;D)
I think Mr. Y is time traveling. I'm sure that the Eastern Michigan Eagles sitting at 3-1 has a lot of people confused up there, but Denison is just 3-0 so far and DePauw is playing Kenyon this week. Denison/DePauw will happen a little further down the road. :)
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 27, 2016, 08:45:54 PM
I think Mr. Y is time traveling. I'm sure that the Eastern Michigan Eagles sitting at 3-1 has a lot of people confused up there, but Denison is just 3-0 so far and DePauw is playing Kenyon this week. Denison/DePauw will happen a little further down the road. :)
OOPS! Yes, 3-1 Kenyon. :-[
A 3-1 record for EMU does tend to discombobulate one! :o
I'm the 3rd column from the left, or more easily, the lone voter for IWU.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 27, 2016, 08:40:48 PM
We seem to be reasonably on the same page, except for DePauw - anywhere from 3rd to off the ballot!
SOMEBODY isn't invited to my Monon Bell party.
Quote from: Li'l Giant on September 27, 2016, 11:13:53 PM
I'm the 3rd column from the left, or more easily, the lone voter for IWU.
I did really wonder who the lone voter for IWU was, since I'm the lone Green Blood guy! ;D (I seriously considered Wabash before deciding to attend IWU. Were you ever a prospect for IWU?)
I really hope they can do enough against Wheaton on Saturday that I can (re)join you! Since the Thunder can't seem to dominate ANYONE, it may take an actual upset win, unless someone else falls out of the top ten (IWU has, by default, moved up to my #11 slot).
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 28, 2016, 12:22:25 AM
I really hope they can do enough against Wheaton on Saturday that I can (re)join you! Since the Thunder can't seem to dominate ANYONE, it may take an actual upset win, unless someone else falls out of the top ten (IWU has, by default, moved up to my #11 slot).
Yeah I've hemmed and hawed between them and Benedictine. And I guess we'll see what they do against Wheaton.
And no, I was not a prospect for IWU though I do remember hearing about y'all a lot when I was at Wabash because y'all won a natty in hoops.
I don't know who left DePauw off this week but it wasn't me as they climbed on for the first time this season at #10. Carthage is my #11.
I'd keep an eye on Bluffton because this might be the year they finally break through the 6-4 barrier and be a potential thorn in the north at large discussion as a weak 9-1 team (at RHIT Oct 29 should be an excellent game)
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 28, 2016, 11:44:27 AM
I don't know who left DePauw off this week but it wasn't me as they climbed on for the first time this season at #10. Carthage is my #11.
I'd keep an eye on Bluffton because this might be the year they finally break through the 6-4 barrier and be a potential thorn in the north at large discussion as a weak 9-1 team (at RHIT Oct 29 should be an excellent game)
FC hopefully will do the dirty work for the Beavers the week before.
I was the column on the far right. I was also the culprit for the tardiness of the poll this week. My apologies.
My Poll this week and some of the data I look at to back it up including any categories ranked in the Top 25 national statistics, opponents record, wins vs other notable opponents,etc:
1. Mt Union-opponents are 2-7, 50 ppg giving up 5.6. ranked in top 10 in country in many different statistical categories. Based on competition we don't know if we have 2015 UMU or 2014 UMU. Either would put them a #1 in the region.
2. NCC (2-0)- opponents are 6-7, 37 ppg and giving up 14. Ranked in top 25 nationally in sacks-8th, turnover margin-2nd, red zone defense-13th, pass effeciency-16th. Best win is @IWU. Don't really know yet what we have with this team since their early NAIA opponents are difficult to judge.
3. Wheaton (4-0)-opponents are 9-5, 29 ppg giving up 8 8. Ranked in top 25 in total defense-12th, sacks-14th, TFL-11th, scoring D-14th, rush D-9th, PR-14th. 2 wins over region top 10 teams. v Benedictine and @Carthage. Dominant and consistent defense against teams that are scoring vs everybody else and hasn't lost a regular season game in almost 3 years. In a rut offensively but not because of talent (other than one of the better RB's in the country hasn't played)--young coaching.
4. Witt (3-0)- opponents are 5-4, 30 ppg giving up 7 ppg. rush D-22th, scoring D-8th, 3rd down D-23rd, TOP-24. One big win v Wabash. To the extent it's possible Witt has been under the radar. With a signature win over it's conference rival all eye will be on these guys the rest of the way.
5. Carthage (3-1) opponents are 4-7, 33 ppg giving up 22 ppg. Rush D-17th, 3rd down D-23. Best win is @Bethel and v Augie. Carthage can run the ball and stop the run. That's a recipe for beating a lot of teams. Their aggressive style makes teams uncomfortable. Style of play is very similar to Wabash in my view. They will have to continue to improve to keep this spot for me (their QB went down last week--which could be good or bad)
6. Franklin (3-1) opponents are 9-5, 36 ppg giving up 36. passing Off-8th, 1st downs-19th. Best win is v TMC and v Bluffton. Loss v D1AA Butler. Franklin has a good win over a top 25 team but the thing that keeps them down for me is being ranked 213th out of 244 teams on defense.
7. Depauw (3-0) opponents are 3-8, 48 ppg vs 18 ppg. Total Off-13th, scoring Off-12th, Rush D-6th, sacks-3. No good wins. Depauw has been impressive vs bad opponents. They are 231st out of 244 teams in passing yds allowed. If they get a win vs Witt in a couple weeks they will move up significantly.
8. Wabash (2-1) opponents are 3-7, 38 ppg v 22 ppg. Total Def-16, Rush Off-14, 3rd dwn def-23, TFL-4th. @Albion is best win. Wabash is 1 play away from being 1-2 and seems to be adjusting to new coaches and their styles. The defense is still very good but they need more from their passing game to balance their run game. They can run the ball and stop the run, similar to Carthage. Obviously their remaining test is Monon.
9. JCU (2-1) opponents are 5-4, 24 ppg v 19 ppg. TOP-21st. Best win v Baldwin Wallace. Not sure what to make of JCU but they appear to be the "Best of the rest" in the OAC.
10. Benedictine (2-1) opponents are 6-4, 25 ppg v 23 ppg. Pass off-21st, red zone defense -21st, fumbles recovered-19th. Best win v SNU and Adrian. Benedictine has a clear path to 9-1 now with only a home game v Lakeland standing in their way. Depending on how well Adrian, SNU and Wheaton end up there is an outside shot they could get a home game in the playoffs. Have to stay healthy as their lineup is thin.
IWU, Olivet, Bluffton, Denison, Lakeland: none of these have any signifcant wins yet nor do any of these rank in the Top 25 statistically in any meaningful categories.
Quote from: USee on September 28, 2016, 01:38:45 PM
IWU, Olivet, Bluffton, Denison, Lakeland: none of these have any signifcant wins yet nor do any of these rank in the Top 25 statistically in any meaningful categories.
I get that probably nobody is going to take Denison very seriously until they beat Wabash/Witt, but Denison does in fact rank very highly in many significant categories (http://stats.ncaa.org/team/182.0/12424), both offense and defense. I like the Big Red a lot and I'm behind their vote this week.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 28, 2016, 01:47:06 PM
Quote from: USee on September 28, 2016, 01:38:45 PM
IWU, Olivet, Bluffton, Denison, Lakeland: none of these have any signifcant wins yet nor do any of these rank in the Top 25 statistically in any meaningful categories.
I get that probably nobody is going to take Denison very seriously until they beat Wabash/Witt, but Denison does in fact rank very highly in many significant categories (http://stats.ncaa.org/team/182.0/12424), both offense and defense. I like the Big Red a lot and I'm behind their vote this week.
My apologies, I fat-fingered the Denison stat page and was looking at the wrong team. Wally is right Denison ranks in the Top 25 in the following: 3rd Down Conversion-4th, 3rd Down Defense-2nd, completion %-4th, Sacks-2nd, Turnovers lost-5th
Quote from: USee on September 28, 2016, 01:38:45 PM
My Poll this week and some of the data I look at to back it up including any categories ranked in the Top 25 national statistics, opponents record, wins vs other notable opponents,etc:
1. Mt Union-opponents are 2-7, 50 ppg giving up 5.6. ranked in top 10 in country in many different statistical categories. Based on competition we don't know if we have 2015 UMU or 2014 UMU. Either would put them a #1 in the region.
2. NCC (2-0)- opponents are 6-7, 37 ppg and giving up 14. Ranked in top 25 nationally in sacks-8th, turnover margin-2nd, red zone defense-13th, pass effeciency-16th. Best win is @IWU. Don't really know yet what we have with this team since their early NAIA opponents are difficult to judge.
3. Wheaton (4-0)-opponents are 9-5, 29 ppg giving up 8 8. Ranked in top 25 in total defense-12th, sacks-14th, TFL-11th, scoring D-14th, rush D-9th, PR-14th. 2 wins over region top 10 teams. v Benedictine and @Carthage. Dominant and consistent defense against teams that are scoring vs everybody else and hasn't lost a regular season game in almost 3 years. In a rut offensively but not because of talent (other than one of the better RB's in the country hasn't played)--young coaching.
4. Witt (3-0)- opponents are 5-4, 30 ppg giving up 7 ppg. rush D-22th, scoring D-8th, 3rd down D-23rd, TOP-24. One big win v Wabash. To the extent it's possible Witt has been under the radar. With a signature win over it's conference rival all eye will be on these guys the rest of the way.
5. Carthage (3-1) opponents are 4-7, 33 ppg giving up 22 ppg. Rush D-17th, 3rd down D-23. Best win is @Bethel and v Augie. Carthage can run the ball and stop the run. That's a recipe for beating a lot of teams. Their aggressive style makes teams uncomfortable. Style of play is very similar to Wabash in my view. They will have to continue to improve to keep this spot for me (their QB went down last week--which could be good or bad)
6. Franklin (3-1) opponents are 9-5, 36 ppg giving up 36. passing Off-8th, 1st downs-19th. Best win is v TMC and v Bluffton. Loss v D1AA Butler. Franklin has a good win over a top 25 team but the thing that keeps them down for me is being ranked 213th out of 244 teams on defense.
7. Depauw (3-0) opponents are 3-8, 48 ppg vs 18 ppg. Total Off-13th, scoring Off-12th, Rush D-6th, sacks-3. No good wins. Depauw has been impressive vs bad opponents. They are 231st out of 244 teams in passing yds allowed. If they get a win vs Witt in a couple weeks they will move up significantly.
8. Wabash (2-1) opponents are 3-7, 38 ppg v 22 ppg. Total Def-16, Rush Off-14, 3rd dwn def-23, TFL-4th. @Albion is best win. Wabash is 1 play away from being 1-2 and seems to be adjusting to new coaches and their styles. The defense is still very good but they need more from their passing game to balance their run game. They can run the ball and stop the run, similar to Carthage. Obviously their remaining test is Monon.
9. JCU (2-1) opponents are 5-4, 24 ppg v 19 ppg. TOP-21st. Best win v Baldwin Wallace. Not sure what to make of JCU but they appear to be the "Best of the rest" in the OAC.
10. Benedictine (2-1) opponents are 6-4, 25 ppg v 23 ppg. Pass off-21st, red zone defense -21st, fumbles recovered-19th. Best win v SNU and Adrian. Benedictine has a clear path to 9-1 now with only a home game v Lakeland standing in their way. Depending on how well Adrian, SNU and Wheaton end up there is an outside shot they could get a home game in the playoffs. Have to stay healthy as their lineup is thin.
IWU, Olivet, Bluffton, Denison, Lakeland: none of these have any signifcant wins yet nor do any of these rank in the Top 25 statistically in any meaningful categories.
nice analysis. I would consider removing the Butler stats from Franklin. That puts the point differential at 43-27 against D3. Also SOS at this point (while not really measurable) would suggest that Franklin has played against 2/3 opponents that are very good (TM) and solid (Bluffton). The rest of the way Franklin's numbers should improve rapidly as the rest of the HCAC (sans RHIT) are not bery good. But the folks you have ahead of Franklin will play a better schedule the rest of the way. Several teams have to play each other still. Still early. Franklin does need to work on its pass defense.
I am not going to "remove" my stats vs Butler because that game actually happened but I can tell you that I do have the numbers in my notes sans Butler and it had no affect on my ranking of Franklin.
Quote from: USee on September 29, 2016, 04:54:04 PM
I am not going to "remove" my stats vs Butler because that game actually happened but I can tell you that I do have the numbers in my notes sans Butler and it had no affect on my ranking of Franklin.
At this point FC has to live with the 600 total yards given up at home to the Beavers. That's a lot of yards to account for. I don't disagree. Franklin is where it needs to be at this point. Looking ahead: A Depauw/Franklin playoff game could look like the old Hanover/FC games where they started the game 30 minutes early at 1pm to make sure it didnt get dark. We have lights at our place now. That could easily be a 1000 yards plus combined.
And turf? I remember the 2008 Wheaton @Franklin game that was moved to a local HS because of a mud bowl in Red Faught Stadium
Quote from: USee on September 29, 2016, 05:10:27 PM
And turf? I remember the 2008 Wheaton @Franklin game that was moved to a local HS because of a mud bowl in Red Faught Stadium
That day Wheaton was a one man team. (I dont recall the guys name - started with an I I think). Had a punt return and a kickoff return for a touch down and scored on a pass play and broke up a sure touch down. Had just a normal guy played, FC would have more than likely gone on to Alliance for an a$$ kicking. 6 inches of snow fell and they had to use snow removal equip to see the yard lines. HS had turf before FC did. The week prior FC knocked out unbeaten and #2 NCC and Wheaton was the 7 seed. 6 and 7 remained that season. FC on road the first two games (Otterbein and NCC).
I recall my HS age son at the time ask why FC didnt have cold weather sideline jackets. I commented that we had never played past mid Nov before.
ITTERSAGEN LIVES
Also, I'm fairly miserable this season and so I would just like to take this opportunity, Franklin fans, to remind you that your little toy program sucks.
Hugs and kisses,
BashDad
Quote from: BashDad on September 29, 2016, 06:17:47 PM
Also, I'm fairly miserable this season and so I would just like to take this opportunity, Franklin fans, to remind you that your little toy program sucks.
Hugs and kisses,
BashDad
Finger nails already gnawed down trying to figure out how we can make the playoffs this year and you kick us while we are down. LOL
Quote from: Li'l Giant on September 28, 2016, 10:58:48 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 28, 2016, 12:22:25 AM
I really hope they can do enough against Wheaton on Saturday that I can (re)join you! Since the Thunder can't seem to dominate ANYONE, it may take an actual upset win, unless someone else falls out of the top ten (IWU has, by default, moved up to my #11 slot).
Yeah I've hemmed and hawed between them and Benedictine. And I guess we'll see what they do against Wheaton.
And no, I was not a prospect for IWU though I do remember hearing about y'all a lot when I was at Wabash because y'all won a natty in hoops.
Well, now I know roughly your era.
I assume you are talking about the 1997 men's hoops title, not the 2012 women's hoops title! ;D Is there ANY following of women's sports at Wabash?
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 29, 2016, 11:09:34 PM
Is there ANY following of women's sports at Wabash?
Being of your era (non-PC / no safe spaces / 1970-ish), Mr. Y, it was solely attire dependent for this cave man. :D ;)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 29, 2016, 11:09:34 PM
Quote from: Li'l Giant on September 28, 2016, 10:58:48 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 28, 2016, 12:22:25 AM
I really hope they can do enough against Wheaton on Saturday that I can (re)join you! Since the Thunder can't seem to dominate ANYONE, it may take an actual upset win, unless someone else falls out of the top ten (IWU has, by default, moved up to my #11 slot).
Yeah I've hemmed and hawed between them and Benedictine. And I guess we'll see what they do against Wheaton.
And no, I was not a prospect for IWU though I do remember hearing about y'all a lot when I was at Wabash because y'all won a natty in hoops.
Well, now I know roughly your era.
I assume you are talking about the 1997 men's hoops title, not the 2012 women's hoops title! ;D Is there ANY following of women's sports at Wabash?
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi2.cdn.turner.com%2Fcnnnext%2Fdam%2Fassets%2F150220153947-hanks-oscar-envelope-large-169.jpg&hash=ffab44e64b83032c95a1eba4abcb11c810a78625)
And the winner of the 2016 award for
Best Attempt To Use A Question In Order To Shoehorn In An Unsolicited Comment About An Alma Mater National Championship In A Sport That Has Zero Relevance To The Questionee is ...
[drumroll] ...
Mr. Ypsi, for, "Do Wabash guys care about women's sports, and did you know that we won a natty in women's basketball once?"
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.reactiongifs.com%2Fr%2Fcrwdc.gif&hash=ebf9fec8dcb6018d1987662e8090c3d7a996824d)
Quote from: Gregory Sager on September 30, 2016, 02:14:36 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 29, 2016, 11:09:34 PM
Quote from: Li'l Giant on September 28, 2016, 10:58:48 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 28, 2016, 12:22:25 AM
I really hope they can do enough against Wheaton on Saturday that I can (re)join you! Since the Thunder can't seem to dominate ANYONE, it may take an actual upset win, unless someone else falls out of the top ten (IWU has, by default, moved up to my #11 slot).
Yeah I've hemmed and hawed between them and Benedictine. And I guess we'll see what they do against Wheaton.
And no, I was not a prospect for IWU though I do remember hearing about y'all a lot when I was at Wabash because y'all won a natty in hoops.
Well, now I know roughly your era.
I assume you are talking about the 1997 men's hoops title, not the 2012 women's hoops title! ;D Is there ANY following of women's sports at Wabash?
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi2.cdn.turner.com%2Fcnnnext%2Fdam%2Fassets%2F150220153947-hanks-oscar-envelope-large-169.jpg&hash=ffab44e64b83032c95a1eba4abcb11c810a78625)
And the winner of the 2016 award for Best Attempt To Use A Question In Order To Shoehorn In An Unsolicited Comment About An Alma Mater National Championship In A Sport That Has Zero Relevance To The Questionee is ... [drumroll] ... Mr. Ypsi, for, "Do Wabash guys care about women's sports, and did you know that we won a natty in women's basketball once?"
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.reactiongifs.com%2Fr%2Fcrwdc.gif&hash=ebf9fec8dcb6018d1987662e8090c3d7a996824d)
Thank you, thank you. I couldn't have won this award without the inspiration of iwu70 and opera! ;D
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 30, 2016, 04:03:08 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on September 30, 2016, 02:14:36 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 29, 2016, 11:09:34 PM
Quote from: Li'l Giant on September 28, 2016, 10:58:48 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 28, 2016, 12:22:25 AM
I really hope they can do enough against Wheaton on Saturday that I can (re)join you! Since the Thunder can't seem to dominate ANYONE, it may take an actual upset win, unless someone else falls out of the top ten (IWU has, by default, moved up to my #11 slot).
Yeah I've hemmed and hawed between them and Benedictine. And I guess we'll see what they do against Wheaton.
And no, I was not a prospect for IWU though I do remember hearing about y'all a lot when I was at Wabash because y'all won a natty in hoops.
Well, now I know roughly your era.
I assume you are talking about the 1997 men's hoops title, not the 2012 women's hoops title! ;D Is there ANY following of women's sports at Wabash?
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi2.cdn.turner.com%2Fcnnnext%2Fdam%2Fassets%2F150220153947-hanks-oscar-envelope-large-169.jpg&hash=ffab44e64b83032c95a1eba4abcb11c810a78625)
And the winner of the 2016 award for Best Attempt To Use A Question In Order To Shoehorn In An Unsolicited Comment About An Alma Mater National Championship In A Sport That Has Zero Relevance To The Questionee is ... [drumroll] ... Mr. Ypsi, for, "Do Wabash guys care about women's sports, and did you know that we won a natty in women's basketball once?"
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.reactiongifs.com%2Fr%2Fcrwdc.gif&hash=ebf9fec8dcb6018d1987662e8090c3d7a996824d)
Thank you, thank you. I couldn't have won this award without the inspiration of iwu70 and opera! ;D
LOL!
Just cast my NRFP ballot. I had no changes. However, while #1 is clear, and so is #2 and #3, #4 through #8 aren't separated by much. So I may be low on Franklin, but in reality, it's just close.
Quote from: smedindy on October 02, 2016, 05:03:50 PM
Just cast my NRFP ballot. I had no changes. However, while #1 is clear, and so is #2 and #3, #4 through #8 aren't separated by much. So I may be low on Franklin, but in reality, it's just close.
Yeah, last night I just copied last week's ballot and submitted it - totally boring week for a voter! ;)
Quote from: smedindy on October 02, 2016, 05:03:50 PM
Just cast my NRFP ballot. I had no changes. However, while #1 is clear, and so is #2 and #3, #4 through #8 aren't separated by much. So I may be low on Franklin, but in reality, it's just close.
. Franklin an enigma as style points are sacrificed in lieu of letting second and third string play half the game.
Quote from: smedindy on October 02, 2016, 05:03:50 PM
Just cast my NRFP ballot. I had no changes. However, while #1 is clear, and so is #2 and #3, #4 through #8 aren't separated by much. So I may be low on Franklin, but in reality, it's just close.
I don't think #1 is clearly Mount.
State your case for North Central or Wheaton!
Quote from: smedindy on October 02, 2016, 09:50:26 PM
State your case for North Central or Wheaton!
It's simple. Mount is very un-Mount right now. Average defensive line, inexperienced secondary,160 lbs TB that looks great against bad teams but can't run against the good ones or break a tackle, and 2 freshman QB's.
Unless they get a very favorable draw, this is the year that the unbelievable semi-final streak ends.
I figured HScoach's case would be a prosecution of Mount as opposed to a case for NCC or Wheaton. I don't see how you can make a case for Wheaton to be honest. I've had to talk myself into keeping them at #3 most weeks.
And I agree 100% with HScoach that the semi-final streak is in serious jeopardy this year. My fear before the season was that this was going to be 2013 minus Burke. Well, Burke absolutely willed them to Salem in a year they had no business being there. They have a similar defense minus a Gagliardi caliber QB.
I understand the hand wringing up in Alliance, but from my perspective, Mount Union has lapped the North region field...probably twice. So a Mount Union in some kind of flux is still probably better than anybody else in the region. Maybe not miles better, but better. Certainly better until proven otherwise.
I think Mount Union is seriously vulnerable to a handful of teams, I'm just not yet convinced any of those teams are on this top 10 list. We'll reassess in another four weeks and these young Raiders have had another month to figure stuff out.
I agree with Wally. Mount may be down, but I think this is an overall down year for most of the North traditional powers. NCC may have the best chance.
The teams on the rise - Carthage, Lakeland, Benedictine, etc. are still a little bit away from the traditional powers.
What exactly makes you think NCC has the best chance?
I think they're playing better than Wheaton right now. No one in the NCAC is up to that level, as far as I can see.
Quote from: smedindy on October 03, 2016, 06:33:13 PM
I think they're playing better than Wheaton right now. No one in the NCAC is up to that level, as far as I can see.
Not sure we have seen a real good team against NCC to determine where we really are. This week doesn't bring that either. Starting play against two NAIA schools is tough to gauge. IWU did not impress me at all, although I'm sure Eash believes he has the better team! ::). It won't be until the Wheaton game, in less that two weeks, that we will get an idea of where these two teams really are.
Quote from: smedindy on October 03, 2016, 06:33:13 PM
I think they're playing better than Wheaton right now. No one in the NCAC is up to that level, as far as I can see.
This makes no sense to me.
Quote from: USee on October 03, 2016, 07:36:15 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 03, 2016, 06:33:13 PM
I think they're playing better than Wheaton right now. No one in the NCAC is up to that level, as far as I can see.
This makes no sense to me.
As a fan of their only common opponent, it makes sense to me. ;) NCC dominated IWU all forty minutes; it took the Swider half-time magic to avoid a huge upset. (I'm guessing he fed his team 'uppers' and somehow slipped 'downers' into the Titans' drinking water! ;D)
The second half of the IWU game is the only time all season that Wheaton has truly dominated an opponent. It IS difficult to evaluate NCC's dominance (other than IWU and Millikin), knowing next to nothing about their NAIA opponents.
In case your objection was to smedindy's second sentence, we should know more when DePauw and Witt collide on Saturday, though still no actual comparison of CCIW vs. NCAC powers. My ballot has NCC 2, Wheaton 3, Witt 4, and DePauw 6 (Franklin is 5).
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 03, 2016, 08:58:11 PM
Quote from: USee on October 03, 2016, 07:36:15 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 03, 2016, 06:33:13 PM
I think they're playing better than Wheaton right now. No one in the NCAC is up to that level, as far as I can see.
This makes no sense to me.
As a fan of their only common opponent, it makes sense to me. ;) NCC dominated IWU all forty minutes; it took the Swider half-time magic to avoid a huge upset. (I'm guessing he fed his team 'uppers' and somehow slipped 'downers' into the Titans' drinking water! ;D)
The second half of the IWU game is the only time all season that Wheaton has truly dominated an opponent. It IS difficult to evaluate NCC's dominance (other than IWU and Millikin), knowing next to nothing about their NAIA opponents.
In case your objection was to smedindy's second sentence, we should know more when DePauw and Witt collide on Saturday, though still no actual comparison of CCIW vs. NCAC powers. My ballot has NCC 2, Wheaton 3, Witt 4, and DePauw 6 (Franklin is 5).
Yspi, That is about as uninformed of a post as I can remember seeing. Wheaton dominated the Titans offensively for the entire game, much more so than NCC did. And defensively they dominated them for really all but 3 big pass plays that resulted in 3 TDs and 160 yds of offense against an offense NCC didn't have to face. From the end of the second quarter on there was never a chance of an upset. As for the rest of the season I think you should take another look. I am pretty sure Wheaton was never threatened in their first two games (leading the second one 40+ to zero at half) and the Wheaton defense has absolutely dominated every team they have played. I am looking forward to NCC and IWU traveling to play Carthage and also seeing how they fare against the Elmhurst defense. Those two teams are currently the #1 and #2 defenses in the CCIW by the way (and #30 and #33 nationally---NCC is #42).
The Thunder, for the first time this season, were at full strength against the Titans and were dominant on both sides of the ball. I have Wheaton #3 and NCC#2 in my poll so these teams, to me, appear to be close though I know much less about NCC so far. I almost switched them this week but I still am watching the Cardinal. What concerns me about NCC is their running game. They have stayed committed to 60/40 run v pass but this year, despite having Austin Bruenig and Oshayne Brown, they are averaging just 3.5 yds per carry (only 2.9 vs IWU to Wheatons. 5.6) when every year for the last 5+ years they have run the ball at a 5.5 yds per carry average. and they have just the 4th ranked defense in the league when every other year they are #1 or #2. I suspect the Cardinals are not as dominant up front as they have been. We will find out in 2 weeks but I am not betting against the team that has won 26 straight regular season games and was the first team since Augie in the 80's to win the CCIW two years in a row as champion with an undefeated regular season.
I submitted my ballot late last night. The only change I made was at #10, replacing IWU with Benedictine.
Should have this up in about 90 minutes, gang. Stay tuned.
Quote from: Li'l Giant on October 04, 2016, 10:03:31 AM
I submitted my ballot late last night. The only change I made was at #10, replacing IWU with Benedictine.
I made no changes this week. This was an easy week finally. Give us a little breather.
Not a lot of change over last week, in fact just a Carthage/JCU flip flop toward the bottom. As a side note, I have one ballot that had Carthage twice and I'll amend this post later once I get that clarification, but it's not going to affect these rankings except to perhaps turn the Carthage/JCU position back to where it was last week. Here's the NRFP Week 5 poll:
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FTOdCKJN.png&hash=4a4f9bd190d6ad90f854b5cd3f76798025085234)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
As for my ballot, I have the same 10 as last week, just flipped a couple of spots. I moved flipped Wheaton and DePauw (not impressive stuff by DPU last week vs. Kenyon) and I flipped Wabash and Denison (was expecting an easier go of it from the Big Red against a struggling OWU team. But yeah, like most of the rest of us, this week didn't have any results that would cause serious significant movement.
The only change I strongly considered was with Franklin and Witt. I have them 4 and 5, respectively and considered switching them. Ultimately I opted not to do that though.
No changes for me this week.
Quote from: USee on October 04, 2016, 12:48:12 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 03, 2016, 08:58:11 PM
Quote from: USee on October 03, 2016, 07:36:15 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 03, 2016, 06:33:13 PM
I think they're playing better than Wheaton right now. No one in the NCAC is up to that level, as far as I can see.
This makes no sense to me.
As a fan of their only common opponent, it makes sense to me. ;) NCC dominated IWU all forty minutes; it took the Swider half-time magic to avoid a huge upset. (I'm guessing he fed his team 'uppers' and somehow slipped 'downers' into the Titans' drinking water! ;D)
The second half of the IWU game is the only time all season that Wheaton has truly dominated an opponent. It IS difficult to evaluate NCC's dominance (other than IWU and Millikin), knowing next to nothing about their NAIA opponents.
In case your objection was to smedindy's second sentence, we should know more when DePauw and Witt collide on Saturday, though still no actual comparison of CCIW vs. NCAC powers. My ballot has NCC 2, Wheaton 3, Witt 4, and DePauw 6 (Franklin is 5).
Yspi, That is about as uninformed of a post as I can remember seeing. Wheaton dominated the Titans offensively for the entire game, much more so than NCC did. And defensively they dominated them for really all but 3 big pass plays that resulted in 3 TDs and 160 yds of offense against an offense NCC didn't have to face. From the end of the second quarter on there was never a chance of an upset. As for the rest of the season I think you should take another look. I am pretty sure Wheaton was never threatened in their first two games (leading the second one 40+ to zero at half) and the Wheaton defense has absolutely dominated every team they have played. I am looking forward to NCC and IWU traveling to play Carthage and also seeing how they fare against the Elmhurst defense. Those two teams are currently the #1 and #2 defenses in the CCIW by the way (and #30 and #33 nationally---NCC is #42).
The Thunder, for the first time this season, were at full strength against the Titans and were dominant on both sides of the ball. I have Wheaton #3 and NCC#2 in my poll so these teams, to me, appear to be close though I know much less about NCC so far. I almost switched them this week but I still am watching the Cardinal. What concerns me about NCC is their running game. They have stayed committed to 60/40 run v pass but this year, despite having Austin Bruenig and Oshayne Brown, they are averaging just 3.5 yds per carry (only 2.9 vs IWU to Wheatons. 5.6) when every year for the last 5+ years they have run the ball at a 5.5 yds per carry average. and they have just the 4th ranked defense in the league when every other year they are #1 or #2. I suspect the Cardinals are not as dominant up front as they have been. We will find out in 2 weeks but I am not betting against the team that has won 26 straight regular season games and was the first team since Augie in the 80's to win the CCIW two years in a row as champion with an undefeated regular season.
If Wheaton dominated IWU in the first half, I'd love more domination like that - we'd win the Stagg Bowl! ;D (I realize you specified only 'offensive', but at halftime IWU led not only in score but in offensive yards gained. You may think that 'big plays' don't really count, but the scoreboard disagrees. :P)
As for the rest of the season, I had mentally shut out the Kazoo game - they are really, really BAAAD. I have little doubt that NPU, Millikin, or Carroll would steamroll them. The
rest of the rest of the season, Wheaton has hardly been a
dominant team. I'll stick with my contention that the second half of the IWU game (aside from pathetic Kazoo) was the only domination that Wheaton has so far shown.
It's Too bad for you and Eash that games aren't counted by the quarter. IWU did win the third quarter against NCC so by your logic NCC only "dominated" one quarter more than Wheaton did. I'll take 26 straight terrible, non dominant wins including the last two years over NCC (and 4 of the last 5). But I'm sure NCC is really, really good this year because they beat up on Millikin and IWU for 3 quarters. 8-)
You should also try to be consistent with this quarter by quarter dominance theme as Wabash was leading Wittenberg 14-0 after the 1st quarter yet Witt somehow managed to move UP in the polls 4 spots after slipping past the LG's, and Franklin, who is ranked ahead of NCC and Wheaton on some ballots lost the first half of their game against Bluffton 17-14 and was losing to Thomas More 32-14 in the 3rd quarter before pulling off their horrendous, non dominant wins over those teams.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 04, 2016, 06:29:56 PM
As for my ballot, I have the same 10 as last week, just flipped a couple of spots. I moved flipped Wheaton and DePauw (not impressive stuff by DPU last week vs. Kenyon) and I flipped Wabash and Denison (was expecting an easier go of it from the Big Red against a struggling OWU team. But yeah, like most of the rest of us, this week didn't have any results that would cause serious significant movement.
Awful lot of love for the Griz there Wally.
Quote from: GRIZ_BACKER on October 05, 2016, 08:51:03 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 04, 2016, 06:29:56 PM
As for my ballot, I have the same 10 as last week, just flipped a couple of spots. I moved flipped Wheaton and DePauw (not impressive stuff by DPU last week vs. Kenyon) and I flipped Wabash and Denison (was expecting an easier go of it from the Big Red against a struggling OWU team. But yeah, like most of the rest of us, this week didn't have any results that would cause serious significant movement.
Awful lot of love for the Griz there Wally.
Yessir. Beating Thomas More, presumptive PAC champion now that they've gone through their top conference rivals, is the most impressive thing anybody in the region has done through five weeks. They should get credit for that.
And they do. Franklin has a championship quality offense and their win over TMC is as good as any but it's kind of hard to overlook the 212th ranked pass defense out of 244 teams and giving up 30+ pts to anyone with a quarterback.
Quote from: USee on October 05, 2016, 10:58:42 AM
And they do. Franklin has a championship quality offense and their win over TMC is as good as any but it's kind of hard to overlook the 212th ranked pass defense out of 244 teams and giving up 30+ pts to anyone with a quarterback.
That's not a good number, but they got the wins- one of which is a better result than any that anybody else has this season. Those kinds of "terrible, non dominant" wins count the same as the rest, right?
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1.kym-cdn.com%2Fphotos%2Fimages%2Ffacebook%2F000%2F616%2F605%2F697.jpg&hash=2c468380ac7cbb8132856b745248fae2c0846970)
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 05, 2016, 11:14:54 AM
Quote from: USee on October 05, 2016, 10:58:42 AM
And they do. Franklin has a championship quality offense and their win over TMC is as good as any but it's kind of hard to overlook the 212th ranked pass defense out of 244 teams and giving up 30+ pts to anyone with a quarterback.
That's not a good number, but they got the wins- one of which is a better result than any that anybody else has this season. Those kinds of "terrible, non dominant" wins count the same as the rest, right?
For sure. I'm with you on Franklin, I just don't think one win over a top 20 team trumps 3 wins over top 40 teams. the hardest thing we do is make decisions with limited data. It's easy to rank the CCIW itself or the NCAC or the PAC. That's the challenge and the fun of having this excercise, what do each of us do with the limited data we have?
Quote from: USee on October 05, 2016, 11:21:48 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 05, 2016, 11:14:54 AM
Quote from: USee on October 05, 2016, 10:58:42 AM
And they do. Franklin has a championship quality offense and their win over TMC is as good as any but it's kind of hard to overlook the 212th ranked pass defense out of 244 teams and giving up 30+ pts to anyone with a quarterback.
That's not a good number, but they got the wins- one of which is a better result than any that anybody else has this season. Those kinds of "terrible, non dominant" wins count the same as the rest, right?
For sure. I'm with you on Franklin, I just don't think one win over a top 20 team trumps 3 wins over top 40 teams. the hardest thing we do is make decisions with limited data. It's easy to rank the CCIW itself or the NCAC or the PAC. That's the challenge and the fun of having this excercise, what do each of us do with the limited data we have?
That's an interesting statement. Who has three wins against the top 40 (which top 40)? I think there's an argument that a single winning result against Thomas More is better than multiple wins against teams ranked between 26-40. The way D3 is tiered, beating somebody in the top 15 can definitely be a larger accomplishment than beating multiple ORVs. The difference in quality is huge between those two strata. We see this on a more micro scale just in the top 10. Beating UMHB or Mount Union is a bigger deal than beating a combo platter of Platteville and Hopkins.
Again, a single winning result against Thomas More is PART of the story. Their defense is horrific and that is also part of the story. We don't know yet how good or bad the win against Bluffton is just like we don't know if Denison is a good or bad result for the NCAC when it happens but we do our analysis on each team (some of us much more than others) and it leads us to believe things like "Bluffton may actually be decent" or "Denison has a chance to be good this year" etc. I also think Wit's win over Wabash is a better in region result than Franklins win over TMC. If you are ranked #2 in the North Region you are a top 10 team in the country most years. There is not enough evidence for me to support Franklin in that conversation. I don't think they are better than Mt Union, Wheaton, NCC, Wittenberg or Carthage. That's who I have ranked ahead of Franklin.
I'm still looking for the team with three wins vs. somebody's top 40. I need to ID those teams before I can have a firm opinion on how those three wins measure up to a win vs. Thomas More. I don't know if I'm missing something or not looking at the right rankings or what.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 05, 2016, 01:04:21 PM
I'm still looking for the team with three wins vs. somebody's top 40. I need to ID those teams before I can have a firm opinion on how those three wins measure up to a win vs. Thomas More. I don't know if I'm missing something or not looking at the right rankings or what.
Look no further than Franklins 215th ranked defense out of 244 teams. Or their 226th ranked run offense to go with their 4th ranked pass offense (total offense ranked 50th). I gave you the teams I have ranked ahead of Franklin. You seem like a smart guy, I'll let you figure out who beat who among them. I am sure you have a pretty firm opinion no matter what anyone else data says.
Quote from: USee on October 05, 2016, 01:24:03 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 05, 2016, 01:04:21 PM
I'm still looking for the team with three wins vs. somebody's top 40. I need to ID those teams before I can have a firm opinion on how those three wins measure up to a win vs. Thomas More. I don't know if I'm missing something or not looking at the right rankings or what.
Look no further than Franklins 215th ranked defense out of 244 teams. Or their 226th ranked run offense to go with their 4th ranked pass offense (total offense ranked 50th). I gave you the teams I have ranked ahead of Franklin. You seem like a smart guy, I'll let you figure out who beat who among them. I am sure you have a pretty firm opinion no matter what anyone else data says.
I just looked at all of the schedules. None of those teams have 3 wins over top 40 teams. I'm now curious also.
Quote from: USee on October 05, 2016, 01:24:03 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 05, 2016, 01:04:21 PM
I'm still looking for the team with three wins vs. somebody's top 40. I need to ID those teams before I can have a firm opinion on how those three wins measure up to a win vs. Thomas More. I don't know if I'm missing something or not looking at the right rankings or what.
Look no further than Franklins 215th ranked defense out of 244 teams. Or their 226th ranked run offense to go with their 4th ranked pass offense (total offense ranked 50th). I gave you the teams I have ranked ahead of Franklin. You seem like a smart guy, I'll let you figure out who beat who among them. I am sure you have a pretty firm opinion no matter what anyone else data says.
I am a smart guy and that's why I'm bothered by the fact that I can't find any team in the North Region that has three wins against the top 40. I've checked the usual suspects and I'm not seeing what you're seeing. Without knowing what top 40 you're talking about, this is starting to feel like an arbitrary designation. Or I'm missing something.
So depending on what list you look at, Wheaton has two such wins (although IWU's ranking in some places seems pretty dubious...it's like they're getting credit for just having played Wheaton and NCC and the results of those games don't seem to matter much in some models). Carthage is also all over the map...models don't know what to do with that Bethel result it seems. Some models like Bethel a lot (likely a product of MIAC boost), some models have Bethel properly rated in the middle of the division.
Anyway, please be specific. I'm not seeing any one team that has more than one such win, let alone a collection of them, that provides enough schedule beef to trump Franklin's win over TMC.
And certainly people can rank Franklin wherever they like. It just seems odd to me that in one post you can basically say winning is winning no matter how meh it looks and then in another post penalize Franklin because the way they win isn't sexy enough.
To be clear, this is what I posted last week:
Quote from: USee on September 28, 2016, 01:38:45 PM
My Poll this week and some of the data I look at to back it up including any categories ranked in the Top 25 national statistics, opponents record, wins vs other notable opponents,etc:
1. Mt Union-opponents are 2-7, 50 ppg giving up 5.6. ranked in top 10 in country in many different statistical categories. Based on competition we don't know if we have 2015 UMU or 2014 UMU. Either would put them a #1 in the region.
2. NCC (2-0)- opponents are 6-7, 37 ppg and giving up 14. Ranked in top 25 nationally in sacks-8th, turnover margin-2nd, red zone defense-13th, pass effeciency-16th. Best win is @IWU. Don't really know yet what we have with this team since their early NAIA opponents are difficult to judge.
3. Wheaton (4-0)-opponents are 9-5, 29 ppg giving up 8 8. Ranked in top 25 in total defense-12th, sacks-14th, TFL-11th, scoring D-14th, rush D-9th, PR-14th. 2 wins over region top 10 teams. v Benedictine and @Carthage. Dominant and consistent defense against teams that are scoring vs everybody else and hasn't lost a regular season game in almost 3 years. In a rut offensively but not because of talent (other than one of the better RB's in the country hasn't played)--young coaching.
4. Witt (3-0)- opponents are 5-4, 30 ppg giving up 7 ppg. rush D-22th, scoring D-8th, 3rd down D-23rd, TOP-24. One big win v Wabash. To the extent it's possible Witt has been under the radar. With a signature win over it's conference rival all eye will be on these guys the rest of the way.
5. Carthage (3-1) opponents are 4-7, 33 ppg giving up 22 ppg. Rush D-17th, 3rd down D-23. Best win is @Bethel and v Augie. Carthage can run the ball and stop the run. That's a recipe for beating a lot of teams. Their aggressive style makes teams uncomfortable. Style of play is very similar to Wabash in my view. They will have to continue to improve to keep this spot for me (their QB went down last week--which could be good or bad)
6. Franklin (3-1) opponents are 9-5, 36 ppg giving up 36. passing Off-8th, 1st downs-19th. Best win is v TMC and v Bluffton. Loss v D1AA Butler. Franklin has a good win over a top 25 team but the thing that keeps them down for me is being ranked 213th out of 244 teams on defense.
7. Depauw (3-0) opponents are 3-8, 48 ppg vs 18 ppg. Total Off-13th, scoring Off-12th, Rush D-6th, sacks-3. No good wins. Depauw has been impressive vs bad opponents. They are 231st out of 244 teams in passing yds allowed. If they get a win vs Witt in a couple weeks they will move up significantly.
8. Wabash (2-1) opponents are 3-7, 38 ppg v 22 ppg. Total Def-16, Rush Off-14, 3rd dwn def-23, TFL-4th. @Albion is best win. Wabash is 1 play away from being 1-2 and seems to be adjusting to new coaches and their styles. The defense is still very good but they need more from their passing game to balance their run game. They can run the ball and stop the run, similar to Carthage. Obviously their remaining test is Monon.
9. JCU (2-1) opponents are 5-4, 24 ppg v 19 ppg. TOP-21st. Best win v Baldwin Wallace. Not sure what to make of JCU but they appear to be the "Best of the rest" in the OAC.
10. Benedictine (2-1) opponents are 6-4, 25 ppg v 23 ppg. Pass off-21st, red zone defense -21st, fumbles recovered-19th. Best win v SNU and Adrian. Benedictine has a clear path to 9-1 now with only a home game v Lakeland standing in their way. Depending on how well Adrian, SNU and Wheaton end up there is an outside shot they could get a home game in the playoffs. Have to stay healthy as their lineup is thin.
IWU, Olivet, Bluffton, Denison, Lakeland: none of these have any signifcant wins yet nor do any of these rank in the Top 25 statistically in any meaningful categories.
There are multiple data points on every team that I use for my analysis. So I am not sure what you mean when you say:
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 05, 2016, 01:57:46 PM
It just seems odd to me that in one post you can basically say winning is winning no matter how meh it looks and then in another post penalize Franklin because the way they win isn't sexy enough.
I never said that. I think it's pretty clear from the data I posted that I do a fair amount of work to understand the teams.
As far as Franklin, the sum of the data and my own opinion says Franklin isn't as good as the other teams in the region I have above them with the possible exception of Carthage who could move down. And, as I said, Witt's win over Wabash is a much better win than Franklin's over TMC in my view.
There is no published top 40, 50 or 60 that I know of so this would be my own rankings of teams which is driven by both quantitative and qualitative analysis.
Quote from: USee on October 05, 2016, 03:48:56 PM
As far as Franklin, the sum of the data and my own opinion says Franklin isn't as good as the other teams in the region I have above them with the possible exception of Carthage who could move down. And, as I said, Witt's win over Wabash is a much better win than Franklin's over TMC in my view.
Flattering, but I'll disagree with this for the time being.
Quote from: USee on October 05, 2016, 03:48:56 PM
There is no published top 40, 50 or 60 that I know of so this would be my own rankings of teams which is driven by both quantitative and qualitative analysis.
This answers my question.
Quote from: USee on October 05, 2016, 01:24:03 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 05, 2016, 01:04:21 PM
I'm still looking for the team with three wins vs. somebody's top 40. I need to ID those teams before I can have a firm opinion on how those three wins measure up to a win vs. Thomas More. I don't know if I'm missing something or not looking at the right rankings or what.
Look no further than Franklins 215th ranked defense out of 244 teams. Or their 226th ranked run offense to go with their 4th ranked pass offense (total offense ranked 50th). I gave you the teams I have ranked ahead of Franklin. You seem like a smart guy, I'll let you figure out who beat who among them. I am sure you have a pretty firm opinion no matter what anyone else data says.
While the 215/244 is a real number that number is misleading. For the most part the starters are not in for Franklin past the forst coople of series in the thrid quarter. In the fourth quarter the 3rd string is playing. For example Manchester scored 2 cheapies in the fourth. Another factor when you score a ton of points quickly via the pass is that the other team has more chances to get more yards and points. Chase Burton threw 6 TD passes before the 4th quarter last week. We really dont know who is better than who. I will say that I think Franklin with no D3 losses and a win against a top 20 should be ranked ahead of Wabash. Is Wabash really a top 20 team with a close win over Albion and a loss to Witt? IDK. Depauw while no quality wins is putting up some obscene numbers with no losses. That is the fun of this board though.
Quote from: GRIZ_BACKER on October 05, 2016, 05:54:58 PM
Quote from: USee on October 05, 2016, 01:24:03 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 05, 2016, 01:04:21 PM
I'm still looking for the team with three wins vs. somebody's top 40. I need to ID those teams before I can have a firm opinion on how those three wins measure up to a win vs. Thomas More. I don't know if I'm missing something or not looking at the right rankings or what.
Look no further than Franklins 215th ranked defense out of 244 teams. Or their 226th ranked run offense to go with their 4th ranked pass offense (total offense ranked 50th). I gave you the teams I have ranked ahead of Franklin. You seem like a smart guy, I'll let you figure out who beat who among them. I am sure you have a pretty firm opinion no matter what anyone else data says.
While the 215/244 is a real number that number is misleading. For the most part the starters are not in for Franklin past the forst coople of series in the thrid quarter. In the fourth quarter the 3rd string is playing. For example Manchester scored 2 cheapies in the fourth. Another factor when you score a ton of points quickly via the pass is that the other team has more chances to get more yards and points. Chase Burton threw 6 TD passes before the 4th quarter last week. We really dont know who is better than who. I will say that I think Franklin with no D3 losses and a win against a top 20 should be ranked ahead of Wabash. Is Wabash really a top 20 team with a close win over Albion and a loss to Witt? IDK. Depauw while no quality wins is putting up some obscene numbers with no losses. That is the fun of this board though.
Griz,
I hear you but don't you think other teams in the top 10 on here have their 3rd/4th string playing late in games? I know UMU, NCC, Wheaton, Witt, etc have done that in their blowout wins.
I agree with you on Franklin. There is only one person with Wabash ahead of Franklin and that's probably to balance out Wally.
Witt/Depauw this week, Wheaton/NCC and Benedictine/Lakeland next week. Clarity is coming.
A lot of those yards for Franklin were in the Bluffton game, who may be better than we traditionally think. That must have been a wild game, as Bluffton put up scads of yardage, 38 points and punted nine times.
If Bluffton continues to play well, I'm going to re-evaluate Franklin. They gave up two garbage time TDs against Manchester, which if gambling were legal in Bushwood would have been a bad beat.
I was column 1 this week. No changes in my top 10 from last week. My next three teams in alphabetical order are Bluffton, Carthage, and Denison.
I'm looking forward to the Bluffton @ RHIT game on the 29th. If Bluffton wins that they should go 9-1 and it will be interesting how the North committee ranks them compared to 8-2 teams.
I am the second column (and the person who accidently listed Carthage twice). I did not make any major changes other than moving Benedictine up a spot. Was tempted to put Lakeland back on the ballot after their resounding win against Concordia Wisconsin.
Just watched Wheaton. I'm starting to think the North region is down as a whole this season.
This is going to be posted on Wednesday this week. We have a voter with previous engagements through the first part of the week so we'll be a day later that usual.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 08, 2016, 10:34:28 PM
This is going to be posted on Wednesday this week. We have a voter with previous engagements through the first part of the week so we'll be a day later that usual.
Knowing who and what you're talking about... was that a pun in there? ;)
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 08, 2016, 11:29:34 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 08, 2016, 10:34:28 PM
This is going to be posted on Wednesday this week. We have a voter with previous engagements through the first part of the week so we'll be a day later that usual.
Knowing who and what you're talking about... was that a pun in there? ;)
Yes. :)
Another easy week of balloting, as games went pretty much 'to chalk'. I did do a slight bit of tinkering. (Last week I just copied my previous week's ballot and sent it in!)
Next week should finally provide some movement (unless, of course, everything again goes as predicted ;)). Undefeated Witt is at undefeated (but untested) Denison, 4-1 Carthage is at 4-2 Elmhurst*, and biggest of all, undefeated Wheaton is at undefeated NCC. (JCU @ ONU might also be interesting - ONU has so far been a dud, but 'Kickoff' had them at #22 preseason, so there must be something there.)
*The three losses by Carthage and Elmhurst consist of a narrow loss each to Wheaton, and Elmhurst's loss AT Olivet (who is near or at the top of my list to replace anyone who drops out of the NRFP).
Sent my ballot in. Had to drop a team down a few spots due to them losing and everyone behind them winning but they stayed in the top 10. Otherwise it was a near replica of last week.
I didn't make any changes this week. I debated moving Denison in at #10 because I wasn't blown away by Benedictine this week, but I opted to wait and see what happens against Witt this week. Normally I would drop DPU for losing as well, but my issue was that I have Wabash ranked right behind them and I couldn't figure out how to justify hopping the LG's over DPU when their loss was to the same team in similar games. I was hoping that either DPU would win or get beat badly so it'd sort itself out for me!
I had both 9 and 10 on my ballot lose so there was a bit of movement at the bottom. For me I think there's the top 7, then a big gap down to a cluster from 8 to about 14. That cluster is tight enough that they will probably move around based on their performance each week.
Also North Central is just 1 spot behind Mount Union on my top 25 ballot.
Back and in. Moved out my 10. Reshuffled from 5 to 8.
Apologies for the late post tonight, gang. Here's the NRFP Week 6 poll:
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fc067BWD.png&hash=23ac36759b49c643885bd69589792ddb87bfb560)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
I am the middle ballot this week. I flipped Witt and Wheaton at 3 and 4: I intended to wait 'til after Wheaton and NCC meet this weekend, but Wheaton 'barely' beating doormat Millikin (as I see it, aside from truly BAD K'zoo, Wheaton's only total domination all season is the second half of the game against IWU), while Witt beat DePauw, was too much.
Benedictine beating Concordia (Wis) by only 2, and yielding 49 points to a team who had never broken 31 before (and that was against virtually countrywide doormat Finlandia) was too much - I dropped them for undefeated Denison. I figured it was probably my last chance to recognize Denison for their great start, since I suspect Witt will double monkey-stomp them on Saturday. ;)
Barring unexpected outcomes, my #10 next week is likely to come from the trio of Bluffton, Olivet, and Trine (or Benedictine, if they beat Lakeland) - but we've had at least two straight weeks of (virtually) no upsets: it's time for some CHAOS! ;D
I moved Wittenberg up to 3 this week after their win over DePauw. Those two results are now better than anything North Central or Wheaton have done to date which prompted a move. But still not better than Franklin over Thomas More, so I'm holding out with Franklin in the 2 spot. Saturday's Wheaton/NCC result is going to force some serious thought about spots 2-5 on my ballot.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 13, 2016, 02:17:59 AM
I am the middle ballot this week. I flipped Witt and Wheaton at 3 and 4: I intended to wait 'til after Wheaton and NCC meet this weekend, but Wheaton 'barely' beating doormat Millikin (as I see it, aside from truly BAD K'zoo, Wheaton's only total domination all season is the second half of the game against IWU), while Witt beat DePauw, was too much.
Benedictine beating Concordia (Wis) by only 2, and yielding 49 points to a team who had never broken 31 before (and that was against virtually countrywide doormat Finlandia) was too much - I dropped them for undefeated Denison. I figured it was probably my last chance to recognize Denison for their great start, since I suspect Witt will double monkey-stomp them on Saturday. ;)
Barring unexpected outcomes, my #10 next week is likely to come from the trio of Bluffton, Olivet, and Trine (or Benedictine, if they beat Lakeland) - but we've had at least two straight weeks of (virtually) no upsets: it's time for some CHAOS! ;D
Worst prediction of the year!! :-[ :-[ Denison 24, Witt 21. As a long time defender of good teams from bad conferences (basketball edition), I have GOT to remember that untested does not automatically translate to 'not good'. My apologies to Denison. :P Also apologies to UW-LaX who only lost to UWW by 10, when I would have expected 30+).
I thought the NCAC was essentially finished - just the Monon Bell game to decide the Pool C candidate. Now it is indeed a four team race! ::)
This was slightly tricky for me this week, but here's my reasoning:
I watched the Wheaton/NCC game and I thought both looked pretty darn good, especially on defense. Because of that I didn't want to pummel Wheaton for the loss. I dropped them from 3 to 5. I would have only dropped them to 4, but I felt compelled to slot an undefeated Denison in at 4 on the strength of having the best win between the two. I also watched the 2nd half of that game was very impressed with Denison's QB. He's a player.
I maintained my order behind Wheaton with Witt, DPU and Wabash. Witt has to be first in that group obviously thanks to H2H.
I was eyeing JCU jumping over Carthage this week, but that was because I was expecting a blowout win for JCU. Didn't happen. Trine and Olivet are in the equation for #10 as well.
1-3 stayed the same for me. Four through 10 are now so close....
Quote from: smedindy on October 16, 2016, 01:25:21 PM
1-3 stayed the same for me. Four through 10 are now so close....
My 1-4 are pretty solid (until someone loses to someone lower), but 5-
13 are really close. ;)
Denison at #5 just FEELS way too high, but what can I do? They beat Witt, who beat both Wabash and DePauw, so until they lose a game, they've gotta be ahead of any other NCAC team.
We almost had consensus balloting this week. Just two outlying votes. Here's the Week 7 NRFP:
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FCpdbBRB.png&hash=e4b33faaa092c6de2ce4c9366812575f07d6cca9)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
LOL. Unless there's a goof in the presentation, someone's got some 'splaining to do here.
How can one justify ranking Wabash 5, Wittenberg 6, DePauw 9, Benedictine 10 and leaving Denison entirely unranked?
Was this just an oversight, or is a 6-0 start punctuated by a win over the same Wittenberg team (who already owns double-digit margin wins against Wabash and DePauw) they're ranking #5 honestly not enough?
I'd understand slow-playing a little and maybe bringing them in near the bottom of the poll if you're cautious, but keeping them entirely out of the poll while ranking three teams from their own conference (all of whom they're currently sitting ahead of in the standings) and ranking Benedictine (who just lost to Lakeland and whose best result is either a 19-point loss to Wheaton or a 35-28 win over not-getting-any-votes Adrian) in the #10 spot ahead of them seems...curious.
I was one of the outliers... surprised still no one else has Bluffton on their ballot. Just comparing Bluffton and DePauw, Bluffton has a 6 point loss at Franklin while DePauw has an 11 point loss at Witt. Slight edge Beavers there since everyone has Franklin ranked higher. DePauw's best win so far is MSJ. Bluffton has won at 5-1 Trine. The one point in DePauw's favor is that they beat MSJ by more than Bluffton did.
Honestly I don't think Denison is the #5 team in the region, but given the games we have so far I didn't have much option. On my top 25 ballot I have Denison, Witt, Wabash 19-21.
I will say that had North Central won a little more convincingly over Wheaton, I was absolutely prepared to move them ahead of Mount. They sit 4 and 5 on my top 25 ballot.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 18, 2016, 11:56:04 PM
I was one of the outliers... surprised still no one else has Bluffton on their ballot. Just comparing Bluffton and DePauw, Bluffton has a 6 point loss at Franklin while DePauw has an 11 point loss at Witt. Slight edge Beavers there since everyone has Franklin ranked higher. DePauw's best win so far is MSJ. Bluffton has won at 5-1 Trine. The one point in DePauw's favor is that they beat MSJ by more than Bluffton did.
Honestly I don't think Denison is the #5 team in the region, but given the games we have so far I didn't have much option. On my top 25 ballot I have Denison, Witt, Wabash 19-21.
I will say that had North Central won a little more convincingly over Wheaton, I was absolutely prepared to move them ahead of Mount. They sit 4 and 5 on my top 25 ballot.
I definitely considered moving NCC over Mt this week. NCC now has the best result in region of anyone.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 18, 2016, 11:56:04 PM
I was one of the outliers... surprised still no one else has Bluffton on their ballot. Just comparing Bluffton and DePauw, Bluffton has a 6 point loss at Franklin while DePauw has an 11 point loss at Witt. Slight edge Beavers there since everyone has Franklin ranked higher. DePauw's best win so far is MSJ. Bluffton has won at 5-1 Trine. The one point in DePauw's favor is that they beat MSJ by more than Bluffton did.
Honestly I don't think Denison is the #5 team in the region, but given the games we have so far I didn't have much option. On my top 25 ballot I have Denison, Witt, Wabash 19-21.
I will say that had North Central won a little more convincingly over Wheaton, I was absolutely prepared to move them ahead of Mount. They sit 4 and 5 on my top 25 ballot.
Bluffton is my #11 team. (Olivet is #12.) Benedictine is no longer even on my radar - I already dropped them last week when they gave up 49 to very bad Wis Lu; now they have lost to Lakeland.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 18, 2016, 10:10:09 PM
LOL. Unless there's a goof in the presentation, someone's got some 'splaining to do here.
How can one justify ranking Wabash 5, Wittenberg 6, DePauw 9, Benedictine 10 and leaving Denison entirely unranked?
Was this just an oversight, or is a 6-0 start punctuated by a win over the same Wittenberg team (who already owns double-digit margin wins against Wabash and DePauw) they're ranking #5 honestly not enough?
I'd understand slow-playing a little and maybe bringing them in near the bottom of the poll if you're cautious, but keeping them entirely out of the poll while ranking three teams from their own conference (all of whom they're currently sitting ahead of in the standings) and ranking Benedictine (who just lost to Lakeland and whose best result is either a 19-point loss to Wheaton or a 35-28 win over not-getting-any-votes Adrian) in the #10 spot ahead of them seems...curious.
That IS curious, but perhaps even worse is the voter who had Denison at 4, but DePauw 5, Wabash 7, and Witt (who beat them both) at 10! :o
BTW, I'm voter #3 this week. You guys must be hacking me - aside from the flip-flop of DePauw and JCU at 9 and 10, the poll exactly reflects my ballot! ;D
Very curious as to your reason for leaving NCC behind FC after the Wheaton win, Wally. I don't mean that in a snarky way; I know you put a lot of thought into this and know more about D3 football than most (including me).
Quote from: New Tradition on October 19, 2016, 08:16:35 AM
Very curious as to your reason for leaving NCC behind FC after the Wheaton win, Wally. I don't mean that in a snarky way; I know you put a lot of thought into this and know more about D3 football than most (including me).
I'm not wally, but here's the case I would build for Franklin:
1) that Thomas More win is easy for NRFP folks to downplay because TMC is not in the North, but that's a really good win, one of the best "non-league" results anyone is carrying around. Franklin rang up 580 yards and 43 points on a TMC team lost at Wabash, in overtime, to make the final eight last year. Thomas More has rolled off six straight wins since that game and is going to cruise to their league title (oddball PAC tiebreaker with CWRU aside). The D3football.com Top 25 is not infallible, but it's worth mentioning that Wheaton is currently #12 and Thomas More is currently #13, so the voters view them in fairly similar esteem (although, somehow, they are still collectively ranking Franklin behind Thomas More...so maybe I shouldn't mention the d3fb top 25).
Anyways, the point is, Franklin beating Thomas More stands up there with North Central's win over Wheaton if we're just comparing the "best result" for each team.
2) the close call with Bluffton, most years, would be a reason to doubt Franklin as a legit contender and arguably dock them a few spots. But as
this particular season goes on, that's looking less like a slip-up against a conference weakling and more like a potential RR win. Bluffton's OOC results are fine (easy win over OAC bottom-feeder, shootout win over 5-1 Trine...if Trine runs the table and wins the MIAA, this keeps looking better and better) and they certainly stand a chance of running the table themselves.
North Central is pretty hard to shoot holes in, too. The win over Wheaton was solid and they've not been threatend otherwise. I don't think it's a slam-dunk for Franklin at #2 over NCC, but nor do I think it's an untenable position.
I cannot say the same about leaving Denison unranked, behind three NCAC teams including one it has beaten, and behind a 4-2 Benedictine team who just lost to Lakeland.
I know that part of the fun of the polls is that we all have our own opinions, and having some variation makes for some good discussion as to how one arrived at the particular ranking. But some things are just...inexplicable.
Quote from: New Tradition on October 19, 2016, 08:16:35 AM
Very curious as to your reason for leaving NCC behind FC after the Wheaton win, Wally. I don't mean that in a snarky way; I know you put a lot of thought into this and know more about D3 football than most (including me).
It's not overly complicated, really. I think TMC > Wheaton, so Franklin beating TMC at home is a better result than NCC beating Wheaton at home. Which is not to say that I think that's an obvious take, Wheaton and TMC are fairly close and part of me thinks that Wheaton
should be better than TMC in 2016, but there's been, I don't know,
something missing from Wheaton this year. No problems with NCC 2 and Franklin lower with anybody who went that way. I certainly evaluated these two pretty heavily this weekend before settling on a final order. Franklin's a tough team to pin down. They have the great result, then have a bunch of results against a bunch of not-so-good teams that don't move the needle, then they have the optics of Butler margin of defeat. There's a lot of stuff on the surface of Franklin's profile that turns people off, which I get.
I moved Franklin up 3 spots to 4 this week. While I generally agree with what Wally has said I think North Central just beat a team with a top 50 defense and Offense and held their #2 nationally ranked pass rush in check. Franklin is the real deal on offense but their 219 ranked pass defense and need to outscore people keeps them from any higher consideration.
I don't know why Franklin gets a pass for their Bluffton result but Wheaton has something "missing" because they don't beat Carthage by more points. Those were both wins against potentially ranked teams so I view them as pretty similar.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 19, 2016, 10:05:43 AM
Quote from: New Tradition on October 19, 2016, 08:16:35 AM
Very curious as to your reason for leaving NCC behind FC after the Wheaton win, Wally. I don't mean that in a snarky way; I know you put a lot of thought into this and know more about D3 football than most (including me).
It's not overly complicated, really. I think TMC > Wheaton, so Franklin beating TMC at home is a better result than NCC beating Wheaton at home. Which is not to say that I think that's an obvious take, Wheaton and TMC are fairly close and part of me thinks that Wheaton should be better than TMC in 2016, but there's been, I don't know, something missing from Wheaton this year. No problems with NCC 2 and Franklin lower with anybody who went that way. I certainly evaluated these two pretty heavily this weekend before settling on a final order. Franklin's a tough team to pin down. They have the great result, then have a bunch of results against a bunch of not-so-good teams that don't move the needle, then they have the optics of Butler margin of defeat. There's a lot of stuff on the surface of Franklin's profile that turns people off, which I get.
I am not a voter but if I had to handicap Franklin vs Wheaton the Thunder would be laying points (even on the road). I think 4 is the right spot. The 4 top teams in the NCAC havent done anything to suggest that they are anywhere near NCC or Wheaton (could Denison actually be for real?) and this year the GRIZ are better than they normally are (and have a of folks that will be back again next season). 9-12 are all having solid years compared to normal but have no quality wins. It will be interesting how the playoff seeding works. Franklin at this point is probably headed for a "3" and should host one of the lesser conference AQ or a pool C from NCAC (if I had to guess). Could even end up a 2 in the south and get TM again. Things are coming into focus. The GRIZ need to take care of business against RHIT and a possibly resurgent MSJ before any real playoff talk happens.
Quote from: USee on October 19, 2016, 10:51:20 AM
I don't know why Franklin gets a pass for their Bluffton result but Wheaton has something "missing" because they don't beat Carthage by more points. Those were both wins against potentially ranked teams so I view them as pretty similar.
I'm not sure what Bluffton and Carthage have to do with anything with respect to how we compare Franklin and Wheaton. Franklin has a meaningful win against an excellent team and Wheaton doesn't. That part does seem pretty straightforward to me.
I'm a slow burner on Denison. They're at #8 on my ballot, mainly because I think Witt beats them 11 times out of 20. But realistically, from #3 through to Bluffton (my #11) is razor thin in my mind.
Quote from: smedindy on October 19, 2016, 01:10:44 PM
I'm a slow burner on Denison. They're at #8 on my ballot, mainly because I think Witt beats them 11 times out of 20. But realistically, from #3 through to Bluffton (my #11) is razor thin in my mind.
Hey, a slow-burn is fine.
I'd still love to hear the logic for someone keeping Benedictine ranked while leaving Denison off the ballot entirely.
And if it's some crap about how ranking more than three NCAC teams seems strange, then I'd like to hear why the team at the
top of the daisy-chain of inter-conference wins in their matchups to date (Denison > Wittenberg > Wabash+DePauw) is the one that's left out.
Thanks for the response!
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 19, 2016, 11:52:30 AM
Quote from: USee on October 19, 2016, 10:51:20 AM
I don't know why Franklin gets a pass for their Bluffton result but Wheaton has something "missing" because they don't beat Carthage by more points. Those were both wins against potentially ranked teams so I view them as pretty similar.
I'm not sure what Bluffton and Carthage have to do with anything with respect to how we compare Franklin and Wheaton. Franklin has a meaningful win against an excellent team and Wheaton doesn't. That part does seem pretty straightforward to me.
You mean a win against the team that most of the D3 world currently has ranked above them? Yep. Pretty straightforward.
Quote from: USee on October 19, 2016, 05:44:29 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 19, 2016, 11:52:30 AM
Quote from: USee on October 19, 2016, 10:51:20 AM
I don't know why Franklin gets a pass for their Bluffton result but Wheaton has something "missing" because they don't beat Carthage by more points. Those were both wins against potentially ranked teams so I view them as pretty similar.
I'm not sure what Bluffton and Carthage have to do with anything with respect to how we compare Franklin and Wheaton. Franklin has a meaningful win against an excellent team and Wheaton doesn't. That part does seem pretty straightforward to me.
You mean a win against the team that most of the D3 world currently has ranked above them? Yep. Pretty straightforward.
Maybe I'm not following your question. Are you asking me why I have Franklin ahead of North Central or why I have Franklin ahead of Wheaton?
Quote from: USee on October 19, 2016, 05:44:29 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 19, 2016, 11:52:30 AM
Quote from: USee on October 19, 2016, 10:51:20 AM
I don't know why Franklin gets a pass for their Bluffton result but Wheaton has something "missing" because they don't beat Carthage by more points. Those were both wins against potentially ranked teams so I view them as pretty similar.
I'm not sure what Bluffton and Carthage have to do with anything with respect to how we compare Franklin and Wheaton. Franklin has a meaningful win against an excellent team and Wheaton doesn't. That part does seem pretty straightforward to me.
You mean a win against the team that most of the D3 world currently has ranked above them? Yep. Pretty straightforward.
I have great respect for the d3fb top 25 voters and do not envy them the difficult task of sorting through 200+ teams to decide on the 25 best, but I think Thomas More's ranking above Franklin right now is an egregious/obvious error and frankly more indicative of voters-not-really-paying-close-attention who have anchored themselves to the idea that certain teams/conferences are "good" and others aren't than it is any real critical thought or analysis about why Thomas More is a better team than Franklin.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 19, 2016, 12:45:46 AM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 18, 2016, 11:56:04 PM
I was one of the outliers... surprised still no one else has Bluffton on their ballot. Just comparing Bluffton and DePauw, Bluffton has a 6 point loss at Franklin while DePauw has an 11 point loss at Witt. Slight edge Beavers there since everyone has Franklin ranked higher. DePauw's best win so far is MSJ. Bluffton has won at 5-1 Trine. The one point in DePauw's favor is that they beat MSJ by more than Bluffton did.
Honestly I don't think Denison is the #5 team in the region, but given the games we have so far I didn't have much option. On my top 25 ballot I have Denison, Witt, Wabash 19-21.
I will say that had North Central won a little more convincingly over Wheaton, I was absolutely prepared to move them ahead of Mount. They sit 4 and 5 on my top 25 ballot.
Bluffton is my #11 team. (Olivet is #12.) Benedictine is no longer even on my radar - I already dropped them last week when they gave up 49 to very bad Wis Lu; now they have lost to Lakeland.
BU plays WLC this Saturday, they gave up 49 to Concordia Wisconsin.
Quote from: Captain_Joe08 on October 19, 2016, 10:56:22 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 19, 2016, 12:45:46 AM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 18, 2016, 11:56:04 PM
I was one of the outliers... surprised still no one else has Bluffton on their ballot. Just comparing Bluffton and DePauw, Bluffton has a 6 point loss at Franklin while DePauw has an 11 point loss at Witt. Slight edge Beavers there since everyone has Franklin ranked higher. DePauw's best win so far is MSJ. Bluffton has won at 5-1 Trine. The one point in DePauw's favor is that they beat MSJ by more than Bluffton did.
Honestly I don't think Denison is the #5 team in the region, but given the games we have so far I didn't have much option. On my top 25 ballot I have Denison, Witt, Wabash 19-21.
I will say that had North Central won a little more convincingly over Wheaton, I was absolutely prepared to move them ahead of Mount. They sit 4 and 5 on my top 25 ballot.
Bluffton is my #11 team. (Olivet is #12.) Benedictine is no longer even on my radar - I already dropped them last week when they gave up 49 to very bad Wis Lu; now they have lost to Lakeland.
BU plays WLC this Saturday, they gave up 49 to Concordia Wisconsin.
Next weekend, the 29th; they're at Olivet this weekend.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 19, 2016, 10:05:43 AM
Quote from: New Tradition on October 19, 2016, 08:16:35 AM
Very curious as to your reason for leaving NCC behind FC after the Wheaton win, Wally. I don't mean that in a snarky way; I know you put a lot of thought into this and know more about D3 football than most (including me).
It's not overly complicated, really. I think TMC > Wheaton, so Franklin beating TMC at home is a better result than NCC beating Wheaton at home. Which is not to say that I think that's an obvious take, Wheaton and TMC are fairly close and part of me thinks that Wheaton should be better than TMC in 2016, but there's been, I don't know, something missing from Wheaton this year.
No question. Even before the "bell" loss, this has felt like a weird season for Wheaton. I think much of this stems who the coaches chose to play quarterback. While it really doesn't matter that every fan disagreed with the coaches, these is no question there were/are players in the locker room who didn't like seeing their senior captain QB benched in a questionable decision (and I'm not even saying anything about the play of Andrew Bowers here). This created a very odd vibe around the team. Watch post-games comments this year and Swider usually appears defensive. It's too bad--talent wise, this roster is right there with anything Wheaton has ever had.
Quote from: izzy stradlin on October 20, 2016, 12:02:02 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 19, 2016, 10:05:43 AM
Quote from: New Tradition on October 19, 2016, 08:16:35 AM
Very curious as to your reason for leaving NCC behind FC after the Wheaton win, Wally. I don't mean that in a snarky way; I know you put a lot of thought into this and know more about D3 football than most (including me).
It's not overly complicated, really. I think TMC > Wheaton, so Franklin beating TMC at home is a better result than NCC beating Wheaton at home. Which is not to say that I think that's an obvious take, Wheaton and TMC are fairly close and part of me thinks that Wheaton should be better than TMC in 2016, but there's been, I don't know, something missing from Wheaton this year.
No question. Even before the "bell" loss, this has felt like a weird season for Wheaton. I think much of this stems who the coaches chose to play quarterback. While it really doesn't matter that every fan disagreed with the coaches, these is no question there were/are players in the locker room who didn't like seeing their senior captain QB benched in a questionable decision (and I'm not even saying anything about the play of Andrew Bowers here). This created a very odd vibe around the team. Watch post-games comments this year and Swider usually appears defensive. It's too bad--talent wise, this roster is right there with anything Wheaton has ever had.
There was a play when Bowers had to take a play off for whatever reason and JP checked into the game. I almost soiled myself. I'm sure anyone listening to the broadcast heard it in my voice. Thankfully for NCC, he only handed the ball off once and checked right back out. I had flashbacks to the 2014 game. :o
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 19, 2016, 07:53:32 PM
Quote from: USee on October 19, 2016, 05:44:29 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 19, 2016, 11:52:30 AM
Quote from: USee on October 19, 2016, 10:51:20 AM
I don't know why Franklin gets a pass for their Bluffton result but Wheaton has something "missing" because they don't beat Carthage by more points. Those were both wins against potentially ranked teams so I view them as pretty similar.
I'm not sure what Bluffton and Carthage have to do with anything with respect to how we compare Franklin and Wheaton. Franklin has a meaningful win against an excellent team and Wheaton doesn't. That part does seem pretty straightforward to me.
You mean a win against the team that most of the D3 world currently has ranked above them? Yep. Pretty straightforward.
I have great respect for the d3fb top 25 voters and do not envy them the difficult task of sorting through 200+ teams to decide on the 25 best, but I think Thomas More's ranking above Franklin right now is an egregious/obvious error and frankly more indicative of voters-not-really-paying-close-attention who have anchored themselves to the idea that certain teams/conferences are "good" and others aren't than it is any real critical thought or analysis about why Thomas More is a better team than Franklin.
More likely on top of name recognition and bias for certain conferences is the fact Franklin has a loss to D1-AA Butler. Had Franklin chosen to play another D3 team (one they could beat) they would be 6-0 and ranked higher. Butler may not "count" but it really does to some degree. Glad they are off the schedule. Benedictine is coming on next season after the road trip to Thomas More.
Quote from: izzy stradlin on October 20, 2016, 12:02:02 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 19, 2016, 10:05:43 AM
Quote from: New Tradition on October 19, 2016, 08:16:35 AM
Very curious as to your reason for leaving NCC behind FC after the Wheaton win, Wally. I don't mean that in a snarky way; I know you put a lot of thought into this and know more about D3 football than most (including me).
It's not overly complicated, really. I think TMC > Wheaton, so Franklin beating TMC at home is a better result than NCC beating Wheaton at home. Which is not to say that I think that's an obvious take, Wheaton and TMC are fairly close and part of me thinks that Wheaton should be better than TMC in 2016, but there's been, I don't know, something missing from Wheaton this year.
No question. Even before the "bell" loss, this has felt like a weird season for Wheaton. I think much of this stems who the coaches chose to play quarterback. While it really doesn't matter that every fan disagreed with the coaches, these is no question there were/are players in the locker room who didn't like seeing their senior captain QB benched in a questionable decision (and I'm not even saying anything about the play of Andrew Bowers here). This created a very odd vibe around the team. Watch post-games comments this year and Swider usually appears defensive. It's too bad--talent wise, this roster is right there with anything Wheaton has ever had.
Just to clarify that
something that I think Wheaton is missing isn't necessarily Peltz at QB. You guys know I'm team #playJohnny all the way, but that's not specifically what I was talking about there. It's something much less tangible and hard to describe. I saw it at Wabash at times in 2012, I'm seeing it this year at Wabash. Seems something similar is happening with Wheaton. I wish I could describe it better.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 19, 2016, 07:53:32 PM
Quote from: USee on October 19, 2016, 05:44:29 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 19, 2016, 11:52:30 AM
Quote from: USee on October 19, 2016, 10:51:20 AM
I don't know why Franklin gets a pass for their Bluffton result but Wheaton has something "missing" because they don't beat Carthage by more points. Those were both wins against potentially ranked teams so I view them as pretty similar.
I'm not sure what Bluffton and Carthage have to do with anything with respect to how we compare Franklin and Wheaton. Franklin has a meaningful win against an excellent team and Wheaton doesn't. That part does seem pretty straightforward to me.
You mean a win against the team that most of the D3 world currently has ranked above them? Yep. Pretty straightforward.
I have great respect for the d3fb top 25 voters and do not envy them the difficult task of sorting through 200+ teams to decide on the 25 best, but I think Thomas More's ranking above Franklin right now is an egregious/obvious error and frankly more indicative of voters-not-really-paying-close-attention who have anchored themselves to the idea that certain teams/conferences are "good" and others aren't than it is any real critical thought or analysis about why Thomas More is a better team than Franklin.
Not that they really check it, but Thomas More has a higher Massey Rating and higher Massey SOS than Franklin. Franklin's wins over Bluffton (before people said, "Hey Bluffton's good!") and Manchester (even though the last two TDs were against scrubs) may have turned off voters, while Thomas More's wins over W&J, C-M, and Westminster carried more weight than their loss to Franklin.
We're now in the season where more data points are accumulated, so we can see the - "Hey, wait a minute!" results.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 18, 2016, 08:57:39 PM
We almost had consensus balloting this week. Just two outlying votes. Here's the Week 7 NRFP:
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FCpdbBRB.png&hash=e4b33faaa092c6de2ce4c9366812575f07d6cca9)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
I forgot to reveal my ballot. I'm the 2nd column.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 20, 2016, 05:13:26 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 18, 2016, 08:57:39 PM
We almost had consensus balloting this week. Just two outlying votes. Here's the Week 7 NRFP:
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FCpdbBRB.png&hash=e4b33faaa092c6de2ce4c9366812575f07d6cca9)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
I forgot to reveal my ballot. I'm the 2nd column.
I am the other dissenting ballot on the list.
Finals of note:
IWU 19
@Carthage 14
Rose Hulman 23
@Franklin 22
OWU 37
@Depauw 15
3 pretty big road wins for some North Region teams.
This is going to be a 'fun' week for voting. By 'fun' I mean brain-wracking.
Good grief. This sure is a mess now.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 22, 2016, 06:59:09 PM
Good grief. This sure is a mess now.
Can we merge with the WRFP?
We had narrowed this thing down to just 12 teams. My early hunch is that we expand this week.
I am not a voter, but after the loss to the Bishops, does DePauw make anyone's top 12?
Looking at last week's ballots, DPU might be an ORV this week, might not appear at all. Depends on what people want to do with the other results from around the region today.
The NRFP had gotten downright boring for several weeks - nice to see a bit of movement! ;D
My ballot will almost certainly drop DePauw and Carthage, to be replaced by two of the following four: 6-1 Olivet, 6-1 Bluffton, 6-2 RHIT, and 5-2 IWU. The other task (assuming Wheaton doesn't lay the biggest egg of the season, hosting NPU) is deciding how far to drop Franklin - right now 6 looks right, but more study to come.
Trine could have been in play for NRFP placement this week, but you can go ahead and add Hope 31, Trine 7 to today's collection of interesting results.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 22, 2016, 08:27:27 PM
Trine could have been in play for NRFP placement this week, but you can go ahead and add Hope 31, Trine 7 to today's collection of interesting results.
If Hope hadn't started off 1-3, they'd be on my radar for sure! The last three weeks they have beaten then 3-1 Alma (at Alma), then 3-2 Adrian (at Adrian), and today monkey-stomped 5-1 Trine. :o They're killing my MIAA pickems, as I picked them to lose all three games. :P
Same. Have to give Hope a ton of credit for their mid-season turnaround. Super rare to see a team just find it and click like that midstream.
You can add the NACC to the mix as Lakeland loses to Wisconsin Lutheran 50-34 today. The top five teams are either 4-3 or 3-4 overall.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 22, 2016, 08:48:51 PM
Same. Have to give Hope a ton of credit for their mid-season turnaround. Super rare to see a team just find it and click like that midstream.
Mount St. Joseph has had an even more dramatic turnaround - from 0-3 to 5-3! The difference is that Hope beat all respectable to fairly good teams; MSJ (with the exception of beating RHIT) beat nothing but tomato cans. This Saturday will be important for the bottom half of the NRFP in HCAC games, as the four one-loss teams square off: Bluffton @ RHIT and Franklin @ MSJ. Can't wait for this week's poll, then this Saturday's games! ;)
Alright gang, Week 8 NRFP:
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FrsonXRL.png&hash=241f7c6074c6028cc9f15ab8eaf44bb50a3e96d4)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
I seem to be an outlier on Olivet vs. IWU. That's all based on conference strength - though really I could have chosen two out of Olivet, Bluffton, IWU and RHIT and been OK.
Quote from: smedindy on October 25, 2016, 08:05:09 PM
I seem to be an outlier on Olivet vs. IWU. That's all based on conference strength - though really I could have chosen two out of Olivet, Bluffton, IWU and RHIT and been OK.
Those were the four I most considered to replace DePauw and Carthage. While RHIT knocked off Franklin, and IWU knocked out Carthage, I ended up going with the one-loss teams over the two-loss teams. But I really don't see much difference among them, and may flip-flop week to week.
BTW, I'm the middle voter again this week.
Wabash at 3 and Witt at 6? Help me with that.
I'm the first column. Hardest thing for me this week was 9-10. Bluffton would be my closest left out.
I'm the second column this week.
I had been keeping Franklin at 2 despite a lot of the warts that USee has been pointing out. My reasoning- Franklin has owned that league for long enough now that I give Mike Leonard all of the benefit of the doubt when it comes to final scores. He's been at the head of the HCAC table long enough that I believe he knows how to manage his team to get through the league and be ready for mid-November. *Stephen A. voice* Howevah...as soon as Franklin loses a league game, they have to own all of those warts. The defense, the lack of run game, all of it. So while 2 to 8 is a big fall for a one point loss, that's just kind of the cash out that happens when Franklin loses an HCAC game.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 26, 2016, 12:11:05 AM
I'm the second column this week.
I had been keeping Franklin at 2 despite a lot of the warts that USee has been pointing out. My reasoning- Franklin has owned that league for long enough now that I give Mike Leonard all of the benefit of the doubt when it comes to final scores. He's been at the head of the HCAC table long enough that I believe he knows how to manage his team to get through the league and be ready for mid-November. *Stephen A. voice* Howevah...as soon as Franklin loses a league game, they have to own all of those warts. The defense, the lack of run game, all of it. So while 2 to 8 is a big fall for a one point loss, that's just kind of the cash out that happens when Franklin loses an HCAC game.
+k Love how I read that last sentence with Stephen A.'s voice. Now if you could have rolled in how you "know Mike Leonard personally and go way back, and I've called him yesterday to talk about this" like the name dropper Stephen A. is... :)
I am the last column this week. I dropped Franklin to 8th and Carthage fell precipitously from 5th to NR for me. I think their defense is top 25 but they went out on IWU 14-0 and didn't score. Their offense is just not good enough for them to beat good opponents. I also punted on Greendingle, they haven't really competed with any of the good teams on their schedule and I don't expect them to at this point.
My biggest noodling came on where to put JCU. I find it really hard to gauge them vis a vis the OAC this year. They don't play Mt until the last game so we won't know. I thought about putting them above the Denison/Witt ranking but ultimately kept them below those two.
Olivet sneaks in at 8 for me along with Bluffton at 10 to replace the two dropouts.
I have no plans to rank RHIT at any point. Their losses to Mt St Joe (by 18 pts) and IC are bad (2-6 Augie won @Mt St Joe by 2 scores) and their win over Franklin was more about the reality that is Franklin than the rise of Rose Hulman in my view.
In the HCAC, RHIT smashed Bluffton, 42-19, and Franklin smashed MSJ, 56-24. Not sure what that will do for Franklin, but RHIT will probably inherit Bluffton's votes (unless they go to IWU or someone else).
Elsewhere, in the NCAC things are one helluva mess for NRFP voters, but at least we no longer need to put Denison higher than I suspect most of us felt was warranted! Previously, with the only results amongst them being Denison > Witt > (Wabash + DePauw), I felt it was borderline dishonest to have any NCAC team above Denison (which forced them uncomfortably high). Now the rankable NCAC teams can be assessed in all sorts of justifiable ways! ;D
JCU is a real unknown. They were smacked down by UW-Oshkosh, but so have a number of good teams, and otherwise they simply won't play anyone decent until UMU on the final day of the regular season. IF they actually give them a game, they'll rise on my ballot; if they get smashed like all other UMU opponents, then they'll be revealed as simply the best of the dwarfs in that Disney classic: "UMU and the Seven Dwarfs". (And, yeah, I know the OAC has nine dwarfs, unless JCU turns out not to be! :))
I'm getting very tempted to put my IWU Titans back on my ballot, but so far they are only #11 - it would be ironic if next week they make it by smashing 'BYE'! :)
Here comes another shake up in NRFP! Hey, that's what makes it fun!... Vote wisely men.
I did some movement. Still couldn't commit to Olivet.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 29, 2016, 08:59:33 PM
In the HCAC, RHIT smashed Bluffton, 42-19, and Franklin smashed MSJ, 56-24. Not sure what that will do for Franklin, but RHIT will probably inherit Bluffton's votes (unless they go to IWU or someone else).
Elsewhere, in the NCAC things are one helluva mess for NRFP voters, but at least we no longer need to put Denison higher than I suspect most of us felt was warranted! Previously, with the only results amongst them being Denison > Witt > (Wabash + DePauw), I felt it was borderline dishonest to have any NCAC team above Denison (which forced them uncomfortably high). Now the rankable NCAC teams can be assessed in all sorts of justifiable ways! ;D
JCU is a real unknown. They were smacked down by UW-Oshkosh, but so have a number of good teams, and otherwise they simply won't play anyone decent until UMU on the final day of the regular season. IF they actually give them a game, they'll rise on my ballot; if they get smashed like all other UMU opponents, then they'll be revealed as simply the best of the dwarfs in that Disney classic: "UMU and the Seven Dwarfs". (And, yeah, I know the OAC has nine dwarfs, unless JCU turns out not to be! :))
I'm getting very tempted to put my IWU Titans back on my ballot, but so far they are only #11 - it would be ironic if next week they make it by smashing 'BYE'! :)
No offense but it has been "UMU and the 7 dwarfs"...Wilmington hasn't even made dwarf status yet. :o ;D However, JCU has gotten better each week. I saw the JC/BW game and both looked terrible. Since then JC is playing very good football. They will test Mount in every phase. Golphin can run it and the passing game looks legit. We will see on the 12th in Alliance.
Quote from: smedindy on October 31, 2016, 12:34:27 PM
I did some movement. Still couldn't commit to Olivet.
Not saying that you should or shouldn't be voting for Olivet. I don't know how good they are. But I'll offer this- Olivet is 7-1 against what the NCAA thinks is a way stronger schedule than John Carroll, also 7-1, has played. And normally I would laugh that number right out of the post because the NCAA's SOS is an illusion at times, but I'm not sure there's a whole heck of a lot of difference between the SJF + MIAA/NACC group that the Comets have played and JCU's UWO + OAC schedule.
You also have some common opponents with Olivet and other NRFP teams: Benedicitine, Trine, Hope, Albion
There is plenty of data to argue Olivet should be ranked
And it's really easy to say JCU got blown out by UWO so they shouldn't be ranked. There are 10 teams that are/have been ranked that would get blown out @UWO so, to Wally's point, we don't really know what we have with JCU relative to any of the teams ranked 4-12.
Massey's got them miles apart, though...
Quote from: smedindy on October 31, 2016, 09:27:50 PM
Massey's got them miles apart, though...
Massey also has Trinity (CT) as the #1 ranked team and has W New England ahead of Wittenberg so while useful, must be taken with a grain of salt
I would take most of the pollsters on this boards ratings ahead of Massey.
Quote from: USee on October 31, 2016, 09:53:54 PM
I would take most of the pollsters on this boards ratings ahead of Massey.
I plan to continue completely ignoring Massey for football until he stops ranking NESCAC teams. It is simply dishonest when using a computer program of results to 'rank' teams who are not really in D3 in football!
Quote from: USee on October 31, 2016, 01:25:37 PM
You also have some common opponents with Olivet and other NRFP teams: Benedicitine, Trine, Hope, Albion
There is plenty of data to argue Olivet should be ranked
I ranked them.
Just throw them (the NESCAC) out. I do. Affects nothing about my analysis.If you can't make that adjustment then maybe you're just an obstinate luddite. ;)
And just because it removes emotion and wishcasting from the equation doesn't make it flawed. It's a reference point.
Western New England has basically rolled everyone - and they're helped by Springfield's close game against Hobart and them keeping SJF within an area code.Witt's hurt by the lower half of the NCAC and Denison, while 7-1, having close-ish games against Marietta and Allegheny.
Starting with week 7 or so, all of the relevant teams are 'connected' so there's real data to parse and these connections are helpful.
Yeah, to the extent that I DO reference Massey, I just ignore NESCAC. But when a computer model includes teams which have ZERO bits of information, it makes me wonder about the competence (and ethics) of the programmer. After all, "Garbage In, Garbage Out". Since he is clearly putting garbage in, I gotta wonder what comes out. :o
I'm just not sold on the MIAA:
MIAA non-conference wins:
Elmhurst
Wisconsin Lutheran
Benedictine
Concordia - Chicago (2)
Manchester (2)
Aurora (2)
Concordia - Wisconsin
Pacific
Lakeland
Rockford (2)
Oberlin
Some OK wins there, but all that says is that they're better than the NACC. The best two wins, I think, are Elmhurst and Pacific - mid pack in their conferences that have some elite teams and some meh teams. Would you like to see North Park play Lewis & Clark?
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 01, 2016, 12:37:49 AM
Yeah, to the extent that I DO reference Massey, I just ignore NESCAC. But when a computer model includes teams which have ZERO bits of information, it makes me wonder about the competence (and ethics) of the programmer. After all, "Garbage In, Garbage Out". Since he is clearly putting garbage in, I gotta wonder what comes out. :o
All he does is set the 'average' NESCAC team to the average college football team from all divisions. I think he should set them to the average D3 team. But I think he pays more attention to the entire rankings, since the entire rankings do affect his D1 rankings I believe. Anyway....
Quote from: smedindy on November 01, 2016, 12:44:07 AM
I'm just not sold on the MIAA:
MIAA non-conference wins:
Elmhurst
Wisconsin Lutheran
Benedictine
Concordia - Chicago (2)
Manchester (2)
Aurora (2)
Concordia - Wisconsin
Pacific
Lakeland
Rockford (2)
Oberlin
Some OK wins there, but all that says is that they're better than the NACC. The best two wins, I think, are Elmhurst and Pacific - mid pack in their conferences that have some elite teams and some meh teams. Would you like to see North Park play Lewis & Clark?
Sure, as long as the school is paying for my flight to Portland to call the game.
Quote from: smedindy on November 01, 2016, 12:45:19 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 01, 2016, 12:37:49 AM
Yeah, to the extent that I DO reference Massey, I just ignore NESCAC. But when a computer model includes teams which have ZERO bits of information, it makes me wonder about the competence (and ethics) of the programmer. After all, "Garbage In, Garbage Out". Since he is clearly putting garbage in, I gotta wonder what comes out. :o
All he does is set the 'average' NESCAC team to the average college football team from all divisions. I think he should set them to the average D3 team. But I think he pays more attention to the entire rankings, since the entire rankings do affect his D1 rankings I believe. Anyway....
He doesn't "set" them to average, but that is how it works out. It's essentially a closed loop within a closed loop. So each closed loop inherently has the same average. Massey generally has good ratings relative to other systems, but he rates pretty much everything, and DIII football is probably pretty far down on his priorities. That said, it really doesn't affect the inputs: home/away, teams competing, and score.
Week 9 NRFP:
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FTs46CzM.png&hash=2707b83b089dac323cf605d81bc942e49b5d1d28)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
I'm the third column this week.
I confess to voting by 'crystal ball' this week in one regard - I put Wabash ahead of Witt (despite the h-t-h) in the 'certainty in my mind' that the LGs will have little trouble with Denison this week. (If I'm wrong, Witt will go back ahead next week.) I still have Franklin pretty high because I discount the loss to Butler (making them effectively 6-1, not 6-2), their win over Thomas More is better than ANY NR team except NCC over Wheaton, and their narrow loss to RHIT is not looking all that horrible.
Now, about that voter who has Wheaton SIXTH ...??!! :o
I might comment on the #8 vote for Carthage also, but that will presumably be rendered moot when Carthage picks up their third loss against NCC on Saturday. IF Denison also falls decisively to Wabash, I guess my Titans WILL make it back into the poll after they SMASH BYE (I've heard BYE is so down this year they couldn't beat a Pop Warner team). ;D
I'm the last column... I guess I'm the only one who believes in Denison more than John Carroll. Honestly, I don't trust anyone from 6 (on my ballot) on down
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 01, 2016, 08:16:01 PM
I'm the third column this week.
I confess to voting by 'crystal ball' this week in one regard - I put Wabash ahead of Witt (despite the h-t-h) in the 'certainty in my mind' that the LGs will have little trouble with Denison this week. (If I'm wrong, Witt will go back ahead next week.) I still have Franklin pretty high because I discount the loss to Butler (making them effectively 6-1, not 6-2), their win over Thomas More is better than ANY NR team except NCC over Wheaton, and their narrow loss to RHIT is not looking all that horrible.
Now, about that voter who has Wheaton SIXTH ...??!! :o
I might comment on the #8 vote for Carthage also, but that will presumably be rendered moot when Carthage picks up their third loss against NCC on Saturday. IF Denison also falls decisively to Wabash, I guess my Titans WILL make it back into the poll after they SMASH BYE (I've heard BYE is so down this year they couldn't beat a Pop Warner team). ;D
Makes my leaving out DePauw a few weeks back a look minor. Speaking of which, who is surprised that DePauw did not get any love this week despite beating Denison?
I am the next to last column. Kinda had it hard to move teams up from the bottom half of the poll.
Quote from: Captain_Joe08 on November 01, 2016, 11:33:23 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 01, 2016, 08:16:01 PM
I'm the third column this week.
I confess to voting by 'crystal ball' this week in one regard - I put Wabash ahead of Witt (despite the h-t-h) in the 'certainty in my mind' that the LGs will have little trouble with Denison this week. (If I'm wrong, Witt will go back ahead next week.) I still have Franklin pretty high because I discount the loss to Butler (making them effectively 6-1, not 6-2), their win over Thomas More is better than ANY NR team except NCC over Wheaton, and their narrow loss to RHIT is not looking all that horrible.
Now, about that voter who has Wheaton SIXTH ...??!! :o
I might comment on the #8 vote for Carthage also, but that will presumably be rendered moot when Carthage picks up their third loss against NCC on Saturday. IF Denison also falls decisively to Wabash, I guess my Titans WILL make it back into the poll after they SMASH BYE (I've heard BYE is so down this year they couldn't beat a Pop Warner team). ;D
Makes my leaving out DePauw a few weeks back a look minor. Speaking of which, who is surprised that DePauw did not get any love this week despite beating Denison?
I am the next to last column. Kinda had it hard to move teams up from the bottom half of the poll.
I think most people are just generally uncomfortable with Denison being pretty good, hence DePauw doesn't get credit. I thought somebody might throw DePauw a vote this week, but it isn't totally surprising. I'm definitely seeing a lot of people anchoring Denison and Wabash while they wait for this weekend's result which is totally understandable. My ballot (first column I think) has Denison, Witt, Wabash 5/6/7. I wasn't ready to push Wabash ahead of Witt and not ready to push Witt ahead of Denison just yet. I'll probably move Wabash ahead of Witt if Wabash wins reasonably comfortable this week. If it's close, I'll probably have a fembot head meltdown trying to figure it out. One mitigating factor with Denison is the compromised status of Canaan Gebele- he played but was reportedly not 100%, which can be a factor. Full strength Gebele might have altered that result...also might not have. DePauw appears to have played one of their best games this past weekend, which they needed. They needed it the week prior, tbh, but better late than never. Hopefully that's the best game they put together this year. :)
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 01, 2016, 07:02:02 PM
Week 9 NRFP:
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FTs46CzM.png&hash=2707b83b089dac323cf605d81bc942e49b5d1d28)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
Guys, let me start by saying I really enjoy following this thread. Love all the discussions between you guys, rationale for rankings etc...
However, I feel that IWU is getting a bit shafted here... 2 losses to the #2 & #3 ranked teams in the region. Yes, their loss to NCC was bad... well NCC is a very good team... they (NCC) could make a deep run in the playoffs. They outplayed WC for the first half, then lost the 2nd half in which WC played their best football of the year. My point is, they're "quality" losses. I don't think you can say the same for Franklin (loss to Rose-Hulman), Denison (loss to DePauw), and RHIT (losses to Illinois College & Mt St Joe). IWU's best win is at Carthage and yes, that win isn't as impressive as some of FC, Denison, or RHIT's wins, but they don't have any "bad" losses.
Just wanted to throw that out there...
Also,
I've become a big fan of Logan Hansen's Rankings. He has IWU @ #20, ahead of Wabash (#29), Witt (#30), Franklin (#46), RHIT (#66). Not that the Hansen Rankings are the end-all-be-all, but there's a strong case for IWU to be higher.
... WHAT IS HAPPENING TO ME???... WHY ALL THE LOVE FOR IWU??? :o :o :o
Quote from: thunderdog on November 02, 2016, 11:53:13 AM
Guys, let me start by saying I really enjoy following this thread. Love all the discussions between you guys, rationale for rankings etc...
However, I feel that IWU is getting a bit shafted here... 2 losses to the #2 & #3 ranked teams in the region. Yes, their loss to NCC was bad... well NCC is a very good team... they (NCC) could make a deep run in the playoffs. They outplayed WC for the first half, then lost the 2nd half in which WC played their best football of the year. My point is, they're "quality" losses. I don't think you can say the same for Franklin (loss to Rose-Hulman), Denison (loss to DePauw), and RHIT (losses to Illinois College & Mt St Joe). IWU's best win is at Carthage and yes, that win isn't as impressive as some of FC, Denison, or RHIT's wins, but they don't have any "bad" losses.
Just wanted to throw that out there...
But IWU hasn't beaten anybody that matters. Carthage- maybe? But even that goes away unless Carthage wins this weekend. RHIT, Franklin, and Denison have all won a game against a ranked team. For me at least, who you beat matters more than you who you lost to.
I think IWU is going to be in this top 10 due to attrition over the next two weeks (and may well be in today's official regional rankings), but there's more than enough sound reasoning to have them just outside of the top 10 at this point.
I ranked them when they beat Carthage, and I think I have DPU, Carthage, and Olivet right behind.
This is the fun times in the poll. Early in the season we are all hashing around about comparitive data points. The variance is big. For some teams we get one big win or one bad loss. We argue beginning of the season matters/doesn't matter as much, a tight loss is an anomoly, injuries affected the outcome, etc, etc. Then teams who have a big win add a bad loss and visa versa and we are all stuck trying to make sense of it. It's human nature to anchor on the data point(s) that lend themselves to prove out our own built in biases. That's what makes this poll fun, it's part art part science.
I voted:
1. Mt Union
2. North Central
3. Wheaton
4. Wittenberg
5. John Carroll
6. Olivet
7. Franklin
8. Denison
9. Wabash
10. IWU
There are pro's and cons for most of the teams past #3. For Witt I see wins over Wabash and Depauw and a loss @Denison. Their wins are convincing wins and their loss is on the road in a tight one. Their overall SOS and defensive/offensive rank put them here for me.
John Carroll is an enigma because of the vaccum that is the OAC right now. JCU lost big at UWO (most of these teams would have the same result @UWO) but haven't really stood out, good or bad, the rest of the way. After UWO, their defense has been pretty good so I am giving them the benefit of the doubt this week with #5 ranking. Last week I had them below the NCAC logjam. this week they are in the middle of it.
Olivet is also an interesting case study. They beat Elmhurst more convincingly than Wheaton did, Benedictine in a closer game than Wheaton, Albion more easily than Wabash and have a bad loss to St John Fisher. Their SOS is second in the NR only to Wheaton and that's probably because of so many common opponents. So in the end, for me, a bunch of decent wins over decent teams along with one bad loss to a good/decent team has them 6th. They play Adrian and Trine now so they could solidify their spot or drop out completely.
Franklin...Franklin.....Franklin. Talk about enigma. First of all, the notion that the Butler loss affects anyone's ranking on here is hogwash IMO. I don't even think twice about it. They have been the only 2 loss team ranked for weeks and that's because everyone sees them as a one loss team. My assessment is they have a good win v TMC and a bad loss v RHIT. I know some view the RHIT loss as a sign of strength for Rose-H but RH has 2 really bad losses that say otherwise. Franklin has a great pass offense and not a lot else to hang their hat on. They still stay at #7 for me.
I dropped Denison to #8 and Wabash is #9. That gets sorted out this weekend but I am more bullish on the LG's than I am on Denison, in large part because of Gisele's injury. (Couldn't resist the Tom Brady inference).
IWU checks in at #10 mainly because their body of work and schedule are better than any other two loss team I can find.
I'm the 5th column this week. I threw RHIT in at 9 I suppose because I'm more in Wally's camp as far as valuing who you beat more than who you lose to. That being said it's tough to swallow their losses because they're bad.
I left Olivet at 10. I have been moving IWU on and off my ballot a little. A better showing against Elmhurst likely would have had the Titans at 9 or 10 this week.
JCU is really hard to rank. I think their defense is good. I think they have some good skill guys at RB and WR. They have a green QB. And the OAC doesn't really tell us anything. To be quite honest, with how much turnover there was at Mount combined with a freshman QB I don't even know how much we'll be able to take from the Mount/JCU result. This isn't a typical Mount team.
Wait, Olivet's not second in the North in SOS.
From what I see in the Top 100 (and I may have missed some):
11. Hope
21. OWU
22. Wheaton
32. Hiram
42. ONU
50. Olivet
53. Wittenberg
57. Benedictine
59. Albion
66. Franklin
69. Carroll
70. Capital
72. Wooster
74. Carthage
81. Manchester
82. IWU
84. Augustana
88. DPU
89. North Park
94. Kalamazoo
99. North Central
100. Adrian
Olivet's got a good NCAA SOS - which isn't really a SOS but more of a rating of how good are the records of who you play are. I think the biggest flaw with the NCAA SOS is that for teams in large conferences who choose to round robin then there's one data point outside of your league. It affects hoops too but not AS much.
The SOS for the NCAC and the OAC are going to normalize after they finish their schedule. ONU has a high SOS thanks to playing Utica (having a great year in a tough conference, but they haven't played Wilmington yet, and that will drive their SOS down.
Quote from: smedindy on November 02, 2016, 01:00:45 PM
Wait, Olivet's not second in the North in SOS.
Second amongst the ranked teams + the handful of teams lingering just beyond the top 10 is how I read that.
Quote from: thunderdog on November 02, 2016, 11:57:36 AM
Also,
I've become a big fan of Logan Hansen's Rankings. He has IWU @ #20, ahead of Wabash (#29), Witt (#30), Franklin (#46), RHIT (#66). Not that the Hansen Rankings are the end-all-be-all, but there's a strong case for IWU to be higher.
... WHAT IS HAPPENING TO ME???... WHY ALL THE LOVE FOR IWU??? :o :o :o
Going back to the CCIW board a couple weeks ago... :P
(https://media.giphy.com/media/pVAMI8QYM42n6/giphy.gif)
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 02, 2016, 01:07:26 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 02, 2016, 01:00:45 PM
Wait, Olivet's not second in the North in SOS.
Second amongst the ranked teams + the handful of teams lingering just beyond the top 10 is how I read that.
Yessir. And I am well aware of the limitations of SOS but the point is it does included OOWP and given the many common opponents they have with others on the NRFP its not that hard to infer a value for Olivet. It's completely subjective and likely wrong, but it's not hard.
No. It's not like I'm discounting Olivet all together. I just think there are 10 better teams, at least.
I actually meant to post this in here originally. I'll bring it over as it's not just CCIW-centric.
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 02, 2016, 04:23:52 PM
Quote from: USee on November 02, 2016, 03:37:20 PM
Regional Rankings released:
NORTH
1 Mount Union 8-0 8-0
2 North Central (Illinois) 6-0 8-0
3 Wheaton (Illinois) 7-1 7-1
4 John Carroll 7-1 7-1
5 Olivet 7-1 7-1
6 Denison 7-1 7-1
7 Wittenberg 7-1 7-1
8 Franklin 6-1 6-2
9 Rose-Hulman 7-2 7-2
10 Wabash 7-1 7-1
Some initial thoughts on this list:
- More or less makes sense. The RAC decided to promote John Carroll ahead of the NCAC mess which was one thing I was interested to see.
- Strange that if they're going to rank Rose-Hulman that they wouldn't go ahead and rank Rose-Hulman ahead of Franklin. The placement of those two teams relative to one another doesn't impact the at-large situation, so why not honor the recent h2h?
- Why not Olivet in front of John Carroll? I mean, we know why, but per the criteria- seriously, why not Olivet in front of John Carroll? It doesn't make a ton of sense to me given that...
- Wabash is paying a steep, steep price for that SOS. It's coming up over the last two weeks into something that will look like John Carroll's 0.466 this week (which is good enough for 4th in the absence of any good results), so don't get too crazy, LG fans. I think Denison looks like they'll stay ranked even if they lose this weekend, which is going to give Wabash a 1-1 vs RROs. That, plus another SOS boost for playing DePauw, and a John Carroll loss coming in two weeks means that Wabash could very well jump up behind Wheaton for that 2nd at large position. Franklin is the hair in the soup at the moment- I don't really know how they'll move over the last two weeks relative to other teams that have big games left to play.
And so to conclude my point about JCU/Olivet- if SOS is the thing that knocks Wabash all the way down to 10 on this list (which is totally fair, btw...I don't have an issue with that ranking), then it should be a thing that boosts Olivet (0.556) over John Carroll (0.466). A 0.090 difference in NCAA SOS is enormous and ought to be honored.
Say JCU loses 24-20 or something like that to Mt. Union. Do they stay ahead of the NCAC runner-up with 1 loss?
Quote from: Mugsy on November 02, 2016, 01:11:00 PM
Quote from: thunderdog on November 02, 2016, 11:57:36 AM
Also,
I've become a big fan of Logan Hansen's Rankings. He has IWU @ #20, ahead of Wabash (#29), Witt (#30), Franklin (#46), RHIT (#66). Not that the Hansen Rankings are the end-all-be-all, but there's a strong case for IWU to be higher.
... WHAT IS HAPPENING TO ME???... WHY ALL THE LOVE FOR IWU??? :o :o :o
Going back to the CCIW board a couple weeks ago... :P
(https://media.giphy.com/media/pVAMI8QYM42n6/giphy.gif)
Nailed it yet again Mugsy ;D
Quote from: smedindy on November 02, 2016, 04:24:37 PM
No. It's not like I'm discounting Olivet all together. I just think there are 10 better teams, at least.
You get to believe whatever you want on here. It's like Wally Wonka's Chocolate factory
Today's results:
NORTH
1 Mount Union 8-0 8-0 def. Muskingum 44-0
2 North Central (Illinois) 6-0 8-0 def. Carthage 34-21
3 Wheaton (Illinois) 7-1 7-1 def. Augustana 37-14
4 John Carroll 7-1 7-1 def. Otterbein 49-6
5 Olivet 7-1 7-1 def. Adrian 44-37
6 Denison 7-1 7-1 lost vs. #10 Wabash 14-22
7 Wittenberg 7-1 7-1 def. Kenyon 64-17
8 Franklin 6-1 6-2 def. Anderson 55-34
9 Rose-Hulman 7-2 7-2 BYE
10 Wabash 7-1 7-1 def. #6 Denison 22-14
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 05, 2016, 06:38:25 PM
Today's results:
NORTH
1 Mount Union 8-0 8-0 def. Muskingum 44-0
2 North Central (Illinois) 6-0 8-0 def. Carthage 34-21
3 Wheaton (Illinois) 7-1 7-1 def. Augustana 37-14
4 John Carroll 7-1 7-1 def. Otterbein 49-6
5 Olivet 7-1 7-1 def. Adrian 44-37
6 Denison 7-1 7-1 lost vs. #10 Wabash 14-22
7 Wittenberg 7-1 7-1 def. Kenyon 64-17
8 Franklin 6-1 6-2 def. Anderson 55-34
9 Rose-Hulman 7-2 7-2 BYE
10 Wabash 7-1 7-1 def. #6 Denison 22-14
Given Denison's loss to Wabash, is it fair to assume they fall out of the NCAA North Regional ranking completely? Who's the most likely to slide into the #10 spot? I predict IWU.
Quote from: thunderdog on November 05, 2016, 11:47:14 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 05, 2016, 06:38:25 PM
Today's results:
NORTH
1 Mount Union 8-0 8-0 def. Muskingum 44-0
2 North Central (Illinois) 6-0 8-0 def. Carthage 34-21
3 Wheaton (Illinois) 7-1 7-1 def. Augustana 37-14
4 John Carroll 7-1 7-1 def. Otterbein 49-6
5 Olivet 7-1 7-1 def. Adrian 44-37
6 Denison 7-1 7-1 lost vs. #10 Wabash 14-22
7 Wittenberg 7-1 7-1 def. Kenyon 64-17
8 Franklin 6-1 6-2 def. Anderson 55-34
9 Rose-Hulman 7-2 7-2 BYE
10 Wabash 7-1 7-1 def. #6 Denison 22-14
Given Denison's loss to Wabash, is it fair to assume they fall out of the NCAA North Regional ranking completely? Who's the most likely to slide into the #10 spot? I predict IWU.
That's what I've pondering this evening. I don't know if Denison will drop all the way out. The likely suspects to replace them would be IWU, Bluffton, Hope, Lakeland, Benedictine, or DePauw.
Bluffton and Lakeland have rotten SOS and/or three losses and no RRO wins, so let's take them out.
Hope and Benedictine actually have nice SOS numbers, but they have three losses and are 0-2 vs. RROs.
DePauw lost h2h to Denison, has a bad common opponent result (Witt) with Denison, so they're probably not going to pass Denison either.
So that leaves IWU. IWU has a 0.517 SOS compared to Denison's 0.502. A difference, but not immense. IWU is 0-2 vs. RROs, Denison is 1-1. And, for whatever it's worth, IWU is 6-2 (0.750 win%) and Denison is 7-2 (0.778 win%). I think Denison stays ranked and IWU stays the first team out.
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 06, 2016, 12:12:45 AM
Quote from: thunderdog on November 05, 2016, 11:47:14 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 05, 2016, 06:38:25 PM
Today's results:
NORTH
1 Mount Union 8-0 8-0 def. Muskingum 44-0
2 North Central (Illinois) 6-0 8-0 def. Carthage 34-21
3 Wheaton (Illinois) 7-1 7-1 def. Augustana 37-14
4 John Carroll 7-1 7-1 def. Otterbein 49-6
5 Olivet 7-1 7-1 def. Adrian 44-37
6 Denison 7-1 7-1 lost vs. #10 Wabash 14-22
7 Wittenberg 7-1 7-1 def. Kenyon 64-17
8 Franklin 6-1 6-2 def. Anderson 55-34
9 Rose-Hulman 7-2 7-2 BYE
10 Wabash 7-1 7-1 def. #6 Denison 22-14
Given Denison's loss to Wabash, is it fair to assume they fall out of the NCAA North Regional ranking completely? Who's the most likely to slide into the #10 spot? I predict IWU.
That's what I've pondering this evening. I don't know if Denison will drop all the way out. The likely suspects to replace them would be IWU, Bluffton, Hope, Lakeland, Benedictine, or DePauw.
Bluffton and Lakeland have rotten SOS and/or three losses and no RRO wins, so let's take them out.
Hope and Benedictine actually have nice SOS numbers, but they have three losses and are 0-2 vs. RROs.
DePauw lost h2h to Denison, has a bad common opponent result (Witt) with Denison, so they're probably not going to pass Denison either.
So that leaves IWU. IWU has a 0.517 SOS compared to Denison's 0.502. A difference, but not immense. IWU is 0-2 vs. RROs, Denison is 1-1. And, for whatever it's worth, IWU is 6-2 (0.750 win%) and Denison is 7-2 (0.778 win%). I think Denison stays ranked and IWU stays the first team out.
Nice analysis Wally. I think you're right. Denison win over RRO Witt will probably keep them in the #10 spot ahead of IWU.
I'm still trying to figure out why a win over a RRO is weighted so much more than a "bad" loss. It seems like it should be:
big win > bad lossbut really, it's:
big win >>> bad lossand that doesn't really make sense to me. Yes, I'd take a big win over bad loss, but just slightly so...
Quote from: thunderdog on November 07, 2016, 02:00:15 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 06, 2016, 12:12:45 AM
Quote from: thunderdog on November 05, 2016, 11:47:14 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 05, 2016, 06:38:25 PM
Today's results:
NORTH
1 Mount Union 8-0 8-0 def. Muskingum 44-0
2 North Central (Illinois) 6-0 8-0 def. Carthage 34-21
3 Wheaton (Illinois) 7-1 7-1 def. Augustana 37-14
4 John Carroll 7-1 7-1 def. Otterbein 49-6
5 Olivet 7-1 7-1 def. Adrian 44-37
6 Denison 7-1 7-1 lost vs. #10 Wabash 14-22
7 Wittenberg 7-1 7-1 def. Kenyon 64-17
8 Franklin 6-1 6-2 def. Anderson 55-34
9 Rose-Hulman 7-2 7-2 BYE
10 Wabash 7-1 7-1 def. #6 Denison 22-14
Given Denison's loss to Wabash, is it fair to assume they fall out of the NCAA North Regional ranking completely? Who's the most likely to slide into the #10 spot? I predict IWU.
That's what I've pondering this evening. I don't know if Denison will drop all the way out. The likely suspects to replace them would be IWU, Bluffton, Hope, Lakeland, Benedictine, or DePauw.
Bluffton and Lakeland have rotten SOS and/or three losses and no RRO wins, so let's take them out.
Hope and Benedictine actually have nice SOS numbers, but they have three losses and are 0-2 vs. RROs.
DePauw lost h2h to Denison, has a bad common opponent result (Witt) with Denison, so they're probably not going to pass Denison either.
So that leaves IWU. IWU has a 0.517 SOS compared to Denison's 0.502. A difference, but not immense. IWU is 0-2 vs. RROs, Denison is 1-1. And, for whatever it's worth, IWU is 6-2 (0.750 win%) and Denison is 7-2 (0.778 win%). I think Denison stays ranked and IWU stays the first team out.
Nice analysis Wally. I think you're right. Denison win over RRO Witt will probably keep them in the #10 spot ahead of IWU.
I'm still trying to figure out why a win over a RRO is weighted so much more than a "bad" loss. It seems like it should be:
big win > bad loss
but really, it's:
big win >>> bad loss
and that doesn't really make sense to me. Yes, I'd take a big win over bad loss, but just slightly so...
I actually think it's the opposite. I think teams get hammered way harder for a "bad" loss than they get credit for a "good" win. And to me, that's an error. When we're talking about teams in the at-large pool, we know they can lose. They're in the at-large pool because they lost. I want to know who you can beat. I think invitation to the tournament ought to come along with some kind of demonstration that you can beat a tournament team. That distinction isn't always available, but when it is and we can
know that a team has beaten a tournament team, that should count for so much more than whatever hypothetical results we can cook up in our head.
And I would also say that RRO wins get more weight (if they actually do, which I'm not convinced of), it's because the criteria very specifically say look at those results against ranked opponents. They are highlighted for a reason.
I did some shuffling in the bottom half this week thanks to Denison losing. My top six remained as is from last week. JCU has the most to gain or lose this week in terms of movement on my ballot.
The poll results I know you've all been waiting for tonight...the Week 10 NRFP:
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fcs6iDm7.png&hash=6d41594f3aaa7b77b15afd8e09f69aa6c6a3da7d)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
I'm column 5 AKA "Mr. Franklin". I just noticed that I had the Griz higher than anyone else. I continue to put a lot of weight in the TMC win. It's arguably the best win in the region other than NCC over Wheaton.
I left Denison in at 10 this week mainly because I just don't think there is much difference between Denison, Witt and Wabash. I've watched all 3 of those games and those teams felt very comparable to me. That makes me believe DU is one of the 10 best teams in the region. Couple that with Witt being a better win than anything IWU gives me and I chose to keep IWU in the on deck circle. I can see that one either way though. It really depends on if you're a "who you beat" guy or a "who you lost to" guy, IMO.
11/9 NCAA Rankings:
NORTH
1 Mount Union 9-0 9-0
2 North Central (Illinois) 7-0 9-0
3 Wheaton (Illinois) 8-1 8-1
4 John Carroll 8-1 8-1
5 Olivet 8-1 8-1
6 Wittenberg 8-1 8-1
7 Wabash 8-1 8-1
8 Rose-Hulman 7-2 7-2
9 Franklin 7-1 7-2
10 Illinois Wesleyan 6-2 6-2
This has kind of played out exactly as we thought, with the IWU or Denison question at the end answered in the favor of IWU. Honestly, I don't get it. I don't think IWU has any particular criteria-based reasons to be ranked ahead of Denison, but the move is hardly surprising.
That makes the news for Wabash a tad bittersweet this week. Denison is out when means zero RRO wins for Wabash. The good news is they did jump Franklin and are really in the best possible position entering Week 11. A win this week coupled with a JCU loss (particularly if there is any kind of significant margin behind it) looks today like it will boost Wabash up into the on deck position in the at-large lineup. Which means Wabash would at least get into the conversation. Last week, getting into the conversation was off the table. So there's hope. We'll see how Week 11 plays out.
After considerable thought on this, I think there's only one clear answer as to how the North is ranking its teams and why. And it's not in the criteria, which makes it suspect, iyam.
Per the criteria, John Carroll really can't be ranked ahead of Olivet or Wittenberg. Certainly Olivet. You can also make criteria based arguments for the placement of Franklin ahead of John Carroll as well. I've already outlined why I think Denison ought to be ranked ahead of Illinois Wesleyan. So what's the missing piece? It seems to me that this committee is really being punitive for teams that have lost to an unranked team- which very much is not a criteria.
John Carroll's one loss is to a ranked team (Oshkosh). Olivet doesn't have a loss to an unranked team, so this order still doesn't make any sense. But let's move down the list..Olivet is higher than Witt who has lost to an unranked team (Denison). Witt is higher than Wabash even though Wabash has not lost to an unranked team, the h2h matters more (as it should). Franklin hasn't lost to an unranked team, but they did lose h2h to RHIT which kind of anchors them and that ranking order seems appropriate. And then there's Illinois Wesleyan, being ranked ahead of Denison and DePauw (who I assume are lurking just below the cut line here). IWU has not lost to an unranked team, Denison and DePauw both have (Denison to DePauw itself, DePauw to OWU), even though Denison has a legit RRO win and IWU does not.
That's a longwinded way to say that this committee really seems laser focused on playing the "who did you lose to" game, which I think is so completely backwards. But what can you do. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I'm curious how Wabash jumped Franklin... Franklin 1-1 RRO while Wabash 0-1... Franklin .499 SoS vs Wabash .450... Wabash 8-1 vs Franklin 7-1 (plus the Butler loss)
If they played today I'd pick Wabash to beat Franklin, but based on the criteria I don't see how they're ahead. Does a loss to Butler mean more than a RRO win and almost .05 SoS?
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 11, 2016, 09:29:16 PM
I'm curious how Wabash jumped Franklin... Franklin 1-1 RRO while Wabash 0-1... Franklin .499 SoS vs Wabash .450... Wabash 8-1 vs Franklin 7-1 (plus the Butler loss)
If they played today I'd pick Wabash to beat Franklin, but based on the criteria I don't see how they're ahead. Does a loss to Butler mean more than a RRO win and almost .05 SoS?
You're right, of course, but I think Wally nailed it. This RAC seems to feel that a bad loss trumps nearly anything else, and Franklin lost to RHIT (who lost to unspeakably bad teams ;)) while Wabash lost to Witt.
It's a fair question, and I was surprised this week when Wabash jumped Franklin. But I think this maybe makes a touch more sense than doubling down on JCU ahead of everybody else.
Franklin lost to RHIT which kind of anchors them to RHIT. And if that's the starting point and you're ranking Wabash vs. RHIT, RHIT has the bad losses, Wabash has the better win percentage...the SOS is still poor, but it's not hard to rank Wabash ahead of RHIT, and as a result ahead of Franklin. Why that wasn't the case in the first rankings, I don't know. But this kind of makes sense, if you're willing to accept that Franklin must be ranked behind RHIT (which is debatable...the NRFP certainly doesn't think Franklin has to be ranked behind RHIT).
And that logic would also help explain the IWU/Denison position at the bottom of the rankings. Denison with an equal record to DePauw probably has to get anchored behind DePauw. And then if you're comparing IWU and DePauw, it's not a hard choice to place IWU in front.
And all of that makes it really unclear what they'll do with JCU if they lose. If they think JCU needs to be ranked ahead of Wittenberg, even with a second loss, then Wabash won't get in behind Wheaton in the on deck circle. I'm not sure why that would happen, but I don't understand why JCU is ranked where they are to begin with.
I'd compare the Franklin/RHIT situation to Witt/Denison... Franklin and Witt have lost just once in D3 (to RHIT and Denison respectively) while Rose and Denison both have 2 losses (Rose to Illinois College and MSJ while Denison to Wabash and DePauw). Yet Rose is ranked 1 spot ahead of Franklin but Denison is at a minimum of 5 spots below Witt.
I think we never talk about (and don't want to believe) a dynamic that I absolutely believe is in play with these regional rankings and that is the bias of the committee members. It was alluded to that Northwestern may well be ranked in the West due to the presence of 2 Midwest Conference reps on the West RAC. I think the rankings in general, where the criteria do not give a definitive answer, have this bias present.
I don't know for sure but I would not be at all surprised if, for example, Wheaton reps contacted Mike Yeager and Chris Martin and lobbied for the ranking of IWU to support Wheaton's Pool C bid. I would be fairly sure the presence of two OAC voters has something to do with JCU's placement on the list as well. Going back, I know in 2008 there was a flurry of activity by Wheaton coaches to committee members to get a 2-loss Wheaton ranked ahead of a 2 loss Wooster (When Wooster was ahead of Wheaton in the final public rankings and both won in the final week). As much as we don't want to admit it, this stuff happens and when the criteria don't match the result, you can usually bet it's the result of lobbying and biases.
Back to the drawing board for this week's ballot - UMU just lost (at home, no less) to JCU, 31-28. :o
Through no fault of IWU, I dropped them.
I did rank DPU, but behind Denison and Wabash. The loss to OWU I think offset it, plus they played a short-handed Denison offense. Frankly, from 6-12 are so even.
Quote from: smedindy on November 12, 2016, 09:24:50 PM
Through no fault of IWU, I dropped them.
I did rank DPU, but behind Denison and Wabash. The loss to OWU I think offset it, plus they played a short-handed Denison offense. Frankly, from 6-12 are so even.
Agreed. I might even make it 6-13, adding Carthage. But I raised IWU, from 9 to 8.
I've been voting in the NRFP since it began. Tonight was the first ever ballot where The Machine was not at the top. :o
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 12, 2016, 11:25:21 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 12, 2016, 09:24:50 PM
Through no fault of IWU, I dropped them.
I did rank DPU, but behind Denison and Wabash. The loss to OWU I think offset it, plus they played a short-handed Denison offense. Frankly, from 6-12 are so even.
Agreed. I might even make it 6-13, adding Carthage. But I raised IWU, from 9 to 8.
I've been voting in the NRFP since it began. Tonight was the first ever ballot where The Machine was not at the top. :o
I think every pollster will be doing a few shots doing their ballot this week (including myself). 8-)
Team A: 8-1; 1-1 RRO; .494 SoS
Team B: 9-1; 0-1 RRO; .490 SoS
Sadly we don't use the names Team A and Team B instead it's Franklin and Mount Union.
There was more carnage than I expected so there's still a faint glimmer of hope. The committee has given Franklin some favorable looks letting them host 1st rounds unexpectedly.
Just let me dream :-\
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 13, 2016, 02:18:59 AM
Team A: 8-1; 1-1 RRO; .494 SoS
Team B: 9-1; 0-1 RRO; .490 SoS
Sadly we don't use the names Team A and Team B instead it's Franklin and Mount Union.
There was more carnage than I expected so there's still a faint glimmer of hope. The committee has given Franklin some favorable looks letting them host 1st rounds unexpectedly.
Just let me dream :-\
And if most dont think team A has a chance to get in then Team B probably should not get in either.
I worked on my ballot as I usually do over breakfast tacos and coffee. It feels weird not having Mount Union at the top. I'm sure it won't last too long, though. I'm curious how far UMU fell on the other ballots and that discussion should be interesting.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 13, 2016, 02:18:59 AM
Team A: 8-1; 1-1 RRO; .494 SoS
Team B: 9-1; 0-1 RRO; .490 SoS
Sadly we don't use the names Team A and Team B instead it's Franklin and Mount Union.
There was more carnage than I expected so there's still a faint glimmer of hope. The committee has given Franklin some favorable looks letting them host 1st rounds unexpectedly.
Just let me dream :-\
I'd love to see what y'all could do in the tourney.
It sucks to be sitting this one out but there stand to be some good matchups of North playoff teams. I guess we'll see in a few hours.
It was great voting in this poll again this year. I'm sorry I didn't spend as much time discussing as I have before (or maybe y'all should be thanking me ;)) but work has been a zoo this season. Thanks again to my long time amigo Wally Wabash for doing this.
I've tried multiple times to tell everyone that this isn't a typical Mount team. You'd have to go back to the very early LK years to find a Mount team this average. Without "Raiders" across their chests, you wouldn't recognize them.
JCU is a pretty decent team, but don't start thinking this is JCU circa 2002 that's entering the playoffs. Without seeing the draw, I'd think both Mount and JCU will be very fortunate to win more than 1 playoff game.
It's hard to really see that from the outside, HScoach. We should have realized that the OAC was pretty tepid this year. I think they're well behind the WIAC, MIAC, E8 and NJAC this year, at the least. Maybe others.
But we didn't believe it until it was too late, almost.
If any year the NCAC could play the OAC pretty even, it was this one. Not that Mt. Union couldn't beat Wabash / DPU / Denison, but it wouldn't be a rout. Same with Witt and JCU. And I think the Wabash / Denison / DPU trio could beat anyone else in the OAC.
I wish this D-3 college football season could just go on...
It is always interesting to see the reaction pollsters have when a top team loses. I suspected the reaction to Mt Union losing (#1-#7)would be to glorify JCU (from #16-#6)when it may actually be that both teams are more average than anyone thinks. We will know soon.
Just submitted my ballot. It was surprisingly easier than I expected.
Quote from: HScoach on November 13, 2016, 01:08:51 PM
I've tried multiple times to tell everyone that this isn't a typical Mount team. You'd have to go back to the very early LK years to find a Mount team this average. Without "Raiders" across their chests, you wouldn't recognize them.
JCU is a pretty decent team, but don't start thinking this is JCU circa 2002 that's entering the playoffs. Without seeing the draw, I'd think both Mount and JCU will be very fortunate to win more than 1 playoff game.
I think Mount lucked out on the draw big time. They can win that region and that's not something I was expecting to say prior to the bracket coming out.
In other NR match ups, I'm excited to see how Witt does against TMC. That's a good game. And a looming CCIW rematch in round 2 is fun as well.
I'm at a conference this week for work, gang. I'll try to get this up tomorrow as usual, but no promises. We might have some delay.
And I think TMC beats the brakes off of Witt.
Sorry for the delay this week. We'll do one more at the end of the tournament.
Week 11 NRFP:
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FmymKqgd.png&hash=27244820924b1460879b6d6341fac1bfc9357cdc)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
I'm the one who spanked his alma mater with a #6 vote for losing to JCU. I stuck with my valuing who they've beaten and, quite frankly, Mount hasn't really had any overly impressive wins. The OAC is not good. Now, I think Mount is clearly much better than the 6th best team in the region, but they haven't proven that on the field this year and I'm a biased fan at the end of the day so I went with what we know. I know Franklin beat what I think is a very good TMC squad. I know Witt beat Wabash and DPU, both of whom are better than anyone Mount beat to date. It is what it is. Go win some playoff games and I'll change my tune.
I moved JCU all the way up to #2 because I think their loss is comparable to Wheaton's, but their win at Mount is much better than anything on Wheaton's resume. Had to reward that.
The intriguing "what if" was what if DPU hadn't crapped the bed against OWU? 9-1 with wins over Wabash and Denison is pretty impressive for NRFP purposes.
So much for the demise of the OAC.
I think it's ok to acknowledge that the OAC has two excellent teams and 8 average-to-poor teams and conclude that the league isn't good. Two teams don't define a league. Mount Union and John Carroll can play for the title and you'll not see me concede that the OAC was really good in 2016. It wasn't.
It's also ok to acknowledge most of us were wrong about JCU. Unranked in the NFRP bynsome through mid season and still ranked 9th at 5-1. And while the OAC has 2 very good teams it is completely subjective they have 8 bad teams. OAC still ranks in the upper quartile of leagues IMO. So if that's bad, then many others are terrible.
I think most (including myself) rate the OAC against other conferences, but also against itself historically. It's not good right now. JCU is clearly very good. Mount is very good albeit definitely down for them big time. They benefitted from a very favorable draw in the east. The other 8? Woof.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on December 04, 2016, 03:35:46 PM
I think most (including myself) rate the OAC against other conferences, but also against itself historically. It's not good right now. JCU is clearly very good. Mount is very good albeit definitely down for them big time. They benefitted from a very favorable draw in the east. The other 8? Woof.
^ what he said
Quote from: Dr. Acula on December 04, 2016, 03:35:46 PM
I think most (including myself) rate the OAC against other conferences, but also against itself historically. It's not good right now. JCU is clearly very good. Mount is very good albeit definitely down for them big time. They benefitted from a very favorable draw in the east. The other 8? Woof.
In Kickoff OAC was 4th, mid season (in ATN) down to 8th. I would put them around 5-6 right now. You guys say "not good" relative to 20 years of OAC but it's still better than 20 other conferences. I would place the WIAC, MIAC, E8 and maybe the ASC and CCIW ahead of them. That's really it in my opinion. Down historically for sure, but still almost top 5.
I think where the ranking of conference thing breaks down pretty rapidly is that most leagues have one or two good teams and then 6-8 layers of meh or worse. How much should we care if the 6-4 team from the Centennial would beat the 6-4 team from the MWC? Or if the 2-8 team from the NJAC would beat the 2-8 team from the IIAC? It just doesn't matter. I think there are maybe...three(?) leagues that count as good: WIAC, MIAC, E8. And then the rest are basically all 1-2 team horse races with a lot of filler to pass the time before those 1-2 good teams play one another in the de facto championship game.
So if we want to rank the OAC as the fifth or sixth "best" conference...I mean, fine, but it's still not a good league. There just aren't many good leagues.
I don't think the OAC as a whole has been good for years, but I'm not sure how to rank the others beyond the WIAC and MIAC. The CCIW has been historically better than the OAC too. The E8 has been a very solid conference, but Alfred just won it as the first 10-0 champ in forever and they gave up 70 to the least talented Mount team since the late 80's. So how good is the E8 this season? Previously pretty good, but this year? Not so much.
Really interested in seeing if JCU can repeat that effort against UWO or whether last week points to this being the 2nd season of UWW being good, but not explosive enough to be a legit title threat. And if Mount can put up a 4 quarter fight against MHB. I fear this will be reminiscent of the ugly 2013 Stagg when Mount had completely out classed by UWW.
Quote from: HScoach on December 04, 2016, 06:17:31 PM
I don't think the OAC as a whole has been good for years, but I'm not sure how to rank the others beyond the WIAC and MIAC. The CCIW has been historically better than the OAC too. The E8 has been a very solid conference, but Alfred just won it as the first 10-0 champ in forever and they gave up 70 to the least talented Mount team since the late 80's. So how good is the E8 this season? Previously pretty good, but this year? Not so much.
Really interested in seeing if JCU can repeat that effort against UWO or whether last week points to this being the 2nd season of UWW being good, but not explosive enough to be a legit title threat. And if Mount can put up a 4 quarter fight against MHB. I fear this will be reminiscent of the ugly 2013 Stagg when Mount had completely out classed by UWW.
I would have agreed with that label 3 weeks ago,but after seeing how good JCU is and watching Mount respond well to adversity the last couple weeks, isn't it a little unfair to judge the 2016 raiders while they still have a chance to win it all?
I just don't think it's out of the realm of possibility that they could win a close game against UMHB in belton and win the rematch against JCU in Salem.
I've hinted at what HScoach said. Even previously saying this is 2013 minus Burke. If they battle UMHB for 4 qtr I will tip my hat to this team and coaching staff. That'd be one hell of an effort.
Quote from: USee on December 04, 2016, 03:29:09 PM
It's also ok to acknowledge most of us were wrong about JCU. Unranked in the NFRP bynsome through mid season and still ranked 9th at 5-1. And while the OAC has 2 very good teams it is completely subjective they have 8 bad teams. OAC still ranks in the upper quartile of leagues IMO. So if that's bad, then many others are terrible.
I think it would be more accurate to say we were in wait-and-see mode about JCU, rather than 'wrong'. After all, they lost by 19 to UWO (who turned out to be even better than most expected), and had serious trouble with BW and ONU. Sure they clobbered the other teams, but ya don't get much credit for clobbering Wilma or Marietta! Until they beat UMU, they certainly had nothing on their resume to match up with Franklin over TM, RHIT over Franklin, or Denison over Witt (just to name a few teams, some of whom I didn't even have above JCU at that time; I'm not sure that there was a single team who received any votes in the NRFP who didn't have at least one result better than anything JCU had prior to week 11).
Yes, the OAC is probably about at the bottom of the TOP quartile of conferences, but also yes, many of them are downright godawful.
Agreed, Mr. Y. I've been one of the slowest to come around on John Carroll, but I don't necessarily think I whiffed on evaluating them all year. They started with a tough loss to a tough team, sure, but three months ago they were coming off an 8-2 non-playoff year and starting a freshman QB which comes with way more questions than answers. What they've evolved into over the course of the season- from what I described to a team that has defeated Mount Union, Wesley, and Whitewater in the last month- is really one of the top storylines of the D3 season. But none of us would have or should have seen that in September.
Quote from: Raiderplaybyplay on December 04, 2016, 07:18:54 PM
Quote from: HScoach on December 04, 2016, 06:17:31 PM
I don't think the OAC as a whole has been good for years, but I'm not sure how to rank the others beyond the WIAC and MIAC. The CCIW has been historically better than the OAC too. The E8 has been a very solid conference, but Alfred just won it as the first 10-0 champ in forever and they gave up 70 to the least talented Mount team since the late 80's. So how good is the E8 this season? Previously pretty good, but this year? Not so much.
Really interested in seeing if JCU can repeat that effort against UWO or whether last week points to this being the 2nd season of UWW being good, but not explosive enough to be a legit title threat. And if Mount can put up a 4 quarter fight against MHB. I fear this will be reminiscent of the ugly 2013 Stagg when Mount had completely out classed by UWW.
I would have agreed with that label 3 weeks ago,but after seeing how good JCU is and watching Mount respond well to adversity the last couple weeks, isn't it a little unfair to judge the 2016 raiders while they still have a chance to win it all?
I just don't think it's out of the realm of possibility that they could win a close game against UMHB in belton and win the rematch against JCU in Salem.
I think both of the bolded statements can be true. Mount Union can win the championship this year and be one of the lesser talented Mount Union teams of the last 20 or so years. That's a testament to where the Mount Union baseline is more than anything else.
Alright gang, just a reminder that we'll do one more NRFP at the end of the season now that all of the North Region teams have completed their seasons. No rush this week as your rankings may be influenced by Friday night's championship game.
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 12, 2016, 11:38:11 PM
Alright gang, just a reminder that we'll do one more NRFP at the end of the season now that all of the North Region teams have completed their seasons. No rush this week as your rankings may be influenced by Friday night's championship game.
I meant to send you a ballot before you posted this, but now I'll go ahead and post my ballot. IF UMHB wins by a double-monkey stomp, I may have to reconsider, but otherwise the h-t-h of JCU over UMU prevails. :o
1. JCU
2. UMU
3. Wheaton
4. NCC (aka, 3A, but Wheaton won the BIGGER game)
5. Witt (and beating TM downgraded Franklin)
6. IWU (MAYBE a homer pick, but can't think who'd I'd put ahead of them)
7. Olivet (got stomped by Stagg-bowl bound JCU - the only team I
might put above IWU)
8. Franklin
9. DePauw
10 Denison
11/12 RHIT/Wabash Can we have a 'snow bowl'?
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 13, 2016, 12:15:52 AM
11/12 RHIT/Wabash Can we have a 'snow bowl'?
I'd love to see us get a 2 year series with RHIT set up when we're done with the Albion games. I admit I miss the old ICAC days.
Quote from: Li'l Giant on December 18, 2016, 09:43:35 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 13, 2016, 12:15:52 AM
11/12 RHIT/Wabash Can we have a 'snow bowl'?
I'd love to see us get a 2 year series with RHIT set up when we're done with the Albion games. I admit I miss the old ICAC days.
Wabash, RHIT, Franklin, DPU...that'd be a fun little horse race currently.
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 18, 2016, 09:48:26 PM
Quote from: Li'l Giant on December 18, 2016, 09:43:35 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 13, 2016, 12:15:52 AM
11/12 RHIT/Wabash Can we have a 'snow bowl'?
I'd love to see us get a 2 year series with RHIT set up when we're done with the Albion games. I admit I miss the old ICAC days.
Wabash, RHIT, Franklin, DPU...that'd be a fun little horse race currently.
Fun little horse race and 4 totally different styles of football, which would be awesome to see.
About five years ago there was some very preliminary discussion about forming a new league with Wabash, DePauw, Franklin, and Rose-Hulman at the core. Other schools that might have filled out the number needed included Hanover, and the other institutions in Indiana : Anderson and Manchester. Not Trine, at least to my knowledge. A few non-Indiana schools were part of the thinking, including several in western Ohio and in Illinois, Also, Centre.
Eventually, those preliminary discussions ended, in part because there was concern that a league of only seven members (that is, enough for an automatic bid to the playoffs) was problematic--scheduling non-conference games is increasingly difficult. And there was no good assurance that more than seven would agree to be part of a new conference. There were other reasons as well pertaining to institutional mission and the reluctance of Centre to join the mix.
Wabash and DePauw in the NCAC is a good fit with other liberal-arts colleges. But travel has always been at least a minor issue with the increasing expense and travel times. I would not be surprised if new discussions occur, but that's pure speculation. There are good geographic reasons for such discussions, but also good reasons why many of the schools would not want to leave their current arrangements.
Is there going to be a final poll?
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on December 25, 2016, 08:45:11 PM
Is there going to be a final poll?
Yes, this is happening. Hopefully tomorrow. :)
I've got one outstanding ballot, gang. I promise this is coming.
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 27, 2016, 08:58:54 PM
I've got one outstanding ballot, gang. I promise this is coming.
Tell the voter to hurry up before we forget the entire NR season! Geez, the poll could have been up three weeks ago! ::)
Sometimes no amount of prodding will get that last ballot in. Pretty much every year someone disappears on the Top 25 board, eventually you just have to post without them (and the missing ballot there was not a north region voter so I don't know who's missing here).
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 27, 2016, 08:58:54 PM
I've got one outstanding ballot, gang. I promise this is coming.
If it's that good, then hurry up and post it.
I was the hold up. My bad. I submitted it just now.
We made it...here it is the 2016 Final NRFP:
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FZWIbErY.png&hash=a4f4cfeb55c187a68fdfd22b171d1d7415b843a5)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
Special thanks to all the voters again this year for doing a great job with this. This is fun because we have a thoughtful group here so thanks for the effort and the discussion fodder again this fall.
Looks about the way I expected. (Mine is the center ballot.) To me, there was a clear top 5 (and a clear order of those five, as six voters agreed), then all sorts of possibilities for the remainder.
I'm very interested in Olivet receiving a #5 vote. Two spots ahead of Witt? Full disclosure I didn't even rank Olivet so clearly my perspective is different.
Agree with Mr. Y regarding the first five and then the hodgepodge behind that. Of the seven other teams on the poll and ORV, you could pick any five in pretty much any order and it makes some kind of sense.
I did an eyebrow raise when I saw a couple of ballots with North Central ahead of Wheaton. There is a season split here, so I guess there are some reasonable pathways to that ordering. I did a double eyebrow raise at Mount Union ahead of John Carroll. I'm just not sure I see what's there on the Mount Union profile that trumps the h2h result, and it's not as if John Carroll didn't validate that result through the postseason.
Wally,
Thanks for running with this again. Your efforts are what allows us all to engage in the discussions, appreciate it again!
On Olivet I think ranking them 5 might be a bit high (obviously since I have them at 6) but not ranking them is equally questionable. There are enough common opponents with others in the poll that put them in the mix. I don't see anyway Olivet should be lower than RHIT as an example. Every piece of criteria says they are better than RHIT and the 2 RHIT losses are the worst losses on the board IMO. I had a hard time putting them at 10 but I ultimately did.
Quote from: USee on December 29, 2016, 11:04:12 AM
Wally,
Thanks for running with this again. Your efforts are what allows us all to engage in the discussions, appreciate it again!
On Olivet I think ranking them 5 might be a bit high (obviously since I have them at 6) but not ranking them is equally questionable. There are enough common opponents with others in the poll that put them in the mix. I don't see anyway Olivet should be lower than RHIT as an example. Every piece of criteria says they are better than RHIT and the 2 RHIT losses are the worst losses on the board IMO. I had a hard time putting them at 10 but I ultimately did.
I can't speak for the other person who left Olivet out, but I didn't rank them because I looked at their schedule and wondered who they beat that was really any good. As Wally brought up earlier, some people are best wins guys and some are best losses guys. I'm a wins guy. Show me you can beat a good team. I don't think they beat any. And they definitely didn't beat anyone close to Wabash/DPU/TMC like Witt did.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on December 29, 2016, 12:00:17 PM
Quote from: USee on December 29, 2016, 11:04:12 AM
Wally,
Thanks for running with this again. Your efforts are what allows us all to engage in the discussions, appreciate it again!
On Olivet I think ranking them 5 might be a bit high (obviously since I have them at 6) but not ranking them is equally questionable. There are enough common opponents with others in the poll that put them in the mix. I don't see anyway Olivet should be lower than RHIT as an example. Every piece of criteria says they are better than RHIT and the 2 RHIT losses are the worst losses on the board IMO. I had a hard time putting them at 10 but I ultimately did.
I can't speak for the other person who left Olivet out, but I didn't rank them because I looked at their schedule and wondered who they beat that was really any good. As Wally brought up earlier, some people are best wins guys and some are best losses guys. I'm a wins guy. Show me you can beat a good team. I don't think they beat any. And they definitely didn't beat anyone close to Wabash/DPU/TMC like Witt did.
I'm the other with Olivet out, and basically for the same reason. It kind of became a process of elimination for me. Franklin beat Thomas More, who I think is really good (and Witt did as well which has second-hand effect on Witt's other opponents) and RHIT beat Franklin so those two kind of get tethered together for me. Same kind of deal with the non-Witt NCAC's on my ballot- there's not a lot of separation there. DPU won at Wabash at the last minute, Wabash won a nailbiter at Denison narrowly, and despite losing to both DPU and Wabash (grinding through those two games with a limited Canaan Gebele, btw) Denison beat Wittenberg. And once I kind of identified those five, I needed something from Olivet to break through into that group and it just wasn't there. The Comets had a postseason opportunity, but didn't show particularly well there either. So against teams that live amongst the top 10 or so in their regions, Olivet was 0-2 having lost by 42 and 25...which just wasn't good enough for me.
I didn't put Olivet ahead of Witt. I don't feel like RHIT is in anyway "tethered" to Franklin. They have two other losses that decouple them from that analysis. Olivet beat Benedictine, Trine, Alma and Hope, all of which are as good (at least as a group if not individually) as a win over Denison. Olivet wasn't 0-2, they were 9-2. They also had a convincing win @Albion where Wabash was fortunate to win.
I think its a mistake to think of it as being a Wins "or" losses guy. That's a trap mentality. You have to look at both. It's just as flawed to say RHIT beat Franklin so they are "tethered" as it is to say they had 2 bad losses. Olivet beat everybody they played and their schedule was better than RHIT and several others in the top 10. They don't have a "signature win" but they have a group of wins that are better than most of the other teams "group wins".
I could make an argument that Depauw is ahead of Olivet on my ballot (good wins against Witt/Wabash bad loss to OWU) but no way I could see putting RHIT or Wabash ahead of them. RHIT with 2 bad losses and 1 quality win, Wabash with no real quality wins any better than Olivet's and 2 losses and the Comets had a group of wins over 7-3/6-4 teams and 2 losses that every team from 6-10 would have had as well. That was more consistent than anything I saw from the teams below them.
This is an interesting construct:
Quote from: USee on December 29, 2016, 01:41:08 PM
Olivet beat everybody they played and their schedule was better than RHIT and several others in the top 10. They don't have a "signature win" but they have a group of wins that are better than most of the other teams "group wins".
and
Quote from: USee on December 29, 2016, 01:41:08 PM
the Comets had a group of wins over 7-3/6-4 teams and 2 losses that every team from 6-10 would have had as well. That was more consistent than anything I saw from the teams below them.
So you're saying that Olivet's schedule was stronger even though they won a bunch of games against average-ish teams that all of the teams you ranked behind them also would have won? So even though Olivet's schedule was stronger, they've benefitted in your ballot essentially by virtue of not having to play anybody really tough (if you don't count the two times that they did play tough teams and caught unmerciful beatemdowns on both occasions).
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 29, 2016, 02:36:49 PM
This is an interesting construct:
Quote from: USee on December 29, 2016, 01:41:08 PM
Olivet beat everybody they played and their schedule was better than RHIT and several others in the top 10. They don't have a "signature win" but they have a group of wins that are better than most of the other teams "group wins".
and
Quote from: USee on December 29, 2016, 01:41:08 PM
the Comets had a group of wins over 7-3/6-4 teams and 2 losses that every team from 6-10 would have had as well. That was more consistent than anything I saw from the teams below them.
So you're saying that Olivet's schedule was stronger even though they won a bunch of games against average-ish teams that all of the teams you ranked behind them also would have won? So even though Olivet's schedule was stronger, they've benefitted in your ballot essentially by virtue of not having to play anybody really tough (if you don't count the two times that they did play tough teams and caught unmerciful beatemdowns on both occasions).
I'm saying (and the SOS numbers agree) that their schedule was tougher than anyone behind them and they beat that schedule. Wabash didn't, RHIT didn't, Depauw didn't and Denison didn't. I have no idea if the teams behind Olivet would have done the same. There are 4 wins on Olivet's resume that are better than losing to OWU and Denison.
You didn't rank Olivet because they were 0-2 against John Carroll and STF. Who in the bottom half of the top ten was anything other than 0-2 against those two? Olivet was ranked 6th on my ballot because I think they are better than anyone below them and if they played them they would win.
Quote from: USee on December 29, 2016, 03:09:56 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 29, 2016, 02:36:49 PM
This is an interesting construct:
Quote from: USee on December 29, 2016, 01:41:08 PM
Olivet beat everybody they played and their schedule was better than RHIT and several others in the top 10. They don't have a "signature win" but they have a group of wins that are better than most of the other teams "group wins".
and
Quote from: USee on December 29, 2016, 01:41:08 PM
the Comets had a group of wins over 7-3/6-4 teams and 2 losses that every team from 6-10 would have had as well. That was more consistent than anything I saw from the teams below them.
So you're saying that Olivet's schedule was stronger even though they won a bunch of games against average-ish teams that all of the teams you ranked behind them also would have won? So even though Olivet's schedule was stronger, they've benefitted in your ballot essentially by virtue of not having to play anybody really tough (if you don't count the two times that they did play tough teams and caught unmerciful beatemdowns on both occasions).
I'm saying (and the SOS numbers agree) that their schedule was tougher than anyone behind them and they beat that schedule. Wabash didn't, RHIT didn't, Depauw didn't and Denison didn't. I have no idea if the teams behind Olivet would have done the same. There are 4 wins on Olivet's resume that are better than losing to OWU and Denison.
You didn't rank Olivet because they were 0-2 against John Carroll and STF. Who in the bottom half of the top ten was anything other than 0-2 against those two? Olivet was ranked 6th on my ballot because I think they are better than anyone below them and if they played them they would win.
I didn't rank Olivet because I don't know who's actually good that they can beat and they had chances. The teams that I have ranked ahead of Olivet on my ballot achieved something significant against at least one good team in 2016. Olivet doesn't have that. Olivet had two chances to differentiate themselves and they got squashed on both occasions.
The Olivet quandary for me comes from the fact that they have nine wins that don't move any needle anywhere and two losses that indicate that they aren't close to playing top quartile regional ball. Everybody that I have ranked ahead of them- Franklin, RHIT, Wabash, DePauw, Denison- they all verified their quality against top regional competition. Could/would Olivet beat one of the NCAC runners up? Maybe? I don't think there are any results here that would say definitely yes.
And I couldn't disagree more with your analysis. I don't have any teams below Olivet that I could confidently say would beat the teams they played and every one of them would get pounded by the same two teams they did. Olivet beat every team they were favored to beat or were equal to and lost to the 2 teams they were double digit underdogs to. Wabash didn't do that, Depauw didn't do that, RHIT certainly didn't do that, not even Witt did that.
Quote from: USee on December 29, 2016, 06:10:27 PM
And I couldn't disagree more with your analysis. I don't have any teams below Olivet that I could confidently say would beat the teams they played and every one of them would get pounded by the same two teams they did. Olivet beat every team they were favored to beat or were equal to and lost to the 2 teams they were double digit underdogs to. Wabash didn't do that, Depauw didn't do that, RHIT certainly didn't do that, not even Witt did that.
1) I'm curious who OC played in those 9 games that you think could beat a good team. I guess Hope would be the best bet?
2) There is no chance that any of those NCAC teams gets beat by SJF by 6 TD's. I wouldn't be surprised if at least one of the NCAC teams beat SJF.
Quote from: USee on December 29, 2016, 06:10:27 PM
And I couldn't disagree more with your analysis. I don't have any teams below Olivet that I could confidently say would beat the teams they played and every one of them would get pounded by the same two teams they did. Olivet beat every team they were favored to beat or were equal to and lost to the 2 teams they were double digit underdogs to. Wabash didn't do that, Depauw didn't do that, RHIT certainly didn't do that, not even Witt did that.
It's fair even if I disagree. Like I said earlier, I think people can rank any of the teams beneath Witt in any order and it's not unreasonable. Maybe you think we've been too high on the NCAC as a whole this year? One person can see this year's NCAC as being more competitive at the top and another can look at the same results and say the top of the NCAC wasn't as good as it has been, hence the extra competition. I'm not sure we really know which is right.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on December 29, 2016, 06:59:11 PM
Quote from: USee on December 29, 2016, 06:10:27 PM
And I couldn't disagree more with your analysis. I don't have any teams below Olivet that I could confidently say would beat the teams they played and every one of them would get pounded by the same two teams they did. Olivet beat every team they were favored to beat or were equal to and lost to the 2 teams they were double digit underdogs to. Wabash didn't do that, Depauw didn't do that, RHIT certainly didn't do that, not even Witt did that.
1) I'm curious who OC played in those 9 games that you think could beat a good team. I guess Hope would be the best bet?
2) There is no chance that any of those NCAC teams gets beat by SJF by 6 TD's. I wouldn't be surprised if at least one of the NCAC teams beat SJF.
So now Olivet's opponents are on trial? I think you just need to look at the SOS of the relative teams that takes all that into account. Which of the teams in the bottom half of the top ten would have beaten JCU or STJF? Depauw lost to OWU at home by 22, Wabash was lucky to beat 1-9 Albion in OT and beat 2 teams with winning records, Denison beat 2 teams with winning records. You don't think any of those teams could lose badly @STJF and JCU?
Did you ever actually watch Olivet play? I saw every team in the top 12-15 play at least 2x. How many games did you watch?
If you guys want to split hairs about Olivet being ranked 6,7,8, that's fine but not ranking them at all when their numbers are significantly better than any of those other bottom half teams is where I disagree.
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 29, 2016, 09:13:03 PM
Quote from: USee on December 29, 2016, 06:10:27 PM
And I couldn't disagree more with your analysis. I don't have any teams below Olivet that I could confidently say would beat the teams they played and every one of them would get pounded by the same two teams they did. Olivet beat every team they were favored to beat or were equal to and lost to the 2 teams they were double digit underdogs to. Wabash didn't do that, Depauw didn't do that, RHIT certainly didn't do that, not even Witt did that.
It's fair even if I disagree. Like I said earlier, I think people can rank any of the teams beneath Witt in any order and it's not unreasonable. Maybe you think we've been too high on the NCAC as a whole this year? One person can see this year's NCAC as being more competitive at the top and another can look at the same results and say the top of the NCAC wasn't as good as it has been, hence the extra competition. I'm not sure we really know which is right.
That's the crux. I have watched a lot of NCAC football in the past several years and Wabash was not nearly as good this year as they were the past 2 years. I think Denison has a good run and everyone thinks the NCAC is better because 4 teams are beating each other. I am not so sure the top didn't come back to the pack a little. I am decidedly not an Olivet apologist but I do think they are a top 10 team in the region this year compared to everyone else I watched.
Quote from: USee on December 29, 2016, 09:13:32 PM
So now Olivet's opponents are on trial? I think you just need to look at the SOS of the relative teams that takes all that into account.
The SOS thing is tricky because I don't think we have a particularly good way to measure it and compare teams from leagues that play four non-league games to teams that play just one. The NCAA's SOS is hot garbage and borderline useless. Or is at least badly misnamed. I know some of the other computer models also rank Olivet's schedule higher than the other teams in this conversation (thought not nearly as wide a margin as the NCAA's vapid system), but how much of that is buttressed by the MIAA's strong record vs. the NACC? There are some real quality opponents in that MIAA non-league schedule that help a lot (Wheaton, Wabash, UW-SP, Monmouth, SJF) but the MIAA squads lost those games pretty badly (yes, Wabash vs. Albion excluded). I think there's a bit of fool's gold there in the MIAA's SOS figures...largely noncompetitive vs. the very strong teams, lots of wins against the NACC and other sub-150 teams. All of which is to say that while the SOS math tells us that there is a huge gulf between the schedule Olivet played and the schedule the NCACs or HCACs played, I'm not convinced that Olivet actually played a schedule all that different in overall difficulty than Wabash/DPU/Denison/Franklin/RHIT. SOS is just a hard thing to clarify with so many teams, so few games, and so few points of intersection.
Quote from: USee on December 29, 2016, 09:13:32 PM
So now Olivet's opponents are on trial? I think you just need to look at the SOS of the relative teams that takes all that into account. Which of the teams in the bottom half of the top ten would have beaten JCU or STJF? Depauw lost to OWU at home by 22, Wabash was lucky to beat 1-9 Albion in OT and beat 2 teams with winning records, Denison beat 2 teams with winning records. You don't think any of those teams could lose badly @STJF and JCU?
Did you ever actually watch Olivet play? I saw every team in the top 12-15 play at least 2x. How many games did you watch?
If you guys want to split hairs about Olivet being ranked 6,7,8, that's fine but not ranking them at all when their numbers are significantly better than any of those other bottom half teams is where I disagree.
Now? In my first post on OC I questioned their opponents. That's what I meant when I said they didn't beat anyone good. I didn't think that was really very controversial.
Conservatively I'd say I watched 40 games in total. I watched OC twice. Unfortunately one of those two was against JCU where they looked like they were comparable to Heidelberg. Very similar games. And no, I am not saying Berg is as good as OC. OC is clearly better. OC faced JCU much later in the year when they were playing their best. That was just the game it reminded me of.
I think Witt, Wabash, DPU and Denison would be 7-10 point favorites against Olivet. I think OWU would be a pick 'em.
The pillow fight between the bottom of the NCAC and the bottom of the MIAA would be interesting.
Quote from: smedindy on December 30, 2016, 12:57:00 PM
I think Witt, Wabash, DPU and Denison would be 7-10 point favorites against Olivet. I think OWU would be a pick 'em.
The pillow fight between the bottom of the NCAC and the bottom of the MIAA would be interesting.
That would assume the NCAC teams are all equal, which they are not.
Massey puts the matchups against Olivet like this:
Witt -14
Wabash -7
Depauw pickem
Denison pickem
OWU +6
Hansen's final ratings went like this:
4. UMU
6. JCU
8. Wheaton
10. North Central
24. IWU
28. Witt
37. Wabash
53. Depauw
64. Franklin
68. Olivet
69. RHIT
79. Denison
87. OWU
Quote from: USee on December 30, 2016, 02:24:15 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 30, 2016, 12:57:00 PM
I think Witt, Wabash, DPU and Denison would be 7-10 point favorites against Olivet. I think OWU would be a pick 'em.
The pillow fight between the bottom of the NCAC and the bottom of the MIAA would be interesting.
That would assume the NCAC teams are all equal, which they are not.
They did all beat one another, so maybe not equal,
per se, but there wasn't a whole lot of differentiation amongst the top 4 NCACs.
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 30, 2016, 02:40:41 PM
Quote from: USee on December 30, 2016, 02:24:15 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 30, 2016, 12:57:00 PM
I think Witt, Wabash, DPU and Denison would be 7-10 point favorites against Olivet. I think OWU would be a pick 'em.
The pillow fight between the bottom of the NCAC and the bottom of the MIAA would be interesting.
That would assume the NCAC teams are all equal, which they are not.
They did all beat one another, so maybe not equal, per se, but there wasn't a whole lot of differentiation amongst the top 4 NCACs.
Well OWU beat Depauw by 22 and I don't hear anyone saying those two are equal. Hansen has a 50 team spread between #1 and #4 and Massey clearly differentiates. Depends on how you define "differentiation". I think you have to look at a team's entire resume to get a better picture. Depauw loses at home to OWU then beats Wabash on the road. One game results don't tell the whole story.
Quote from: USee on December 30, 2016, 02:56:36 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 30, 2016, 02:40:41 PM
Quote from: USee on December 30, 2016, 02:24:15 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 30, 2016, 12:57:00 PM
I think Witt, Wabash, DPU and Denison would be 7-10 point favorites against Olivet. I think OWU would be a pick 'em.
The pillow fight between the bottom of the NCAC and the bottom of the MIAA would be interesting.
That would assume the NCAC teams are all equal, which they are not.
They did all beat one another, so maybe not equal, per se, but there wasn't a whole lot of differentiation amongst the top 4 NCACs.
Well OWU beat Depauw by 22 and I don't hear anyone saying those two are equal. Hansen has a 50 team spread between #1 and #4 and Massey clearly differentiates. Depends on how you define "differentiation". I think you have to look at a team's entire resume to get a better picture. Depauw loses at home to OWU then beats Wabash on the road. One game results don't tell the whole story.
Right, which is why I get confused by your logic sometimes. You destroy teams for what you deem one bad loss. There's more going on than just that one result.
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 30, 2016, 03:52:55 PM
Quote from: USee on December 30, 2016, 02:56:36 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 30, 2016, 02:40:41 PM
Quote from: USee on December 30, 2016, 02:24:15 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 30, 2016, 12:57:00 PM
I think Witt, Wabash, DPU and Denison would be 7-10 point favorites against Olivet. I think OWU would be a pick 'em.
The pillow fight between the bottom of the NCAC and the bottom of the MIAA would be interesting.
That would assume the NCAC teams are all equal, which they are not.
They did all beat one another, so maybe not equal, per se, but there wasn't a whole lot of differentiation amongst the top 4 NCACs.
Well OWU beat Depauw by 22 and I don't hear anyone saying those two are equal. Hansen has a 50 team spread between #1 and #4 and Massey clearly differentiates. Depends on how you define "differentiation". I think you have to look at a team's entire resume to get a better picture. Depauw loses at home to OWU then beats Wabash on the road. One game results don't tell the whole story.
Right, which is why I get confused by your logic sometimes. You destroy teams for what you deem one bad loss. There's more going on than just that one result.
Right, which is why I get confused by your logic. You elevate teams for what you deem one good win. There is indeed more going on. RHIT is a case study. One good win 2 bad losses, yet you fixate on the Franklin win and "couple" them. Faulty logic to me.
First, thanks to Wally for doing this again this season. I enjoy this poll, despite not being a huge part of the discussion this year. Work was crazy this season.
I'm the 3rd column from the right.
I agree with the pu pu platter at the bottom. I think any order in that 6-10 group can be justified.
I think Hanson's model is too down on Denison, BTW. With only 10-games it's really hard to have a rigorous model, especially with the limited non-conference schedules.
Quote from: USee on December 30, 2016, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 30, 2016, 03:52:55 PM
Quote from: USee on December 30, 2016, 02:56:36 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 30, 2016, 02:40:41 PM
Quote from: USee on December 30, 2016, 02:24:15 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 30, 2016, 12:57:00 PM
I think Witt, Wabash, DPU and Denison would be 7-10 point favorites against Olivet. I think OWU would be a pick 'em.
The pillow fight between the bottom of the NCAC and the bottom of the MIAA would be interesting.
That would assume the NCAC teams are all equal, which they are not.
They did all beat one another, so maybe not equal, per se, but there wasn't a whole lot of differentiation amongst the top 4 NCACs.
Well OWU beat Depauw by 22 and I don't hear anyone saying those two are equal. Hansen has a 50 team spread between #1 and #4 and Massey clearly differentiates. Depends on how you define "differentiation". I think you have to look at a team's entire resume to get a better picture. Depauw loses at home to OWU then beats Wabash on the road. One game results don't tell the whole story.
Right, which is why I get confused by your logic sometimes. You destroy teams for what you deem one bad loss. There's more going on than just that one result.
Right, which is why I get confused by your logic. You elevate teams for what you deem one good win. There is indeed more going on. RHIT is a case study. One good win 2 bad losses, yet you fixate on the Franklin win and "couple" them. Faulty logic to me.
Can't ignore that h2h win and just say Franklin is better than RHIT. I mean you
can as you've done, but I can't. I think that's unfair to RHIT and the achievement of going on the road and winning the HCAC against the guys that have ruled the roost for decade. That's a big deal. It's a bigger deal than just not losing to Alma/Kalamazoo/Adrian/Albion.
It's not faulty logic, it's just different than yours. You judge teams heavily on who they lose to. I judge teams heavily on who they beat. I'm a carrot guy, you're a stick guy. Just different POVs.
Uh are we doing a fanpoll this year?
I think we usually wait until a few days after Kickoff comes out to do the preseason poll. Wally can confirm as my memory may be failing me!
For the national top 25 poll I've already posted to get things rolling but the deadline is after Kickoff is released
Quote from: Captain_Joe08 on August 17, 2017, 08:56:30 AM
Uh are we doing a fanpoll this year?
Totally. I think is a really fun forum during the season so I don't think it's going anywhere. Kickoff launches on Tuesday (please subscribe if you haven't yet!! (http://d3football.com/notables/2017/08/order-kickoff-2017-now)), so maybe we can get preseason ballots in by 8/25?
I just sent in my preseason ballot. Thanks for running it again, Wally! +k, sir.
As for the ballot itself...I thought the top 4 were so close. IMO there's no right or wrong order there. I actually thought that it was very difficult to rank the bottom half again.
My ballot is in. I had 15 teams up for my 10 spots. Top 5 were pretty easy and picking the rest is a bit of a crapshoot but Kickoff definitely helped!
I'm in. Had an office move so finally all settled.
Here is your preseason NRFP. One abstention this week so we have eight ballots instead of the usual nine. Should be back to full strength next week.
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FBe6qloW.png&hash=ac650c7f7b26b34738896a76b5da445df7a81907)
click to enlarge
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
We're back! Finally. A few thoughts:
I'm not questioning the consensus, but I thought someone may have gone with a non-Mount #1. If it ain't broke I guess.
While I am cautiously optimistic about Denison, I am mildly surprised they were outside the top 10 on 3 of the 8 ballots.
I figured I was going to be the most bullish on Franklin (#6) but someone bested my blue tinted glasses! As usual Franklin had a wide spread (4 to 9). Opening with TMC will hopefully help us out with gauging the Grizz.
I'm the outlier on Wheaton, just a gut. I think Wheaton / NC / John Carroll are close to even, and Witt just slightly behind.
I'm disappointed in Wheaton's NC schedule - Benedictine and K'Zoo won't tell us much.
Meanwhile, JC opening up with UW-O is brilliant. IF there's anything that can be a 'good loss' (not in the criteria, but still...) it's a close one to Oshkosh. And if they win, well they may just defend their OAC crown
I was the 6th column. I had the most teams in the ORV category with 3. At least I was with the consensus of which teams were in the top 7.
2-4 are really 2a 2b and 2c as they're 6-8 on my top 25 ballot. I thought I was stretching it a bit putting Franklin at 7 but I didn't have anyone else to stick up there. Hopefully whoever put them at #4 is right :). IWU was team 10b with Denison and Rose-Hulman next in line.
I'm the column that had RHIT at 10. I'm going in on Denison and I'm between cautiously optimistic and bullish on RHIT. I'm also frequently wrong.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on August 26, 2017, 02:04:09 PM
We're back! Finally. A few thoughts:
I'm not questioning the consensus, but I thought someone may have gone with a non-Mount #1. If it ain't broke I guess.
While I am cautiously optimistic about Denison, I am mildly surprised they were outside the top 10 on 3 of the 8 ballots.
I figured I was going to be the most bullish on Franklin (#6) but someone bested my blue tinted glasses! As usual Franklin had a wide spread (4 to 9). Opening with TMC will hopefully help us out with gauging the Grizz.
I couldn't find a good reason to not pick Mount Union #1 here (not that I'm actively looking for reasons to do so). The guys that beat them last year lost the coaching staff. That's a big deal. Kickoff readers know I'm super bullish on Wheaton, but I don't know who is playing QB at Wheaton and that's a bit too much question mark to make them #1. I think Wheaton is really the only other semi-reasonable option for that spot, but you kind of have to hand wave around the QB thing to get there.
And I'm the 4 on Franklin. Franklin has a badass senior quarterback which is an incredibly valuable and rare piece. As much as this poll- this week in particular- is a measure of potential, Burton really moves the needle.
The stud senior QB thinking was what kind of drove my Franklin and Denison thinking. I liked Gebele a lot the couple times I saw him last year.
I was torn somewhat on what to do with Wabash. Not sure what's going on at QB there. The only things I was sure of were a stout D and a solid running game. That's good stuff, but I'm not sure where that leaves you relative to the competition especially if we think Denison may be ascending a little.
I'm interested to see what the new staff wants to do offensively at JCU. They're going to be just nasty in the front 7 on D and they return both starting RB's and QB (who can run). I wonder if that combined with the losses at WR/TE doesn't spell more ground and pound. Unfortunately you're not just going to run the ball at will on UWO so we'll learn about the new pass catchers right away!
Gebele is just a junior! :o
Column 4 for me.
I found this easier than most years because many of these teams have a lot of returning players. For me that's always easier to predict in the pre-season. I flirted with a non MUC #1 but in the end they are still the team to beat in the North. UMU has 16 starters back (9 on D) from a team that was playing their best at the end of the year. JCU has only 13 starters back and a new coach so there is much more uncertainty for me. Easiest was Wheaton and NCC. The Thunder return 19 starters from a final 8 team (10 on a defense that led nation in sacks). I don't need to see what they do against Bendecitine and Kzoo to know they are going to be there at the end. Same with NCC. They have one of the best QB's in the country and a top line Defensive front (top 3 in country in sacks). I am pretty sure they will be top 10 all year.
Witt was the hardest for me. They have only 11 back and I flirted with bumping them below Denison (18 starters return with 9 on Offense) but I put them ahead of Denison and Wabash for now.
I feel like Carthage (19 returning starters from 7-3 team) has a better team right now than IWU (17 starters from 7-3 team) so I ranked them ahead of the Titans. Wabash (15 returning starters, 2nd year coach) I am looking for a bounce back from last year.
Quote from: wally_wabash on August 27, 2017, 04:01:43 PM
Gebele is just a junior! :o
You'd think I wouldn't have been too lazy to look that up before posting...oops!
Looking at the schedule there are some nice games for us to chew on from a NRFP perspective this weekend.
UWO/JCU is obviously the game of the week involving a NR team. But also...
TMC/Franklin
UWW/IWU
Berg/Olivet
Hope/Monmouth
I like it. Some good stuff to watch right out of the gate. Only a few more days!
Franklin's D gave up 246 yards in the 1st QUARTER. Yikes. Burton better make sure that arm is stretched out today.
Sent my ballot in. IMO was a little tough to hash out a ballot this week due to the results put forth by the teams in the poll (and ORV).
Final tally coming early this evening.
NRFP through games of Week 1:
(https://i.imgur.com/ESRRAiC.png)
click to enlarge
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
I threw Lakeland a bone. The #10 team was tough to determine.
Quote from: smedindy on September 05, 2017, 06:44:33 PM
I threw Lakeland a bone. The #10 team was tough to determine.
Agreed. I had Carthage (I'm the last column), but could easily be talked into any of the ORV teams (and perhaps a couple of others, to boot).
I was column 4 (I had all 10 that finished in the top 10? I demand a recount ;D). I have IWU 15th on my top 25 ballot but that's only good for 6th in the north right now.
I'm rather surprised at the size of the drop Franklin took... they lost by 10 to a team that was ranked 4th by the South voters. The only team that jumped them on my ballot was IWU
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 05, 2017, 08:59:26 PM
I was column 4 (I had all 10 that finished in the top 10? I demand a recount ;D). I have IWU 15th on my top 25 ballot but that's only good for 6th in the north right now.
I'm rather surprised at the size of the drop Franklin took... they lost by 10 to a team that was ranked 4th by the South voters. The only team that jumped them on my ballot was IWU
Franklin stayed on my ballot (I'm the 7th column), but I think Franklin gets dinged more than others because they just don't have the same margin for error. I ranked Franklin pretty high last week on all of this potential...Chase Burton and an offense that should rock and roll their way through the HCAC looked like a really, really good proposition. But it's hard to not have your opinion unchanged when you see things like 391 rush yards allowed and a 28-minute(!!) TOP deficit. You really have to be able to defend to be in the top 6-7 in this region, IMO. Franklin is the team to beat for sure in the HCAC, but it's only going to take one average day from the offense and they can get caught by Bluffton or RHIT or MSJ. Tighten up that D!
I moved IWU up to 4 behind Wheaton and NCC. If this were 2014, I think IWU could have jumped both of those schools on my ballot, but this UWW isn't that UWW. It's a tremendous win, absolutely. But I think the top 25 poll was overvaluing the Warhawks quite a bit. They're very, very good. I don't know if they're still great.
I'm column 5. I almoooost ran the table this week.
I also moved IWU up to 4 and my logic was almost identical to Wally's as he outlined above. I watched most of that game. It's a huge win for IWU, no question. I didn't move them any higher based largely on the fact that I wasn't blown away by UWW especially at the skill spots on offense. Wilber throws a nice ball, but he's not much of a runner and there is definitely no Kumerow or Coppage out there. I don't know where they should be slotted in the top 25, but I'd say UWW is most likely around the midpoint between where they were (3) and are (15). I give IWU bonus points for the mental aspect of beating a "purple power" and a top 10 team (IMO), but that's not enough to leapfrog their CCIW foes yet.
Franklin I dropped mainly due to the defense. I'm not expecting the '85 Bears, but it needs to be better than that effort. TMC has a really good offense, but the Griz just got manhandled. I kept them on my ballot at 9 based solely on Burton and crew.
I dropped ONU out and replaced them with Carthage at 10. I watched the ONU/Adrian game and ONU did not impress me defensively. That was a very even game and I did not even consider Adrian for my top 10 so I gave ONU the boot.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 06, 2017, 09:20:08 AM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 05, 2017, 08:59:26 PM
I was column 4 (I had all 10 that finished in the top 10? I demand a recount ;D). I have IWU 15th on my top 25 ballot but that's only good for 6th in the north right now.
I'm rather surprised at the size of the drop Franklin took... they lost by 10 to a team that was ranked 4th by the South voters. The only team that jumped them on my ballot was IWU
Franklin stayed on my ballot (I'm the 7th column), but I think Franklin gets dinged more than others because they just don't have the same margin for error. I ranked Franklin pretty high last week on all of this potential...Chase Burton and an offense that should rock and roll their way through the HCAC looked like a really, really good proposition. But it's hard to not have your opinion unchanged when you see things like 391 rush yards allowed and a 28-minute(!!) TOP deficit. You really have to be able to defend to be in the top 6-7 in this region, IMO. Franklin is the team to beat for sure in the HCAC, but it's only going to take one average day from the offense and they can get caught by Bluffton or RHIT or MSJ. Tighten up that D!
I moved IWU up to 4 behind Wheaton and NCC. If this were 2014, I think IWU could have jumped both of those schools on my ballot, but this UWW isn't that UWW. It's a tremendous win, absolutely. But I think the top 25 poll was overvaluing the Warhawks quite a bit. They're very, very good. I don't know if they're still great.
I won't deny that Franklin's defense is what holds it back as they've always been a bit weak in the trenches. But I don't really see any of the other teams around them (Denison, Carthage, all the ORV) being within 2 scores against Thomas More.
Time of Possession is one of if not the most useless stat. Not really surprised there was a big difference when one team is pass oriented while the other rushes 65 times. Sewanee was #2 in possession last year and went 0-10 while the worst was WashU who despite having the ball only 23:20 a game was 8-3. (Franklin was 215th while Thomas More was 53rd). Of course I remember when the Colts beat the Dolphins when Miami had the ball for 45:07 ;D.
I probably should have spotlighted the difference in the number of snaps taken rather than TOP because I agree- TOP in a vacuum is a useless number. I was just using it here as the easiest marker to point out that Franklin couldn't get off the field. 31 first downs allowed, TMC was +37 on offensive plays run. I mean, it's hard to beat anybody when you spot them 37 offensive plays.
There are many of the traditional stats in football that are useless, until they are not. Not getting off the field in a game where you have to come from behind is not trivial.
Franklin always "loses" the TOP, they score quick via passing. I agree that the defense is always the Grizzlies weak link, has been since I began following them in 1980. But they really need to improve this season! I have never seen so many missed tackles! The positive is that the GRIZ were in position to make the tackles, the negative is the number of missed tackles!
Going to be a quiet weekend here... 9 of the 14 teams that received a vote are on a off week. Wheaton is at Kalamazoo, IWU hosts Nebraska Wesleyan, Franklin hosts FCS Butler, Carthage hosts Bethel, and Rose-Hulman hosts Millikin while Mount Union, North Central, John Carroll, Wittenberg, Denison, Wabash, Ohio Northern, Heidelberg, and Lakeland all take a break.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 08, 2017, 08:26:57 PM
Going to be a quiet weekend here... 9 of the 14 teams that received a vote are on a off week. Wheaton is at Kalamazoo, IWU hosts Nebraska Wesleyan, Franklin hosts FCS Butler, Carthage hosts Bethel, and Rose-Hulman hosts Millikin while Mount Union, North Central, John Carroll, Wittenberg, Denison, Wabash, Ohio Northern, Heidelberg, and Lakeland all take a break.
Yeah, barring a big upset somewhere, I suspect my ballot will be a rerun! ;D
Our family vacation got mis-scheduled. We're renting a house for a week near Traverse City, to be joined by son, d-i-l, and grandkids - I'll be out of the loop NEXT week, when ballots might actually show some change! ;)
I thought this would pretty much be a mail-it-in week too, but UWW losing again and TMC losing to Bridgewater is going to force me to look at things a little more in depth than I had anticipated.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 09, 2017, 05:32:48 PM
I thought this would pretty much be a mail-it-in week too, but UWW losing again and TMC losing to Bridgewater is going to force me to look at things a little more in depth than I had anticipated.
Yeah, I fear that UWW's loss will tarnish the lustre of IWU's win. Interestingly, Concordia-Moorhead, who beat UWW today, beat Neb Wes last week (34-14), the team IWU squashed today (it was 42-7 before the scrubs let in 2 TDs - final 42-21). Memo to Whitewater: don't schedule any more Nebraska Wesleyan opponents! ;D
I thought Franklin's loss to TMC was no big deal; TMC's loss today says it was.
And Carthage more than monkey-stomped Bethel (31-0). Is Bethel that bad this year, or is Carthage that good? Last week I had Franklin #7 and Carthage #10 - haven't decided for sure, but I may just flip-flop them.
One ballot still out. Hopefully can get that in and have the poll up tonight.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 09, 2017, 08:26:38 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 09, 2017, 05:32:48 PM
I thought this would pretty much be a mail-it-in week too, but UWW losing again and TMC losing to Bridgewater is going to force me to look at things a little more in depth than I had anticipated.
Yeah, I fear that UWW's loss will tarnish the lustre of IWU's win. Interestingly, Concordia-Moorhead, who beat UWW today, beat Neb Wes last week (34-14), the team IWU squashed today (it was 42-7 before the scrubs let in 2 TDs - final 42-21). Memo to Whitewater: don't schedule any more Nebraska Wesleyan opponents! ;D
I thought Franklin's loss to TMC was no big deal; TMC's loss today says it was.
And Carthage more than monkey-stomped Bethel (31-0). Is Bethel that bad this year, or is Carthage that good? Last week I had Franklin #7 and Carthage #10 - haven't decided for sure, but I may just flip-flop them.
Unless they make a drastic recovery, UWW is looking at a 1-3 record to start the season. Shocking, though interesting to see if this is a dip or a free fall to becoming Augustana.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 09, 2017, 08:26:38 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 09, 2017, 05:32:48 PM
I thought this would pretty much be a mail-it-in week too, but UWW losing again and TMC losing to Bridgewater is going to force me to look at things a little more in depth than I had anticipated.
Yeah, I fear that UWW's loss will tarnish the lustre of IWU's win. Interestingly, Concordia-Moorhead, who beat UWW today, beat Neb Wes last week (34-14), the team IWU squashed today (it was 42-7 before the scrubs let in 2 TDs - final 42-21). Memo to Whitewater: don't schedule any more Nebraska Wesleyan opponents! ;D
I thought Franklin's loss to TMC was no big deal; TMC's loss today says it was.
And Carthage more than monkey-stomped Bethel (31-0). Is Bethel that bad this year, or is Carthage that good? Last week I had Franklin #7 and Carthage #10 - haven't decided for sure, but I may just flip-flop them.
Concordia-Moorhead led Neb Wesleyan 34-7 in week one until they gave up a TD with 7 minutes left.
Maybe their reserves are a better defense than IWU??? ;)
Neb Wesleyan should to try to have their games start 0-0 in the 4th quarter??
TMC will be okay. Starting with this week. They play at a good W&J program, but they've had the Presidents' number in recent years. Last week was a big-time lesson on learning how to deal with in-game adversity for alot of kids who didn't play huge roles last year. They had 7 personal foul/unsportsmanlike penalties and two long TD's called back due to penalty.
They know they literally won't get any calls in Washington, PA on Saturday night.
Its not too late for Franklin to look good with a loss AT Thomas More.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 12, 2017, 06:30:48 PM
One ballot still out. Hopefully can get that in and have the poll up tonight.
All in. I'll have this up as soon as I get home tonight.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 09, 2017, 08:26:38 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 09, 2017, 05:32:48 PM
I thought this would pretty much be a mail-it-in week too, but UWW losing again and TMC losing to Bridgewater is going to force me to look at things a little more in depth than I had anticipated.
Yeah, I fear that UWW's loss will tarnish the lustre of IWU's win.
It might, if a voter was giving IWU credit for beating the #3 team in the nation (which UWW wasn't really even before the IWU and Concordia results). I didn't move IWU this week. I think their results are worth #4 in the region, regardless of UWW's week 2 score. Will revisit that idea a little more considerably though if UWW drops to WashU, who I think is very overmatched this week.
NRFP through games of Week 2:
(https://i.imgur.com/JCMeqGw.png)
click to enlarge
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
We're all struggling to find a 10th team worthy of a vote. And for good reason. It took me a good long while before I settled on Hope.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 13, 2017, 06:25:20 PM
We're all struggling to find a 10th team worthy of a vote.
Then it's a good thing this week will try to inject some clarity into that picture, as ONU hosts Heidelberg while Lakeland travels to Hope.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 13, 2017, 06:23:44 PM
NRFP through games of Week 2:
(https://i.imgur.com/JCMeqGw.png)
click to enlarge
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
I'd say you guys are killing me with having JCU at #5, but then I remember that we are still 0-1, so I have no room to complain! lol
I would argue that you have it right
Honestly 2-5 are pretty close in my eyes.
I kept the status quo. I may have overreacted with IWU being #2, but that we shall see very soon whether I did so or not.
It's bothersome that my column isn't centered like all the others are. I want to go in and fix it so bad :(
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 14, 2017, 12:42:49 PM
It's bothersome that my column isn't centered like all the others are. I want to go in and fix it so bad :(
If I had to guess, I'd say that some amateur didn't paste--special--values when moving your votes into this grid thus overwriting the text justification formatting in those cells, didn't notice the error until after he posted, and then was too lazy to go back and fix it last night. :)
At least you didn't write a query that wanted to exclude certain gifts, and instead wrote it so it ONLY included those gifts you wanted to exclude....and then used that query for a bundle of eight other queries.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 14, 2017, 12:42:49 PM
It's bothersome that my column isn't centered like all the others are. I want to go in and fix it so bad :(
Yours is just unique. 8-)
Quote from: smedindy on September 14, 2017, 01:37:40 PM
At least you didn't write a query that wanted to exclude certain gifts, and instead wrote it so it ONLY included those gifts you wanted to exclude....and then used that query for a bundle of eight other queries.
Well, if you screw up a select query, you can always rewrite it and try it again. If you write a query to delete one particular row, and forget to specify a row ID so it deletes
all of the rows...
Come on Men! If you want people to take this poll serious how can you honestly vote JCU 5/6 in the North? I understand they are 0 - 1 on the season, but that loss is to the top team in the WIAC for crying out loud.
Quote from: Sir Battlescars on September 15, 2017, 10:22:03 PM
Come on Men! If you want people to take this poll serious how can you honestly vote JCU 5/6 in the North? I understand they are 0 - 1 on the season, but that loss is to the top team in the WIAC for crying out loud.
Tom Arth still coaches in Tennessee, right?
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 15, 2017, 10:40:25 PM
Quote from: Sir Battlescars on September 15, 2017, 10:22:03 PM
Come on Men! If you want people to take this poll serious how can you honestly vote JCU 5/6 in the North? I understand they are 0 - 1 on the season, but that loss is to the top team in the WIAC for crying out loud.
Tom Arth still coaches in Tennessee, right?
That's a valid point in the pre-season, but not after playing a close game in week one.
Quote from: Sir Battlescars on September 15, 2017, 10:22:03 PM
Come on Men! If you want people to take this poll serious how can you honestly vote JCU 5/6 in the North? I understand they are 0 - 1 on the season, but that loss is to the top team in the WIAC for crying out loud.
I think the CCIW needs to shake out first, and the gap between 2-5 is not big, not big at all. Plus, the D3 football top 25 has JCU 4th in the North. So what's the difference between 4 and 5?
Quote from: Sir Battlescars on September 15, 2017, 10:57:43 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 15, 2017, 10:40:25 PM
Quote from: Sir Battlescars on September 15, 2017, 10:22:03 PM
Come on Men! If you want people to take this poll serious how can you honestly vote JCU 5/6 in the North? I understand they are 0 - 1 on the season, but that loss is to the top team in the WIAC for crying out loud.
Tom Arth still coaches in Tennessee, right?
That's a valid point in the pre-season, but not after playing a close game in week one.
I mean, Oshkosh also has question marks. Lost a zillion dudes from the 2016 defense. We don't quite know what they are yet either. 5 is plenty fair for a team that is 0-1 and lost their coaching staff in the offseason.
Quote from: Sir Battlescars on September 15, 2017, 10:57:43 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 15, 2017, 10:40:25 PM
Quote from: Sir Battlescars on September 15, 2017, 10:22:03 PM
Come on Men! If you want people to take this poll serious how can you honestly vote JCU 5/6 in the North? I understand they are 0 - 1 on the season, but that loss is to the top team in the WIAC for crying out loud.
Tom Arth still coaches in Tennessee, right?
That's a valid point in the pre-season, but not after playing a close game in week one.
I'm the resident OAC homer voting and after watching that JCU game I have them 5. I wasn't blown away by what I saw, especially the 2 QB thing. Keep in mind that the only reason it was close was thanks to what can only be called a fluke TD.
After watching that JCU/BW game I may be generous with my #5 ranking. JCU did not look good. If BW has anything resembling decent skill guys and they probably win that game. We'll see how BW looks next week against Mount. Maybe under Hilvert they're much improved, but they didn't look like it.
With all the action in the CCIW I figured my ballot would see some moving and shaking. Not so much once I actually put pen to paper.
p.s. I wish those games would have been at separate times. I hated having to watch one of them on my iPad. Both quality video streams though. Kudos to both schools for that.
I had Illinois Wesleyan high. That changed. I think 1-3 has broken away from 4-9 (a new #9 for me), and #10 is still a roll of an 8-sided die.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 17, 2017, 12:16:07 PM
With all the action in the CCIW I figured my ballot would see some moving and shaking. Not so much once I actually put pen to paper.
p.s. I wish those games would have been at separate times. I hated having to watch one of them on my iPad. Both quality video streams though. Kudos to both schools for that.
Thanks! Glad you enjoyed!
Quote from: smedindy on September 17, 2017, 09:27:52 PM
I had Illinois Wesleyan high. That changed. I think 1-3 has broken away from 4-9 (a new #9 for me), and #10 is still a roll of an 8-sided die.
Ain't that the truth!
BTW, not sure if anyone else caught any of that Denison/Gheny game, but oh man is Gebele something. I'm a little concerned about their defense, but holy crap can that kid play some QB.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 18, 2017, 11:01:34 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 17, 2017, 09:27:52 PM
I had Illinois Wesleyan high. That changed. I think 1-3 has broken away from 4-9 (a new #9 for me), and #10 is still a roll of an 8-sided die.
Ain't that the truth!
BTW, not sure if anyone else caught any of that Denison/Gheny game, but oh man is Gebele something. I'm a little concerned about their defense, but holy crap can that kid play some QB.
Denison lost a couple of dudes on defense from last year that is impacting that unit a little more than I thought it might. But I think they'll be fine. Your defense can be cut a little bit of slack when the offense is gaining 9.85 yards
PER PLAY. I know top 25 voters are on a wait and see thing with Denison and they aren't going to budge until they beat Wittenberg next weekend, but that Denison is still polling at zero is bonkers. They're really good.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 18, 2017, 11:07:00 AM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 18, 2017, 11:01:34 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 17, 2017, 09:27:52 PM
I had Illinois Wesleyan high. That changed. I think 1-3 has broken away from 4-9 (a new #9 for me), and #10 is still a roll of an 8-sided die.
Ain't that the truth!
BTW, not sure if anyone else caught any of that Denison/Gheny game, but oh man is Gebele something. I'm a little concerned about their defense, but holy crap can that kid play some QB.
Denison lost a couple of dudes on defense from last year that is impacting that unit a little more than I thought it might. But I think they'll be fine. Your defense can be cut a little bit of slack when the offense is gaining 9.85 yards PER PLAY. I know top 25 voters are on a wait and see thing with Denison and they aren't going to budge until they beat Wittenberg next weekend, but that Denison is still polling at zero is bonkers. They're really good.
Unrelated note, Wally, have you been hacked? Is that Wooster plaid in your picture box??
Quote from: bluestreak66 on September 18, 2017, 12:50:33 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 18, 2017, 11:07:00 AM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 18, 2017, 11:01:34 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 17, 2017, 09:27:52 PM
I had Illinois Wesleyan high. That changed. I think 1-3 has broken away from 4-9 (a new #9 for me), and #10 is still a roll of an 8-sided die.
Ain't that the truth!
BTW, not sure if anyone else caught any of that Denison/Gheny game, but oh man is Gebele something. I'm a little concerned about their defense, but holy crap can that kid play some QB.
Denison lost a couple of dudes on defense from last year that is impacting that unit a little more than I thought it might. But I think they'll be fine. Your defense can be cut a little bit of slack when the offense is gaining 9.85 yards PER PLAY. I know top 25 voters are on a wait and see thing with Denison and they aren't going to budge until they beat Wittenberg next weekend, but that Denison is still polling at zero is bonkers. They're really good.
Unrelated note, Wally, have you been hacked? Is that Wooster plaid in your picture box??
Not hacked. Take a look in the NCAC thread. A Wooster player died after the game Saturday. Tragic.
Quote from: jknezek on September 18, 2017, 12:51:33 PM
Quote from: bluestreak66 on September 18, 2017, 12:50:33 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 18, 2017, 11:07:00 AM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 18, 2017, 11:01:34 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 17, 2017, 09:27:52 PM
I had Illinois Wesleyan high. That changed. I think 1-3 has broken away from 4-9 (a new #9 for me), and #10 is still a roll of an 8-sided die.
Ain't that the truth!
BTW, not sure if anyone else caught any of that Denison/Gheny game, but oh man is Gebele something. I'm a little concerned about their defense, but holy crap can that kid play some QB.
Denison lost a couple of dudes on defense from last year that is impacting that unit a little more than I thought it might. But I think they'll be fine. Your defense can be cut a little bit of slack when the offense is gaining 9.85 yards PER PLAY. I know top 25 voters are on a wait and see thing with Denison and they aren't going to budge until they beat Wittenberg next weekend, but that Denison is still polling at zero is bonkers. They're really good.
Unrelated note, Wally, have you been hacked? Is that Wooster plaid in your picture box??
Not hacked. Take a look in the NCAC thread. A Wooster player died after the game Saturday. Tragic.
Oh my God. I hadn't seen that. Prayers to him and his family. So sad when someone so young passes away
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 18, 2017, 11:07:00 AM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 18, 2017, 11:01:34 AM
Quote from: smedindy on September 17, 2017, 09:27:52 PM
I had Illinois Wesleyan high. That changed. I think 1-3 has broken away from 4-9 (a new #9 for me), and #10 is still a roll of an 8-sided die.
Ain't that the truth!
BTW, not sure if anyone else caught any of that Denison/Gheny game, but oh man is Gebele something. I'm a little concerned about their defense, but holy crap can that kid play some QB.
Denison lost a couple of dudes on defense from last year that is impacting that unit a little more than I thought it might. But I think they'll be fine. Your defense can be cut a little bit of slack when the offense is gaining 9.85 yards PER PLAY. I know top 25 voters are on a wait and see thing with Denison and they aren't going to budge until they beat Wittenberg next weekend, but that Denison is still polling at zero is bonkers. They're really good.
Witt has not been confidence inspiring offensively. As always their D is tough. It seems like it's going to be a strength vs. strength match up. Gebele is just so hard to contain for 4 qtrs when he can beat you in so many ways. It was like a video game watching that Allegheny game.
Not hacked, bluestreak. Just showing support and solidarity for a fellow NCAC school going through a difficult time. It's a small gesture, but I hope it's worth even a sliver of comfort for the Wooster community.
Wally
Great touch with the Wooster plaid. Love it! Classy!
Nicely done, Wally, We are all wearing the MacLeod of Lewis tartan today while directing our best thoughts to the Geib family and the Wooster community.
Do we have the results?
Waiting on one more. I'll put up our results tonight either way.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 18, 2017, 01:48:56 PM
Not hacked, bluestreak. Just showing support and solidarity for a fellow NCAC school going through a difficult time. It's a small gesture, but I hope it's worth even a sliver of comfort for the Wooster community.
+1! Prayers. Parents should not have to bury their children.
One voter on vacay this week, one ballot is in the wind, but alas the show must go on! NRFP through games of Week 3:
(https://i.imgur.com/IBcmaH3.png)
click to enlarge
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
Consensus on 1-3. Slightly surprised but great minds think alike. I had IWU 4 still. Didn't know how that'd play but it seems pretty consistent with the group.
I'm also maintained my 4 on IWU. I thought it was a fairly even game with North Central that turned around completely on a particularly tough (for IWU) three-play sequence early in the 3rd quarter. And they still have that win against Whitewater, which remains the most impressive result among regional teams so far (or at least among teams that I've ranked below IWU).
I also didn't ding Carthage too hard for losing at Wheaton. Wheaton is really, really good at football.
And I have to apologize for sloppy table work again this week. IWU and JCU should be noted as t-4 and Carthage/Heidelberg should be noted as t-9.
IWU and Carthage both benefited from me watching those games in their entirety. I didn't ding either of them really (dropped Carthage 1 spot). A lot of times it's just impossible to watch all the games, but the night games worked out well for us last week and let us knock out 4 teams at once.
As usual, the MIAA has split the electorate, as it were.
Some of us give Heidelberg the benefit of the doubt, others, not so much. Again, as usual.
We're kinda predictable that way.
Luckily, we are getting to the meat of the season now, so we will all begin to know where everyone stands. Should be some exciting football coming soon!
I gotta rethink some things....
Quote from: smedindy on September 23, 2017, 05:25:39 PM
I gotta rethink some things....
This was by far the hardest week IMO. Just sent my ballot in and it was not easy to complete this week. Lots of moving parts. Curious to see everyone else's thoughts.
I was the vacationing voter last week - rented a house 20 miles NW of Traverse City and had son, D-i-L, and 3 grandkids join us. Incredible weather, though Leelanau County is not supposed to be 90+ in late September!
I had been keeping JCU at #4 (blocking my Titans), but dropped them all the way out after that pummeling (that also led me to drop UWO from 3 to 5 on my national ballot, since their ONLY credentials were last year and beating JCU).
Shelby (our coon hound) spent 11 days at 'Camp Bow Wow', a 'good' kennel. Not by any means her first stay, but she seems to have come back with PTSD: she has not uttered a sound in six hours! While she does other things that are short-term more annoying, her worst fault is too much barking - we're enjoying the continued silence!
Back at full strength this week! NRFP through games of Week 4:
(https://i.imgur.com/jAQdCCL.png)
click to enlarge
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
Apologies for the non-specific post, but I've got a general observation to make about the first couple weeks of the season, so I'm going to post this in each of the respective "fan poll" threads since they will typically get some readership from many different conferences / audiences (of course, within each thread, it can and likely will spawn some discussion specific to that region):
The first couple weeks of the season feel like we're seeing one of the more "wide open" seasons in D3 football in several years, IMHO. It's not just about UWW losing a few games; all over the Division, we've seen signs that some leagues may not adhere to a traditional hierarchy.
- Thomas More has already lost to two other conference rivals, turning the PAC into a potentially entertaining four-team horse race;
- Wabash had to scrap their way past an admittedly-improved Hiram team, leaving several NRFP voters believing that Denison and/or DePauw are the teams Wittenberg really needs to be worried about;
- Whitewater already has two losses on the board to "very good but not great; teams that you wouldn't normally expect them to lose to" opponents and travels to UW-Oshkosh this week facing the prospect of their earliest "likely elimination from playoff contention" since 2002;
- St. Thomas picked up an early loss to UW-Stout (?!) and now likely has to play the season under "win the MIAC or risk missing the playoffs" pressure;
- John Carroll, fresh off a season where they snapped Mount Union's forever-long OAC win streak and made an appearance in the national semifinals, took it on the chin from Heidelberg, leaving us wondering if maybe Heidelberg is the real "second banana" to challenge Mount this year rather than JCU
- Wesley, who has had as much success as any non-Purple (UMU, UWW, Linfield, UMHB, UST) in the last decade, took a loss in Week 1 - admittedly against a quality opponent, a much less surprising loss than Stout vs. UST - but, similarly to UST, likely will play the season under "win the league or you might be home for the holidays" pressure
I know there have been some early surprises in other seasons, too, but this just feels like a season that's elicited a lot more "Whoa! That happened?" reactions in the first few weeks than seasons past. Instead of the inevitable slog to the playoffs where it feels like we already know who lots of the players will be, several leagues feel more open top-to-bottom than usual and we're seeing some fun teams getting votes in the poll who may or may not deserve to be there, but are sitting there currently lacking any other evidence that someone else is definitively better. Raise your hand if you thought UW-Stout would appear in a D3fb top 25 this season. Or if you thought Frostburg State would be ranked 11th in the same week UW-Whitewater is barely holding onto a few votes.
It could be a wild second half, folks, and we're not even out of September. Yee-haw! High times for Division III football, if you ask me.
I'm the far right.
I was interested to see how my positioning of Berg (5) would align with the group. Pretty close. I slotted them just ahead of Witt based largely on the fact that I feel they've been more impressive against better competition than Witt to date.
Because I'm an OAC homer I also wanted to see if anyone left JCU on their ballot. Pretty much as expected there. Mount's drubbing of BW didn't make JCU squeaking out a win in Berea look good. And I always dislike splitting QB snaps as JCU has done (albeit more in a starter/reliever way as opposed to rotating series).
I dropped Wabash a little this week after watching the 2nd half of that game. I was underwhelmed by the LG's. Those teams didn't look mismatched which can be both a credit to Hiram improving and a cause for concern (especially at QB) for Wabash.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 27, 2017, 09:37:00 AM
I dropped Wabash a little this week after watching the 2nd half of that game. I was underwhelmed by the LG's. Those teams didn't look mismatched which can be both a credit to Hiram improving and a cause for concern (especially at QB) for Wabash.
Thank goodness you didn't see the first half!
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 27, 2017, 10:13:04 AM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 27, 2017, 09:37:00 AM
I dropped Wabash a little this week after watching the 2nd half of that game. I was underwhelmed by the LG's. Those teams didn't look mismatched which can be both a credit to Hiram improving and a cause for concern (especially at QB) for Wabash.
Thank goodness you didn't see the first half!
That doesn't sound good. To be honest, it didn't even occur to me to watch because it was Hiram. It wasn't until I saw the score that I hopped on the feed to see what the heck was going on.
I'm the Trine voter, and the Carthage non-voter. Still a tough choice for the bottom.
ETP - Yeah, except for UMHB and Mt. Union, this...this is an interesting year. I was surprised how easily UMHB beat Linfield, until I read the Linfield posters. They're really worried about Whitworth.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 27, 2017, 11:07:02 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 27, 2017, 10:13:04 AM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 27, 2017, 09:37:00 AM
I dropped Wabash a little this week after watching the 2nd half of that game. I was underwhelmed by the LG's. Those teams didn't look mismatched which can be both a credit to Hiram improving and a cause for concern (especially at QB) for Wabash.
Thank goodness you didn't see the first half!
That doesn't sound good. To be honest, it didn't even occur to me to watch because it was Hiram. It wasn't until I saw the score that I hopped on the feed to see what the heck was going on.
I haven't had Wabash in my top 10 here yet this year (and was the only one until this week). Last season some things happened that gave me pause. Wabash started giving up a lot of points to the mid-level teams in the NCAC. Wabash's offense looked great against teams that were just physically overmatched. Teams that could hold their own even a little bit against Wabash's offensive line, caused significant problems that in most cases never got solved during the course of a game...lack of the adjustment-to-the-adjustment kind of thing. Wabash won some games last year in spite of an offense that often just looked really confused. That all happened with experienced personnel. This year with key positions to be filled with new starters and no obvious indicators that the offense was going to be any more creative or efficient, I've taken a wait and see approach with the LGs. I don't think you score points by blasting Kenyon 62-7 and in Wabash's other two games, they've been ok but not near top 10 quality, IMO. Maybe I'm judging too harshly using pre-2016 Wabash as a measuring stick? Wabash gets a tricky road game this weekend. Then back home against Denison the week after. The offense can not be confused or stale or inefficient in these next 10 days. My hope is that last Saturday is a bit of a wake up call for everybody, Wabash dominates this weekend, and gets momentum into the juicy part of the schedule. Wabash can certainly be in my top 10, but they haven't played well enough this season. Yet. :)
Just for the sake of discussion, I think it's interesting that one voter thinks Wabash is better than both Denison and DePauw. Denison might be the best of the three, truthfully. They're second in the country in scoring and fifth in total offense. That said, I also get that there's no concrete evidence of how good Denison might be because they've played 3 pretty bad teams. We'll learn more about Denison this weekend in Springfield.
DePauw A) just beat Wabash last year and B) DePauw and Wabash played Hiram a week apart. DePauw beat them by 27. Wabash beat them by 4. I think that matters when it comes how those two are ranked.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 28, 2017, 03:41:59 AM
Just for the sake of discussion, I think it's interesting that one voter thinks Wabash is better than both Denison and DePauw. Denison might be the best of the three, truthfully. They're second in the country in scoring and fifth in total offense. That said, I also get that there's no concrete evidence of how good Denison might be because they've played 3 pretty bad teams. We'll learn more about Denison this weekend in Springfield.
DePauw A) just beat Wabash last year and B) DePauw and Wabash played Hiram a week apart. DePauw beat them by 27. Wabash beat them by 4. I think that matters when it comes how those two are ranked.
I think it is two voters and your point is valid. Wabash being ranked ahead of Denison and DePauw right now is a vote based on what was versus a vote based on what is. It may work out that way in the end, but through three games in 2017 Wabash is not playing better than those two squads.
I ordered them Denison, DPU, Wabash. I knew I was putting Wabash 3rd of the trio, but I debated 1-2 a little. The NCAC is going to be a battle this year as I don't think Witt is a clear cut favorite by any means.
Quote from: Old Pal Wes on September 28, 2017, 03:41:59 AM
Just for the sake of discussion, I think it's interesting that one voter thinks Wabash is better than both Denison and DePauw. Denison might be the best of the three, truthfully. They're second in the country in scoring and fifth in total offense. That said, I also get that there's no concrete evidence of how good Denison might be because they've played 3 pretty bad teams. We'll learn more about Denison this weekend in Springfield.
DePauw A) just beat Wabash last year and B) DePauw and Wabash played Hiram a week apart. DePauw beat them by 27. Wabash beat them by 4. I think that matters when it comes how those two are ranked.
I agree with this. On my ballot I had Denison at 7, Depauw at 10, and Wabash unranked.
Last week I had DePauw 9 and Wabash 10. They both won today, but very unimpressively. I'm seriously considering replacing them with Hope and Trine; neither has played anyone all that impressive, but at least they are rather soundly defeating them. My usual go-to-team, Franklin, lost to TM who is now 1-4 with their ONLY win over Franklin - no thanks! JCU gets no chance to prove themselves until they face UMU, but UWO finally looked like a top five team today, so maybe I'll give JCU another chance just through lack of alternatives.
I think I just talked myself into Hope 9 and Trine 10 for THIS week; next week it will probably be different.
Fascinating mayhem at the top: with about 11 seconds left, and IWU on Wheaton's 12, Brandon Bauer got sacked and the Titans had no time-outs left - game over, Wheaton wins, 10-7. WAIT, hold the bus! Someone on Wheaton had called time before the snap!! Given a second chance after all, Bauer connected with Walsh (who made a FANTASTIC one-handed catch while falling out of bounds!!) for a game-winning TD, Titans 14, Thunder 10! ;D
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 30, 2017, 06:20:58 PM
My usual go-to-team, Franklin, lost to TM who is now 1-4 with their ONLY win over Franklin - no thanks!
Thomas More's schedule was incredibly front-loaded and they should cruise to a 6-4 record. Their four losses are to teams that are a combined 14-2 at the moment and 3 of those losses were 1 score games including today's OT game. I'd still pick TM to beat any team out of the MIAA right now.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 30, 2017, 06:52:40 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 30, 2017, 06:20:58 PM
My usual go-to-team, Franklin, lost to TM who is now 1-4 with their ONLY win over Franklin - no thanks!
Thomas More's schedule was incredibly front-loaded and they should cruise to a 6-4 record. Their four losses are to teams that are a combined 14-2 at the moment and 3 of those losses were 1 score games including today's OT game. I'd still pick TM to beat any team out of the MIAA right now.
And it would not surprise me terribly if Franklin could beat any team in the MIAA more often than not. But the HCAC just doesn't really give you a chance (most years) to demonstrate it.
This week's last couple spots on my ballot is an absolute bear. Good grief. It's like no one wants to be in the poll!
NRFP through games of Week 5:
(https://i.imgur.com/8AZ5w6h.png)
click to enlarge
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
I'm either the middle column or the far right column. I've never before noticed two ballots being completely identical. With only ten teams, I'm sure it happens, but you're not likely to notice it unless one of the ballots is yours!
So ... which one of you reprobates hacked my computer and copied my ballot?! :o ;D
No hack needed, Mr. Y. ;)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 03, 2017, 09:51:23 PM
I'm either the middle column or the far right column. I've never before noticed two ballots being completely identical. With only ten teams, I'm sure it happens, but you're not likely to notice it unless one of the ballots is yours!
So ... which one of you reprobates hacked my computer and copied my ballot?! :o ;D
Definitely wasn't me... I was column 1. I don't think I've ever been this different from the group before... and that includes when I had North Central ahead of Mount Union in the final poll after UMU beat them in the semifinals by 1 point.
I'm curious to hear why Carthage jumped so much. They went from 10 to off for me meaning the other 8 voters raised them 18 points (2.25 a ballot).
Also (purely from a Griz perspective) I'm a bit sad that everyone is off of Franklin now, especially after they played their best all around game I've seen in quite some time. Hopefully they'll creep back onto ballots as teams knock each other off.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 03, 2017, 11:22:32 PM
No hack needed, Mr. Y. ;)
Just collect the ballots and copy your favorite, eh?
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 03, 2017, 11:45:26 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 03, 2017, 09:51:23 PM
I'm either the middle column or the far right column. I've never before noticed two ballots being completely identical. With only ten teams, I'm sure it happens, but you're not likely to notice it unless one of the ballots is yours!
So ... which one of you reprobates hacked my computer and copied my ballot?! :o ;D
Definitely wasn't me... I was column 1. I don't think I've ever been this different from the group before... and that includes when I had North Central ahead of Mount Union in the final poll after UMU beat them in the semifinals by 1 point.
I'm curious to hear why Carthage jumped so much. They went from 10 to off for me meaning the other 8 voters raised them 18 points (2.25 a ballot).
Also (purely from a Griz perspective) I'm a bit sad that everyone is off of Franklin now, especially after they played their best all around game I've seen in quite some time. Hopefully they'll creep back onto ballots as teams knock each other off.
If Franklin keeps winning, I'm sure they will be back on my ballot before season's end; same with JCU.
Carthage has held steady at #7 on my ballot ever since they destroyed Bethel (though that may not be the accomplishment I thought at the time, but they DID beat them worse than anyone else has, including Concordia-Moorhead and St. John's). Walloping Augie and Carroll doesn't earn many points in my book. They still have games AT IWU and AT NCC so they can rise or fall on the field (I suspect they will fall).
I moved Carthage back in...
Kicked one team off the list with a loss and nearly kicked another one off despite winning. Really tough voting this week.
I had Carthage 10 last week and 7 this week. It was less a product of moving them up as it was moving down the teams I had just ahead of them (the NCAC teams). I would have left Carthage near the bottom had everyone held serve, but after watching a good amount of NCAC football last weekend I couldn't just leave those teams where they were. I felt like I had to move them down.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 04, 2017, 09:33:54 AM
I had Carthage 10 last week and 7 this week. It was less a product of moving them up as it was moving down the teams I had just ahead of them (the NCAC teams). I would have left Carthage near the bottom had everyone held serve, but after watching a good amount of NCAC football last weekend I couldn't just leave those teams where they were. I felt like I had to move them down.
There's a weird thing happening in the NCAC right now where it sorta looks like the league is getting better because we're seeing some closer results between teams that don't always play close games, but in the end I'm with you, Dr. A. I'm not convinced right now that the league bunching up is a product of more NCAC teams getting good as much as it is some other NCAC teams drifting toward average. Maybe it makes for more entertaining games, but the November prognosis for whoever comes out of the league right now doesn't look awesome. It's a pretty mushy top third of the league at the moment, iyam.
Barring a monumental upset in Tiffin, it looks to be a very quiet week for North Region voters this week. In the CCIW, Carthage is idle and the three big dogs are all favored by Massey by 90+% (in fact, he has NCC 100% to NPU 0% -can't recall ever seeing that before!) Witt plays Hiram. There are only three games that will likely affect voters near the bottom of their ballots: Denison is at Wabash (I think everyone has at least one of the two on their ballot) and in the MIAA, 3-1 Hope hosts 3-1 Alma, while 4-0 Trine visits traditionally strong but 1-3 this season Albion.
Two other teams on the radar get no chance to prove anything this week: JCU plays Marietta; Franklin 'plays' Earlham.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 04, 2017, 07:34:23 PM
In the CCIW, Carthage is idle and the three big dogs are all favored by Massey by 90+% (in fact, he has NCC 100% to NPU 0% -can't recall ever seeing that before!)
There's 5 games this week listed as 100%/0% games including the Franklin/Earlham game. I'd be curious to see whether any of the 0% teams have ever pulled off the upset.
Edit: Had a quick look through this years games... there have been 20 such games so far in D3 (2 vs non D3 and 2 NESCAC). Whether you count Williams only losing by 8 to Trinity or not as the closest... the best non-NESCAC game was Earlham only losing by 22 points to Hiram.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 04, 2017, 07:55:49 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 04, 2017, 07:34:23 PM
In the CCIW, Carthage is idle and the three big dogs are all favored by Massey by 90+% (in fact, he has NCC 100% to NPU 0% -can't recall ever seeing that before!)
There's 5 games this week listed as 100%/0% games including the Franklin/Earlham game. I'd be curious to see whether any of the 0% teams have ever pulled off the upset.
Edit: Had a quick look through this years games... there have been 20 such games so far in D3 (2 vs non D3 and 2 NESCAC). Whether you count Williams only losing by 8 to Trinity or not as the closest... the best non-NESCAC game was Earlham only losing by 22 points to Hiram.
I guess it is pretty obvious that I don't generally follow Massey! ;D I only knew the CCIW odds because Gregory Sager posts the Massey picks each week - pretty sure this is the first time he has ever posted a 100-0 Massey prediction for the CCIW.
There is one other 'game' involving teams NRFP voters may be watching, but even though Oberlin is currently 2-2, I can't imagine they will give DePauw any trouble on Saturday. Assuming DePauw moves to 5-0, I may have to give them a nod if anyone else falters.
I feel confident in my top 4... after that I have no idea who I'll put where. Wheaton with their 2nd close loss in a row... Heidelberg getting thumped... while DePauw, Wabash and Trine keep a 0 in the loss column. Maybe I'll stick the Benedictine-Lakeland winner on my ballot next week ;D
Millikin may have played its way on here, too.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 08, 2017, 01:06:22 AM
I feel confident in my top 4... after that I have no idea who I'll put where. Wheaton with their 2nd close loss in a row... Heidelberg getting thumped... while DePauw, Wabash and Trine keep a 0 in the loss column. Maybe I'll stick the Benedictine-Lakeland winner on my ballot next week ;D
Agreed. Since rankings are comparative, simple mathematics dictates that SOMEONE has to be the fifth best team in the region. But I am having a devil of a time coming up with a team I can put fifth without gagging a bit. ::)
The Machine is still The Machine, but losing THAT badly suggests Heidelberg had been overranked. Same with Denison, who has lost two weeks in a row. Wabash, DePauw, and Trine are all 5-0, but their list of victims is underwhelming (though Trine, at least, has been DESTROYING their opponents). And I just can't quite come to grips with Millikin over Wheaton - was Wheaton THAT overrated (both losses came in the final seconds, but should the opponents have been close enough to matter?) or has Millikin been THAT overlooked (they did give 5-1 RHIT their only loss, AT RHIT)?
I'm tempted to vote for ten, but number the ranks 1-4, then 10-15! ;D
Sent my ballot in a couple hours ago. To me, at least, the top four are obvious (as is the order); beyond that I think there are about ten teams that you could select any six, put them in any order, and I wouldn't argue against you very strenuously!
So much for my post on Wednesday predicting a 'very quiet week' for NRFP voters! I hadn't taken into the account the effects of UMU treating Heidi like they were Wilma, of Wabash reasserting dominance over Denison, and certainly not of Millikin upending Wheaton - I thought the season was supposed to eventually clarify things, not just get harder and harder! :P
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 08, 2017, 02:40:43 PM
I'm tempted to vote for ten, but number the ranks 1-4, then 10-15! ;D
I like this approach
This is going to be one of the more interesting NRFPs we've seen, I think. Wheaton's second loss was always going shuffle things up a bit, but a second loss to a team not already on this list causes chaos. We have three undefeated teams left in the NCAC which the field seems to be split on how to handle. A pair of strong MIAA teams out there. The CCIW fielding as many as five really quality teams. I think most looked at that early RHIT loss to Millikin as a disqualifier, but that perception probably needs to evolve. I haven't filled my 10 out yet...it's going to be tough this week.
Maybe with all this chaos my ballot won't look so bad compared to everyone else this week. I ranked 1-4 then skipped to 15-20. I only had 4 North teams on my Top 25 ballot this week.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 09, 2017, 09:04:23 PM
Maybe with all this chaos my ballot won't look so bad compared to everyone else this week. I ranked 1-4 then skipped to 15-20. I only had 4 North teams on my Top 25 ballot this week.
O, ye of little faith! I had seven.
I'll be intrigued to see if anyone shares my NRFP #5 vote this week - I suspect not! ;)
Just sent my ballot in. Sheesh that was bruuutal. I was chasing my tail because I kept saying to myself "I can't rank ___ at number ___. They aren't that good!" The problem was I was saying that about half the ballot. You have to rank 10 teams unfortunately.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 09, 2017, 09:36:50 PM
Just sent my ballot in. Sheesh that was bruuutal. I was chasing my tail because I kept saying to myself "I can't rank ___ at number ___. They aren't that good!" The problem was I was saying that about half the ballot. You have to rank 10 teams unfortunately.
While I hated to put anyone 5th or 6th, when I hit 10th I still had five more I really wanted to somehow squeeze in! :D
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 09, 2017, 09:36:50 PM
Just sent my ballot in. Sheesh that was bruuutal. I was chasing my tail because I kept saying to myself "I can't rank ___ at number ___. They aren't that good!" The problem was I was saying that about half the ballot. You have to rank 10 teams unfortunately.
That was my experience as well. I felt like I was just throwing darts on the bottom half.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 09, 2017, 08:46:36 AM
This is going to be one of the more interesting NRFPs we've seen, I think. Wheaton's second loss was always going shuffle things up a bit, but a second loss to a team not already on this list causes chaos. We have three undefeated teams left in the NCAC which the field seems to be split on how to handle. A pair of strong MIAA teams out there. The CCIW fielding as many as five really quality teams. I think most looked at that early RHIT loss to Millikin as a disqualifier, but that perception probably needs to evolve. I haven't filled my 10 out yet...it's going to be tough this week.
Assuming we ever see it! :P Are you waiting on a ballot, or just got swamped at work?
A little of both? Here it is!
NRFP through games of Week 6:
(https://i.imgur.com/Qk9rNg4.png)
click to enlarge
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
I'm column 6... going to take a guess that Ypsi is column 8
I'm the 8th column, actually. I've had Hope on my ballot just about every week. They shot way up this week as I ran into the same conundrum at the 5 spot that everybody else did. Could have picked a handful of teams to be fifth and I just happened to land on Hope.
As I expected, no one matched my #5 vote - Millikin! (Though one other voter did have them 6th.) In addition to beating formerly highly regarded Wheaton, they also gave 5-1 (not 4-1) RHIT their only loss. Assuming Rose doesn't lay an egg at Manchester this Saturday, the winner of the Franklin/RHIT game the following Saturday will DEFINITELY be on my ballot, no matter who I have to drop! (I haven't checked the schedules very closely, but I suspect Carthage may have played their way off my ballot by then.)
I'm not sure I expect the Big Blue to remain in the top ten very long, but for now I'd say they are the surprise team of the North!
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 11, 2017, 08:52:34 PM
I'm column 6... going to take a guess that Ypsi is column 8
I'm curious why you thought I was column 8? The MIAA schools at 5 and 6? (I'm a fan of the MIAA - second only to the CCIW in my heart - but I don't think they are very good at football!)
Thanks for the copy edit, Mr. Y. ;)
I think the MIAA has definitely improved. I have no idea how Albion isn't winning more games last year or this year. They just aren't nearly as bad as that record. Olivet is on a nice little upswing. Trine has good inertia. The thing that I think is really helping the MIAA is Sturrsma getting Hope back on the good. There's a depth of quality in that league there now that was missing for awhile.
I wound up going back and forth on #10 for a while with Carthage and DePauw. Ultimately went with Carthage given DPU's QB issues that manifested itself in kind of a blah effort against Oberlin (the same kind of result, quite frankly, that was keeping Wabash off of my ballot until this week). So Carthage stayed in, and DPU didn't quite make it. Carthage, btw, dropped from 7 to 10 on my ballot as collateral damage from Wheaton's tumble. They're kind of anchored behind Wheaton until they get some more results in league play.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 11, 2017, 09:19:34 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 11, 2017, 08:52:34 PM
I'm column 6... going to take a guess that Ypsi is column 8
I'm curious why you thought I was column 8? The MIAA schools at 5 and 6? (I'm a fan of the MIAA - second only to the CCIW in my heart - but I don't think they are very good at football!)
You had said you didn't think anyone would match your #5 vote and that was the big outlier. The Millikin vote was my 2nd choice but didn't seem like a big stretch that someone else might vote them that high.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 11, 2017, 09:33:33 PM
Thanks for the copy edit, Mr. Y. ;)
I think the MIAA has definitely improved. I have no idea how Albion isn't winning more games last year or this year. They just aren't nearly as bad as that record. Olivet is on a nice little upswing. Trine has good inertia. The thing that I think is really helping the MIAA is Sturrsma getting Hope back on the good. There's a depth of quality in that league there now that was missing for awhile.
I wound up going back and forth on #10 for a while with Carthage and DePauw. Ultimately went with Carthage given DPU's QB issues that manifested itself in kind of a blah effort against Oberlin (the same kind of result, quite frankly, that was keeping Wabash off of my ballot until this week). So Carthage stayed in, and DPU didn't quite make it. Carthage, btw, dropped from 7 to 10 on my ballot as collateral damage from Wheaton's tumble. They're kind of anchored behind Wheaton until they get some more results in league play.
I think what would really spark the MIAA in football would be if Calvin would finally take it up.. For the first couple of years, everyone could enjoy kicking sand in the face of the big, bad bully, but soon they would probably perennially be a contender.
As to Carthage, I now note that on the 21st they play AT IWU. IF we do them them what I hope we will, that can finally make room for Franklin/RHIT (or whoever).
This week the BIG game is the Little Brass Bell - NCC/Wheaton. Unless we (and D3football) were totally wrong about the Thunder, they should be madder 'an hell and have the talent to 'upset' the Cards. Wouldn't THAT throw a monkey wrench into next week's rankings?! I have my doubts, but a Thunder win somehow seems less improbable than a THIRD consecutive loss.
I had five CCIW teams in the ranking, which I never thought I'd have five of any of the conferences in there.
Quote from: smedindy on October 12, 2017, 02:54:13 PM
I had five CCIW teams in the ranking, which I never thought I'd have five of any of the conferences in there.
Same. I couldn't get to a point where I was convinced Wheaton wasn't in the top 10. They lost twice under weird circumstances that you normally see once every four seasons. That lightning struck twice in two weeks for the Thunder.
Ha. I didn't even plan that one.
I imagine everyone noticed that the top four teams captured ALL of the 1-4 votes. But I just took a closer look, and after that it becomes damn near random! Only nine voters, yet five teams got #5 votes, six teams got #6 votes, six teams got #7 votes, etc.
Some posters were joking about flipping coins or throwing darts after the top four - it almost seems to be the reality! ;D
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 13, 2017, 12:01:22 AM
I imagine everyone noticed that the top four teams captured ALL of the 1-4 votes. But I just took a closer look, and after that it becomes damn near random! Only nine voters, yet five teams got #5 votes, six teams got #6 votes, six teams got #7 votes, etc.
Some posters were joking about flipping coins or throwing darts after the top four - it almost seems to be the reality! ;D
Yes. The dropoff from 66 to 39 points is striking!
Despite the suspension of the NCC @ Wheaton game at halftime, to be completed tomorrow evening, the D3.Football.com poll went ahead on schedule. The North is well represented, with UMU 2nd, NCC 4th, IWU 11th, Witt 13th, Berg 24th, and DePauw 25th. Additionally, Wheaton is tops in the ORV with 28 points, Millikin got 19, Trine got 11, and Wabash and Carthage each received 7. No wonder I had qualms about stopping at ten - that's eleven right there, and Hope, Franklin, and RHIT are all definitely on my radar! [Personally, I was quite surprised to see Berg RETURN to the top 25 - needing OT to beat Ott at home did not impress me. :P]
I almost sent in my ballot already, but decided that since our regional poll never comes out before Wednesday anyway, may as well wait for NCC @ Wheaton to finish! My imaginary money says NCC 27, Wheaton 14 (or very close to that), but if I am wrong, I would have had to send in a revised ballot anyway!
I'm going to wait on the Wheaton / NCC game to finish. You never know what can happen on a game that has a break in it.
Quote from: smedindy on October 15, 2017, 11:03:06 PM
I'm going to wait on the Wheaton / NCC game to finish. You never know what can happen on a game that has a break in it.
Even without a break in it, any game with a Bell attached can be unpredictable! It may be less recognized nationally, but to NCC and Wheaton I suspect the Little Brass Bell carries the same weight as the Monon Bell does for a couple of Indiana schools. ;D
Yeah, I'm waiting as well.
I generally don't get all of the ballots until Tuesday or Wednesday a.m., so please do wait on today's result as it certainly impacts this poll significantly.
A good thing everyone held off, or there would be a flurry of 'adjusted' ballots! Wheaton so far is doing a number on the Cards - 21 unanswered points - to take a 28-13 lead with 3+ minutes left in the third.
I did NOT see this coming! :o
YIKES!! Wheaton 42, NCC 20. :o
What a mess in the NRFP!
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 16, 2017, 08:25:38 PM
YIKES!! Wheaton 42, NCC 20. :o
What a mess in the NRFP!
I should have waited, but I didn't see this coming. :o :o :P :P
Well, I've sent my ballot (though as I told wally, I didn't much like it! :P), so on to next week! A flurry of games that could clarify or make this even more of a clusterf**k:
Probably the top ballot changer: Witt @ DePauw. Then there is Carthage @ IWU. And two games that will probably determine conference AQs: Hope @ Trine and Franklin @ RHIT. I suspect that next week's ballot will bear only a coincidental resemblance to this week's! ;)
Five CCIW teams make up 3-7 on my ballot.
I didn't put North Central behind Wheaton because I thought this was a fluky thing, and Wheaton has two losses. But man...
I don't have a clue what I'm doing. I've changed my ballot up so many times and every time it's a different change. I know my top 2... and then it's chaos on down to 14 or 15. I think I've finally settled on my 10 to submit... but I thought that 15 minutes and 3 changes ago too. :-\
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 16, 2017, 08:25:38 PM
YIKES!! Wheaton 42, NCC 20. :o
What a mess in the NRFP!
So much for a clear #2 behind Mount in the north!
On a bigger scale, I'm really curious what the NCAA is going to do with the seedings for the playoffs with Linfield having a loss, Whitewater being out, the CCIW not having an undefeated champ, etc. As of today 3 of the top seeds are pretty obvious with MHB, Mount and Oshkosh but who is the 4th? St Thomas even though they have a loss? Del Valley is likely to remain undefeated but can anyone serious consider them a #1 seed? My guess is St Thomas at 9-1 as the last #1 seed.
If Brockport can run the table in the E8 they will look pretty good. OOC wins over Hobart, Ithica, and St. Lawrence will give them a decent SOS mathematically. Hobart and Ithica are likely to be in the running for the LL and over .500. St.L not so much obviously. Still, come out of the E8 undefeated and in a year like this you might get a sniff.
I think Del Val is an option. That win over Wesley is a nice chip to play. Wartburg is lurking around out there without a loss as well. It'll be interesting to see how the east and west RACs order their teams.
If everything holds true, either Brockport or Delaware Valley will have the #1 Seed. However, will either Delaware Valley or Brockport escape the first two rounds. We may have a situation like 2011 where Delaware Valley was the #1 seed but loss to St. John Fisher (8-2 at large team).
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 17, 2017, 08:42:44 AM
I don't have a clue what I'm doing. I've changed my ballot up so many times and every time it's a different change. I know my top 2... and then it's chaos on down to 14 or 15. I think I've finally settled on my 10 to submit... but I thought that 15 minutes and 3 changes ago too. :-\
It's really tough right now. Lots of circular reasoning leading you no where.
I just sent Wally my ballot this morning. I'm sure I was the hold up so I do apologize.
Sent mine in this morning too. Had to juggle a few teams.
One of the more interesting polls we've done. Nothing makes sense!
NRFP through games of Week 7:
(https://i.imgur.com/3oayidi.png)
click to enlarge
And also welcome to our 10th voter, HOPEful!
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
To my everlasting shame, I am column three. My diploma may be revoked if anyone sees that I had IWU #5, lowest of any voter! (Hey! No one can call me a 'homer'! 8-)) I was carried away a bit by the second half demolition Wheaton did on NCC (I didn't think ANY D3 team could paste 35 points on the NCC defense in one half! :o) It could be worse - on my national ballot I had 2-loss Wheaton #8 in the whole country! ::)
Fortunately, the games this Saturday (Witt @ DePauw, Carthage @ IWU, Hope @ Trine, Franklin @ RHIT, etc.) should make for a brand new poll landscape next week, erasing any memories of this week's poll! ;)
I was column 9. Further off my ballot were 11 Heidelberg, 12 Wabash, 13 Trine, 14 Carthage
Lots of opinions on the ordering of Illinois Wesleyan, North Central, and Wheaton (and this isn't even throwing in the 4 ballots that had Millikin or Carthage in the mix)
IWU, NCC, WC 5 ballots
WC, NCC, IWU 2
NCC, IWU, WC 2
IWU, WC, NCC 1
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 18, 2017, 10:42:41 PM
I was column 9. Further off my ballot were 11 Heidelberg, 12 Wabash, 13 Trine, 14 Carthage
Lots of opinions on the ordering of Illinois Wesleyan, North Central, and Wheaton (and this isn't even throwing in the 4 ballots that had Millikin or Carthage in the mix)
IWU, NCC, WC 5 ballots
WC, NCC, IWU 2
NCC, IWU, WC 2
IWU, WC, NCC 1
One of the more interesting parts of the poll. I wasn't sure what people were going to do with the Wheaton/NCC result- I barely knew what to do with it, if I'm honest. I'm the fourth column and my order was: IWU 2, NCC 3, Millikin 5, Wheaton 6, Carthage 7. When processing that Wheaton/NCC game, I eventually landed on giving Wheaton partial credit. I felt like the circumstances were so strange that it was just difficult to give Wheaton full credit for that result (opponent and margin). Had that whole thing happened on Saturday night, my ballot plays out quite differently. I thought I'd be the oddball on that, but it turns out that most of us did something similar.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 19, 2017, 08:36:55 AM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 18, 2017, 10:42:41 PM
I was column 9. Further off my ballot were 11 Heidelberg, 12 Wabash, 13 Trine, 14 Carthage
Lots of opinions on the ordering of Illinois Wesleyan, North Central, and Wheaton (and this isn't even throwing in the 4 ballots that had Millikin or Carthage in the mix)
IWU, NCC, WC 5 ballots
WC, NCC, IWU 2
NCC, IWU, WC 2
IWU, WC, NCC 1
One of the more interesting parts of the poll. I wasn't sure what people were going to do with the Wheaton/NCC result- I barely knew what to do with it, if I'm honest. I'm the fourth column and my order was: IWU 2, NCC 3, Millikin 5, Wheaton 6, Carthage 7. When processing that Wheaton/NCC game, I eventually landed on giving Wheaton partial credit. I felt like the circumstances were so strange that it was just difficult to give Wheaton full credit for that result (opponent and margin). Had that whole thing happened on Saturday night, my ballot plays out quite differently. I thought I'd be the oddball on that, but it turns out that most of us did something similar.
Interestingly, if you take the 4 north voters out, the remaining Top 25 voters had 3 order them IWU, WC, NCC and 3 had them NCC, IWU, WC so none of them agreed with our most popular choice of IWU, NCC, WC
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 18, 2017, 10:22:16 PM
Fortunately, the games this Saturday (Witt @ DePauw, Carthage @ IWU, Hope @ Trine, Franklin @ RHIT, etc.) should make for a brand new poll landscape next week, erasing any memories of this week's poll! ;)
This. I've given Wittenberg, DePauw, Hope, and Trine the benefit of the doubt. Maybe deep down I want to believe the best team(s) in the MIAA and NCAC are still better than the 4th and 5th team in the CCIW... After this weekend, that belief will strengthen for two of these teams and potentially be shattered for the other two...
I do think the CCIW is legitimately deeper this year than it has been. There are five quality teams there without question. Millikin has beaten Wheaton and RHIT and two voters still don't have Millikin in the 10 (one of those two has RHIT in, which is kind of weird). I get the unease that comes with ranking so many teams from one conference in this regional poll, but the results to date kind of warrant it. Those h2h's are coming that will sort it out a little more for us.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 19, 2017, 09:50:41 AM
I do think the CCIW is legitimately deeper this year than it has been. There are five quality teams there without question. Millikin has beaten Wheaton and RHIT and two voters still don't have Millikin in the 10 (one of those two has RHIT in, which is kind of weird). I get the unease that comes with ranking so many teams from one conference in this regional poll, but the results to date kind of warrant it. Those h2h's are coming that will sort it out a little more for us.
I was originally going to move RHIT ahead of Millikin but kept them the same. Millikin has that 4 point win on Wheaton... but lost by 30 to North Central and came from behind to survive Augustana by 1. Carthage meanwhile has lost to Wheaton by 22 and their signature win is to a mediocre Bethel team (a few years ago it'd be impressive but not this year). I'm predicting they lose their next 3 against IWU, Millikin, and NCC or at the very best go 1-2.
At least 3 CCIW coaches believe this is the deepest CCIW league in history. My analysis concurs with that sentiment. Most years our 4/5 teams are good but not this good. Carthage could go 0-3 the next 3 weeks but they are good enough to go 3-0 and capture the AQ. It's a brutal stretch but they are absolutely good enough to do it. 3 turnovers in 6 games with 16 takeaways is ridiculous. They play defense, stop the run, have the best WR in the conference, and take care of the football. That's a pretty strong recipe for success. Millikin's QB has been better than Broc Rutter (who is unreal), just look at the numbers and watch him play. With all respect and praise for Rutter, Stepina, in my view, is the OPOY in the conference this year and it's not that close. The main difference between NCC and Millikin is the Big Blue have much better receivers than NCC.
Not sure why Wheaton can beat NCC by 22 points and NCC gets a pass but Wheaton over Carthage by 17 means Carthage doesn't measure up. Carthage is going to beat some or all of those teams because they are that good. NCC, IWU, Carthage and Millkin all have 1 loss by double digit margins. Wheaton has two losses by a combined total of 8pts.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 19, 2017, 08:36:55 AM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 18, 2017, 10:42:41 PM
I was column 9. Further off my ballot were 11 Heidelberg, 12 Wabash, 13 Trine, 14 Carthage
Lots of opinions on the ordering of Illinois Wesleyan, North Central, and Wheaton (and this isn't even throwing in the 4 ballots that had Millikin or Carthage in the mix)
IWU, NCC, WC 5 ballots
WC, NCC, IWU 2
NCC, IWU, WC 2
IWU, WC, NCC 1
One of the more interesting parts of the poll. I wasn't sure what people were going to do with the Wheaton/NCC result- I barely knew what to do with it, if I'm honest. I'm the fourth column and my order was: IWU 2, NCC 3, Millikin 5, Wheaton 6, Carthage 7. When processing that Wheaton/NCC game, I eventually landed on giving Wheaton partial credit. I felt like the circumstances were so strange that it was just difficult to give Wheaton full credit for that result (opponent and margin). Had that whole thing happened on Saturday night, my ballot plays out quite differently. I thought I'd be the oddball on that, but it turns out that most of us did something similar.
After much frustration I ended up on this same order (albeit different rankings) for the CCIW schools. I'm the 2nd column.
BTW, don't think that it doesn't make me sad that I'm ranking 5 CCIW teams and I can't even bring myself to throw a 2nd OAC on my ballot. Not a great year for the OAC which, aside from last year, is becoming too much of a trend for my liking.
I had:
IWU 3
Carthage 4
N Central 5
Millikin 6
Wheaton 7
Frankly, I could have just stuck their names in a hat and pulled them out randomly to rank them 3-7. I switched this order at least four times.
Sorry to interrupt the CCIW discussion (and I might be just a tad bit biased ;D), but I'm fascinated by the fact that Hope is ranked 10th while my Muskies can't even sniff a ballot. Surely a 2 point head to head loss at Hope doesn't show that much separation?
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 19, 2017, 08:36:55 AM
One of the more interesting parts of the poll. I wasn't sure what people were going to do with the Wheaton/NCC result- I barely knew what to do with it, if I'm honest. I'm the fourth column and my order was: IWU 2, NCC 3, Millikin 5, Wheaton 6, Carthage 7. When processing that Wheaton/NCC game, I eventually landed on giving Wheaton partial credit. I felt like the circumstances were so strange that it was just difficult to give Wheaton full credit for that result (opponent and margin). Had that whole thing happened on Saturday night, my ballot plays out quite differently. I thought I'd be the oddball on that, but it turns out that most of us did something similar.
wally,
I'm not sure I follow your logic here. Why would WC only be given partial credit? The circumstances, as strange as they were, were identical for both teams.
Look, Saturday night wasn't going well for the Thunder, that's not a secret. NCC had 270 yards in the 1st half alone. Despite "being dominated" - those aren't my words, they actually belong to NCC's punter who took to Twitter to talk about being blessed for the opportunity to "dominate Xheaton twice in 1 week" - Wheaton trailed by only 6 at half. Yes, we took the best shots NCC had to offer and we only trailed by 6 with a full half of football still to be played. And what happened in the 2nd half? I think's it's safe to say that would fall into the "domination" category. Heck, NCC went for a 4th & 6 from their own 26, trailing 20-35, with 13 minutes left in the 4th quarter? If that's not a panic/desperation move, not sure what is.
Wheaton grabbed the momentum away from NCC starting on Saturday night when Spencer Peterson found Carter Roberts on a 34 yard pass with 1 minute to play in the half, cutting the lead from 0-13 to 7-13. I think it's a stretch to say the only reason the momentum carried into the 2nd half is because it was played on a different night.
As someone who highly values your opinion on all things d3 football, I'm curious as to why NCC should be given a pass more so than Wheaton given credit for what happened on Monday night?
Quote from: Ryan Stoppable on October 19, 2017, 02:06:47 PM
Sorry to interrupt the CCIW discussion (and I might be just a tad bit biased ;D), but I'm fascinated by the fact that Hope is ranked 10th while my Muskies can't even sniff a ballot. Surely a 2 point head to head loss at Hope doesn't show that much separation?
I think if Lakeland keeps winning, they'll wind up on some ballots here as the CCIWs start knocking each other around and out. It's a strange circumstance of the schedule that we're getting into Week 8 and there are four 1-loss CCIW teams and on 2-loss CCIW team, that might actually be better than the previously noted four.
Quote from: thunderdog on October 19, 2017, 02:14:38 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 19, 2017, 08:36:55 AM
One of the more interesting parts of the poll. I wasn't sure what people were going to do with the Wheaton/NCC result- I barely knew what to do with it, if I'm honest. I'm the fourth column and my order was: IWU 2, NCC 3, Millikin 5, Wheaton 6, Carthage 7. When processing that Wheaton/NCC game, I eventually landed on giving Wheaton partial credit. I felt like the circumstances were so strange that it was just difficult to give Wheaton full credit for that result (opponent and margin). Had that whole thing happened on Saturday night, my ballot plays out quite differently. I thought I'd be the oddball on that, but it turns out that most of us did something similar.
wally,
I'm not sure I follow your logic here. Why would WC only be given partial credit? The circumstances, as strange as they were, were identical for both teams.
Look, Saturday night wasn't going well for the Thunder, that's not a secret. NCC had 270 yards in the 1st half alone. Despite "being dominated" - those aren't my words, they actually belong to NCC's punter who took to Twitter to talk about being blessed for the opportunity to "dominate Xheaton twice in 1 week" - Wheaton trailed by only 6 at half. Yes, we took the best shots NCC had to offer and we only trailed by 6 with a full half of football still to be played. And what happened in the 2nd half? I think's it's safe to say that would fall into the "domination" category. Heck, NCC went for a 4th & 6 from their own 26, trailing 20-35, with 13 minutes left in the 4th quarter? If that's not a panic/desperation move, not sure what is.
Wheaton grabbed the momentum away from NCC starting on Saturday night when Spencer Peterson found Carter Roberts on a 34 yard pass with 1 minute to play in the half, cutting the lead from 0-13 to 7-13. I think it's a stretch to say the only reason the momentum carried into the 2nd half is because it was played on a different night.
As someone who highly values your opinion on all things d3 football, I'm curious as to why NCC should be given a pass more so than Wheaton given credit for what happened on Monday night?
Appricate that, thanks. I'll fully admit that my treatment of Wheaton 42, North Central 20 is pretty unfair to Wheaton. The delay happened for both teams. Both teams had the same opportunity to review and adjust. I can't disagree with any of those things. My thinking here is that the game basically got reset, Wheaton got a do-over from a night that maybe they would have won, but that wasn't certain and it certainly wasn't trending toward 42-20. And I still can't just put those two Ls in my back pocket and forget they happened. Wheaton lost those games and there's a poll penalty for losing. So Wheaton stays the 4th ranked CCIW on my ballot.
It would be a different thing if all or most of the game were played on Monday (Saturday). The way it happened though, it's almost easier to digest the two halves of the game as two separate games. The series is tied 1-1. I need a third half to sort it out.
I would also say that when I locked in my ballot, I really thought I was going to be the one person holding Wheaton back. It didn't turn out that way, and I think the other voters here probably wound up following a similar path as they figured out what to do with Wheaton. And North Central definitely didn't get a pass. They slipped in the poll this week.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 19, 2017, 03:02:50 PM
Quote from: Ryan Stoppable on October 19, 2017, 02:06:47 PM
Sorry to interrupt the CCIW discussion (and I might be just a tad bit biased ;D), but I'm fascinated by the fact that Hope is ranked 10th while my Muskies can't even sniff a ballot. Surely a 2 point head to head loss at Hope doesn't show that much separation?
I think if Lakeland keeps winning, they'll wind up on some ballots here as the CCIWs start knocking each other around and out. It's a strange circumstance of the schedule that we're getting into Week 8 and there are four 1-loss CCIW teams and on 2-loss CCIW team, that might actually be better than the previously noted four.
I was at the Hope Lakeland game, and can tell you it was a very good/fun game to watch. It was also a very strange game. The first half was all Lakeland save for three plays... but those three plays were a 68 yard TD, a punt return for a TD, and a 58 yard TD run. The second half seemed to be all Hope (they went up 37-23 with 8 minutes left in the game. The game ended 35-37 due to a failed 2 point conversion attempt to tie it and a failed onside kick. Just a strange game.
Here's what I know about Hope... they seem to be getting better every week. I wish the Monmouth had been later in the season, the result might have been different. I realize the goal for every team is to get better as the season progresses, but Hope seems to being doing it at a faster rate than years past or your average team. I would guess this has a lot to do with it being the second year for the head coach?
Lakeland might crack my list if they stay unblemished in the NACC and beat up on Aurora. But you can't just use one game (weird or not) to measure a team. Lakeland beat Adrian by 7 in a 47-40 game, Hope beat them 22-3, etc.) Plus, as with Wheaton, you can't ignore the two losses, regardless of who they were to. Ultimately, with 0 quality wins, a weak conference, and two losses, it'll be difficult for Lakeland to build any kind of a resume to crack this list, IMO. To a lesser extent, the same goes for Hope or Trine. How much does being undefeated mean if your best win was at Albion? Personally, the winner of Hope @ Trine this weekend stays firmly in my rankings. The loser probably drops out.
Quote from: Ryan Stoppable on October 19, 2017, 02:06:47 PM
Sorry to interrupt the CCIW discussion (and I might be just a tad bit biased ;D), but I'm fascinated by the fact that Hope is ranked 10th while my Muskies can't even sniff a ballot. Surely a 2 point head to head loss at Hope doesn't show that much separation?
Agree with Wally and HOPEful. Keep winning and you might make the bottom of a lot of ballots. Being in what is generally considered to be the weakest conference in the North, you had just two chances to prove yourselves: beat Hope or lose (NO one would expect a win) respectably to Platteville - alas, you didn't do either.
Franklin and RHIT are in the same boat. The HCAC is by general consensus the second-weakest North conference. Neither is currently in the poll since they didn't do what they needed to do in the OOC. At least they have each other! The winner of this Saturday's game will almost certainly break into the poll. Aurora, alas for you, is no Franklin or RHIT - but a win
might be enough to get you votes (or even in).
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 20, 2017, 11:19:34 PM
Quote from: Ryan Stoppable on October 19, 2017, 02:06:47 PM
Sorry to interrupt the CCIW discussion (and I might be just a tad bit biased ;D), but I'm fascinated by the fact that Hope is ranked 10th while my Muskies can't even sniff a ballot. Surely a 2 point head to head loss at Hope doesn't show that much separation?
Agree with Wally and HOPEful. Keep winning and you might make the bottom of a lot of ballots. Being in what is generally considered to be the weakest conference in the North, you had just two chances to prove yourselves: beat Hope or lose (NO one would expect a win) respectably to Platteville - alas, you didn't do either.
Franklin and RHIT are in the same boat. The HCAC is by general consensus the second-weakest North conference. Neither is currently in the poll since they didn't do what they needed to do in the OOC. At least they have each other! The winner of this Saturday's game will almost certainly break into the poll. Aurora, alas for you, is no Franklin or RHIT - but a win might be enough to get you votes (or even in).
Or we might lose tomorrow (today by now?) and it will all be a moot point, though I obviously hope not. ;D
In any event, thanks to all of you for indulging me with the discussion. :) Ultimately, despite my belief that we should have won the Hope game (as should any team who gains 23 more first downs and runs 58 more offensive plays than its foe), we didn't. And we
needed to win the game, because with the 2 losses, even if we win out, we're going to end up getting drawn against Oshkosh or...whoever comes out of the CCIW logjam, and that is
not a recipe for winning playoff games. 9-1 might have given us a chance of a slightly friendlier draw.
But I digress. We still didn't beat Hope, and have 2 losses, and therefore shouldn't be in the NRFP right now, and maybe not later either. (I don't even think calling the NACC the weakest conference in the region is controversial; how can it not be when all of the eye-popping non-conference results go against its teams?) But we should, at least, be kept in mind.
A lot to digest this week... Trine easily handled Hope, IWU survives Carthage (which I'll admit was a lot closer than I thought it'd be), Wittenberg destroys DePauw, Franklin takes control of the HCAC, Heidelberg gets upended by Marietta.
I'll probably have 2 new teams jump into my top 10 and I'm confident in who my top 2 teams are... beyond that I have no idea what my ballot will look like in a couple days.
I almost put "THIS SPACE FOR RENT" at team #10
Quote from: smedindy on October 22, 2017, 03:42:43 PM
I almost put "THIS SPACE FOR RENT" at team #10
Now that's funny.
And accurate
The new poll is out - they have the "CCIW Jumble" as 10. NCC 12. IWU 23. Wheaton (24 points) Millikin, (zero points) Carthage. I have the same order on my ballot, but disagree with Carthage receiving zero votes: I actually raised them one slot on my NRFP ballot for the 10-13 loss AT IWU. Their defense is MUCH tougher than I had realized! Only TWO teams have held the Titans to 13 points this season: NCC and Carthage.
Quote from: Ryan Stoppable on October 21, 2017, 02:11:18 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 20, 2017, 11:19:34 PM
Quote from: Ryan Stoppable on October 19, 2017, 02:06:47 PM
Sorry to interrupt the CCIW discussion (and I might be just a tad bit biased ;D), but I'm fascinated by the fact that Hope is ranked 10th while my Muskies can't even sniff a ballot. Surely a 2 point head to head loss at Hope doesn't show that much separation?
Agree with Wally and HOPEful. Keep winning and you might make the bottom of a lot of ballots. Being in what is generally considered to be the weakest conference in the North, you had just two chances to prove yourselves: beat Hope or lose (NO one would expect a win) respectably to Platteville - alas, you didn't do either.
Franklin and RHIT are in the same boat. The HCAC is by general consensus the second-weakest North conference. Neither is currently in the poll since they didn't do what they needed to do in the OOC. At least they have each other! The winner of this Saturday's game will almost certainly break into the poll. Aurora, alas for you, is no Franklin or RHIT - but a win might be enough to get you votes (or even in).
Or we might lose tomorrow (today by now?) and it will all be a moot point, though I obviously hope not. ;D
In any event, thanks to all of you for indulging me with the discussion. :) Ultimately, despite my belief that we should have won the Hope game (as should any team who gains 23 more first downs and runs 58 more offensive plays than its foe), we didn't. And we needed to win the game, because with the 2 losses, even if we win out, we're going to end up getting drawn against Oshkosh or...whoever comes out of the CCIW logjam, and that is not a recipe for winning playoff games. 9-1 might have given us a chance of a slightly friendlier draw.
But I digress. We still didn't beat Hope, and have 2 losses, and therefore shouldn't be in the NRFP right now, and maybe not later either. (I don't even think calling the NACC the weakest conference in the region is controversial; how can it not be when all of the eye-popping non-conference results go against its teams?) But we should, at least, be kept in mind.
With Trine eviscerating Hope, your chances of even sneaking on to the bottom of ballots may be gone. Though you might try lobbying smeds - he is desperate for a #10 team! ;D
Good luck to the Muskies. I fully expect you will make the playoffs, but fear you are correct that the first-round game will probably be a hopeless situation. But shock the world and if you can't win, at least put a scare in 'em! ;)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 22, 2017, 08:53:39 PM
The new poll is out - they have the "CCIW Jumble" as 10. NCC 12. IWU 23. Wheaton (24 points) Millikin, (zero points) Carthage. I have the same order on my ballot, but disagree with Carthage receiving zero votes: I actually raised them one slot on my NRFP ballot for the 10-13 loss AT IWU. Their defense is MUCH tougher than I had realized! Only TWO teams have held the Titans to 13 points this season: NCC and Carthage.
The IWU offense is averaging 19 ppg in the CCIW so far this year so holding them to 13 was amazing. ;)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 22, 2017, 08:53:39 PM
The new poll is out - they have the "CCIW Jumble" as 10. NCC 12. IWU 23. Wheaton (24 points) Millikin, (zero points) Carthage. I have the same order on my ballot, but disagree with Carthage receiving zero votes: I actually raised them one slot on my NRFP ballot for the 10-13 loss AT IWU. Their defense is MUCH tougher than I had realized! Only TWO teams have held the Titans to 13 points this season: NCC and Carthage.
The IWU offense is averaging 19 ppg in the CCIW so far this year so holding them to 13 was amazing. ;)
They really only allowed 1 TD though as one score came via a punt block.
Quote from: izzy stradlin on October 22, 2017, 09:14:59 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 22, 2017, 08:53:39 PM
The new poll is out - they have the "CCIW Jumble" as 10. NCC 12. IWU 23. Wheaton (24 points) Millikin, (zero points) Carthage. I have the same order on my ballot, but disagree with Carthage receiving zero votes: I actually raised them one slot on my NRFP ballot for the 10-13 loss AT IWU. Their defense is MUCH tougher than I had realized! Only TWO teams have held the Titans to 13 points this season: NCC and Carthage.
The IWU offense is averaging 19 ppg in the CCIW so far this year so holding them to 13 was amazing. ;)
Hardly amazing (we ARE somewhat offensively impaired this season), but it WAS better than Wheaton, UWW, or anyone else could do. We are living off what I contend is a top 5 in the nation defense, regardless of what the stats say.
Saw your addition just before hitting 'post'. Yes, the IWU defense/special teams are running close to neck-and-neck with the offense! So another plaudit for the Carthage DEFENSE.
Never mind they actually only scored one TD against Carthage as their other score was special teams. And there was another CCIW game the Titans scored only 14, 7 of which was in the last 6 seconds.
Yea, IWU's offense is not what's making a name for the Titans this season.
Quote from: USee on October 22, 2017, 09:35:07 PM
Never mind they actually only scored one TD against Carthage as their other score was special teams. And there was another CCIW game the Titans scored only 14, 7 of which was in the last 6 seconds.
Yea, IWU's offense is not what's making a name for the Titans this season.
Fortunately that 7-points in the last six seconds (which only occurred because someone from Wheaton called a time-out before IWU DIDN'T score) led to a 14-10 win! ;D
Titans D just might deserve a Stagg spot; Titans O not so much. ::)
Unless they lay an egg against Elmhurst or Millikin, the Titans should make the playoffs. They won't go far unless the O can come anywhere close to matching the D. ;D
Ypsi the timeout had no impact on the outcome. The whistle blew when the Wheaton coaches called timeout and the Titan Oline stopped and that's why Bauer was sacked.
Quote from: USee on October 23, 2017, 12:01:02 AM
Ypsi the timeout had no impact on the outcome. The whistle blew when the Wheaton coaches called timeout and the Titan Oline stopped and that's why Bauer was sacked.
OK, but do you have any evidence that the winning play was the play they called before the time-out?!
Points in the last six seconds still count, certainly in a one-score game, so attempting to discount them because they were in the last six seconds is pretty specious at best. It wasn't garbage time!
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 23, 2017, 12:08:04 AM
Quote from: USee on October 23, 2017, 12:01:02 AM
Ypsi the timeout had no impact on the outcome. The whistle blew when the Wheaton coaches called timeout and the Titan Oline stopped and that's why Bauer was sacked.
OK, but do you have any evidence that the winning play was the play they called before the time-out?!
Other than the fact it was a completely different formation, no.
Pat you obviously completely missed the point.
Quote from: USee on October 23, 2017, 12:15:05 AM
Pat you obviously completely missed the point.
I expect that's your default assumption for me these days but I'm not sure what the point was, then.
Quote from: USee on October 23, 2017, 12:15:05 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 23, 2017, 12:08:04 AM
Quote from: USee on October 23, 2017, 12:01:02 AM
Ypsi the timeout had no impact on the outcome. The whistle blew when the Wheaton coaches called timeout and the Titan Oline stopped and that's why Bauer was sacked.
OK, but do you have any evidence that the winning play was the play they called before the time-out?!
Other than the fact it was a completely different formation, no.
Pat you obviously completely missed the point.
I have no clue what 'point' Pat missed. For that matter I have no clue what point you are trying to make.
Wheaton called a time-out on what I thought was a blown IWU play - PERHAPS as you say, only because they quit when the refs blew a whistle (NOT what I saw, but whatever; the announcers also thought IWU had lost).
On the do-over, IWU scored the game-winning TD.
So, your point was ... what?
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 23, 2017, 12:37:58 AM
Quote from: USee on October 23, 2017, 12:15:05 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 23, 2017, 12:08:04 AM
Quote from: USee on October 23, 2017, 12:01:02 AM
Ypsi the timeout had no impact on the outcome. The whistle blew when the Wheaton coaches called timeout and the Titan Oline stopped and that's why Bauer was sacked.
OK, but do you have any evidence that the winning play was the play they called before the time-out?!
Other than the fact it was a completely different formation, no.
Pat you obviously completely missed the point.
I have no clue what 'point' Pat missed. For that matter I have no clue what point you are trying to make.
Wheaton called a time-out on what I thought was a blown IWU play - PERHAPS as you say, only because they quit when the refs blew a whistle (NOT what I saw, but whatever; the announcers also thought IWU had lost).
On the do-over, IWU scored the game-winning TD.
So, your point was ... what?
It doesn't matter what you saw or what you or I think, Coach Swider is on record that the "Timeout sack" was a non play and had no relevance in the outcome. So one of my points was to refute your continued use of that play as some kind of mistake by Wheaton, it wasn't.
My bigger point was to refute your arbitrary claim that NCC and Carthage were the only teams to hold IWU's offense to 13 points. I simply pointed out that another team held them to 14 pts and Carthage actually held them to 7. You were somehow surprised about Carthage's defense when there is ample evidence they are one of the top defenses in the country and I would have been surprised if IWU scored more than 2 TD's Saturday. IWU's defense is the reason they are 9-1. My concern for Carthage going into the game Saturday was their ability to score. It didn't help that Carthage lost the best WR in the conference in the first quarter Saturday (Cobbs was on crutches on the sideline the rest of the game).
And if IWU gets beat by Elmhurst, they laid an egg, if they lose to Millikin, it's because the Big Blue are better and it would be no fluke. I don't expect either to happen but Millkin is good enough to beat IWU.
::) ::) ::) ::)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 22, 2017, 09:06:45 PM
With Trine eviscerating Hope, your chances of even sneaking on to the bottom of ballots may be gone. Though you might try lobbying smeds - he is desperate for a #10 team! ;D
Quote from: smedindy on October 22, 2017, 03:42:43 PM
I almost put "THIS SPACE FOR RENT" at team #10
Then the path ahead is simple, smedindy. Search your feelings. You know it to be true.
wally, any chance of a poll tonite, or still waiting on ballots?
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 24, 2017, 06:55:52 PM
wally, any chance of a poll tonite, or still waiting on ballots?
One out that I think probably won't come until tomorrow. I'll put it out tomorrow evening either way. Unless I get the last ballot tonight, in which case I'll get it out tonight. :)
We're all locked in! NRFP through games of Week 8:
(https://i.imgur.com/TzdaNia.png)
click to enlarge
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
I was column 6 this week. In response to smedindy's angst over slot #10, if they don't deserve higher (usually the case) but don't totally stink (they're 6-1) do what I do: plug in "Wabash"! They'd better do a heckuva lot better than DePauw against Witt this week if they want to stay on my ballot!
If there are two or more "eggs" laid this week, I may join smed's anguished cry!
I was column 4. Feels good to have folks voting for Franklin again ;D
My ballot was tiered...
The Purple Power tier of Mount Union
The 'Excellent but not purple' tier of Witt
The CCIW tier of NCC, IWU, WC
The 'Decent enough that they're better than the alternatives' tier of Franklin, Trine, Carthage, Millikin
The 'I have a spot left and no one really deserves it' tier of Wabash and DePauw
The 'In a normal year probably wouldn't be close to sniffing 10th' tier of Rose, Hope, Lakeland, *insert 2 loss OAC team*
I'm column 1. I knew I'd be on the low end with Wheaton at 7, but I'm interested to hear the thinking behind Wheaton at 2. I debated them being anywhere between 4 and 7.
I'm column 5. Clearly I'm giving added value to being undefeated. There's not much more Trine could have done to this point to prove the belong. That, and the manner in which they dismantled Hope last weekend in what was a de facto conference championship game, earned them the 3 spot in my rankings. If they follow it up by laying an egg this weekend at Adrian, I will have no problem dropping them to eighth or lower.
It's very difficult assessing what to do with the CCIW... Do I think Wheaton would beat Wittenberg on a neutral field? Do I think Millikin would beat Trine? I don't know. Without any real common opponents, I'm giving the edge to the undefeated team I'm confident will get an AQ spot in the playoffs. For now.
We can eye roll Trine's schedule, but their results are basically on par with what you would expect a really good team to do against that kind of schedule. They're not squeaking by anybody. Trine's statistical rankings within the region are also very strong. Whatever reservations people had, should have been largely alleviated with Saturday's result. Trine is 5th on my card (2nd column).
I'm always the one on d3boards.com who argues that the present season should be taken on its own. However, football's an anomaly, because the extremely limited amount of interleague competition creates such a sense of isolation for comparison purposes in the D3 version of this sport. Football might thus be the only sport in which a moderately strong emphasis upon past-season performance is warranted when constructing rankings. And the past performance of MIAA champions in postseason play is not a pretty one:
2016: John Carroll 37, Olivet 12
2015: Wabash 35, Albion 14
2014: Mount Union 63, Adrian 3
2013: North Central 63, Albion 7
2012: Franklin 42, Adrian 10
2011: UW-Whitewater 59, Albion 0
2010: UW-Whitewater 45, Trine 31
In other words, you have to go back seven years to find a MIAA champion that didn't get blown out in the first round.
The MIAA as a whole this season is 13-12 in non-conference play. It breaks down as:
1-1 vs. CCIW
3-1 vs. HCAC
0-1 vs. MWC
8-3 vs. NACC
0-2 vs. NCAC
0-2 vs. OAC
1-0 vs. PAC
0-2 vs. WIAC
Three non-conference games remain, all against NACC teams.
All of the MIAA's wins came against other lower-tier leagues save one -- Olivet's 26-20 win over Elmhurst, in which the game ended with EC taking a shot at the end zone from the Olivet 22. And Elmhurst (2-5, 2-3) isn't exactly burning up the track in the CCIW.
Does this mean that Trine's undefeated record and gaudy winning margins are irrelevant, or that Trine couldn't hold its own against the top-tier teams in the North Region? No, not necessarily. Again, the lack of crossover really prevents any solid conclusions from being drawn. But, based upon what scant indirect evidence there is, if I was a voter in your poll I wouldn't put a tremendous amount of stock in Trine.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 25, 2017, 11:11:44 AM
We can eye roll Trine's schedule, but their results are basically on par with what you would expect a really good team to do against that kind of schedule. They're not squeaking by anybody. Trine's statistical rankings within the region are also very strong. Whatever reservations people had, should have been largely alleviated with Saturday's result. Trine is 5th on my card (2nd column).
At this point I'm almost treating Trine this year like I normally treat Franklin. I know their competition is not great, but they're doing exactly what I think a very good team would do against those teams and dominating them. That certainly doesn't translate into playoff wins necessarily, but I can only go off of what has occurred to date.
I've got Trine 8th, because I'm waiting for the CCIW to reveal itself. Carthage's second loss helps a bit, but I still think they're better than Trine.
The RR's will be interesting for sure. If Trine goes undefeated, will they be slotted at 3rd or 4th despite their poor SOS?
I think that's a fair take, Greg. My only counter is that with all of those teams running back to the 2010 Eric Watt Trine team two things are common:
- they all lost out of conference games, some by hideous margins (particularly in some of those old MIAA/CCIW crossover games)
- the league champions either lost in conference somewhere or made it through undefeated, but were pushed by league competition consistently
It's not until you go back to that Trine team where you find an MIAA champ that went through undefeated and conquered their schedule as easily as 2017 Trine has. That Trine team did win a playoff game at DePauw before eventually succumbing to the national champs up in Whitewater (in a game that was tied 31-31 through 3 quarters).
I'll need some of our folks more familiar with the MIAA week-to-week to chime in, but this Trine seems like the best MIAA team since that Trine team by a fair margin. I think Trine is a sneaky tough draw for any of the non-purply schools they might go to (or host) in Week 12.
Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 25, 2017, 01:11:37 PM
I'm always the one on d3boards.com who argues that the present season should be taken on its own. However, football's an anomaly, because the extremely limited amount of interleague competition creates such a sense of isolation for comparison purposes in the D3 version of this sport. Football might thus be the only sport in which a moderately strong emphasis upon past-season performance is warranted when constructing rankings. And the past performance of MIAA champions in postseason play is not a pretty one:
2016: John Carroll 37, Olivet 12
2015: Wabash 35, Albion 14
2014: Mount Union 63, Adrian 3
2013: North Central 63, Albion 7
2012: Franklin 42, Adrian 10
2011: UW-Whitewater 59, Albion 0
2010: UW-Whitewater 45, Trine 31
In other words, you have to go back seven years to find a MIAA champion that didn't get blown out in the first round.
The MIAA as a whole this season is 13-12 in non-conference play. It breaks down as:
1-1 vs. CCIW
3-1 vs. HCAC
0-1 vs. MWC
8-3 vs. NACC
0-2 vs. NCAC
0-2 vs. OAC
1-0 vs. PAC
0-2 vs. WIAC
Three non-conference games remain, all against NACC teams.
All of the MIAA's wins came against other lower-tier leagues save one -- Olivet's 26-20 win over Elmhurst, in which the game ended with EC taking a shot at the end zone from the Olivet 22. And Elmhurst (2-5, 2-3) isn't exactly burning up the track in the CCIW.
Does this mean that Trine's undefeated record and gaudy winning margins are irrelevant, or that Trine couldn't hold its own against the top-tier teams in the North Region? No, not necessarily. Again, the lack of crossover really prevents any solid conclusions from being drawn. But, based upon what scant indirect evidence there is, if I was a voter in your poll I wouldn't put a tremendous amount of stock in Trine.
I have actually long thought the MIAA as a whole is not as bad as the playoff results would suggest. I think they suffer by being a decent conference surrounded by really, really good conferences. So they almost always have to go play the OAC or CCIW champs first.
Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 25, 2017, 01:11:37 PM
I'm always the one on d3boards.com who argues that the present season should be taken on its own. However, football's an anomaly, because the extremely limited amount of interleague competition creates such a sense of isolation for comparison purposes in the D3 version of this sport. Football might thus be the only sport in which a moderately strong emphasis upon past-season performance is warranted when constructing rankings. And the past performance of MIAA champions in postseason play is not a pretty one:
2016: John Carroll 37, Olivet 12
2015: Wabash 35, Albion 14
2014: Mount Union 63, Adrian 3
2013: North Central 63, Albion 7
2012: Franklin 42, Adrian 10
2011: UW-Whitewater 59, Albion 0
2010: UW-Whitewater 45, Trine 31
I agree, it isn't pretty. But this list of opponents is hardly fair. John Carroll beat Whitewater last year 31-14 in the playoffs (Not very different from the 37-12 line for Olivet). In 2015, Wabash's first loss for the year came in December to St. Thomas. And all of the blowouts to Mount Union or Whitewater are simply no different than everyone else who's been blown out by those two schools over the past decade plus.
I believe Trine's team this year is the best MIAA team I've seen in quite some time. But if they have to go to Mount Union for the first round and lose by a score closer than 43-14, it would be the best anyone has been able to do against the Raiders so far this season. I don't think simplifying your list to read... 2017: Mount Union 42, Trine 21 would be a fair assessment of the MIAA's growth or a true measure of how good this team is compared to the other teams in the region not names Mount Union.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 25, 2017, 01:35:46 PM
I'll need some of our folks more familiar with the MIAA week-to-week to chime in, but this Trine seems like the best MIAA team since that Trine team by a fair margin. I think Trine is a sneaky tough draw for any of the non-purply schools they might go to (or host) in Week 12.
I thought this year's Hope team was the best I've ever seen in person. Trine beat them 50-14. Yes, I think it's fair to say this year's Trine team is the best MIAA team since that Trine team.
Right now, I don't think Trine is in a position to draw Mount Union in the first round. If they complete the regular season 10-0, they should see a winnable game in the first round, possibly host (if they've filed the paperwork...deadline today!!).
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 25, 2017, 04:03:37 PM
Right now, I don't think Trine is in a position to draw Mount Union in the first round. If they complete the regular season 10-0, they should see a winnable game in the first round, possibly host (if they've filed the paperwork...deadline today!!).
Back in 2012 when Concordia Chicago went 10-0 they hosted (although they lost a tight game to Bethel).
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 24, 2017, 09:09:02 PM
We're all locked in! NRFP through games of Week 8:
(https://i.imgur.com/TzdaNia.png)
click to enlarge
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
Column 10 for me
Games of interest to NRFP voters this Saturday (barring some huge unforeseen upset):
Two that affect nearly all ballots: Witt @ Wabash and Millikin @ Carthage. Due to lack of good alternatives, Wabash just has to outperform DePauw (6-52) against Witt, which shouldn't be hard, to maintain a spot at the bottom of the poll. An actual Wabash win would probably throw the NRFP into another spasm of disarray. Massey has Carthage as an 86%-14% favorite. I expect the RedMen to win, but think that margin of certainty is ridiculous (did Massey forget to enter the Wheaton games into his computer? :o)
Lakeland @ Aurora is Lakeland's last chance to do anything impressive for voters. Trine @ Adrian will probably be a romp for the Thunder, but Adrian is traditionally a MIAA power, and the game is at their house.
Well, no huge unforeseen upsets, so a fairly quiet week. My ballot is in.
Wabash not only outperformed DePauw, they definitely COULD have won that game. I dropped Witt from 2 to 4, and raised Wabash from 10 to 9 (not very often that I lower the winner and raise the loser!). Carthage won by more than I expected (3 scores), and rose from 7 to 6, while Millikin dropped from 6 to 10. Trine was also quite impressive, winning a monkey-stomp, and rising from 8 to 7. Since they have no decent opponents left, Lakeland needed to eviscerate a rather pedestrian Aurora team - they didn't, and are no longer even on my radar. For the first time in forever, there is NO second OAC team that I am following at all - 3-loss Marietta giving ONU their third loss AT ONU took care of that. :P Will the OAC EVER produce a team that can be a respectable second-choice for more than a season or two?
Barring upsets, looks like another quiet week coming up. Unless I overlooked something, the only game likely to affect anyone's ballot (again, barring upsets) is Carthage @ NCC. I'm expecting that NCC will win fairly easily (though probably not a blow-out - Carthage's defense is just too tough to expect blow-outs).
But I'll be rooting for Carthage to pull the upset and give IWU a shot at the AQ! And if IWU can't beat Millikin the final week for the AQ, the CCIW would PROBABLY see an unprecedented FIVE-way tie for first, as Carthage, IWU, Millikin, NCC, and Wheaton would likely all finish 6-2! :o
I see the most probable CCIW finish as NCC 7-1 (AQ), IWU 7-1 (near lock for a C), Wheaton 6-2, Carthage and Millikin both 5-3.
I swapped three CCIW teams around, but no other changes.
Trine's 55-34 win at Adrian was too close for me... (The game was tie 27-27 going into the 4th) I dropped them to be more in line with everyone else. Hope beat Adrian 22-3. An elite team doesn't allow Adrian to put up 34 points and I'm worried what happens to Trine in the playoffs when they play a team with a much better defense than any they've seen so far this season.
Trine's SOS is horrible (an MIAA team with a bad SOS, imagine that). But I think they may slot in 5th in the RRs behind Mt. Union, Witt, North Central, and Illinois Wesleyan. Depending on what happens, they may have the best possible first round game for them (a 4/5).
If I had my guess, the RRs will be:
1. Mt. Union
2. Witt
3. North Central
4. Illinois Wesleyan
5. Trine
6. DePauw
7. Heidelberg
8. Wheaton
9. Millikin
10. Carthage
I don't think we'll see five teams from the CCIW in the regional rankings.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 30, 2017, 12:02:49 PM
I don't think we'll see five teams from the CCIW in the regional rankings.
Maybe, but I think they have better credentials than Wabash.
Oh, I forgot Franklin....they're 10th, I bet.
I don't think we'll see Wabash in the RR's either.
I don't think Millikin will be ranked but Carthage may sneak in there. I would be surprised if Heidelberg is ahead of Wheaton in the RR. Heidelberg has a similar SOS (right now-Wheaton's will drop over next 2 weeks) and 0-1 v RRO where Wheaton will be 1-1 and possibly 2-1 (if Carthage sneaks in).
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 28, 2017, 11:50:39 PM
Well, no huge unforeseen upsets, so a fairly quiet week. My ballot is in.
Wabash not only outperformed DePauw, they definitely COULD have won that game. I dropped Witt from 2 to 4, and raised Wabash from 10 to 9 (not very often that I lower the winner and raise the loser!). Carthage won by more than I expected (3 scores), and rose from 7 to 6, while Millikin dropped from 6 to 10. Trine was also quite impressive, winning a monkey-stomp, and rising from 8 to 7. Since they have no decent opponents left, Lakeland needed to eviscerate a rather pedestrian Aurora team - they didn't, and are no longer even on my radar. For the first time in forever, there is NO second OAC team that I am following at all - 3-loss Marietta giving ONU their third loss AT ONU took care of that. :P Will the OAC EVER produce a team that can be a respectable second-choice for more than a season or two?
Not likely. JCU had a chance but the whole coaching staff left, taking their soul with them. The last really good team was Capital but they disappeared after Rocky Pentello graduated and Jim Collins left to join the GLIAC.
Based on on-the-field merit there should not be a 2nd OAC team in the RR. JCU has 3 losses. Berg and ONU both lost to Etta. That alone should automatically disqualify you IMO.
Maybe the NCAA regional committee will just rank 6 teams and sell the extra slots to another region?
Quote from: HScoach on October 30, 2017, 01:00:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 28, 2017, 11:50:39 PM
Well, no huge unforeseen upsets, so a fairly quiet week. My ballot is in.
Wabash not only outperformed DePauw, they definitely COULD have won that game. I dropped Witt from 2 to 4, and raised Wabash from 10 to 9 (not very often that I lower the winner and raise the loser!). Carthage won by more than I expected (3 scores), and rose from 7 to 6, while Millikin dropped from 6 to 10. Trine was also quite impressive, winning a monkey-stomp, and rising from 8 to 7. Since they have no decent opponents left, Lakeland needed to eviscerate a rather pedestrian Aurora team - they didn't, and are no longer even on my radar. For the first time in forever, there is NO second OAC team that I am following at all - 3-loss Marietta giving ONU their third loss AT ONU took care of that. :P Will the OAC EVER produce a team that can be a respectable second-choice for more than a season or two?
Not likely. JCU had a chance but the whole coaching staff left, taking their soul with them. The last really good team was Capital but they disappeared after Rocky Pentello graduated and Jim Collins left to join the GLIAC.
Rocky Pentello graduated? I thought I saw him out there....
(sorry, couldn't resist)
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 30, 2017, 01:05:23 PM
Based on on-the-field merit there should not be a 2nd OAC team in the RR. JCU has 3 losses. Berg and ONU both lost to Etta. That alone should automatically disqualify you IMO.
Heidelberg's got a great SOS, now.
Quote from: smedindy on October 30, 2017, 05:41:23 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 30, 2017, 01:05:23 PM
Based on on-the-field merit there should not be a 2nd OAC team in the RR. JCU has 3 losses. Berg and ONU both lost to Etta. That alone should automatically disqualify you IMO.
Heidelberg's got a great SOS, now.
Heidleberg .580 0-1 v RRO
Wheaton .562 2-1 v RRO
IWU .495 2-1 v RRO
NCC .521 1-1 v RRO
Trine .456 0-0 v RRO
Witt .546 1-0 v RRO?
It's amazing to me that IWU can have played UWW, NCC, Wheaton, and Carthage, and has an SOS below .500! SOS is fatally flawed.
Elmhurst, North Park, Carroll and Augustana went a combined 1-6 vs. D-III outside of the conference.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 30, 2017, 07:18:24 PM
Elmhurst, North Park, Carroll and Augustana went a combined 1-6 vs. D-III outside of the conference.
Also, have to look at what Nebraska Wesleyan has done this year.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 30, 2017, 06:50:11 PM
It's amazing to me that IWU can have played UWW, NCC, Wheaton, and Carthage, and has an SOS below .500! SOS is fatally flawed.
If you take the good, you gotta take the bad. Nebraska Wesleyan's 1-7, and then the IIAC is a whole pile of disappointing meh behind Wartburg (for the OOWP)
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 30, 2017, 07:18:24 PM
Elmhurst, North Park, Carroll and Augustana went a combined 1-6 vs. D-III outside of the conference.
Take NPU out of that equation, and you get 0-6. ;)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 30, 2017, 06:50:11 PM
It's amazing to me that IWU can have played UWW, NCC, Wheaton, and Carthage, and has an SOS below .500! SOS is fatally flawed.
I wouldn't say is fatally flawed, but I don't think its a great measure of a team A vs team B. I don't have another way to measure strength of schedule, but I don't think it's "fair" for non-D3 to be worthless. I understand that a team shouldn't be punished for playing up a level (D2), but (imo) teams should be punished for scheduling College of Faith or Virginia-Lynchburg. For those games to not count for anything is almost a benefit to D3 teams.
Look at UWO this year, JCU is a great OOC game and should be rewarded in SOS. But VA-Lynchburg would be a 1-9 or 0-10 type D3 team and bring down UWO's SOS tremendously, but instead it counts for nothing. Plus in terms of the playoffs; instead of filling a tenth game with a sub-par D3 team (record-wise) UWO is better off taking a bye.
I understand the travel and budget issues of D3 athletics, and there is no easy way to "fix" this. But SOS is a strange thing in D3.
Yeah, I understand the math of how they are sub-.500 in SOS, but it still seems totally odd. Already having to face NCC and Wheaton in conference (they have beaten both of them in the same season exactly ONCE in the 21st century), they go and take on perennial Stagg Bowl participant UWW in the OOC! UWW was #3 in the pre-season poll, so who knew they would not only miss the Stagg but miss the playoffs, and who knew Neb Wes would be THAT bad? They SCHEDULED well (one very daunting opponent, one decent opponent that would hopefully build confidence), but the future intervened. And we're not about to quit the conference just because Elmhurst, et. al., currently stink.
With only Millikin remaining, we will probably finish just a shade over .500; but as far as expected high-quality opponents, IWU must rank in the top ten.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 30, 2017, 08:26:35 PMAnd we're not about to quit the conference just because Elmhurst, et. al., currently stink.
Yes, your former athletic director was famous for suggesting that
other schools quit the conference for stinking ... which didn't exactly endear him, or your alma mater, to others.
Quote from: merlecanlas on October 30, 2017, 08:01:58 PM
I wouldn't say is fatally flawed, but I don't think its a great measure of a team A vs team B. I don't have another way to measure strength of schedule, but I don't think it's "fair" for non-D3 to be worthless. I understand that a team shouldn't be punished for playing up a level (D2), but (imo) teams should be punished for scheduling College of Faith or Virginia-Lynchburg. For those games to not count for anything is almost a benefit to D3 teams.
Look at UWO this year, JCU is a great OOC game and should be rewarded in SOS. But VA-Lynchburg would be a 1-9 or 0-10 type D3 team and bring down UWO's SOS tremendously, but instead it counts for nothing. Plus in terms of the playoffs; instead of filling a tenth game with a sub-par D3 team (record-wise) UWO is better off taking a bye.
I understand the travel and budget issues of D3 athletics, and there is no easy way to "fix" this. But SOS is a strange thing in D3.
Punished seems harsh. I don't think Oshkosh wanted to schedule those games (and they basically got shamed out of the CoF engagement). How many calls do you think got made before they landed on VA-Lynchburg? They're definitely not going to repeat 2014 and stack up a bunch of Ls against scholarship schools- that decision cost them a place in the tournament. I don't know what the "fix" is, but I don't think you can do anything punitive with Oshkosh if nobody inside the division will agree to play them.
There should be someone willing to play them - it's why some WIAC schools have shrunk to nine game schedules and on a couple of occasions played each other twice.
Quote from: HOPEful on October 30, 2017, 11:48:59 AM
Trine's 55-34 win at Adrian was too close for me... (The game was tie 27-27 going into the 4th) I dropped them to be more in line with everyone else. Hope beat Adrian 22-3. An elite team doesn't allow Adrian to put up 34 points and I'm worried what happens to Trine in the playoffs when they play a team with a much better defense than any they've seen so far this season.
Adrian is 29th in the country in total yardage a game offensively, they are very explosive. The circumstances from the Hope game are not indicative to the talent Adrian has on the offensive side of the ball.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 31, 2017, 08:14:18 AM
Quote from: merlecanlas on October 30, 2017, 08:01:58 PM
I wouldn't say is fatally flawed, but I don't think its a great measure of a team A vs team B. I don't have another way to measure strength of schedule, but I don't think it's "fair" for non-D3 to be worthless. I understand that a team shouldn't be punished for playing up a level (D2), but (imo) teams should be punished for scheduling College of Faith or Virginia-Lynchburg. For those games to not count for anything is almost a benefit to D3 teams.
Look at UWO this year, JCU is a great OOC game and should be rewarded in SOS. But VA-Lynchburg would be a 1-9 or 0-10 type D3 team and bring down UWO's SOS tremendously, but instead it counts for nothing. Plus in terms of the playoffs; instead of filling a tenth game with a sub-par D3 team (record-wise) UWO is better off taking a bye.
I understand the travel and budget issues of D3 athletics, and there is no easy way to "fix" this. But SOS is a strange thing in D3.
Punished seems harsh. I don't think Oshkosh wanted to schedule those games (and they basically got shamed out of the CoF engagement). How many calls do you think got made before they landed on VA-Lynchburg? They're definitely not going to repeat 2014 and stack up a bunch of Ls against scholarship schools- that decision cost them a place in the tournament. I don't know what the "fix" is, but I don't think you can do anything punitive with Oshkosh if nobody inside the division will agree to play them.
I'd love to see who paid to have VA-Lynchburg fly(?) to Wisconsin. There has to be some D3 teams around instead of playing some joke school from NAIA (are they even NAIA?). Maybe University of Phoenix or Southern New Hampshire can fill out the UWO schedule next year
Quote from: merlecanlas on October 31, 2017, 11:40:24 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 31, 2017, 08:14:18 AM
Quote from: merlecanlas on October 30, 2017, 08:01:58 PM
I wouldn't say is fatally flawed, but I don't think its a great measure of a team A vs team B. I don't have another way to measure strength of schedule, but I don't think it's "fair" for non-D3 to be worthless. I understand that a team shouldn't be punished for playing up a level (D2), but (imo) teams should be punished for scheduling College of Faith or Virginia-Lynchburg. For those games to not count for anything is almost a benefit to D3 teams.
Look at UWO this year, JCU is a great OOC game and should be rewarded in SOS. But VA-Lynchburg would be a 1-9 or 0-10 type D3 team and bring down UWO's SOS tremendously, but instead it counts for nothing. Plus in terms of the playoffs; instead of filling a tenth game with a sub-par D3 team (record-wise) UWO is better off taking a bye.
I understand the travel and budget issues of D3 athletics, and there is no easy way to "fix" this. But SOS is a strange thing in D3.
Punished seems harsh. I don't think Oshkosh wanted to schedule those games (and they basically got shamed out of the CoF engagement). How many calls do you think got made before they landed on VA-Lynchburg? They're definitely not going to repeat 2014 and stack up a bunch of Ls against scholarship schools- that decision cost them a place in the tournament. I don't know what the "fix" is, but I don't think you can do anything punitive with Oshkosh if nobody inside the division will agree to play them.
I'd love to see who paid to have VA-Lynchburg fly(?) to Wisconsin. There has to be some D3 teams around instead of playing some joke school from NAIA (are they even NAIA?). Maybe University of Phoenix or Southern New Hampshire can fill out the UWO schedule next year
Who? Serious question- who are the D3 teams around, and do you think they weren't approached at all?
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 31, 2017, 11:44:11 AM
Quote from: merlecanlas on October 31, 2017, 11:40:24 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 31, 2017, 08:14:18 AM
Quote from: merlecanlas on October 30, 2017, 08:01:58 PM
I wouldn't say is fatally flawed, but I don't think its a great measure of a team A vs team B. I don't have another way to measure strength of schedule, but I don't think it's "fair" for non-D3 to be worthless. I understand that a team shouldn't be punished for playing up a level (D2), but (imo) teams should be punished for scheduling College of Faith or Virginia-Lynchburg. For those games to not count for anything is almost a benefit to D3 teams.
Look at UWO this year, JCU is a great OOC game and should be rewarded in SOS. But VA-Lynchburg would be a 1-9 or 0-10 type D3 team and bring down UWO's SOS tremendously, but instead it counts for nothing. Plus in terms of the playoffs; instead of filling a tenth game with a sub-par D3 team (record-wise) UWO is better off taking a bye.
I understand the travel and budget issues of D3 athletics, and there is no easy way to "fix" this. But SOS is a strange thing in D3.
Punished seems harsh. I don't think Oshkosh wanted to schedule those games (and they basically got shamed out of the CoF engagement). How many calls do you think got made before they landed on VA-Lynchburg? They're definitely not going to repeat 2014 and stack up a bunch of Ls against scholarship schools- that decision cost them a place in the tournament. I don't know what the "fix" is, but I don't think you can do anything punitive with Oshkosh if nobody inside the division will agree to play them.
I'd love to see who paid to have VA-Lynchburg fly(?) to Wisconsin. There has to be some D3 teams around instead of playing some joke school from NAIA (are they even NAIA?). Maybe University of Phoenix or Southern New Hampshire can fill out the UWO schedule next year
Who? Serious question- who are the D3 teams around, and do you think they weren't approached at all?
Agree with Wally here. It takes 2 to tango and I am sure Oshkosh reached out to many schools to fill holes in the schedule and got no takers. Wesley had this problem for years when they were an independent and filled their schedule with anyone who would play them.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 31, 2017, 11:44:11 AM
Quote from: merlecanlas on October 31, 2017, 11:40:24 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 31, 2017, 08:14:18 AM
Quote from: merlecanlas on October 30, 2017, 08:01:58 PM
I wouldn't say is fatally flawed, but I don't think its a great measure of a team A vs team B. I don't have another way to measure strength of schedule, but I don't think it's "fair" for non-D3 to be worthless. I understand that a team shouldn't be punished for playing up a level (D2), but (imo) teams should be punished for scheduling College of Faith or Virginia-Lynchburg. For those games to not count for anything is almost a benefit to D3 teams.
Look at UWO this year, JCU is a great OOC game and should be rewarded in SOS. But VA-Lynchburg would be a 1-9 or 0-10 type D3 team and bring down UWO's SOS tremendously, but instead it counts for nothing. Plus in terms of the playoffs; instead of filling a tenth game with a sub-par D3 team (record-wise) UWO is better off taking a bye.
I understand the travel and budget issues of D3 athletics, and there is no easy way to "fix" this. But SOS is a strange thing in D3.
Punished seems harsh. I don't think Oshkosh wanted to schedule those games (and they basically got shamed out of the CoF engagement). How many calls do you think got made before they landed on VA-Lynchburg? They're definitely not going to repeat 2014 and stack up a bunch of Ls against scholarship schools- that decision cost them a place in the tournament. I don't know what the "fix" is, but I don't think you can do anything punitive with Oshkosh if nobody inside the division will agree to play them.
I'd love to see who paid to have VA-Lynchburg fly(?) to Wisconsin. There has to be some D3 teams around instead of playing some joke school from NAIA (are they even NAIA?). Maybe University of Phoenix or Southern New Hampshire can fill out the UWO schedule next year
Who? Serious question- who are the D3 teams around, and do you think they weren't approached at all?
VA-Lynchburg is 900 miles from UWO. If they contacted every school within 900 miles, I would be shocked to find out that there were no takers for a game.
Wesley is different, as an independent they were trying to fill an entire schedule not just early week OOC games
Merle,
Do you honestly think UWO wanted to/went out of their way to play Lynchburg?
If you stop and think about it, forget all the playoff stuff, do you think the players want to use up one of their 10 game opportunities to play such a weak opponent? Do you think the coaching staff would intentionally scheduled such a disappointing game if they had options?
If it was so easy to find someone else, why did UWO only get 9 games this year?
I get the feeling you are so fixated on the idea that UWO may take one of the two top seeds away from Mt that you can't think objectively.
Quote from: emma17 on October 31, 2017, 12:05:30 PM
Merle,
Do you honestly think UWO wanted to/went out of their way to play Lynchburg?
If you stop and think about it, forget all the playoff stuff, do you think the players want to use up one of their 10 game opportunities to play such a weak opponent? Do you think the coaching staff would intentionally scheduled such a disappointing game if they had options?
If it was so easy to find someone else, why did UWO only get 9 games this year?
I get the feeling you are so fixated on the idea that UWO may take one of the two top seeds away from Mt that you can't think objectively.
I dont think UWO will make the semi-finals, so I am not concerned with seeding. Maybe I'm crazy, but there are a million D3 teams and to think that there is not a match anywhere is odd to me. If it was a financial decision, I would understand but if you are flying a team from VA then why couldn't you fly a D3 team from anywhere else?
Sept 9, Sept 16 or Sept 23 open and all you came up with was VA-Lynchburg and a bye. I'd be disappointed with that as a UWO fan/coach/player/donor
Quote from: merlecanlas on October 31, 2017, 12:31:21 PM
Quote from: emma17 on October 31, 2017, 12:05:30 PM
Merle,
Do you honestly think UWO wanted to/went out of their way to play Lynchburg?
If you stop and think about it, forget all the playoff stuff, do you think the players want to use up one of their 10 game opportunities to play such a weak opponent? Do you think the coaching staff would intentionally scheduled such a disappointing game if they had options?
If it was so easy to find someone else, why did UWO only get 9 games this year?
I get the feeling you are so fixated on the idea that UWO may take one of the two top seeds away from Mt that you can't think objectively.
I dont think UWO will make the semi-finals, so I am not concerned with seeding. Maybe I'm crazy, but there are a million D3 teams and to think that there is not a match anywhere is odd to me. If it was a financial decision, I would understand but if you are flying a team from VA then why couldn't you fly a D3 team from anywhere else?
Sept 9, Sept 16 or Sept 23 open and all you came up with was VA-Lynchburg and a bye. I'd be disappointed with that as a UWO fan/coach/player/donor
Your assumption that every D3 team has unlimited availability on an unlimited number of open dates without any reservation at all (for any one of 500 valid reasons) to take a trip to Oshkosh is totally unhooked from reality. That's just not how any of it works.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 31, 2017, 12:46:45 PM
Quote from: merlecanlas on October 31, 2017, 12:31:21 PM
Quote from: emma17 on October 31, 2017, 12:05:30 PM
Merle,
Do you honestly think UWO wanted to/went out of their way to play Lynchburg?
If you stop and think about it, forget all the playoff stuff, do you think the players want to use up one of their 10 game opportunities to play such a weak opponent? Do you think the coaching staff would intentionally scheduled such a disappointing game if they had options?
If it was so easy to find someone else, why did UWO only get 9 games this year?
I get the feeling you are so fixated on the idea that UWO may take one of the two top seeds away from Mt that you can't think objectively.
I dont think UWO will make the semi-finals, so I am not concerned with seeding. Maybe I'm crazy, but there are a million D3 teams and to think that there is not a match anywhere is odd to me. If it was a financial decision, I would understand but if you are flying a team from VA then why couldn't you fly a D3 team from anywhere else?
Sept 9, Sept 16 or Sept 23 open and all you came up with was VA-Lynchburg and a bye. I'd be disappointed with that as a UWO fan/coach/player/donor
Your assumption that every D3 team has unlimited availability on an unlimited number of open dates without any reservation at all (for any one of 500 valid reasons) to take a trip to Oshkosh is totally unhooked from reality. That's just not how any of it works.
I'm sure the Mount Union JV team would have been available for a September game or any of the local high schools. I don't have a problem with UWO playing my sister's all-girls college in September, but that game should count against their SOS. Just as Wilmington or Muskingum hurt Mount or the majority of the ASC hurts UMHB. That's my gripe.
we can all agree to disagree and wait for the regional rankings come out.
High schools and a junior varsity team? You're not even trying to be realistic at this point.
Can't wait to get those ballots in and change the subject.
It's excluded from playoff criteria, so it's excluded from SOS.
My goodness, you do realize that many conferences only have one or two non-conference games to throw around and several of these arrangements are made years in advance. The WIAC has three non-conference games, but that means week 3 or week 4, and by that time many conferences are solidly in league play.
Last year they played Finlandia, who probably decided against such foolishness as trying to play Oshkosh and Wartburg. In 2014, they scheduled three games against tough NAIA or D-1AA teams, and lost them all - they then went 6-1 in the WIAC and missed the playoffs mainly because of those non-conference losses (if memory serves).
You're coming off here (and in other boards) as a barely transparent homer.
BTW - Virginia Lynchburg is a HBC and has games also against Mississippi Valley State and Tennessee State. They're wanting to move to Division 2 at some point, but were in the USCAA for a long time, and revived football in 2011. It's a struggle to start a football program anyway, but at an underfunded private HBC with a limited scholastic offering, it must be nutty.
Quote from: smedindy on October 31, 2017, 01:18:29 PM
It's excluded from playoff criteria, so it's excluded from SOS.
My goodness, you do realize that many conferences only have one or two non-conference games to throw around and several of these arrangements are made years in advance. The WIAC has three non-conference games, but that means week 3 or week 4, and by that time many conferences are solidly in league play.
Last year they played Finlandia, who probably decided against such foolishness as trying to play Oshkosh and Wartburg. In 2014, they scheduled three games against tough NAIA or D-1AA teams, and lost them all - they then went 6-1 in the WIAC and missed the playoffs mainly because of those non-conference losses (if memory serves).
You're coming off here (and in other boards) as a barely transparent homer.
BTW - Virginia Lynchburg is a HBC and has games also against Mississippi Valley State and Tennessee State. They're wanting to move to Division 2 at some point, but were in the USCAA for a long time, and revived football in 2011. It's a struggle to start a football program anyway, but at an underfunded private HBC with a limited scholastic offering, it must be nutty.
oh I'm a huge homer, I thought that was apparent with my gripe. My gripe is non-d3 games get counted as a non-game.
I thought that non-D3 games didn't count for or against a D3 school? Maybe UWO missed the playoffs that year because they didn't play/win enough D3 games to counter an .857 D3 winning percentage? not that they lost 3 non-d3 games.
I'll have my ballot in shortly... still trying to figure out who should be 9 and 10.
Anyone want to bribe a voter? Might be slightly suspicious if I have Wilmington and Rockford on my ballot though :D
UWW - 10 d3 games
UWP - 10 d3 games
UWL - 10 d3 games
UWS - 9 d3 games
UWSP - 10 d3 games
UWRF - 9 d3 games
UWEC - 10 d3 games
UWO - 8 d3 games :(
all of those other WIAC schools are probably just lucky to overcome the trials and tribulations of D3 scheduling to have a full schedule or nine games.....
take off Mount or UMHB's two worst opponents and watch that SOS soar up
Did I miss the memo where Wisconsin Oshkosh joined the North Region??? ::)
Quote from: bluestreak66 on October 31, 2017, 01:48:13 PM
Did I miss the memo where Wisconsin Oshkosh joined the North Region??? ::)
You're right, I'm sorry....back to the north region
Sorry for asking this question (I should know answer, but can't think of it) on this board, but something Merle posted sparked it.
If the #2 overall seed lost in the first three rounds, does the team that beat them hold home-field for future games- or does it depend on what that team was seeded?
Or is it determined week by week, which as I recall we have to wait for the NCAA to announce the locations of the following week's games?
Quote from: emma17 on October 31, 2017, 02:03:45 PM
Sorry for asking this question (I should know answer, but can't think of it) on this board, but something Merle posted sparked it.
If the #2 overall seed lost in the first three rounds, does the team that beat them hold home-field for future games- or does it depend on what that team was seeded?
Or is it determined week by week, which as I recall we have to wait for the NCAA to announce the locations of the following week's games?
I see a Playoff thread was started in the General Board, I'll take move this question over there.
Quote from: Diezel1 on October 31, 2017, 11:36:24 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on October 30, 2017, 11:48:59 AM
Trine's 55-34 win at Adrian was too close for me... (The game was tie 27-27 going into the 4th) I dropped them to be more in line with everyone else. Hope beat Adrian 22-3. An elite team doesn't allow Adrian to put up 34 points and I'm worried what happens to Trine in the playoffs when they play a team with a much better defense than any they've seen so far this season.
Adrian is 29th in the country in total yardage a game offensively, they are very explosive. The circumstances from the Hope game are not indicative to the talent Adrian has on the offensive side of the ball.
The relevant question, since this is a page that compares teams across conferences, is whether Adrian would still be 29th in the country in total yardage if it was playing a schedule against CCIW teams or OAC teams.
Also, the rule of thumb for making comparisons is that if you're going to throw out the weakest example (which, in the case of Adrian's offense, is the Hope game), then you have to throw out the strongest example (the Rockford game) as well.
Quote from: merlecanlas on October 31, 2017, 11:40:24 AM
I'd love to see who paid to have VA-Lynchburg fly(?) to Wisconsin. There has to be some D3 teams around instead of playing some joke school from NAIA (are they even NAIA?).
Virginia-Lynchburg has never been NAIA. VUL was a member of the USCAA for awhile, but it's currently unaffiliated.
Quote from: merlecanlas on October 31, 2017, 11:40:24 AMMaybe University of Phoenix or Southern New Hampshire can fill out the UWO schedule next year
That's tremendously unfair. As smeds pointed out, VUL is an actual, functioning, campus-based not-for-profit institution of higher learning that's been around since 1886. It's not a diploma mill like those two schools you mentioned. Just because the VUL football program is barely hatched out of the egg and is still working towards both affiliation and proper scheduling doesn't make the school itself some sort of fly-by-night renegade that deserves your, or anybody else's, disparagement.
Quote from: emma17 on October 31, 2017, 12:05:30 PM
Merle,
Do you honestly think UWO wanted to/went out of their way to play Lynchburg?
UWO didn't play Lynchburg. It played
Virginia-Lynchburg. Lynchburg College is a member of the ODAC and a charter member of D3. Virginia University of Lynchburg is a different institution in the same small southern Virginia city, and VUL is unaffiliated with any conference or national organization.
Quote from: merlecanlas on October 31, 2017, 01:00:26 PM
I'm sure the Mount Union JV team would have been available for a September game or any of the local high schools. I don't have a problem with UWO playing my sister's all-girls college in September, but that game should count against their SOS. Just as Wilmington or Muskingum hurt Mount or the majority of the ASC hurts UMHB. That's my gripe.
There's no satisfactory rationale behind that gripe, though. The reason why D3 only considers games played against other D3 schools within its primary criteria for determining W-L and SOS -- and this applies to all D3 sports, not just football -- is because of the wide variance of competition outside the division, and the concomitant inability to determine (or control, through rules regarding scholarships, season lengths, practice rules, etc.) competitive level. This means that it doesn't count towards primary criteria when, say, UW-Oshkosh plays Virginia-Lynchburg -- but it also doesn't count when Franklin plays D1-FCS Butler. In other words, games played against fledgling, unaffiliated programs are treated the exact same way as games played against D1 schools. They're both discounted altogether from primary criteria ... which is as it should be.
Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 31, 2017, 02:43:25 PM
There's no satisfactory rationale behind that gripe, though. The reason why D3 only considers games played against other D3 schools within its primary criteria for determining W-L and SOS -- and this applies to all D3 sports, not just football -- is because of the wide variance of competition outside the division, and the concomitant inability to determine (or control, through rules regarding scholarships, season lengths, practice rules, etc.) competitive level. This means that it doesn't count towards primary criteria when, say, UW-Oshkosh plays Virginia-Lynchburg -- but it also doesn't count when Franklin plays D1-FCS Butler. In other words, games played against fledgling, unaffiliated programs are treated the exact same way as games played against D1 schools. They're both discounted altogether from primary criteria ... which is as it should be.
This is a good point. The non-division games are excluded from the
primary criteria. They may be considered if/when secondary criteria come in to play. This is certainly what kept Oshkosh out of the tournament in 2014. There can be a penalty, win OR lose, for playing outside of the division. It's one more reason why it's unfair to assume Oshkosh picked that game in lieu of an in-division opponent. They know better than anybody that there's virtually no upside to playing non-division games.
QuoteVirginia-Lynchburg has never been NAIA. VUL was a member of the USCAA for awhile, but it's currently unaffiliated.
I know that I said I was done. But Kent State-Tusc is a member of the USCAA, there are also two Bryant & Stranton "branches" as members. C'mon man. Ok, ok. After a good laugh, back to North ....hahah...North Region football only
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 31, 2017, 02:51:29 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 31, 2017, 02:43:25 PM
There's no satisfactory rationale behind that gripe, though. The reason why D3 only considers games played against other D3 schools within its primary criteria for determining W-L and SOS -- and this applies to all D3 sports, not just football -- is because of the wide variance of competition outside the division, and the concomitant inability to determine (or control, through rules regarding scholarships, season lengths, practice rules, etc.) competitive level. This means that it doesn't count towards primary criteria when, say, UW-Oshkosh plays Virginia-Lynchburg -- but it also doesn't count when Franklin plays D1-FCS Butler. In other words, games played against fledgling, unaffiliated programs are treated the exact same way as games played against D1 schools. They're both discounted altogether from primary criteria ... which is as it should be.
This is a good point. The non-division games are excluded from the primary criteria. They may be considered if/when secondary criteria come in to play. This is certainly what kept Oshkosh out of the tournament in 2014. There can be a penalty, win OR lose, for playing outside of the division. It's one more reason why it's unfair to assume Oshkosh picked that game in lieu of an in-division opponent. They know better than anybody that there's virtually no upside to playing non-division games.
There is
some value to playing those games -- it sharpens the mettle of your two-deep if you're playing a D1, D2, or good NAIA program, or it gets your younger players on the field for some experience if you're playing a team further down on the college football totem pole (such as Virginia-Lynchburg), and it adds to the perceived value of the student-athlete experience if they're allowed to play their allotted number of contests. But, yeah, in terms of how the people who put the D3 playoffs field together perceive it, there's probably not going to be an upside to playing non-division games.
Would Adrian be 29th in total offense, against CCIW competition, probably not. But, that doesn't mean their offense wouldn't be capable of making plays against tougher competition in those conferences.
Quote from: Diezel1 on October 31, 2017, 11:36:24 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on October 30, 2017, 11:48:59 AM
Trine's 55-34 win at Adrian was too close for me... (The game was tie 27-27 going into the 4th) I dropped them to be more in line with everyone else. Hope beat Adrian 22-3. An elite team doesn't allow Adrian to put up 34 points and I'm worried what happens to Trine in the playoffs when they play a team with a much better defense than any they've seen so far this season.
Adrian is 29th in the country in total yardage a game offensively, they are very explosive. The circumstances from the Hope game are not indicative to the talent Adrian has on the offensive side of the ball.
When comparing Trine, Mt. Union, and Wittenberg to CCIW teams, you're forced into make comparisons where head to head or mutual opponents don't exist. I wanted/want to believe that Trine should be in the same conversation as the upper tier teams in the North. In my opinion, an "upper tier" team steamrolls Adrian...
(edited by GS for formatting)
(https://i.giphy.com/media/CiKrEFdzR4y7S/giphy.webp)
Regional rankings day!
In the spirit of regional rankings release day, I thought I'd drop the NRFP results at some unspecified time today and we can all just crush the refresh button on our browsers until it shows up. :)
Kidding. I think I've got one ballot outstanding and I'll post this week's poll as soon as that comes in.
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 01, 2017, 08:33:28 AM
(https://i.giphy.com/media/CiKrEFdzR4y7S/giphy.webp)
Regional rankings day!
In the spirit of regional rankings release day, I thought I'd drop the NRFP results at some unspecified time today and we can all just crush the refresh button on our browsers until it shows up. :)
Kidding. I think I've got one ballot outstanding and I'll post this week's poll as soon as that comes in.
It's not me this time!
Quote from: HOPEful on November 01, 2017, 08:19:22 AM
Quote from: Diezel1 on October 31, 2017, 11:36:24 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on October 30, 2017, 11:48:59 AM
Trine's 55-34 win at Adrian was too close for me... (The game was tie 27-27 going into the 4th) I dropped them to be more in line with everyone else. Hope beat Adrian 22-3. An elite team doesn't allow Adrian to put up 34 points and I'm worried what happens to Trine in the playoffs when they play a team with a much better defense than any they've seen so far this season.
Adrian is 29th in the country in total yardage a game offensively, they are very explosive. The circumstances from the Hope game are not indicative to the talent Adrian has on the offensive side of the ball.
When comparing Trine, Mt. Union, and Wittenberg to CCIW teams, you're forced into make comparisons where head to head or mutual opponents don't exist. I wanted/want to believe that Trine should be in the same conversation as the upper tier teams in the North. In my opinion, an "upper tier" team steamrolls Adrian...
I agree an "upper tier" team crushes Adrian. The question is whether a mid tier or 8,9,10 team in the region crushes Adrian as well. We just don't know and that's the challenge. As a result, people tend to view previous playoff years as the benchmark by which to measure MIAA champions. All Trine can do is keep winning against their schedule, they will be in, and they will have an opportunity to show what they can do.
(edited by GS for formatting)
Quote from: USee on November 01, 2017, 09:30:28 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on November 01, 2017, 08:19:22 AM
Quote from: Diezel1 on October 31, 2017, 11:36:24 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on October 30, 2017, 11:48:59 AM
Trine's 55-34 win at Adrian was too close for me... (The game was tie 27-27 going into the 4th) I dropped them to be more in line with everyone else. Hope beat Adrian 22-3. An elite team doesn't allow Adrian to put up 34 points and I'm worried what happens to Trine in the playoffs when they play a team with a much better defense than any they've seen so far this season.
Adrian is 29th in the country in total yardage a game offensively, they are very explosive. The circumstances from the Hope game are not indicative to the talent Adrian has on the offensive side of the ball.
When comparing Trine, Mt. Union, and Wittenberg to CCIW teams, you're forced into make comparisons where head to head or mutual opponents don't exist. I wanted/want to believe that Trine should be in the same conversation as the upper tier teams in the North. In my opinion, an "upper tier" team steamrolls Adrian...
I agree an "upper tier" team crushes Adrian. The question is whether a mid tier or 8,9,10 team in the region crushes Adrian as well. We just don't know and that's the challenge. As a result, people tend to view previous playoff years as the benchmark by which to measure MIAA champions. All Trine can do is keep winning against their schedule, they will be in, and they will have an opportunity to show what they can do.
I agree completely. After Trine obliterated Hope, I was willing to begin considering them to be an "upper tier" team (I ranked them 3rd in the North last week, giving them the benefit of the doubt over the one loss teams).
I believe this Trine team is the best MIAA team we've had in some time. However, I lowered that lofty ranking this week after the win against Adrian.
(edited by GS for formatting)
I'm not disagreeing with you. But what I am saying is all it takes is for the WR to get behind a defender once or twice and the RB to break a long run, which they are both capable of doing, and they can be in any game. Which is exactly what happened against Trine. Those two guys are two of the most dangerous in this region, hands down.
Quote from: Diezel1 on November 01, 2017, 10:49:38 AM
Those two guys are two of the most dangerous in this region, hands down.
I don't doubt "those two guys" are good, but to clarify, have you seen every other WR/QB in the region? Hands back up.....
I have seen a few, yes.
a few is quite different than "all". Tough to claim someone is "Most..." unless you have seen all the options. I haven't so I have no opinion.
I apologize if I made it sound like I thought they were THE most dangerous.
Quote from: Captain_Joe08 on November 01, 2017, 08:56:56 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 01, 2017, 08:33:28 AM
(https://i.giphy.com/media/CiKrEFdzR4y7S/giphy.webp)
Regional rankings day!
In the spirit of regional rankings release day, I thought I'd drop the NRFP results at some unspecified time today and we can all just crush the refresh button on our browsers until it shows up. :)
Kidding. I think I've got one ballot outstanding and I'll post this week's poll as soon as that comes in.
It's not me this time!
I knew it wasn't me either. But then I got a PM from wally asking about my ballot. Yup, my dumb a$$ replied to a PM from OC_SID instead of wally on Monday! The lesson as always...I'm an idiot. ;D
The regional ranking doesn't surprise me too much. I expect a few changes once the RRO are factored in perhaps North Central over Trine, IWU over DePauw.
The one thing that I didn't expect is Millikin over Carthage for #10. Apparently a slight edge in SoS (.529 vs .512) tops the H2H win.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 01, 2017, 04:55:42 PM
The regional ranking doesn't surprise me too much. I expect a few changes once the RRO are factored in perhaps North Central over Trine, IWU over DePauw.
The one thing that I didn't expect is Millikin over Carthage for #10. Apparently a slight edge in SoS (.529 vs .512) tops the H2H win.
Yeah, the Millikin/Carthage thing really surprised me. It will all be moot after Saturday when Carthage either loses game #3 to NCC, or gets a RRO win. And the same the following week when Millikin visits IWU for either loss #3 or a RRO win.
NRFP through games of Week 9:
(https://i.imgur.com/p30ZzPk.png)
click to enlarge
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
I'm column 3 this week. Despite my ranking them third, I guess I'm responsible for my alma mater being #2 this week! (I docked Witt two slots for barely surviving Wabash, whom all their fans seem to think stinks this year, and are headed towards being Earlham! ;D)
There can always be totally unforeseen upsets, but unless I overlooked something I see only three games the last two weeks likely to affect voting. This week: Carthage @ NCC. Final week: Millikin @ IWU and that Monon Bell thingy that some posters seem to get all bent outa shape about. ::)
FWIW, I'll predict NCC, but root for Carthage; predict IWU and root for same; and am neutral on Monon Bell, but predict Wabash.
I'm the last column. At this point, I feel like it's...
1. Mount Union
2 through 6. IWU, Wittenberg, North Central, Wheaton, and Trine in whatever order feels right this week. You could jumble these 5 teams in any order you want and make a decent arguement for why that is the correct order for the rankings. I can understand if you feel Carthage deserves to be in the mix toward the bottom of these rankings...
7 through 10. Does it even matter anymore? 2 more CCIW teams, the HCAC's best, and there's still another spot to fill!
New week, same feeling. The bottom of the ballot is just gross.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on November 07, 2017, 12:08:27 PM
New week, same feeling. The bottom of the ballot is just gross.
I agree. The OAC completely pissing down their respective legs has left the bottom of North Region in a very weak position.
Quote from: HScoach on November 07, 2017, 12:22:40 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on November 07, 2017, 12:08:27 PM
New week, same feeling. The bottom of the ballot is just gross.
I agree. The OAC completely pissing down their respective legs has left the bottom of North Region in a very weak position.
It's sad really. Wanted to put a second MIAA (Hope) or the NACC Champ (Lakeland) on but it was a threadbare case at best. Basically we have 5 strong teams (6 if you include Trine) then 4 meh ones.
NRFP through games of Week 10:
(https://i.imgur.com/QgL8BID.png)
click to enlarge
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
Column 1 this week.
The closest anyone has DePauw to IWU is 4 places yet the committee still says DePauw is ahead? Apparently a RRO win is worth less than .015 SoS.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 08, 2017, 07:14:55 PM
Column 1 this week.
The closest anyone has DePauw to IWU is 4 places yet the committee still says DePauw is ahead? Apparently a RRO win is worth less than .015 SoS.
Yeah, since the North RAC can't get it right, Wabash better do it in the Monon Bell game! I try to stay neutral in intense rivalries my team is not in, like Monon Bell or Hope/Calvin in basketball (don't want to get hit in the crossfire! ;D), but this is different: GO WABASH, CRUSH the Dannies! ;D
I suspect that UWW will be ranked in the final rankings (once they reach .700 winning percentage); that will also help IWU.
BTW, I'm column 8. Wabash and DePauw were both VERY unimpressive on Saturday, so I dropped Wabash, didn't replace them with DePauw, and put Hope at #10 (they CRUSHED Albion who gave Wabash fits).
Why wouldn't Trine be considered a strong team at this point?
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 08, 2017, 08:48:41 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 08, 2017, 07:14:55 PM
Column 1 this week.
The closest anyone has DePauw to IWU is 4 places yet the committee still says DePauw is ahead? Apparently a RRO win is worth less than .015 SoS.
Yeah, since the North RAC can't get it right, Wabash better do it in the Monon Bell game! I try to stay neutral in intense rivalries my team is not in, like Monon Bell or Hope/Calvin in basketball (don't want to get hit in the crossfire! ;D), but this is different: GO WABASH, CRUSH the Dannies! ;D
I suspect that UWW will be ranked in the final rankings (once they reach .700 winning percentage); that will also help IWU.
BTW, I'm column 8. Wabash and DePauw were both VERY unimpressive on Saturday, so I dropped Wabash, didn't replace them with DePauw, and put Hope at #10 (they CRUSHED Albion who gave Wabash fits).
I think IWU being left out because they're ranked behind DePauw would be the biggest travesty in the history of the playoffs. That alone is enough for me to want Wabash to win Saturday. So that a legitimate top 10 team isn't sitting at home next weekend.
Quote from: Diezel1 on November 08, 2017, 10:35:15 PM
Why wouldn't Trine be considered a strong team at this point?
Why would they be? There are indications that Trine is a stronger than usual MIAA rep. They handled their schedule with relative ease, but they haven't played a schedule like Whitewater, Platteville, St Johns or even Frostburg. All those teams have played well against top ranked opponents so it's easier to have a feel for their positioning. Rightly or wrongly Trine is strapped with the poor playoff record of previous MIAA champs. It wouldn't surprise me if Trine ends up making a playoff run and ranked in the top 10 this year. It also wouldn't surprise me if they lost in round 1 to a Franklin, Wartburg or Wittenberg either. I hope they beat some people and make them take notice but no one is going to assume that's the case
Quote from: Diezel1 on November 08, 2017, 10:35:15 PM
Why wouldn't Trine be considered a strong team at this point?
I would argue they are. I think they have the potential to be a contender in a game against most teams. But we won't really know until their first playoff game because the best team they've played this season is Hope.
If they stay undefeated (and they should), they should be hosting the first weekend. Win and maybe next year the MIAA will get a smidge more benefit of the doubt. Go Thunder!
Quote from: USee on November 09, 2017, 12:35:56 AM
Quote from: Diezel1 on November 08, 2017, 10:35:15 PM
Why wouldn't Trine be considered a strong team at this point?
Why would they be? There are indications that Trine is a stronger than usual MIAA rep. They handled their schedule with relative ease, but they haven't played a schedule like Whitewater, Platteville, St Johns or even Frostburg. All those teams have played well against top ranked opponents so it's easier to have a feel for their positioning. Rightly or wrongly Trine is strapped with the poor playoff record of previous MIAA champs. It wouldn't surprise me if Trine ends up making a playoff run and ranked in the top 10 this year. It also wouldn't surprise me if they lost in round 1 to a Franklin, Wartburg or Wittenberg either. I hope they beat some people and make them take notice but no one is going to assume that's the case
Would it not be more practical to judge them on their performance in the playoffs than the league in general?
You mean playoffs this year? That is true but we are talking about speculative rankings among teams with no apparent comparitive link.
If you are talking about past performance (which is not indicative of future results 8-)) then, yes, that's probably why Trine (place MIAA Champ here) is not ranked or thought of more highly.
I was referencing the past, as it was brought up in topic a few weeks ago. Although they are not comparable to the elite teams in the country, which very few are, Trine was the last MIAA team to win a game in the playoffs. And even though it isn't great, doesn't a 2-3 record in the playoffs show they can win there? To me, having the ability to win a game in the playoffs shows you are a "strong" team, no matter what conference you are in.
Quote from: Diezel1 on November 09, 2017, 11:57:41 AM
I was referencing the past, as it was brought up in topic a few weeks ago. Although they are not comparable to the elite teams in the country, which very few are, Trine was the last MIAA team to win a game in the playoffs. And even though it isn't great, doesn't a 2-3 record in the playoffs show they can win there? To me, having the ability to win a game in the playoffs shows you are a "strong" team, no matter what conference you are in.
It shows Trine with a Gagliardi winning quarterback can win in the playoffs. 2017 Trine needs to earn their own stripes.
Quote from: Diezel1 on November 09, 2017, 11:57:41 AM
I was referencing the past, as it was brought up in topic a few weeks ago. Although they are not comparable to the elite teams in the country, which very few are, Trine was the last MIAA team to win a game in the playoffs. And even though it isn't great, doesn't a 2-3 record in the playoffs show they can win there? To me, having the ability to win a game in the playoffs shows you are a "strong" team, no matter what conference you are in.
Seriously? You're investing the current Trine team with the mojo of the 2010 Trine team, in spite of the fact that there was a 4-6 season and three straight 6-4 seasons in that intervening six-year period for the Thunder?
But Greg, the campus is the same, the facilities are the same. Now you are probably going to say that they changed coaches since then too ???.
I'm told to look at the past and the history of the program. Is that not what I am doing?
The past is relevant if it's part of a continuous chain of success or failure. F'rinstance, in addition to the other data points that we have on Mount Union, we know that the Purple Raiders are likely to be a formidable opponent in the playoffs because their unbroken string of success stretches back so far and has continually peaked so high. The same thing can be said, albeit to a lesser degree, about the likes of Linfield, North Central, Wesley, Mary Hardin-Baylor, and perhaps a few others. And it goes in the opposite direction if you're talking about a team that's been down forever. But a program such as Trine that has had peaks and valleys? How do you draw relevance from 2010 when the Thunder have had a losing season and three mediocre seasons over a four-year period in between then and now?
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 08, 2017, 06:55:51 PM
NRFP through games of Week 10:
(https://i.imgur.com/QgL8BID.png)
click to enlarge
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
I'm column 5. I have DPU at 10, but strongly considered Hope for my final spot. It makes me wanna puke (Mike Gundy voice) to put a team that won a dog fight with an 0-9 team on my ballot.
I understand your logic, and appreciate the clarification. I'm not trying to debate that Trine is anywhere close to being on the same level of those schools. IMHO, those schools would be considered the elite programs in the country. To me, any team that can go 9-0 to this point is considered a strong team, no matter what their past is. Are they elite? No, not even close. Are they a good, strong team? If you are in the top 25, I'd say yes.
My ballot is in. For almost certainly the first time ever, I've voted for TWO MIAA teams two weeks in a row! (I realize that the opponents have not exactly been stellar, but Hope has won its last three games by a combined 168-18!) Also, as promised, the winner of the Moanin' Bell ;) is on my ballot, though just barely; to make room I dropped Millikin, who could do NOTHING against the Titan defense.
Did D3 pass a rule against upsets? Both my national and regional ballots have barely changed since mid-October!
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 11, 2017, 10:41:32 PM
Did D3 pass a rule against upsets? Both my national and regional ballots have barely changed since mid-October!
The top of my ballot was basically solid the last month of the season or so. It's been the bottom of the ballot where things got a bit dicey.
My ballot is in early this week. Good luck to everyone in the playoffs.
Boy, it took a lot of thought to land on someone for that 10 spot this week. Very, very iffy resumes. I blame my own conference for laying an egg and not giving us a 2nd team you could even consider. Parity = mediocrity in the OAC.
Are we getting a poll this week? I know we're all dying to know who #10 in the north is this week :D
Yes. Been a busy week. I owe you all the final regular season poll for the NRFP as well as Week 11 and final standings in the NCAC Pick 'Em. I'll get those both out this evening. Sorry for the delay!
Final 2017 NRFP:
(https://i.imgur.com/DUMyKfU.png)
click to enlarge
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
Thanks to everybody who participated this year both with voting and the always good discussion in this forum. This board is always one of my favorites on the site thanks to you all that contribute. Let's do it again this fall.
Can we talk about the person who voted Wabash at 19? I know it's muddled down at the bottom of the ballot but that seems extreme :D
FWIW JCU was 6-4. Had they been 7-3 with competitive losses to UWO and Mount they probably would have been my 10.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 17, 2017, 05:38:10 AM
Can we talk about the person who voted Wabash at 19? I know it's muddled down at the bottom of the ballot but that seems extreme :D
The worst part is that this is my column. For shame. Supposed to be 10 for Wabash there.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on November 17, 2017, 08:26:21 AM
FWIW JCU was 6-4. Had they been 7-3 with competitive losses to UWO and Mount they probably would have been my 10.
Clearly I have some more cleaning up to do on this table tonight. This week's NRFP post was inspired by the untidy work done by the selection committee this past weekend. :)
Maybe the east is not the weakest region in the country. 3 and 4 in the north get trounced today, one by an east team who put up 35 on Wittenberg.
Quote from: wesleydad on November 18, 2017, 04:18:37 PM
Maybe the east is not the weakest region in the country. 3 and 4 in the north get trounced today, one by an east team who put up 35 on Wittenberg.
Huh? I don't know anybody in this forum had been taking shots at the East region. I know that happens elsewhere, but the neeener-neener stuff is misdirected here I think.
Great win by Frostburg today. Absolutely handled Wittenberg.
Yeah, no one takes shots at the East here, especially this year when our leagues were meh or feasted on themselves.
Witt picked the wrong week to not show up.
I think we've sorted out #1, #2 and #3 in the region, for keeps. And maybe #4, after faceplants by IWU and Wittenberg. Franklin put up a valiant effort out there in Iowa.
Right, it's the geographically dispersed ones talking. South folks still trying to lay claim to Wesley and Frostburg, perhaps after the vaunted HSU went down (tough first round matchup, I get it, but please let's stop complaining there isn't more D3 teams in the S/SW and NW/West Coast, it's still complaining about something silly), cause setting aside any artifice created by the NCAA (current conference construct in the entire NE is based on the AQ rather than historical relationships at this point) I tend to think of DE and MD as being very similar to TX and AL.
But, after the 2012 Hobart playoff game and this one, I'm starting to drop Witt in the same bucket as W&J. Good, generally always at the top of their conference, which is middling, every time they are ranked between 15-20 they should probably be 5 or so lower, getting a reputation bump. (understanding rankings and NCAA seeding/matchups are unrelated in theory) Anecdotal, but my bias is heading in that direction. There's always been a bit of an OH/PA rust belt reputation (tough physical dudes who worked summers at the steel mill) bump over the NE, but over a generation, wondering if that needs to go away.
Aside from benefitting from a potential residual rust belt bump, Witt and W&J benefit from another key thing: tradition. Those are two programs that have been very good for a very long time. Witt is #2 in most wins in D3 and I believe W&J is #3. They've both made it to multiple title games although I don't think W&J ever won one.
I know a little something about significant sports history. It has a shelf life. Didn't help W&J today against a pool C runner up to another school who lost by 21 to a NY state public school with very limited tradition.
W&J and Witt are overrated in the national landscape pretty consistently.
Just a reminder that I'll put out a final NRFP. There is but one North region team left standing. I imagine we'll have all the data we need to put together final regional ballots after this weekend. I'd like to put out the final poll by 12/17 and put the 2017 season to bed. :)
(o)(o) peeking in
End of season polls are always a pain because there's always someone who seems to have disappeared. I'm still waiting on one ballot for the Top 25 poll too.
I sent my ballot in early this week.
Did we ever see a final poll
Quote from: smedindy on January 03, 2018, 07:48:41 PM
Did we ever see a final poll
Nope... and it's caused a lot of sleepless nights wondering who was the #1 team in the region this year :(
(https://media3.giphy.com/media/5dWWa4tYjpBSM/giphy.gif)
I'm so sorry, gang. I'll have this posted for you this evening.
Final 2017 NRFP:
(https://i.imgur.com/DUMyKfU.png)
click to enlarge
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
Thanks to everybody who participated this year both with voting and the always good discussion in this forum. This board is always one of my favorites on the site thanks to you all that contribute. Let's do it again this fall.
I think column 6 is missing a team
I was column 4. The big position I was looking forward to was Trine vs Franklin. At least I wasn't the only one who had Franklin ahead. They had 3 common opponents this year (vs Manchester, @ Bluffton, @ Wartburg in playoffs) and especially that last one Franklin was better. Yes Franklin lost 2 more games but Thomas More and Butler were much better than Trine's non-conference slate of Manchester, Bluffton, WI Lutheran, and Concordia-Chicago.
I need a copy editor.
Re: Trine/Franklin...I'm the first column and I had Trine 3, Franklin 4 (how am I the high man on Franklin, FCGG??). I did give thought to pushing Franklin ahead there, but the extra losses were damaging. Not so much the Butler loss, but it's difficult to award Franklin a lot of credit for Thomas More result given the way Thomas More's season unfolded. Still though, for me it was very close between the two. I did feel that Franklin's effort vs. Wartburg was impressive enough to launch them up and over Wittenberg and Illinois Wesleyan - both total no-shows at home in the tournament.
Quote from: wally_wabash on January 05, 2018, 01:25:32 PM
I need a copy editor.
Re: Trine/Franklin...I'm the first column and I had Trine 3, Franklin 4 (how am I the high man on Franklin, FCGG??). I did give thought to pushing Franklin ahead there, but the extra losses were damaging. Not so much the Butler loss, but it's difficult to award Franklin a lot of credit for Thomas More result given the way Thomas More's season unfolded. Still though, for me it was very close between the two. I did feel that Franklin's effort vs. Wartburg was impressive enough to launch them up and over Wittenberg and Illinois Wesleyan - both total no-shows at home in the tournament.
Well I was one of the high water marks for Wabash so we're even ;)
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 05, 2018, 03:17:43 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on January 05, 2018, 01:25:32 PM
I need a copy editor.
Re: Trine/Franklin...I'm the first column and I had Trine 3, Franklin 4 (how am I the high man on Franklin, FCGG??). I did give thought to pushing Franklin ahead there, but the extra losses were damaging. Not so much the Butler loss, but it's difficult to award Franklin a lot of credit for Thomas More result given the way Thomas More's season unfolded. Still though, for me it was very close between the two. I did feel that Franklin's effort vs. Wartburg was impressive enough to launch them up and over Wittenberg and Illinois Wesleyan - both total no-shows at home in the tournament.
Well I was one of the high water marks for Wabash so we're even ;)
You two should get a room!
I am surprised that no one ranked 8-2 Depauw ahead of 8-2 Wabash despite the head to head. I am actually most surprised that I am one of those who didn't either!
Now that everyone has had some time to study Kickoff, are we having a preseason poll again this year?
I'll be rather shocked if The MachineTM is not unanimously #1, but am quite interested in seeing how others rank 2-10. (For that matter, I'm curious how I will rank 2-10!)
I didn't order Kickoff. In the MIAA, what is the predicted order of finish this year? Trine lost MIAA offensive player of the year Evan Wyse at QB, and some losses on the OLine, DLine and Safety, but have enough guns returning, including various publication preseason All American corners Marcus Winters and Cayleel Hill, to be in the mix again at the top of the league.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on August 11, 2018, 04:15:10 PM
Now that everyone has had some time to study Kickoff, are we having a preseason poll again this year?
I'll be rather shocked if The MachineTM is not unanimously #1, but am quite interested in seeing how others rank 2-10. (For that matter, I'm curious how I will rank 2-10!)
Yessir! Let's shoot for ballots in by EOB on Friday (8/17). I'll send offlines to last year's voters and get the ball rolling.
Quote from: TUAngola on August 12, 2018, 10:40:29 AM
I didn't order Kickoff. In the MIAA, what is the predicted order of finish this year? Trine lost MIAA offensive player of the year Evan Wyse at QB, and some losses on the OLine, DLine and Safety, but have enough guns returning, including various publication preseason All American corners Marcus Winters and Cayleel Hill, to be in the mix again at the top of the league.
Yoooo...do yourself a favor and get that Kickoff. It's fantastic and supports the site in a big way. You'll get a full team-by-team breakdown of the MIAA and every other conference! Really though, can't recommend it strongly enough.
Quote from: wally_wabash on August 12, 2018, 10:46:44 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on August 11, 2018, 04:15:10 PM
Now that everyone has had some time to study Kickoff, are we having a preseason poll again this year?
I'll be rather shocked if The MachineTM is not unanimously #1, but am quite interested in seeing how others rank 2-10. (For that matter, I'm curious how I will rank 2-10!)
Yessir! Let's shoot for ballots in by EOB on Friday (8/17). I'll send offlines to last year's voters and get the ball rolling.
Quote from: TUAngola on August 12, 2018, 10:40:29 AM
I didn't order Kickoff. In the MIAA, what is the predicted order of finish this year? Trine lost MIAA offensive player of the year Evan Wyse at QB, and some losses on the OLine, DLine and Safety, but have enough guns returning, including various publication preseason All American corners Marcus Winters and Cayleel Hill, to be in the mix again at the top of the league.
Yoooo...do yourself a favor and get that Kickoff. It's fantastic and supports the site in a big way. You'll get a full team-by-team breakdown of the MIAA and every other conference! Really though, can't recommend it strongly enough.
For what it's worth, so probably not much, I agree with Wally! I enjoyed reading the full breakdown of DIII Football from guys who love this level as much as me!
I've submitted my ballot but I have 0 confidence in it. Probably a lot of changes after week 1.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on August 16, 2018, 09:19:51 PM
I've submitted my ballot but I have 0 confidence in it. Probably a lot of changes after week 1.
I think that is just SOP for a preseason ballot! ;D
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on August 16, 2018, 09:35:56 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on August 16, 2018, 09:19:51 PM
I've submitted my ballot but I have 0 confidence in it. Probably a lot of changes after week 1.
I think that is just SOP for a preseason ballot! ;D
Didn't even have to wait until week 1... I forgot to put on John Carroll and had to add them in :-[
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on August 16, 2018, 10:47:02 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on August 16, 2018, 09:35:56 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on August 16, 2018, 09:19:51 PM
I've submitted my ballot but I have 0 confidence in it. Probably a lot of changes after week 1.
I think that is just SOP for a preseason ballot! ;D
Didn't even have to wait until week 1... I forgot to put on John Carroll and had to add them in :-[
That's what we're banking will happen this season... every team will forgot to prep for us as we causally go 10-0! lol
JCUStreaks70
Never fear. Mount Union won't forget! Go Raiders! Go Streaks! ☠🏈
I nearly missed the deadline as I was leaving for high school football tonight.
Also a Streak died in Fond Du Lac tonight.
Sorry for holding everyone up. I had a big deadline at work and hadn't had time to come up for air.
Got my ballot sent in today.
At long last, the 2018 preseason NRFP:
(https://i.imgur.com/qTBGlzh.png)
click to enlarge
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
Quote from: wally_wabash on August 19, 2018, 08:26:58 PM
At long last, the 2018 preseason NRFP:
(https://i.imgur.com/qTBGlzh.png)
click to enlarge
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, USee, and wally wabash.
With the exception of that last column, there's a pretty fair amount of consensus given the fact that we only have potential and historical data to go off of. Impressive. Looking forward to hearing all of your opinions this year!
Quote from: MUC57 on August 17, 2018, 05:04:44 PM
JCUStreaks70
Never fear. Mount Union won't forget! Go Raiders! Go Streaks! ☠🏈
Damn! I was hoping we'd go unnoticed until we beat you on 9/22! LOL Well in the words of a wise man: Go Streaks! Go Raiders! Go Everybody!
I'll start! I'm the first column. Mount Union is #1 across the board and they are the best team in the region with plenty of distance. I think they've got a significant gap the entire D3 field and not just the region this year if I'm being honest. After that I had to revisit my end of season rankings and see how I felt about some teams. I was high on Franklin and Trine at the end of last year, but I've got significant questions about them coming into 2018. Franklin slotted in at 10 for me, Trine was just off. For Trine, I don't know that they are in a place where they can lose a player of Wyse's caliber and get back to the tournament. They haven't had that kind of consistency. Franklin certainly has been able to lose a star QB and keep on going, but they lost a lot in addition to Burton. So I'm a little cautious about those squads. I like what North Central (2) and Wheaton (3) have coming back and I'm sure Wheaton is in a better place than they were at this time last year. Wittenberg (4) really drifted up for me because they have a 3-year starting QB who is really unheralded, but has been rock solid and they have a handful of fifth year guys that I wasn't anticipating being back. They're going to be really good. JCU is my fifth team and could definitely rise if they really dominate their non-UMU schedule. Then I went Millikin at 6- I'm a sucker for talented, experienced QBs. No doubt though, Millikin is sneaking up on nobody this year, so they'll really have to be sharp to not drift back into the middle of the CCIW. IWU (7) is my fourth CCIW team- such a rugged league right now. Five different CCIW teams were recognized on this poll which is pretty incredible. Then I went with Hope at 8. I like what Stuursma is doing there and it feels like he's really building a strong, consistent team. I think Hope is the team to beat in the MIAA and getting Trine at home certainly influenced that call. Lastly I've got Wabash at 9. I think Wabash is loaded with offensive talent, IF they can get QB play good enough to unlock it. There's been a change at OC which I think is really helpful. The Little Giants are going to get a year younger on defense, which might be trouble in a league where offenses are exploding. It'll be interesting to see how that works out. Anyway, for me, there's not much difference at all right now between teams 8-10 on my ballot and then the next 4 or so that just missed for me (Trine, Denison, DePauw, B-W). Also keeping a close eye on Allegheny this year. They've got an interesting game coming in week 1 vs. RPI. A result there might get them top 10 consideration.
JCUStreaks70
Ah, you're my kind of guy! You make me almost want to root for Tha Bluestreaks. Well, anyway, best to you guys on the season (until you play UMU). You have a good program going. Keep it moving along. "A wise man"? You're too kind! OK! Go Bluestreaks! Beat the other 8 teams in the OAC! ☠🏈🍺
Let me know if you're coming to Alliance. Would love to meet you. Behind the west stands, with my two friends, Guido and Nunzio. They' re Raider fans. That is, The Palermo Raiders. See you there?
Quote from: MUC57 on August 20, 2018, 09:55:00 AM
JCUStreaks70
Ah, you're my kind of guy! You make me almost want to root for Tha Bluestreaks. Well, anyway, best to you guys on the season (until you play UMU). You have a good program going. Keep it moving along. "A wise man"? You're too kind! OK! Go Bluestreaks! Beat the other 8 teams in the OAC! ☠🏈🍺
Let me know if you're coming to Alliance. Would love to meet you. Behind the west stands, with my two friends, Guido and Nunzio. They' re Raider fans. That is, The Palermo Raiders. See you there?
Unfortunately I will not be able to attend. Being in Chicago, I can only make the trek back to CLE once a year, so I always do a home game... That and I in a wedding that day.. It's myself and a bunch of Illini fans (at least one of those teams knows how to win!) lol
My trip back to Cleveland this year is Week 11 for the Storied "Cuyahoga Gold Bowl".
Best of luck to you guys this year though! Thanks for the kind words about our program, if only that was the case when I was playing there!
Column 2 for me. My thoughts on the CCIW teams are well published on the CCIW board. I picked Wheaton ahead of NCC because of the experience in the trenches the Thunder have and the Cardinals don't. I picked Carthage ahead of Millikin because the Redmen return 17 starters, had the #2 defense in the CCIW for a 7-3 team and its hard not to see how they will be better(I originally had them 3rd in the CCIW but their fall roster indicated 3 key guys aren't returning so I dropped them below IWU). Millikin will be fantastic on offense but will rely on freshman at about 4-5 key spots and couldn't stop anyone last year. I slotted Trine high because they surprised me last year getting to round 2 of the playoffs, have 20 returning starters though losing Wyse will hurt I anticipate them having an even better year. Witt has a great QB, awesome depth at WR but their defense is in serious question with the losses and a first round no show last year doesn't give me great confidence at this point and puts them in IWU territory on my list. I really like Wabash Offense and if Reid is the real deal at QB I like them to win the league. Young Defense I'll be watching early. ONU got my 10 spot over Franklin/Depauw/Millikin and BW in that order.
I believe I'm column 9. I really have no idea until we see some action so I went with a basic and safe ballot.
Mount Union on top, CCIW 1 at #2 which I gave to NCC,
Then at 3-4-5 go in some order NCAC 1, OAC 2, and CCIW 2. I ended up Witt, Wheaton, JCU.
Beyond that it's a mix of somebody has to be there and these are the usual suspects. IWU slots in at 6, Wabash at 7.
Franklin at 8 (with the potential to actually win both non-conference games for once).
MIAA placeholder at 9 I used Trine (the top MIAA team is usually worthy of being ranked it's just a matter of who that will be. 4 different teams have gone to the playoffs the last 4 years... maybe it's Hope's turn this year?).
Finally to finish off the ballot is RHIT who are following the Franklin blueprint and head to Alliance to start the season. Can't wait for the end of September when the Engineers head to Franklin.
I was the voter joining Wally ranking Millikin. Looks like I played it pretty much down the middle otherwise since my other 9 spots were dead on the final tally of the group. The spots I spent the most time on were NCC vs. Wheaton and IL Wesleyan vs. JCU. As the resident OAC homer I did not give any consideration to a 3rd OAC team in my bottom spot(s). I would have considered ONU, but the Williams ACL injury has me in wait and see mode with them now.
I didn't rank Illinois Wesleyan. I think Kickoff scared me off of them.
Quote from: smedindy on August 20, 2018, 11:23:26 PM
I didn't rank Illinois Wesleyan. I think Kickoff scared me off of them.
Almost did for me too. They're listed as #21 in the country, but in the CCIW listings of Kickoff, they're behind Millikin, which was 42nd. Pat and Keith just went with the preseason poll for 1-25, but it is pretty obvious they were simply outvoted in the poll on some teams. I'm really curious where THEY would have had IWU (somewhere in the 50s?)
Loyalty (and optimism) made me put them 6th (I'm third column from the left), but they'll drop out quickly if they don't beat UWLaX in the opener. Their QB is now an upperclassman, and IMO only a half-step behind Brock Rutter, which always gives one some hope.
Speaking of Hope, I agree with FCGG that the MIAA top dog is generally worthy of a spot at least near the bottom of the top 10, but wonder who that top dog is - I kinda suspect Trine, but decided to take a flyer on Hope.
I think the CCIW group of Carthage, IWU, Millikin are all very, very close overall and that group is a step ahead of the next lower group in the CCIW and 1-2 steps behind the top 2. I wouldn't be surprised to see those three in any order as the 3-5 teams in the league.
As for Bauer, he is a playmaker (see last drive vs Wheaton last year) and a gunslinger, but he doesn't quite have the accuracy or efficiency to be compared with Rutter in my opinion.
I'm column 10. Top five are pretty much the same as everyone else. I've got Trine and Hope basically in a tie for 6th. I really like what Stuursma is doing at Hope, and Trine really impressed me last season. I should have had John Carroll next, I don't know why I went with Franklin before them. And 10 was a toss up... I went Ross Hulman but could easily change that to Wabash or DePauw after week 1.
10 days until Hope v. Milikin! 7:00 night game under the lights.
I did not rank Wittenberg (Hence I have Lakeland at 10). Just an educated guess for me at this point considering I have not paid much attention than I really should have considering how busy I have been. We'll see how teams stack up once the season gets underway.
My gut feeling is that 10 might be a little high for the Muskies, especially now with Whitley having graduated, but like you say, once September rolls around things will take care of themselves,.one way or the other.
Love the Hope/Millikin matchup. Will be a fun one to watch to measure both teams.
Quote from: Captain_Joe08 on August 21, 2018, 12:06:23 PM
I did not rank Wittenberg (Hence I have Lakeland at 10). Just an educated guess for me at this point considering I have not paid much attention than I really should have considering how busy I have been. We'll see how teams stack up once the season gets underway.
Joe Fincham...the Rodney Dangerfield of the NRFP? ;D
Hey guys, long time lurker here. Have been bouncing around on this site for a few years and loved reading the comments you all had. One of my favorite parts of the board is the poll that comes out every week. It was interesting to see your thoughts and the view how you reflected that into your poll. So, this year I am looking forward to partaking in a poll with you all every week and hearing your thoughts about why you put a team where. I was the last slot this week and here is my breakdown:
#1 - Mount Union - This one doesn't need any explaining.
#2 - Trine - I think the defense is going to take a big step forward this year. They return 8 guys on that side of the ball and a transfer comes in from Siena Heights who was a two time all-conference player to anchor the linebackers. They are young but experienced and I think the loss of Wyse won't be as large as everyone thinks. Duckett will step in and do a good job with all the skill players they have back. I may have them a little high but I think they are a mainstay on the top 10 this year.
#3 - North Central - Love their QB situation with the addition of a transfer from Illinois State. Their defense is very athletic and their secondary while losing some players, I don't think will miss a beat. NCC is going to be solid as usual this year.
#4 - Wittenberg - I love Jake Kennedy. This is his year and I think he will really wreck havoc on opposing defenses. I am high on Witt due to his return. Their defense returns seven guys to a team who was very good defensively all of last year beside the postseason game.
#5 - Mt. St. Joseph - I am very high on Mt. St. Joseph as you can see. I love what they have returning and their defense has been together for a few years now. In year two of their passing attack I think will be Franklin-esque with how well they pass the ball. It'll be interesting to see what they bring this year but I am expecting them to only lose a game besides the Morehead State game.
#6 - John Carroll - I had to slot the OAC #2 here as I think they'll have a bounce back year and contend for the playoffs again. Last year was strange for JCU.
#7 - Illinois Wesleyan - The last half of my poll got a little shaky, first here with IWU. I know that they struggled last year and only return one offensive lineman starter but I have faith that they will bounce back this year and do better than their predicted kickoff season. QB and skill guys come back so if they can correct their defensive woes, IWU could be headed to another playoff berth.
#8 - Wheaton - I am lower on Wheaton than most but I think that even with 36 seniors on their roster they won't be someone who goes out and dominates this year. I'm sure they'll move up but the first two weeks of the season are huge for them. Two wins and they'll jump a few teams. Just have to see how they respond out of the gate.
#9 - Franklin - This year with the fastest player on the team at QB, I think Franklin could be an animal. But, their defense will really have to step up this year. A few new receivers are in the mold too so I think it'll be a bit of a learning curve at first. It's kind of a wait and see thing with Franklin as I think their defense needs a bit of work.
#10 - Wabash - Wabash is a bit of a wildcard. Depending on their QB they could be one of the best offenses in the NCAC as their main skill guys return. They needed someone to throw the ball and with Reid and Williamson there, they have it. It's a new secondary so I think that if they are able to keep big plays in check that they will be able to surprise some people.
Welcome to the board and the NRFP. Great to have some new perspectives. I like the bold picks. And as a fellow golf nut I love the handle.
Just sent my ballot to wally. No changes for me this week. Everything went pretty much as I expected.
Got mine in on Sunday, a few changes to mine after seeing some of the offenses play. Not a ton of movement though.
2018 Week 1 NRFP:
(https://i.imgur.com/EExNphW.png)
click to enlarge
The NRFP is voted on (usually) by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, thunderdog, USee, and wally wabash.
Edit: Table updated with one last ballot. I thought we lost HOPEful! That's an even dozen and I think that'll be the cap for 2018. I do appreciate everybody's interest in the poll and maybe we'll expand further in the future.
I'm the last column with Millikin at #9. As I said, I didn't change anything. The only things I really debated were flip flopping JCU and IWU at 5/6 and possibly moving Franklin in at 10 in place of DPU. Had Wabash struggled with Hiram a little I would have considered moving Millikin up to 8 on the strength of a nice win over Hope, but that didn't play out.
Kind of confused by the Trine #2 vote. I feel like they're closer to being undeserving of a ranking than they are of being the second best team in the region
Quote from: bluestreak66 on September 05, 2018, 09:51:40 AM
Kind of confused by the Trine #2 vote. I feel like they're closer to being undeserving of a ranking than they are of being the second best team in the region
I am second column from the right and have Trine as second highest among voters at #4. I am usually a skeptic of MIAA teams but have seen a handful that can compete with nationally ranked top 10 teams. This Trine team, if you take the time to look deep enough, looks and smells like a team in that category for me. They went undefeated in the MIAA last year and won every regular season game by at least 20 points. They won their first round team, albeit against another suspect team in Monmouth. They return 8 starters from that undefeated MIAA team on both offense and defense (Kickoff has 20 starters back but lists 8O, 8D, and 2 specialists =18). I think Trine is unarguably a top 25 team and pretty clearly a top 10 NRFP team. How high is really subjective. I happen to like them this year better than some others that I have historically liked in the past. I also like the way Witt opened up and strongly considered moving them up ahead of Trine. For now, Trine has performed in a way that keeps them at 4 with Witt at 5.
For my other spots I moved Wabash up a spot mainly because the biggest question I had was at QB and I like how Jake Reid performed last week. If he can sustain that level, Wabash will continue to win and will rise on most ballots.
I kept Carthage in my top 10. For me, they provided the best data point of any team in the poll with their level of play against #4 in the country. For me, If Carthage isn't a top 10 team in the North, I don't know who is. I believe they will win a lot of games this year. Carthage's issue, which did come out a little on Saturday, is they are not deep and their schedule will result in some injuries. Last year I believe their lack of depth cost them 1-2 games (on a 7-3 team). They stay for now. Millikin is my #11 team and will appear on my poll at some point if they continue.
I am very eager to see IWU, NCC and Depauw this weekend as its tough to measure teams who haven't played (so all based on who they have returning, schedule, etc) against teams that have played a game. In particular I am eager for the IWU game against an upper half WIAC team. I have my questions about IWU (as documented on the CCIW board) which are mainly up front on offense and defense, which will definitely be answered this weekend against a physical team.
Fifth column for me. Carthage got closer to the top 10 for me, but I didn't quite get them in there. I feel a little bit like Oshkosh is really masquerading as a top 5 or maybe even a top 10 team. It's hard for teams to lose the Gagliardi winner and just keep on chugging. 10-19 for 39 yards is a bad, bad, bad team passing stat line no matter what defense you're playing against. I think I need more info on Oshkosh before I can really know how much credit I should give Carthage for hanging in there.
Also, it was just difficult for me to move teams around a bunch this week because we didn't really get results that warranted it. I did shimmy Wabash up a notch or two because they've made immediate and dramatic changes to diversify the offense. I moved Hope just out and Trine just in. And I pulled Millikin down some, but not out (it makes sense that should be in and around my Hope/Trine cluster). Those are really the only changes I've made this week. I'll have to monitor Wittenberg closely to see how they manage without their RB1 DeShawn Sarley. That does change the dynamics a little bit in that offense so we'll see how they adjust.
I'm column 8. The only change I made was dropping Rose out of 10th. Everyone else did pretty much as was expected so I found no reason to move anyone this week.
Something is clearly wrong when my ballot is almost identical to the actual poll. Just had 3/4 (and they're next to each other on my top 25 ballot) and 8/9 flipped.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 05, 2018, 11:30:19 AM
Fifth column for me. Carthage got closer to the top 10 for me, but I didn't quite get them in there. I feel a little bit like Oshkosh is really masquerading as a top 5 or maybe even a top 10 team. It's hard for teams to lose the Gagliardi winner and just keep on chugging. 10-19 for 39 yards is a bad, bad, bad team passing stat line no matter what defense you're playing against. I think I need more info on Oshkosh before I can really know how much credit I should give Carthage for hanging in there.
I can follow this logic pretty easily. Much harder to defend the d3.com poll with UWO at 4 and Carthage nowhere to be found. It seems to me they are compartmentalizing the teams. E.G. "UWO won so they are still top 5" and "Carthage lost so they don't get any votes".
I watched much of that game and Carthage is exactly what I thought they would be. I think UWO's defense is going to be really special again. I would argue that 10-39 is somewhat expected as it's hard to break in a QB against an aggressive, bump and run man, type of defense that is that good. Not many first year starters are gonna look good in their first college start against that kind of scheme.
I'm not too concerned. Carthage has plenty more games against ranked teams and if they deserve the votes people want them to get, we'll see it in the W column at some point.
I am not too concerned either. At the end of the season the poll usually gets the top 10 teams right so lets wait til then to post it?
I didn't realize Wabash played UWSP this week. That's a nice stroke of luck letting us see a common opponent so quickly.
Voters...you can take Trine off of your Top 10 ballot in the region. Defensively we have played very well the 1st 2 games. But is that because of the competition from middle of the pack HCAC teams? Yeah, that probably figures into it. Offensively, we have Carswell to tote the ball, but the Oline was bad yesterday, was completely dominated by Bluffton's Dline. And the QB situation is dicey at best. Both Duckett and Winters can run, but if we can't pass the ball, or reluctant to pass the ball, then teams are going to start playing 8 in the box. We have not once in the first 2 games tried what I'd call an "over the top" pass. You need to throw those deep balls every now and then to keep the defense honest. We got wideouts with tons of speed in Barnett and Kellah, need to utilize them.
I don't have Trine on my national Top 25, but I might have them on my list of 10 in the North, if I were compiling one.
I haven't started in on my region top 10 yet. Plenty of interesting results around the region to consider- most of them not good for the usual suspects. Going to be an interesting week to see how things shuffle in here.
We're only 2 games in and the bottom half of my ballot is already tricky. This could be a tough year for us, fellas!
This week was "interesting" for the North, but not as "interesting" as the West. My ballot there got all crosseyed. What to do with Oshkosh and Linfield, and then Wartburg lays a giant Thuringer mettwurst.
I wound up having for UW schools in a row starting at 3.
Quote from: smedindy on September 10, 2018, 11:42:20 AMand then Wartburg lays a giant Thuringer mettwurst.
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.debbieschlussel.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F08%2Fhitlerlaughing.jpg&hash=e8e95c49425c345deac1036a17790a75bf865eb7)
Not the most tasteful post. Especially considering that it is Rosh Hoshana
Quote from: ADL70 on September 11, 2018, 12:09:26 AM
Not the most tasteful post. Especially considering that it is Rosh Hoshana
Perhaps not - but I had to wipe off my screen after spitting my coffee out laughing.
2018 Week 2 NRFP:
(https://i.imgur.com/WYsBzB1.png)
click to enlarge
Just 11 ballots this week as Mr. Y is on his annual autumn recess and abstains this week.
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, thunderdog, USee, and wally wabash.
In the unlikely, but stranger things have happened, event that WashU beats NCC would they be a North team? D3football still has them in South, but as an IND, not in CCIW
Quote from: ADL70 on September 12, 2018, 11:15:06 PM
In the unlikely, but stranger things have happened, event that WashU beats NCC would they be a North team? D3football still has them in South, but as an IND, not in CCIW
They surely are a North team, but we wait for the NCAA handbook to come out before moving teams around, just for confirmation.
WashU is definitely NRFP eligible.
Kind of confused by the one voter who put Wabash at 5, but JCU unranked considering they have a mutual opponent and the margin of victory was +21 in favor of John Carroll. Added with the fact that JCU played UWSP on the road and Wabash was home.
Could be biased, but I confused nonetheless.
Quote from: JCUStreaks70 on September 13, 2018, 09:37:42 AM
Kind of confused by the one voter who put Wabash at 5, but JCU unranked considering they have a mutual opponent and the margin of victory was +21 in favor of John Carroll. Added with the fact that JCU played UWSP on the road and Wabash was home.
Could be biased, but I confused nonetheless.
Someone else has Franklin at 8 and Albion unranked so there's plenty of confusion to go around
The non-JCU vote has been consistent all season. Franklin ranked and Albion not given Saturday's result is weird, but my personal policy is to not insert my opinions into the ballots that I get until after everything gets posted. If that was a mistake, the voter can correct next week.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 13, 2018, 10:03:50 AM
The non-JCU vote has been consistent all season. Franklin ranked and Albion not given Saturday's result is weird, but my personal policy is to not insert my opinions into the ballots that I get until after everything gets posted. If that was a mistake, the voter can correct next week.
Sorry for confusion, I meant biased on my part! lol
I believe I'm column 8. I need to see Albion beat Hope on October 6th before I can justify ranking them.
Quote from: JCUStreaks70 on September 13, 2018, 09:37:42 AM
Kind of confused by the one voter who put Wabash at 5, but JCU unranked considering they have a mutual opponent and the margin of victory was +21 in favor of John Carroll. Added with the fact that JCU played UWSP on the road and Wabash was home.
Could be biased, but I confused nonetheless.
I have JCU at 5 so it wasn't me! Don't want any OAC brethren thinking I'm screwing over a rival for grins. Heck, I even swallowed hard and put the flaming pile on my ballot this week. That's just nauseating as a Mount guy. ;D
I'm the last column (from the left), or 1st (from the right). As of now, I'm pretty convinced of my top 6, with Wabash at 6. I felt I could have gone a number of different ways with 7-10. I do see I'm low man for Trine (having them at #10). Truth is, it's gonna take a bit for me to start ranking the MIAA leader higher than 9 or 10. However, Albion's solid win over Franklin was a nice step in that direction. Millikin/IWU (CCIW), BW/ONU (OAC), Trine/Albion (MIAA) are all pretty interchangeable at this point, IMO, until we get more data.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 13, 2018, 08:00:30 PM
Quote from: JCUStreaks70 on September 13, 2018, 09:37:42 AM
Kind of confused by the one voter who put Wabash at 5, but JCU unranked considering they have a mutual opponent and the margin of victory was +21 in favor of John Carroll. Added with the fact that JCU played UWSP on the road and Wabash was home.
Could be biased, but I confused nonetheless.
I have JCU at 5 so it wasn't me! Don't want any OAC brethren thinking I'm screwing over a rival for grins. Heck, I even swallowed hard and put the flaming pile on my ballot this week. That's just nauseating as a Mount guy. ;D
That is big! lol
Third column from left for me. I was close to flipping the order of JCU, Witt, Trine but decided to wait another week. BW entered my poll after another strong showing vs an OAC team that was picked to finish higher than them, for their second straight dominant win. My CCIW order has held pretty consistent (Wheaton/NCC/Carthage/IWU/Milikin) and I don't see any result that has done anything but confirm that. Wabash has risen for me based on the QB play and he didn't play that well vs UWSP but the game was played in large part in the pouring rain so I give him a pass.
Quote from: USee on September 14, 2018, 12:51:28 PM
Third column from left for me. I was close to flipping the order of JCU, Witt, Trine but decided to wait another week. BW entered my poll after another strong showing vs an OAC team that was picked to finish higher than them, for their second straight dominant win. My CCIW order has held pretty consistent (Wheaton/NCC/Carthage/IWU/Milikin) and I don't see any result that has done anything but confirm that. Wabash has risen for me based on the QB play and he didn't play that well vs UWSP but the game was played in large part in the pouring rain so I give him a pass.
I'm here for the puns. Intended or not. :)
It turns out I am funnier than I realized! 8-)
I have a feeling that this will be a very messed up bottom of the poll this week. Lots of teams that have merit to be 8-13
Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on September 18, 2018, 10:57:45 AM
I have a feeling that this will be a very messed up bottom of the poll this week. Lots of teams that have merit to be 8-13
to me its more like lots of teams with little to no merit make up the 8-13 ranks.
Quote from: USee on September 18, 2018, 11:32:28 AM
Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on September 18, 2018, 10:57:45 AM
I have a feeling that this will be a very messed up bottom of the poll this week. Lots of teams that have merit to be 8-13
to me its more like lots of teams with little to no merit make up the 8-13 ranks.
You're right. I worded that wrong. I went back and first with about 6 teams to see who "deserved" my final three spots. This year there is a huge discrepancy between 1-3, 4-7, 8/9-x. That is my opinion at least.
I kinda just got annoyed at going through one loss teams, most who have lost to Mount Union, and just kind of stuck two teams on there.
I think that's a bit harsh - I do think things are becoming more competitive except for the tippy top.
Think of this - UW Platteville lost to Thomas More who lost to NC Wesleyan who lost to Shenandoah who lost to Hobart who lost to Brockport.
Quote from: smedindy on September 18, 2018, 12:15:27 PM
I think that's a bit harsh - I do think things are becoming more competitive except for the tippy top.
Think of this - UW Platteville lost to Thomas More who lost to NC Wesleyan who lost to Shenandoah who lost to Hobart who lost to Brockport.
I just don't think that the teams on the outside of 1-7 have the resume to make it into the poll. And, TM didn't make mine because of the loss and who that opponent has played.
Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on September 18, 2018, 12:26:20 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 18, 2018, 12:15:27 PM
I think that's a bit harsh - I do think things are becoming more competitive except for the tippy top.
Think of this - UW Platteville lost to Thomas More who lost to NC Wesleyan who lost to Shenandoah who lost to Hobart who lost to Brockport.
I just don't think that the teams on the outside of 1-7 have the resume to make it into the poll. And, TM didn't make mine because of the loss and who that opponent has played.
Probably need to make a call on what region Thomas More lives in. I
think Thomas More will be a South region team when the NCAA handbook comes out. They could be a North region independent though. Unless we get an official note saying otherwise from the NCAA, Thomas More is a South region team and not NRFP eligible.
I just submitted my ballot. Sorry for the hold up. As Wally perfectly replied when I messaged him yesterday saying I wouldn't be able to submit it because it was the corporate tax filing deadline..."the tax man waits for nobody".
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 18, 2018, 01:08:11 PM
Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on September 18, 2018, 12:26:20 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 18, 2018, 12:15:27 PM
I think that's a bit harsh - I do think things are becoming more competitive except for the tippy top.
Think of this - UW Platteville lost to Thomas More who lost to NC Wesleyan who lost to Shenandoah who lost to Hobart who lost to Brockport.
I just don't think that the teams on the outside of 1-7 have the resume to make it into the poll. And, TM didn't make mine because of the loss and who that opponent has played.
Probably need to make a call on what region Thomas More lives in. I think Thomas More will be a South region team when the NCAA handbook comes out. They could be a North region independent though. Unless we get an official note saying otherwise from the NCAA, Thomas More is a South region team and not NRFP eligible.
Well, there you have it.
While what we do here is a purely intellectual pursuit with no real consequences, where the NCAA decides to put Thomas More may well be very important on Selection Sunday. As a true at-large team, if the Saints get edged out by an undefeated NEWMAC team (feels much less likely with Springfield's loss on Saturday) for the Pool B bid, the Saints would still be Pool C eligible. There's a lot of miles and a lot of good teams between now and then but IF Thomas More can get all the way to the close of business on 11/10 with just the one DIII loss, they're absolutely going to disrupt the pecking order in whatever region they land in.
Depending on what happens the rest of the way with UWP, they could disrupt 2 regions.
We're doing this thing on a Tuesday! Solid work, gang. 2018 Week 3 NRFP:
(https://i.imgur.com/am6dU5s.png)
click to enlarge
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, thunderdog, USee, and wally wabash.
Edit 9/18/18: Updated table to correct one ballot.
I am row 4. A few breakdowns team-by-team below.
1. Mount Union (1) - Yeahhh, they will be #1 in my poll all year long. They aren't going to lose, even if they lose to JCU I am not sure that I could move them even then to be honest.
2. North Central (2) - I think by virtue of some other teams losing, NCC has made it's way up to #2. Definitely not locked in here, my 2-6 are going to shuffle most likely depending on how they look. NCC just beat a pretty solid WashU team, though.
3. Wittenberg (3) - Witt is really good this year due to the passing of Jake Kennedy and he and that receiving corp are going to burn through teams. Their defense is solid but the one question mark I have is the running game since Sarley is out for the year. This was flagged as they had 52 yards in their first game rushing and 116 against Oberlin.
4. John Carroll (4) - JCU had a pretty commanding win against UWSP and then ran over Otterbein. They are on the upswing especially if they have a good showing this weekend.
5. Illinois Wesleyan (5) - They lost the opening game to UW-La Crosse, but then picked up a huge win over Wheaton. I am not as high on Wheaton, and haven't been this whole year as I ranked them 8th to begin the year. The way they beat Wheaton was impressive so I moved them up. Their defense was spectacular.
6. Trine (6) - I had Trine at 2 to open the year as I thought their defense would take a big step forward this year and it has, but I just haven't seen them play anyone remotely decent. Once they do, they have Hope this weekend, I think I will buy-in more to the team as a whole. They are going to have to go out and prove that they can handle a good offense.
7. Wabash (7) - Wabash has been very impressive and their defense has been swarming. They are able to move the ball more efficiently, but like Trine I want to see them against a good team to pass the judgement. UWSP was solid, but they only won 16-13 in the rain. Special teams is holding them back from jumping Trine in my book. It will lose them a game at some point.
8. Wheaton (8) - I had Wheaton at 8 to begin the year and they return there after the loss against IWU. They could not move the ball in this one and their offense was supposed to be very good. They have two solid games coming up vs. Millikin and NCC that will either drop them off or move them back up.
9. Albion (NR) - This is a team that is going to score a ton of points and after putting up 50 again I had to give them a spot. Their defense has been off thus far but they will score a ton of points to match anyone.
10. Millikin (10) - The win against Hope was validated with another win this past week. They could sneak up on some team this year. We shall see after the Wheaton game this weekend.
I almost had the teams in order, I have never been close before. I only had Albion at 9 and they were NR, that was my only miss.
Row 3 for me. I blundered and sent Wheaton and IWU in the opposite order of what I should have. Other than that, I gave benefit of the doubt to some undefeated teams (Trine, Milikin, and Wabash) over them, but I figure that will work itself out in the weeks to come.
Column 7 here. I'd like to get Albion in (though stomping Franklin does not seem as impressive this year as it normally would), but I was REALLY impressed with Carthage leading Oshkosh with only 90 seconds to go (final score was totally misleading). I am reluctant to put too much weight on a 'good loss', so will feel much better if Carthage can tackle a WashU team that beat Chicago and gave NCC a helluva game.
BTW, not ready to pull the trigger on Millikin just yet. IF they give Wheaton a good game this weekend, then yes - but I suspect they will get monkey-stomped. Winning at Hope was somewhat impressive, but I'm reserving judgment on whether or not beating North Park means anything.
I am fifth from the right. I jumped Witt over Trine to 3 for now. Trine isn't going higher than 4 for me until I see them play other contenders. I already have them higher than everybody else. My CCIW order is NCC/Carthage/IWU/Millikin/Wheaton for now. I am the only one without a top 10 rank for Wheaton. In my opinion, ranked teams don't score zero offensive points and stay ranked. I added Millikin at bottom of my poll.
Column 5 doesn't have a team ranked #5.
I'm the last column.
Quote from: smedindy on September 19, 2018, 11:08:28 AM
Column 5 doesn't have a team ranked #5.
It has to be Trine I'd imagine.
I'm column 9. Back to my normal ways I have all 10 teams that ended up ranked on my ballot. I wasn't sure that'd happen thanks to the last couple of spots.
Looking to this weekend I currently have JCU at 4. We'll see how the game goes, but they'd have to really get stomped to move down more than a spot or two on my ballot.
Quote from: smedindy on September 19, 2018, 11:08:28 AM
Column 5 doesn't have a team ranked #5.
So it doesn't. I'll have a stern talking to with my staff and have this rectified this evening.
Looking at the full slate for this weekend I don't see much threatening to shake up the ballots. JCU/Mount and Millikin/Wheaton look like the best bets by a pretty wide margin.
Alright, updated the table. Had a Trine/Wheaton mixup. All squared away now and the proper tally has Wheaton at 7 and Wabash at 8.
I'll be curious to see what everyone does with JCU. Mount was very fortunate to win that game.
Quote from: HScoach on September 23, 2018, 08:09:14 AM
I'll be curious to see what everyone does with JCU. Mount was very fortunate to win that game.
Yeah, that was the first thing I thought when I started seeing the tweets of how this game was going. I was apparently criminally underrating JCU.
Quote from: Li'l Giant on September 23, 2018, 12:21:26 PM
Quote from: HScoach on September 23, 2018, 08:09:14 AM
I'll be curious to see what everyone does with JCU. Mount was very fortunate to win that game.
Yeah, that was the first thing I thought when I started seeing the tweets of how this game was going. I was apparently criminally underrating JCU.
JCU was struggling to move the ball with anything other than a broken play by the QB, but their Dline owned the line of scrimmage. Very similar to MHB last year or maybe even better. They just couldn't sustain a drive when they need it.
I think JCU was rightlybplaces at 4. I don't see much movement based on the result vs Mt. the assumption is that the top 3-4 teams in our region should be able to play a closer game Vs Mt and that's what JCU did.
Quote from: USee on September 23, 2018, 09:25:35 PM
I think JCU was rightlybplaces at 4. I don't see much movement based on the result vs Mt. the assumption is that the top 3-4 teams in our region should be able to play a closer game Vs Mt and that's what JCU did.
I fully agree. If ever there was a reason to move someone up after a loss, this was it for me.
I left JCU at 4. I debated jumping them over Witt to 3, but I'm a little too conservative to start jumping them over top 3 teams after a loss no matter how well they played.
One thing is for sure though...JCU continues to prove that they don't shrink on the big stage. In the last 3 years they've beaten Mount in Alliance, beaten Wesley, won at UWW and gone toe to toe with Mount two more times and UWO twice.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 24, 2018, 03:39:21 PM
I left JCU at 4. I debated jumping them over Witt to 3, but I'm a little too conservative to start jumping them over top 3 teams after a loss no matter how well they played.
One thing is for sure though...JCU continues to prove that they don't shrink on the big stage. They've beaten Wesley, won at UWW and gone toe to toe with Mount and UWO twice apiece over the last 3 years.
Those are some great things to say about Dear Alma Mater! However you did forget to mention that we also have one win against a certain team in Alliance! ;) lol
In all seriousness, I feel way more confident about them now than I did last week. It has been a real pleasure watching this turn around in the program!
Haha I didn't even do that on purpose! I seriously must have blacked that out of my memory permanently. I edited it to include that as that's kind of an important one to note on their resume.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 24, 2018, 04:42:26 PM
Haha I didn't even do that on purpose! I seriously must have blacked that out of my memory permanently. I edited it to include that as that's kind of an important one to note on their resume.
Well as long as it was only an oversight! Ha
My only change in the top 8 was that I DID move JCU over Witt. I had them virtually tied anyway, and what JCU did against The Machine (albeit a loss) was more impressive than anything Witt could do against anyone on their schedule not named Wabash.
I rarely move anyone up with a loss, but do sometimes first take close notice after a 'good loss' - i.e, Carthage after almost beating UWO, and WashU after putting a scare into NCC. The (main) exceptions would be narrow losses to UMU, UMHB, and (formerly) UWW. (In the national poll, Ithaca has been helped more by their narrow loss to Brockport than by any of their wins.)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 18, 2018, 11:29:55 PM
BTW, not ready to pull the trigger on Millikin just yet. IF they give Wheaton a good game this weekend, then yes - but I suspect they will get monkey-stomped. Winning at Hope was somewhat impressive, but I'm reserving judgment on whether or not beating North Park means anything.
Glad I didn't vote for Millikin - 6-63 is darn close to a TRIPLE monkey stomp!
With Carthage losing by 20 to WashU, they fell out of 10th. ONU is now 4-0, but I was seriously unimpressed by their win (13-7) over an Otterberg team (now 0-4) who had been eviscerated by both BW and JCU. I moved them down from 9th to 10th, which meant I needed a 9th. BW and WashU were the obvious choices, but I like to include MIAA and HCAC teams whenever practicable. Since Trine is #7, I rejected 3-0 Albion in favor of taking a flyer on Mount St. Joe. I suspect they won't last long on my ballot, but there they are for now!
Otterberg is 1-3 btw. :)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 24, 2018, 11:21:41 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 18, 2018, 11:29:55 PM
BTW, not ready to pull the trigger on Millikin just yet. IF they give Wheaton a good game this weekend, then yes - but I suspect they will get monkey-stomped. Winning at Hope was somewhat impressive, but I'm reserving judgment on whether or not beating North Park means anything.
Glad I didn't vote for Millikin - 6-63 is darn close to a TRIPLE monkey stomp!
With Carthage losing by 20 to WashU, they fell out of 10th. ONU is now 4-0, but I was seriously unimpressed by their win (13-7) over an Otterberg team (now 0-4) who had been eviscerated by both BW and JCU. I moved them down from 9th to 10th, which meant I needed a 9th. BW and WashU were the obvious choices, but I like to include MIAA and HCAC teams whenever practicable. Since Trine is #7, I rejected 3-0 Albion in favor of taking a flyer on Mount St. Joe. I suspect they won't last long on my ballot, but there they are for now!
I gave MSJ a spot at 10 this week as well. It was either them or Wash U for me. I'm positive that's a first on my ballot for the Lions. Sorry, Saintsfan.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 25, 2018, 09:12:34 AM
Otterberg is 1-3 btw. :)
Rats! And I thought that Otterberg was a can't-miss in the D3 survivor pool. Who'd have thought that anyone would beat Otterberg this season? ;)
Things to do in Otterberg (when you're either alive or dead...)
https://www.tripadvisor.com/Attractions-g1053702-Activities-Otterberg_Rhineland_Palatinate.html
Not to be confused with nearby Otterbach, of course:
https://www.tripadvisor.com/Attractions-g1053700-Activities-Otterbach_Rhineland_Palatinate.html (https://www.tripadvisor.com/Attractions-g1053700-Activities-Otterbach_Rhineland_Palatinate.html)
Quote from: Gregory Sager on September 25, 2018, 01:21:52 PM
Not to be confused with nearby Otterbach, of course:
https://www.tripadvisor.com/Attractions-g1053700-Activities-Otterbach_Rhineland_Palatinate.html (https://www.tripadvisor.com/Attractions-g1053700-Activities-Otterbach_Rhineland_Palatinate.html)
Let us not forgot about Otterburn either.....
http://www.ville.otterburnpark.qc.ca/
You know it's going to be a good NRFP week when voters are talking ballots before the release of the results. It looks like everybody's ballot is in, so we'll have a new poll up this evening.
I don't have much to say this week as my ballot is exactly the same as last week. Easy to identify as it will be the one with Albion at 7.
John Carroll did move up a spot on my Top 25 ballot to #12 and are the highest ranked team with a loss.
The much anticipated 2018 Week 4 NRFP:
(https://i.imgur.com/nMgTd4o.png)
click to enlarge
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, thunderdog, USee, and wally wabash.
9/25: Edited table for one balloting correction.
I am column 6 and I made a mistake when I submitted my ballot this week. I actually had ONU as #7 and indavertantly left them off my ballot so actually my 7-10 are my 8-11 teams. Apologies for the mess up.
I saw no reason to change the top 7 on my ballot, keeping JCU where they were despite the loss where they showed no real ability to score. I moved Albion up to 10 with my IWU/Wheaton pairing pretty much tethered together until this weekend.
I am surprised someone left ONU off and voted for Hope at 10 when Hope lost at home to Millikin. That and JCU at 2 seems like irrational exuberance. Other than that it all looks about what I suspected.
I'm column #9 this week.
I noticed my 'Otterberg' brainfart soon after I posted, but everyone was having so much fun with it, I didn't have the heart to make the correction! And it's probably less bizarre than if I had posted 'Heidelbein'! :o (The risk of brainfarts is why I usually just go with Ott and Heidi!)
Updated the table to account for USee's notes.
I'm column 4 and the ballot with JCU at #2. Exuberance? Maybe. This early in the season major results will cause bigger moves. Last week I had JCU at #3, so this wasn't a giant leap for them on my ballot, but my reasoning for putting them at #2 right now is that I think they just did a thing against Mount Union that nobody else in the region can do- they stalled out that incredible offense and they held the ball late in the 4th quarter with a chance to win. I really just don't see any other team being able to pull that off. Now, over time I may come to learn that Mount Union isn't as good as I think they are OR this result with JCU was a one-off for the Streaks OR both. Adjustments will be made accordingly, but if Mount Union and JCU both bulldoze their way through the rest of the schedule, I'm probably not going to be convinced that they aren't the best two in the region. Somebody else is going to have to do something really, really special.
As for the rest of my ballot, I'm not terribly comfortable with my ONU placement. That 13-7 business against Otterbein isn't quite a full red flag, but not just a yellow flag either. More of a burnt orange situation there. Off the back end of my ballot I'm watching (in no particular order) Eureka, Denison, Baldwin-Wallace, and WashU.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 25, 2018, 07:42:46 PM
Updated the table to account for USee's notes.
I'm column 4 and the ballot with JCU at #2. Exuberance? Maybe. This early in the season major results will cause bigger moves. Last week I had JCU at #3, so this wasn't a giant leap for them on my ballot, but my reasoning for putting them at #2 right now is that I think they just did a thing against Mount Union that nobody else in the region can do- they stalled out that incredible offense and they held the ball late in the 4th quarter with a chance to win. I really just don't see any other team being able to pull that off. Now, over time I may come to learn that Mount Union isn't as good as I think they are OR this result with JCU was a one-off for the Streaks OR both. Adjustments will be made accordingly, but if Mount Union and JCU both bulldoze their way through the rest of the schedule, I'm probably not going to be convinced that they aren't the best two in the region. Somebody else is going to have to do something really, really special.
As for the rest of my ballot, I'm not terribly comfortable with my ONU placement. That 13-7 business against Otterbein isn't quite a full red flag, but not just a yellow flag either. More of a burnt orange situation there. Off the back end of my ballot I'm watching (in no particular order) Eureka, Denison, Baldwin-Wallace, and WashU.
Since you're column 4, your next beer is on me! :)
Quote from: USee on September 25, 2018, 06:01:48 PM
I am surprised someone left ONU off and voted for Hope at 10 when Hope lost at home to Millikin...
That would be me at column 1. My rationale is simple. There is drop-off, no, a cliff, at about the 8 spot. When looking at MSJ, ONU, Denison, Albion, Hope, etc., I asked who do I actually think are the best two teams of the lot. I'm surprised someone thinks ONU is better than Wheaton and IWU. To me the gap between ONU and the better CCIW teams is much wider than the gap between them and any MIAA or Ohio team not named Mount Union, John Carroll, or Wittenberg.
In many ways, the close loss to Millikin passes the smell test for me better than the close win to 1-3 Otterbein. I'm completely uncertain who the best team in the MIAA is currently. I could see Albion, Hope, or Trine winning the conference this season. My leaning right now is Hope or Trine. Hope hosts Trine on Saturday, so I figure I'll either be 1 week ahead of everyone else, or drop them off the radar entirely next week. Denison could replace them with a good showing against Witt. If ONU beats Marietta, they'll most likely be on my list next week. But I could see Marietta beating them and ONU finishing fourth in the OAC...
Quote from: JCUStreaks70 on September 26, 2018, 12:53:18 AM
Adjustments will be made accordingly, but if Mount Union and JCU both bulldoze their way through the rest of the schedule, I'm probably not going to be convinced that they aren't the best two in the region. Somebody else is going to have to do something really, really special.
I'm leaning this direction as well. I think North Central is the only team at this time I believe COULD be at that level. For now, I'm keeping North Central at 2, and if they stay unblemished in the CCIW, they'll stay there.
Thanks, MSJ. That completely lackluster performance over 1-4 Bluffton makes me oh so pleased that I gave you a spot in my top 10. And don't think I didn't notice you guys too, Albion. And finally, ONU. What the heck. Does no one want to be in those 8-10 spots??
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 29, 2018, 05:45:23 PM
Thanks, MSJ. That completely lackluster performance over 1-4 Bluffton makes me oh so pleased that I gave you a spot in my top 10. And don't think I didn't notice you guys too, Albion. And finally, ONU. What the heck. Does no one want to be in those 8-10 spots??
I think Marietta does! lol
Quote from: JCUStreaks70 on October 01, 2018, 10:03:31 AM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 29, 2018, 05:45:23 PM
Thanks, MSJ. That completely lackluster performance over 1-4 Bluffton makes me oh so pleased that I gave you a spot in my top 10. And don't think I didn't notice you guys too, Albion. And finally, ONU. What the heck. Does no one want to be in those 8-10 spots??
I think Marietta does! lol
Quote from: HOPEful on September 26, 2018, 10:40:37 AM
If ONU beats Marietta, they'll most likely be on my list next week. But I could see Marietta beating them and ONU finishing fourth in the OAC...
Every now and then, I get one right. My 9 is going to Marietta this week. My 10 went to an undeserving team from the CCIW, simply because I couldn't justify giving it to anyone in the MIAA, OAC, NCAC, or HCAC. At this rate, I may have to seriously consider giving a spot to Eureka at some point!
The bottom of the poll is going to be interesting. I have half of the ballots in and I've already seen 9 different teams named in 8-10 spots. Not a lot of separation between about a dozen teams right I think.
I went heavy OAC, since I couldn't justify Albion after Alma, I couldn't justify a 2-loss Denison, or Franklin due to Albion and Rose, or Eureka....
Maybe MSJ in the future....
Just sent mine in. Toughest decisions this week for me were Witt vs. JCU and, of course, who can I stomach putting in that 10 spot without feeling like I need a shower.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 01, 2018, 02:26:24 PM
Just sent mine in. Toughest decisions this week for me were Witt vs. JCU and, of course, who can I stomach putting in that 10 spot without feeling like I need a shower.
I feel like this might be your way of saying that your #10 is BW.... ;D
Quote from: JCUStreaks70 on October 01, 2018, 02:50:33 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 01, 2018, 02:26:24 PM
Just sent mine in. Toughest decisions this week for me were Witt vs. JCU and, of course, who can I stomach putting in that 10 spot without feeling like I need a shower.
I feel like this might be your way of saying that your #10 is BW.... ;D
It is. How'd you ever guess?! In their case the shower is needed just based on my general disdain for their football program rather than my disgust from looking at their resume as was the case with the others I considered there. But just so no one thinks I'm turning over a new leaf with BW I will just mention that they've made the playoffs one time in the last 2 decades and the last time they did was with a QB who graduated high school in the 1990's. There, I feel better.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 01, 2018, 04:28:00 PM
Quote from: JCUStreaks70 on October 01, 2018, 02:50:33 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 01, 2018, 02:26:24 PM
Just sent mine in. Toughest decisions this week for me were Witt vs. JCU and, of course, who can I stomach putting in that 10 spot without feeling like I need a shower.
I feel like this might be your way of saying that your #10 is BW.... ;D
It is. How'd you ever guess?! In their case the shower is needed just based on my general disdain for their football program rather than my disgust from looking at their resume as was the case with the others I considered there. But just so no one thinks I'm turning over a new leaf with BW I will just mention that they've made the playoffs one time in the last 2 decades and the last time they did was with a QB who graduated high school in the 1990's. There, I feel better.
Haha, well do you know how many BW fans it takes to change a light bulb???
Three. One to change the light; and two to talk about how great the old one was.
JCUStreaks70
I'd tell you that was a great BW joke but K &J's Dad might object, so I won't. Bye! ☠🏈
Look around, look around and I see a lot of new faces- ORV doubled this week. Maybe the first double tie in NRFP history as well. People did some interesting things with Wittenberg. All in all, a really interesting poll.
2018 Week 5 NRFP:
(https://i.imgur.com/ZTAdipr.png)
click to enlarge
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, thunderdog, USee, and wally wabash.
I'm column 4 this week. I nearly substituted Marietta for either Bald Wally or MSJ, but they haven't beaten anyone (unless you wanna count ONU, and giving up 50 to 0-4 Capital was a deal-breaker for me. I also gave strong consideration to Albion, but the thought of TWO MIAA teams was a bit much, even for this Michigan guy.
At the moment, I think we have a top 8, then throw darts at the wall. ;)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 02, 2018, 07:50:00 PM
I'm column 4 this week. I nearly substituted Marietta for either Bald Wally or MSJ, but they haven't beaten anyone (unless you wanna count ONU, and giving up 50 to 0-4 Capital was a deal-breaker for me. I also gave strong consideration to Albion, but the thought of TWO MIAA teams was a bit much, even for this Michigan guy.
At the moment, I think we have a top 8, then throw darts at the wall. ;)
Who knew that adding Gray turf was all Marietta needed to start winning some ball games?
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 02, 2018, 07:50:00 PM
At the moment, I think we have a top 8, then throw darts at the wall. ;)
Row 8 for me. And yes, 9 and 10 were indeed darts at the wall. I went Millikin at 10 solely because they were the next "best" team from the CCIW. I'll probably put Albion on here if they beat Hope on Saturday.
BW finishes the season @ Marietta, ONU, @ John Carroll. I think I'll have a difficult time putting them in my rankings before that Marietta game...
I'm column 12.
The interesting activity for me this week was with Wittenberg, John Carroll, and the CCIW triumverate. Most people clustered IWU/Wheaton/NCC together, in that order, which is what makes sense to me. A couple of people moved Wheaton ahead of IWU, which, sure, I guess. I think I need more information on IWU and North Central before I'm comfortable overruling the h2h's there.
Now, what's really interesting is whether people kept Wittenberg ahead of the CCIWs or moved them behind and also where people wanted to squeeze John Carroll into that quagmire. I went JCU 2 (I was an early adopter on JCU and had them there last week), then the CCIWs (IWU>Wheaton>NCC), then Witt. You guys know I love me some me Denison, but I can't talk myself into Witt doing a 68-66 game with Denison and being in the same ballpark as JCU's UMU result or either of the three CCIW teams. So Witt fell a bit for me this week behind all of those teams- and in my mind clearly behind them.
BTW, I'm either column 4 or 9...Mr. Y and I had the same 10 in the same order this week.
I'm column 2.
I'm column 11.
I think the CCIW/JCU cluster belongs together for now and I bumped Witt below that because of the game vs Denison, whom is no slouch but I couldn't rationalize putting Witt ahead of that group based on that result though I did drop NCC to 8 because their defense is atrocious. I also dropped undefeated Trine from 4 to 7 as a close loss to Hope doesn't match up with the other.
Basically I looked at these teams comparatively based on what is now several regional results against ranked teams. When I look at this way I find the following:
Rank/Record vs RRO
Mt. Union 2-0 (JCU, BW)
Wheaton 3-1 (Monmouth, Millikin, NCC-IWU)
IWU 1-1 (Wheaton-UWL)
JCU 0-1 (Mt Union)
Witt 0-0 (I don't count Denison as a RRO, yet)
Wabash 0-0
Trine 1-0 (Hope)
North Central 1-1 (WashU-Wheaton)
Baldwin Wallace and Marietta rounded out the bottom of my poll.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 03, 2018, 01:14:23 PM
I went JCU 2 (I was an early adopter on JCU and had them there last week), then the CCIWs (IWU>Wheaton>NCC), then Witt. You guys know I love me some me Denison, but I can't talk myself into Witt doing a 68-66 game with Denison and being in the same ballpark as JCU's UMU result or either of the three CCIW teams. So Witt fell a bit for me this week behind all of those teams- and in my mind clearly behind them.
I'm column 6.
Wally's analysis re: the UMU/JCU and the CCIW triplets is pretty much how I feel. I think there's a clear divide between the bottom of that CCIW cluster and Witt/Wabash/Trine et al.
No 10 was basically a dart throw and it landed on Denison for me.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 03, 2018, 01:14:23 PM
The interesting activity for me this week was with Wittenberg, John Carroll, and the CCIW triumverate. Most people clustered IWU/Wheaton/NCC together, in that order, which is what makes sense to me. A couple of people moved Wheaton ahead of IWU, which, sure, I guess. I think I need more information on IWU and North Central before I'm comfortable overruling the h2h's there.
Now, what's really interesting is whether people kept Wittenberg ahead of the CCIWs or moved them behind and also where people wanted to squeeze John Carroll into that quagmire. I went JCU 2 (I was an early adopter on JCU and had them there last week), then the CCIWs (IWU>Wheaton>NCC), then Witt. You guys know I love me some me Denison, but I can't talk myself into Witt doing a 68-66 game with Denison and being in the same ballpark as JCU's UMU result or either of the three CCIW teams. So Witt fell a bit for me this week behind all of those teams- and in my mind clearly behind them.
BTW, I'm either column 4 or 9...Mr. Y and I had the same 10 in the same order this week.
Is that evidence that 'great minds think alike' or that both our minds are flowing down the same gutter?! ;D
(When I claimed column 4, I hadn't noticed that column 9 was exactly identical! :o)
Alright, here is my weekly rundown of my ballot. I am column #3.
1. Mount Union - They won't move for me.
2. John Carroll - They too, won't move. I think a close loss to Mount Union is going to be better than any other result in the North this year.
3. Wittenberg - I think that Denison's offense is really good and I think Witt's offense is really good. Not sure how they let Denison come back from 25 down, but that's moot. I didn't think anyone else gave me enough to put over Witt at the three spot.
4. Illinois Wesleyan - IWU has the best resume in my opinion over the teams below. I thought about putting them up at number 3, but Jake Kennedy.
5. Wheaton - Well, Wheaton had a convincing win this week over North Central. So they move up four spots for me. I think they are really good when they come out and play but that seems to be hit or miss this year.
6. North Central - They got destroyed by Wheaton, but I don't think that should move them down below Wabash because NCC had some good wins this year.
7. Wabash - I think Wabash is really good. They just haven't played anyone yet. This weekend against Denison is going to be a game that I'll be watching closely.
8. Trine - I had Trine up at #2 in the preseason, but they keep slipping. They are winning but just not convincingly over lesser teams. I do think they can score on anyone though.
9. Albion - I can't really justify anyone else here. But Albion gets the nod because they are still undefeated.
10. Denison - They scored 66 points against Witt, who I don't think has that bad of a defense. Gebele is a rock solid QB and I think that Denison will lose just one more game this year.
HUGE Saturday around D3 (10 Top 25 teams played each other), but almost all of it was elsewhere. Not that much to unsettle the NRFP standings, though Wabash got absolutely drilled at Denison and previously unbeaten Albion lost at home to Hope. In other action that might be relevant to voters, IWU needed 2 OTs to down Carthage, Witt (47-28 at home to Hiram) and MSJ (49-27 at home to Manchester) both had far more trouble than most probably expected. Marietta moved to 5-0, but beat "Heidelbein" ;D by a 20 point smaller margin than Bald Wally did (38-34 vs. 34-10).
My "Top 8, then throw darts at the wall" has become a top 7 with The Little Giants living up to only the second word of their slogan. I know who my top 7 will be (though not necessarily the order); my bottom three is a real puzzle.
Wittenberg was up 47-7 45 seconds into the 4th quarter, so nobody needs to be fooled into thinking they had any trouble whatsoever with Hiram. They cruised.
My ballot is.."Going through changes...."
(https://img.discogs.com/lE0uN8CCgAhbNZ8WVKAC17FwxhI=/fit-in/300x300/filters:strip_icc():format(jpeg):mode_rgb():quality(40)/discogs-images/R-975419-1469636016-8300.jpeg.jpg)
An additional note to any voters who have yet to submit (or wanna file an 'amended return' ;)): in addition to the teams I mentioned in my earlier post, there are still two other 5-0 teams in the region: neither Kalamazoo nor Eureka has beaten anyone of note, but if you're searching for a 9 or a 10, they might be worth a flyer. Teams can only play who's on the schedule, so a team in a bad conference could conceivably be really, really good with no way to prove it. (I have my doubts about either of these being 'really, really good', but who can say - neither is on my ballot, but they are on my radar.)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 07, 2018, 10:58:03 PM
An additional note to any voters who have yet to submit (or wanna file an 'amended return' ;)): in addition to the teams I mentioned in my earlier post, there are still two other 5-0 teams in the region: neither Kalamazoo nor Eureka has beaten anyone of note, but if you're searching for a 9 or a 10, they might be worth a flyer. Teams can only play who's on the schedule, so a team in a bad conference could conceivably be really, really good with no way to prove it. (I have my doubts about either of these being 'really, really good', but who can say - neither is on my ballot, but they are on my radar.)
None of the teams Eureka has beaten thus far have more than one win yet, and only one remaining on the schedule does. I don't think I'd call them "really, really good" either - good enough to win the NACC, certainly, but even if they run the table, I'm not sure how much that says in the bigger picture.
Kalamazoo, on the other hand, I can't speak to what they have but they will have chances to "prove it" in the back half of MIAA play.
Am I allowed to pick just a top 7? I might just randomly pick teams to fill out my ballot by favorite colors or something.
Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on October 08, 2018, 08:44:32 PM
Am I allowed to pick just a top 7? I might just randomly pick teams to fill out my ballot by favorite colors or something.
OOH, make a statement. Pick Earlham, Finlandia, and Defiance! I didn't check their colors. :P
That. Was. Painfulllllllllll. I switched around my ballot three times because I kept looking at it saying "no way, that CANNOT be it." Sadly one of those times it did have to be it.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 08, 2018, 10:07:21 PM
Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on October 08, 2018, 08:44:32 PM
Am I allowed to pick just a top 7? I might just randomly pick teams to fill out my ballot by favorite colors or something.
OOH, make a statement. Pick Earlham, Finlandia, and Defiance! I didn't check their colors. :P
That would be quite the act of DEFIANCE! ;D
bluestreak66
Boo! Hiss! ^^^ ☠🏈
Just sent my ballot. 8 out of 10 come from just 2 conferences :-\
Quote from: MUC57 on October 09, 2018, 11:04:36 AM
bluestreak66
Boo! Hiss! ^^^ ☠🏈
I'll be here all week!
Quote from: bluestreak66 on October 09, 2018, 12:48:57 PM
Quote from: MUC57 on October 09, 2018, 11:04:36 AM
bluestreak66
Boo! Hiss! ^^^ ☠🏈
I'll be here all week!
That nearly made me tip over in my chair because it was so groan-worthy.
Quote from: Ryan Stoppable on October 08, 2018, 03:03:41 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 07, 2018, 10:58:03 PM
An additional note to any voters who have yet to submit (or wanna file an 'amended return' ;)): in addition to the teams I mentioned in my earlier post, there are still two other 5-0 teams in the region: neither Kalamazoo nor Eureka has beaten anyone of note, but if you're searching for a 9 or a 10, they might be worth a flyer. Teams can only play who's on the schedule, so a team in a bad conference could conceivably be really, really good with no way to prove it. (I have my doubts about either of these being 'really, really good', but who can say - neither is on my ballot, but they are on my radar.)
None of the teams Eureka has beaten thus far have more than one win yet, and only one remaining on the schedule does. I don't think I'd call them "really, really good" either - good enough to win the NACC, certainly, but even if they run the table, I'm not sure how much that says in the bigger picture.
Kalamazoo, on the other hand, I can't speak to what they have but they will have chances to "prove it" in the back half of MIAA play.
Late news: I was the one that put Eureka on the ballot last week. Granted they haven't really played anyone (Or for that matter the NACC tends to struggle of conference on a yearly basis) but they are 5-0. The two biggest roadblocks for them is Benedictine (who I think is better than their record shows), a surprising CUW team, and a underachieving Lakeland team.
Somehow we ended up with one more ORV than last week. I think we've set a new highwater mark for number of teams receiving votes in the NRFP.
2018 Week 6 NRFP:
(https://i.imgur.com/e4K9jPF.png)
click to enlarge
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, thunderdog, USee, and wally wabash.
So every top seven vote bar one went to the same seven teams, and then we have TEN other teams getting consideration in the 8-10 spots. Does no one want those spots?
(Also, there's a pair of #2 votes in Column 1.)
Quote from: Ryan Stoppable on October 09, 2018, 09:53:17 PM
So every top seven vote bar one went to the same seven teams, and then we have TEN other teams getting consideration in the 8-10 spots. Does no one want those spots?
(Also, there's a pair of #2 votes in Column 1.)
I'm the Bar One, column 11. I've consistently been low man on Trine all season. Why? There's nothing there to convince me they can beat the 3rd (maybe even the 4th place teams) from the OAC and CCIW or the 2nd place team from the NCAC. I had Trine at #9 last week, while being the high man on Denison at #8 (last week). Denison's dominant win over Wabash "Justified" (great show BTW) my thinking they belonged ahead of Trine, so they move up to #7 for me with Trine right behind at #8. Denison's competitive loss to Witt, whom I still have at #3, ahead of the 3 headed CCIW monster, is also part of my thinking. I went with the 3rd & 4th best schools (as of now) from the OAC at #9 and #10. Next up for me is MSJ and WashU, but both need a victory this weekend to make that happen. After that, Wabash is still probably my #13, but that loss to Denison doesn't make me think they can upset Witt. Eureka (weak schedule), Albion (home loss to Hope), Hope (home loss to Millikin), Millikin (bad loss to Wheaton) aren't really even on my radar yet. Just my .02
Quote from: Ryan Stoppable on October 09, 2018, 09:53:17 PM
So every top seven vote bar one went to the same seven teams, and then we have TEN other teams getting consideration in the 8-10 spots. Does no one want those spots?
(Also, there's a pair of #2 votes in Column 1.)
Good eye! Wally can confirm, but I'd imagine that the second 2 (IWU) should be a 3.
BTW, I'm column 7. In retrospect, I should have put WashU #10 instead of MSJ. But that would be FOUR CCIW teams (musn't be a homer! ;)), and I like throwing a bone to the HCAC (since Franklin can't hold their traditional spot this season). MSJ and Franklin play this Saturday - winner MAY hold on in my ballot (just noticed that although Franklin has not been their dominant selves, their only loss is to Albion).
Like I said, we are (for the moment, at least) a top SEVEN, then throw darts at the wall region.
I gave Hope #10, then I second guessed myself - since they lost to Millikin, but Millikin was poleaxed by Wheaton and struggled with Augie. Hope's playing better now.
But then there's Denison, who I probably should have voted for, but they lost to Southwestern, who is probably going to wind up 5-5.
I can't fully trust Wash U - their schedule is seriously backloaded. I don't know about MSJ since the HCAC is really bad this year, and Franklin lost to Albion who lost to Hope. I guess the Franklin / MSJ winner will get the bottom vote on a few polls.
Eureka could go 10-0 and not be in the North Top 10.
Ye Gods, the North is wack.
I'm column 5. I went with Marietta, Millikin, and Denison in the 8-10. Baldwin Wallace, FWIW, is my 11.
Marietta is undefeated and at least beat ONU. Do I think they'll get shellacked by John Carroll and Mount Union. Yep. Could they lose to BW, yep. Do I have any faith whatsoever in any team past 7? Nope.
My vote for Millikin was less a vote for Big Blue and more a vote for the CCIW. Washington is very much on the radar but haven't played anyone yet. Excited to see what they do against Wheaton this weekend. If they beat Wheaton they will most likely jump to 8 on my rankings.
Denison? I don't know. I just can't put in the best team from HCAC or NACC this year. Already gave an extra vote to the CCIW. So... OAC or NCAC? Coin flip between Denison and BW. Tie breaker went to the team that took Wittenberg to OT and whompped Wabash last week...
Quote from: HOPEful on October 10, 2018, 07:40:03 AM
I'm column 5. I went with Marietta, Millikin, and Denison in the 8-10. Baldwin Wallace, FWIW, is my 11.
Marietta is undefeated and at least beat ONU. Do I think they'll get shellacked by John Carroll and Mount Union. Yep. Could they lose to BW, yep. Do I have any faith whatsoever in any team past 7? Nope.
My vote for Millikin was less a vote for Big Blue and more a vote for the CCIW. Washington is very much on the radar but haven't played anyone yet. Excited to see what they do against Wheaton this weekend. If they beat Wheaton they will most likely jump to 8 on my rankings.
Denison? I don't know. I just can't put in the best team from HCAC or NACC this year. Already gave an extra vote to the CCIW. So... OAC or NCAC? Coin flip between Denison and BW. Tie breaker went to the team that took Wittenberg to OT and whompped Wabash last week...
Seems logical to me. Nice job.
Quote from: HOPEful on October 10, 2018, 07:40:03 AM
I'm column 5. I went with Marietta, Millikin, and Denison in the 8-10. Baldwin Wallace, FWIW, is my 11.
Marietta is undefeated and at least beat ONU. Do I think they'll get shellacked by John Carroll and Mount Union. Yep. Could they lose to BW, yep. Do I have any faith whatsoever in any team past 7? Nope.
My vote for Millikin was less a vote for Big Blue and more a vote for the CCIW. Washington is very much on the radar but haven't played anyone yet. Excited to see what they do against Wheaton this weekend. If they beat Wheaton they will most likely jump to 8 on my rankings.
Denison? I don't know. I just can't put in the best team from HCAC or NACC this year. Already gave an extra vote to the CCIW. So... OAC or NCAC? Coin flip between Denison and BW. Tie breaker went to the team that took Wittenberg to OT and whompped Wabash last week...
WashU pounded Carthage and kept it pretty close with North Central, who appears to be someone. Carthage hasn't had the results on the field but as a common opponent they lost at the end to UWO, got smoked by WashU and were a lineman downfield away from beating IWU in OT. To me WashU has a better resume than anyone in the 7-10 range
Quote from: USee on October 10, 2018, 08:37:23 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on October 10, 2018, 07:40:03 AM
I'm column 5. I went with Marietta, Millikin, and Denison in the 8-10. Baldwin Wallace, FWIW, is my 11.
Marietta is undefeated and at least beat ONU. Do I think they'll get shellacked by John Carroll and Mount Union. Yep. Could they lose to BW, yep. Do I have any faith whatsoever in any team past 7? Nope.
My vote for Millikin was less a vote for Big Blue and more a vote for the CCIW. Washington is very much on the radar but haven't played anyone yet. Excited to see what they do against Wheaton this weekend. If they beat Wheaton they will most likely jump to 8 on my rankings.
Denison? I don't know. I just can't put in the best team from HCAC or NACC this year. Already gave an extra vote to the CCIW. So... OAC or NCAC? Coin flip between Denison and BW. Tie breaker went to the team that took Wittenberg to OT and whompped Wabash last week...
WashU pounded Carthage and kept it pretty close with North Central, who appears to be someone. Carthage hasn't had the results on the field but as a common opponent they lost at the end to UWO, got smoked by WashU and were a lineman downfield away from beating IWU in OT. To me WashU has a better resume than anyone in the 7-10 range
Probably poor choice of words. Yes, North Central is someone. But it was a loss and they were down 22-0 at half. I don't have enough info to go on at this point in the season to determine if they came back or NC took their foot off the accelerator. I have a hard time pointing to a win against a 2-3 team and a 32-19 loss as milestones. A close week 1 against Chicago just adds to my uncertainty... But that's all about to change! Back to back games against Wheaton and IWU means the Bears have two opportunities to sky rocket up my rankings with wins. Even losses but good showings will probably be enough for me to launch them into the 8 or 9 range.
The fact we have a season where a team lime Marietta is in the top 10 after 6 weeks makes me happy in so many ways! ;D
Quote from: HOPEful on October 10, 2018, 09:07:32 AM
Quote from: USee on October 10, 2018, 08:37:23 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on October 10, 2018, 07:40:03 AM
I'm column 5. I went with Marietta, Millikin, and Denison in the 8-10. Baldwin Wallace, FWIW, is my 11.
Marietta is undefeated and at least beat ONU. Do I think they'll get shellacked by John Carroll and Mount Union. Yep. Could they lose to BW, yep. Do I have any faith whatsoever in any team past 7? Nope.
My vote for Millikin was less a vote for Big Blue and more a vote for the CCIW. Washington is very much on the radar but haven't played anyone yet. Excited to see what they do against Wheaton this weekend. If they beat Wheaton they will most likely jump to 8 on my rankings.
Denison? I don't know. I just can't put in the best team from HCAC or NACC this year. Already gave an extra vote to the CCIW. So... OAC or NCAC? Coin flip between Denison and BW. Tie breaker went to the team that took Wittenberg to OT and whompped Wabash last week...
WashU pounded Carthage and kept it pretty close with North Central, who appears to be someone. Carthage hasn't had the results on the field but as a common opponent they lost at the end to UWO, got smoked by WashU and were a lineman downfield away from beating IWU in OT. To me WashU has a better resume than anyone in the 7-10 range
Probably poor choice of words. Yes, North Central is someone. But it was a loss and they were down 22-0 at half. I don't have enough info to go on at this point in the season to determine if they came back or NC took their foot off the accelerator. I have a hard time pointing to a win against a 2-3 team and a 32-19 loss as milestones. A close week 1 against Chicago just adds to my uncertainty... But that's all about to change! Back to back games against Wheaton and IWU means the Polar Bears have two opportunities to sky rocket up my rankings with wins. Even losses but good showings will probably be enough for me to launch them into the 8 or 9 range.
We have more information on WashU than almost anyone ranked 5 or lower. It's all uncertain but I can tell you I feel a lot better about WashU's place in the world order than Marietta, Baldwin Wallace, or Eureka. You categorize Carthage as a "2-3 team" but I look through that a little deeper. I find it compelling that WashU soundly beat a Carthage team at home that Unanimous Top 5 pick IWU needed a penalty flag to beat at home. There's is a direct, comparative result there. For me that's more info than we have for most of these teams. We will certainly know more about WashU in 2 weeks than we know now, but that doesn't help me fill out this weeks poll.
Quote from: USee on October 10, 2018, 09:17:59 AM
We have more information on WashU than almost anyone ranked 5 or lower. It's all uncertain but I can tell you I feel a lot better about WashU's place in the world order than Marietta, Baldwin Wallace, or Eureka
FWIW, there is a zero percent change Eureka makes my rankings this season.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 09, 2018, 09:45:35 PM
Somehow we ended up with one more ORV than last week. I think we've set a new highwater mark for number of teams receiving votes in the NRFP.
2018 Week 6 NRFP:
(https://i.imgur.com/e4K9jPF.png)
click to enlarge
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, thunderdog, USee, and wally wabash.
Interesting contrast - SRFP had only 11 teams receive votes this week. Of course we only have five participants.
Quote from: HOPEful on October 10, 2018, 09:07:32 AM
Quote from: USee on October 10, 2018, 08:37:23 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on October 10, 2018, 07:40:03 AM
I'm column 5. I went with Marietta, Millikin, and Denison in the 8-10. Baldwin Wallace, FWIW, is my 11.
Marietta is undefeated and at least beat ONU. Do I think they'll get shellacked by John Carroll and Mount Union. Yep. Could they lose to BW, yep. Do I have any faith whatsoever in any team past 7? Nope.
My vote for Millikin was less a vote for Big Blue and more a vote for the CCIW. Washington is very much on the radar but haven't played anyone yet. Excited to see what they do against Wheaton this weekend. If they beat Wheaton they will most likely jump to 8 on my rankings.
Denison? I don't know. I just can't put in the best team from HCAC or NACC this year. Already gave an extra vote to the CCIW. So... OAC or NCAC? Coin flip between Denison and BW. Tie breaker went to the team that took Wittenberg to OT and whompped Wabash last week...
WashU pounded Carthage and kept it pretty close with North Central, who appears to be someone. Carthage hasn't had the results on the field but as a common opponent they lost at the end to UWO, got smoked by WashU and were a lineman downfield away from beating IWU in OT. To me WashU has a better resume than anyone in the 7-10 range
Probably poor choice of words. Yes, North Central is someone. But it was a loss and they were down 22-0 at half. I don't have enough info to go on at this point in the season to determine if they came back or NC took their foot off the accelerator. I have a hard time pointing to a win against a 2-3 team and a 32-19 loss as milestones. A close week 1 against Chicago just adds to my uncertainty... But that's all about to change! Back to back games against Wheaton and IWU means the Polar Bears have two opportunities to sky rocket up my rankings with wins. Even losses but good showings will probably be enough for me to launch them into the 8 or 9 range.
Ohio Northern is the Polar Bears. Wash U is simply the Bears. As anyone who has been to St. Louis between the months of May and September will tell you, there's nothing the least bit polar about the Gateway City. ;)
Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 10, 2018, 10:49:32 AM
Ohio Northern is the Polar Bears. Wash U is simply the Bears. As anyone who has been to St. Louis between the months of May and September will tell you, there's nothing the least bit polar about the Gateway City. ;)
Silly mistake. Thank you Mr. Sager for the correction! :)
Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 10, 2018, 10:49:32 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on October 10, 2018, 09:07:32 AM
Quote from: USee on October 10, 2018, 08:37:23 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on October 10, 2018, 07:40:03 AM
I'm column 5. I went with Marietta, Millikin, and Denison in the 8-10. Baldwin Wallace, FWIW, is my 11.
Marietta is undefeated and at least beat ONU. Do I think they'll get shellacked by John Carroll and Mount Union. Yep. Could they lose to BW, yep. Do I have any faith whatsoever in any team past 7? Nope.
My vote for Millikin was less a vote for Big Blue and more a vote for the CCIW. Washington is very much on the radar but haven't played anyone yet. Excited to see what they do against Wheaton this weekend. If they beat Wheaton they will most likely jump to 8 on my rankings.
Denison? I don't know. I just can't put in the best team from HCAC or NACC this year. Already gave an extra vote to the CCIW. So... OAC or NCAC? Coin flip between Denison and BW. Tie breaker went to the team that took Wittenberg to OT and whompped Wabash last week...
WashU pounded Carthage and kept it pretty close with North Central, who appears to be someone. Carthage hasn't had the results on the field but as a common opponent they lost at the end to UWO, got smoked by WashU and were a lineman downfield away from beating IWU in OT. To me WashU has a better resume than anyone in the 7-10 range
Probably poor choice of words. Yes, North Central is someone. But it was a loss and they were down 22-0 at half. I don't have enough info to go on at this point in the season to determine if they came back or NC took their foot off the accelerator. I have a hard time pointing to a win against a 2-3 team and a 32-19 loss as milestones. A close week 1 against Chicago just adds to my uncertainty... But that's all about to change! Back to back games against Wheaton and IWU means the Polar Bears have two opportunities to sky rocket up my rankings with wins. Even losses but good showings will probably be enough for me to launch them into the 8 or 9 range.
Ohio Northern is the Polar Bears. Wash U is simply the Bears. As anyone who has been to St. Louis between the months of May and September will tell you, there's nothing the least bit polar about the Gateway City. ;)
Especially because the Blues are usually out of the Stanley Cup playoffs by then!
Major upsets are always possible, of course, but it looks to be a fairly quiet Saturday in the North. The games most likely to affect voting (in no particular order) include 4-1 JCU @ 4-1 ONU, 4-1 Wheaton @ 4-1 WashU, 4-1 Franklin @ 5-1 MSJ, 5-0 Kazoo @ 4-1 Albion, and 5-0 Trine @ 4-1 Olivet (and perhaps 4-1 Millikin @ 2-3 Carthage).
(Carthage may well be the best 2-3 team in the country [no way will I spend any time investigating such a trivial claim!]: they led Oshkosh with 90 seconds to go; took IWU to double OT, and would have won if not for a really stupid penalty; only WashU has beaten them soundly; and their two wins were both blowouts. Someone is still giving Millikin a vote, but I suspect Carthage will win by a monkey-stomp - IF Millikin wins, I'll get them on my ballot somehow!)
I'm column 3. My biggest move this week actually had more to do with last week. I moved Witt from 2 to 5 mainly because I meant to move them down last week, but didn't and immediately had buyer's remorse once I sent my ballot in with them at 2. I would have moved them to 6, but Denison's performance against Wabash lessened the blow and I ended up slotting Witt behind Wheaton. 8-10 continue to be a crap shoot as they seem to be for everyone else.
WashU knocking off Wheaton is gonna wreak havoc on ballots! Instead of the three-headed CCIW monster, it's now FOUR-headed! And instead of bemoaning the lack of decent candidates for the nether reaches of the ballot, there is a glut of candidates. In no particular order, there is Franklin moving to 5-1, knocking off MSJ; Olivet coming within a blown two-point conversion of knocking Trine from the unbeaten ranks; Kalamazoo remaining unbeaten by edging Albion; Millikin downing Carthage to move to 5-1; etc.
Quote from: ADL70 on October 10, 2018, 10:12:10 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 09, 2018, 09:45:35 PM
Somehow we ended up with one more ORV than last week. I think we've set a new highwater mark for number of teams receiving votes in the NRFP.
2018 Week 6 NRFP:
(https://i.imgur.com/e4K9jPF.png)
click to enlarge
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, thunderdog, USee, and wally wabash.
Interesting contrast - SRFP had only 11 teams receive votes this week. Of course we only have five participants.
I think that the NRFP was relatively homogenous. If you drop the teams that only appeared on 1 ballot (or rather did not appear on any of the other 11 ballots), then you are down to 12 teams. The questionable ballot that I see is Albion as a #8. Respectfully, I have real problems giving the MIAA 2 teams on the Region Fan Poll.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 13, 2018, 09:15:59 PM
Quote from: ADL70 on October 10, 2018, 10:12:10 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 09, 2018, 09:45:35 PM
Somehow we ended up with one more ORV than last week. I think we've set a new highwater mark for number of teams receiving votes in the NRFP.
2018 Week 6 NRFP:
(https://i.imgur.com/e4K9jPF.png)
click to enlarge
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, thunderdog, USee, and wally wabash.
Interesting contrast - SRFP had only 11 teams receive votes this week. Of course we only have five participants.
I think that the NRFP was relatively homogenous. If you drop the teams that only appeared on 1 ballot (or rather did not appear on any of the other 11 ballots), then you are down to 12 teams. The questionable ballot that I see is Albion as a #8. Respectfully, I have real problems giving the MIAA 2 teams on the Region Fan Poll.
Me too. On the other hand, Kalamazoo is now 6-0, having defeated Albion. while Trine was a muffed two-point conversion away from falling from the undefeated against Olivet. I MIGHT make an exception for Trine and Kazoo, but too early to say.
While only a week ago I scrambled to fill my ballot, now I have like 15 tempting options for the top 10! :P
And I said it looked like a quiet week in the North! :o
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 13, 2018, 08:49:04 PM
WashU knocking off Wheaton is gonna wreak havoc on ballots! Instead of the three-headed CCIW monster, it's now FOUR-headed!
I'm not exactly sure what four CCIW teams you are referring to (whether you are including Wheaton or Millikin), but I'd say the CCIW currently has five title contenders, not four...
(conference record)IWU (5-0) - @ Wash U, @ Millikin, vs NCC, @ North Park
Millikin (4-1) - @ Elmhurst, vs IWU, vs Wash U, @ NCC
Wash U (4-1) - vs IWU, @ Augustana, @ Millikin, vs Carroll
NCC (4-1) - @ Carthage, vs Elmhurst, @ IWU, vs Millikin
Wheaton (3-2) - @ Augustana, vs Carroll, @ Carthage, vs Elmhurst
As of today, I believe all five have a legitimate shot of winning a piece of the championship.
In terms of a national or regional ranking order, seems at this point it has to be: IWU, North Central, Wash U, Wheaton, Millikin. That order should be very fluid as the games play out.
Yeah, I probably should have included Millikin. I just have a hard time taking them seriously after the 63-6 beat down they took from Wheaton.
Just sent in my ballot. Actually found it easier than previous weeks. Hardest part was how to order the CCIW teams and where in that order to sneak in Wittenberg. I have a feeling I won't be the only person ranking Millikin this week.
It's actually a lot easier to rank the CCIW this week than any other week.
I shuffled around Trine and the CCIW and added Wash U and Millikin. Dropped Hope and Wheaton.
Quote from: HOPEful on October 14, 2018, 07:13:22 PM
Just sent in my ballot. Actually found it easier than previous weeks. Hardest part was how to order the CCIW teams and where in that order to sneak in Wittenberg. I have a feeling I won't be the only person ranking Millikin this week.
Clearly not, as smedindy said he added them. Despite my promise to get them on the ballot somehow, I just couldn't find the space with adding WashU and still undefeated Kalamazoo. I dropped Bald Wally and MSJ I retained Wheaton, but they slid 3 slots.
This week Marietta will either soar or (more likely) fall off the ballot as they play at JCU. WashU hosts IWU in probably the biggest game in the North this week. Kazoo probably should beat Alma, but then they meet the 'killers' row' of the MIAA: Olivet, Hope, and Trine. So soon spaces will (probably) open for Millikin, Bald Wally, Franklin, etc. But almost certainly NOT Eureka - their only hope of making my ballot is a postseason win, which would likely be a HUGE upset.
I dropped JCU, Witt and Mt Union and made Kzoo, Eureka and Marietta my top 3. I have a good feeling about them.
Nice that K'Zoo is undefeated, but one point wins against Albion and Adrian doesn't get my motor running.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 14, 2018, 10:35:23 PM
Clearly not, as smedindy said he added them. Despite my promise to get them on the ballot somehow, I just couldn't find the space with adding WashU and still undefeated Kalamazoo.
...
But almost certainly NOT Eureka - their only hope of making my ballot is a postseason win, which would likely be a HUGE upset.
Admittedly, I haven't seen either of these teams in person. But where's the big difference between what Kalamazoo and Eureka have done so far? I'm not seeing it.
Quote from: Ryan Stoppable on October 15, 2018, 12:34:46 PM
Admittedly, I haven't seen either of these teams in person. But where's the big difference between what Kalamazoo and Eureka have done so far? I'm not seeing it.
Kalamazoo beat Finlandia 56-7 while Eureka only beat them 34-12. :)
In all seriousness, Kalamazoo needs to play and beat either Trine or Hope to even get on my radar regionally.
Quote from: Ryan Stoppable on October 15, 2018, 12:34:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 14, 2018, 10:35:23 PM
Clearly not, as smedindy said he added them. Despite my promise to get them on the ballot somehow, I just couldn't find the space with adding WashU and still undefeated Kalamazoo.
...
But almost certainly NOT Eureka - their only hope of making my ballot is a postseason win, which would likely be a HUGE upset.
Admittedly, I haven't seen either of these teams in person. But where's the big difference between what Kalamazoo and Eureka have done so far? I'm not seeing it.
I admit that so far there really isn't any difference (though Albion may be better than anyone Eureka has faced). But soon Kazoo will get the opportunity to prove themselves for real. I wanted to get them on the ballot while I still had a chance, since I suspect they will implode once they get to the tough part of the schedule.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 15, 2018, 01:00:52 PM
I wanted to get them on the ballot while I still had a chance, since I suspect they will implode once they get to the tough part of the schedule.
That's really strange voting theory -- I better vote for them now because I think they are going to suck later.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 15, 2018, 01:44:01 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 15, 2018, 01:00:52 PM
I wanted to get them on the ballot while I still had a chance, since I suspect they will implode once they get to the tough part of the schedule.
That's really strange voting theory -- I better vote for them now because I think they are going to suck later.
It's once ranked, always ranked here in the NRFP so Mr. Y is just doing his job to cement Kalamazoo as a quality opponent. :)
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 15, 2018, 01:46:37 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 15, 2018, 01:44:01 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 15, 2018, 01:00:52 PM
I wanted to get them on the ballot while I still had a chance, since I suspect they will implode once they get to the tough part of the schedule.
That's really strange voting theory -- I better vote for them now because I think they are going to suck later.
It's once ranked, always ranked here in the NRFP so Mr. Y is just doing his job to cement Kalamazoo as a quality opponent. :)
Based on their history, I figure this might be the only chance I ever get to write in 'Kazoo'! ;D
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 15, 2018, 01:46:37 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 15, 2018, 01:44:01 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 15, 2018, 01:00:52 PM
I wanted to get them on the ballot while I still had a chance, since I suspect they will implode once they get to the tough part of the schedule.
That's really strange voting theory -- I better vote for them now because I think they are going to suck later.
It's once ranked, always ranked here in the NRFP so Mr. Y is just doing his job to cement Kalamazoo as a quality opponent. :)
Chuck could be presenting us with another opportunity for a neologism. Just as "to ypsi" means to coax statistical or historical information out of other posters that he's capable of looking up himself, "to chuck" could mean to promote for the sake of novelty a lightly-regarded conference's traditional nonentity that currently sports a gaudy record before it inevitably runs head-first into the brick wall of reality. ;)
And, in the interest of fair-mindedness, it should be noted that NACC supporter Ryan Stoppable has adeptly avoided chucking thus far on behalf of Eureka. ;)
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 15, 2018, 01:44:01 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 15, 2018, 01:00:52 PM
I wanted to get them on the ballot while I still had a chance, since I suspect they will implode once they get to the tough part of the schedule.
That's really strange voting theory -- I better vote for them now because I think they are going to suck later.
Welcome to our world. :-\
Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 15, 2018, 02:09:27 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 15, 2018, 01:46:37 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 15, 2018, 01:44:01 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 15, 2018, 01:00:52 PM
I wanted to get them on the ballot while I still had a chance, since I suspect they will implode once they get to the tough part of the schedule.
That's really strange voting theory -- I better vote for them now because I think they are going to suck later.
It's once ranked, always ranked here in the NRFP so Mr. Y is just doing his job to cement Kalamazoo as a quality opponent. :)
Chuck could be presenting us with another opportunity for a neologism. Just as "to ypsi" means to coax statistical or historical information out of other posters that he's capable of looking up himself, "to chuck" could mean to promote for the sake of novelty a lightly-regarded conference's traditional nonentity that currently sports a gaudy record before it inevitably runs head-first into the brick wall of reality. ;)
Everyone needs some loving so maybe the ypsi approach has merit or maybe on second thought maybe Chuck is practicing to be a politican.
Oh, I'm not objecting to it at all. Indeed, the part of me that loves underdogs applauds his motives, even if they aren't particularly in keeping with a cut-and-dried ranking of the ten best teams in the region. I just like the idea of coining new terms and expressions. I'm funny that way. ;)
I can't picture Chuck running for public office. It would cut too deeply into his d3boards.com time. ;)
It's odd - I have angst because I have to keep out a few teams here that may be worthy. Denison, Franklin, Hope, Wheaton (now). But I never even thought of K'Zoo. I would rank Olivet ahead of them, probably.
Sorry guys, I'm sure I'm the hold up on the poll. Stupid tax deadlines need to be outside of football season only! I am finalizing now and sending to Wally.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 16, 2018, 12:21:55 PM
Sorry guys, I'm sure I'm the hold up on the poll. Stupid tax deadlines need to be outside of football season only! I am finalizing now and sending to Wally.
That's usually me being the holdup since I work Sunday and Monday.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 16, 2018, 12:21:55 PM
Sorry guys, I'm sure I'm the hold up on the poll. Stupid tax deadlines need to be outside of football season only! I am finalizing now and sending to Wally.
You should probably send your taxes to the IRS and not to Wally, but I'm no CPA so what do I know
:P :P
Quote from: jamtoTommie on October 16, 2018, 12:31:07 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 16, 2018, 12:21:55 PM
Sorry guys, I'm sure I'm the hold up on the poll. Stupid tax deadlines need to be outside of football season only! I am finalizing now and sending to Wally.
You should probably send your taxes to the IRS and not to Wally, but I'm no CPA so what do I know
:P :P
I figure if Wally understands the pool C stuff then tax regs shouldn't be too difficult for him! wally_wabash, paid preparer has a nice ring to it.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 16, 2018, 12:35:25 PM
Quote from: jamtoTommie on October 16, 2018, 12:31:07 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 16, 2018, 12:21:55 PM
Sorry guys, I'm sure I'm the hold up on the poll. Stupid tax deadlines need to be outside of football season only! I am finalizing now and sending to Wally.
You should probably send your taxes to the IRS and not to Wally, but I'm no CPA so what do I know
:P :P
I figure if Wally understands the pool C stuff then tax regs shouldn't be too difficult for him! wally_wabash, paid preparer has a nice ring to it.
Wally, what's your going rate for financial/tax advice? ;)
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 16, 2018, 12:35:25 PM
Quote from: jamtoTommie on October 16, 2018, 12:31:07 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 16, 2018, 12:21:55 PM
Sorry guys, I'm sure I'm the hold up on the poll. Stupid tax deadlines need to be outside of football season only! I am finalizing now and sending to Wally.
You should probably send your taxes to the IRS and not to Wally, but I'm no CPA so what do I know
:P :P
I figure if Wally understands the pool C stuff then tax regs shouldn't be too difficult for him! wally_wabash, paid preparer has a nice ring to it.
The IRS grades out pretty well in the primary criteria:
- win % (1.000)
- results vs. regionally ranked opponents (all wins, all monkey stomps)
- SOS ranks only 4th nationally, somehow trailing three WIAC schools
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 16, 2018, 01:13:35 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 16, 2018, 12:35:25 PM
Quote from: jamtoTommie on October 16, 2018, 12:31:07 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 16, 2018, 12:21:55 PM
Sorry guys, I'm sure I'm the hold up on the poll. Stupid tax deadlines need to be outside of football season only! I am finalizing now and sending to Wally.
You should probably send your taxes to the IRS and not to Wally, but I'm no CPA so what do I know
:P :P
I figure if Wally understands the pool C stuff then tax regs shouldn't be too difficult for him! wally_wabash, paid preparer has a nice ring to it.
The IRS grades out pretty well in the primary criteria:
- win % (1.000)
- results vs. regionally ranked opponents (all wins, all monkey stomps)
- SOS ranks only 4th nationally, somehow trailing three WIAC schools
Who can forget in 1931, when they took down Al Capone, the juggernaut previously believed to be unbeatable? #upsetofthecentury
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 16, 2018, 01:13:35 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 16, 2018, 12:35:25 PM
Quote from: jamtoTommie on October 16, 2018, 12:31:07 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 16, 2018, 12:21:55 PM
Sorry guys, I'm sure I'm the hold up on the poll. Stupid tax deadlines need to be outside of football season only! I am finalizing now and sending to Wally.
You should probably send your taxes to the IRS and not to Wally, but I'm no CPA so what do I know
:P :P
I figure if Wally understands the pool C stuff then tax regs shouldn't be too difficult for him! wally_wabash, paid preparer has a nice ring to it.
The IRS grades out pretty well in the primary criteria:
- win % (1.000)
- results vs. regionally ranked opponents (all wins, all monkey stomps)
- SOS ranks only 4th nationally, somehow trailing three WIAC schools
"Our WIAC conference schedule just isn't challenging enough. You know what we need? Another road game against a top 10 opponent!" - WIAC schedule makers
I had an out of town hearing that kept me from being timely with my ballot. I just turned it in. Apologies if I'm the beaver in the stream of commerce here.
I haven't filled my NRFP ballot out yet, so it's probably me that we're waiting on. I was surprised with a birthday weekend in NOLA and am still half-zombie. I'll get the ballots tabulated and posted tonight.
On a related note, there's not much that will make you more acutely aware of how old you are like a birthday weekend in NOLA. LG, you were missed brother!
2018 Week 7 NRFP:
(https://i.imgur.com/bK4NUaX.png)
click to enlarge
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, thunderdog, USee, and wally wabash.
I, of course, am column 1 (immediately obvious by the Kazoo vote!) I knew they wouldn't make it into the top ten, but I wanted to toss them a bone with their best start in 'forever'.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 16, 2018, 01:13:35 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 16, 2018, 12:35:25 PM
Quote from: jamtoTommie on October 16, 2018, 12:31:07 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 16, 2018, 12:21:55 PM
Sorry guys, I'm sure I'm the hold up on the poll. Stupid tax deadlines need to be outside of football season only! I am finalizing now and sending to Wally.
You should probably send your taxes to the IRS and not to Wally, but I'm no CPA so what do I know
:P :P
I figure if Wally understands the pool C stuff then tax regs shouldn't be too difficult for him! wally_wabash, paid preparer has a nice ring to it.
The IRS grades out pretty well in the primary criteria:
- win % (1.000)
- results vs. regionally ranked opponents (all wins, all monkey stomps)
- SOS ranks only 4th nationally, somehow trailing three WIAC schools
Maybe THIS year, but I got audited a number of years ago, did my homework, and ended up with them sending me a BIGGER refund! (I've never been audited since. :P)
I sure hope the IRS doesn't monitor this website - There is probably a 15-audit penalty for taunting. ;)
I'm column 5. Looks like I differ from the crowd on 3 teams: Denison, WashU, and Wheaton.
I remain the high vote for Denison at #6, yet survey says Unranked or #11. I'll admit that ranking the Big Red at #6 somewhat gives them a pass for their opening week loss at Soutwestern, but they're thru the heart of their NCAC schedule with a 2-1 record vs what I consider the top 3 opponents in Witt (66-68 loss), Wabash (34-10 win), and DePauw (20-12 win). I think they finish 8-2 and in sole possession of 2nd place in the NCAC. I'll stick to my guns on this one.
I'm low man for WashU at #10 while survey says #6. This is somewhat tied to where I have Wheaton, which is Unranked (they'd be my #11) while survey says #8. As a rather close follower of Wheaton football, I think this team has an incredibly high ceiling, but it also has a much lower floor normally associated with said high ceiling. The lack of consistency makes me feel as if I'm watching a completely different team from week-to week and it's also the reason why they don't make my ballot... currently, at least. Anyway, back to WashU. They played a heckuva game vs Wheaton. I was very impressed by QB Johnny Davidson. His escapability was frustrating (as a Wheaton fan) and reminiscent of Russell Wilson (WashU announcer appropriately said he looked like Fran Tarkenton). Their defense played lights out with the 10 sacks. All that said, I still feel the outcome was more a result of "Wheaton playing poorly and not making adjustments when needed, particularly on offense" as opposed to "WashU played great and earned the W". WashU still has IWU and Millikin on the schedule, if I'm wrong, they should be able to win both those games. IMHO, I don't see WashU beating IWU (you're welcome Titan fans, I always do what I can to provide your opponents with bulletin board material ;))
Looking ahead to Saturday, two games will definitely affect the voting: (5-1) IWU @ (5-1) WashU, and (6-0) Marietta @ (5-1) JCU.
Three other games might be interesting: (4-2) Wheaton @ (3-3) Augie, (5-1) NCC @ (2-4) Carthage, and (3-3) DePauw @ (6-0) Witt. Any other games that affect voting would be HUGE upsets, or at least anomalously close games.
I'm row 7.
I still have Wheaton at 7. I don't really see how the two respectable losses of at IWU and at WashU have anyone thinking this team is unrankable. They beat North Central and crushed Millikin. How did 2 of you vote for Millikin at 10 over Wheaton?
I finished my 7-10 with Wheaton, Millikin, Trine, Marietta. My thought process it simple. Wheaton's 63-6 win head-to-head keeps them ahead of Millikin. I saw both Millikin and Trine in person against Hope, and neither stood out as impressively better than the other. I left both games thinking "Hope should have won that game..." I gave the tie-breaker to Millikin for their win over Carthage. Marietta was the undefeated team I chose to plop in the 10 spot. I could be easily swayed in the direction of BW or Denison.
I am uncertain what I'll do with Marietta next week if they lose to John Carroll in a relatively close contest.
^ I'd be shocked if Marietta is within 20 points of JCU. I'm happy to see Marietta off the mat, but I'm expecting them to end season 1-3. Still, a great season for Marietta to build from, but they're not ready for prime time yet.
Quote from: HScoach on October 17, 2018, 12:20:23 PM
^ I'd be shocked if Marietta is within 20 points of JCU. I'm happy to see Marietta off the mat, but I'm expecting them to end season 1-3. Still, a great season for Marietta to build from, but they're not ready for prime time yet.
I agree.
I would also be shocked if in a hypothetical world, Trine or Milikin played JC and kept it close. The distance between 2 and 8 significant.
Quote from: HOPEful on October 17, 2018, 12:48:59 PM
Quote from: HScoach on October 17, 2018, 12:20:23 PM
^ I'd be shocked if Marietta is within 20 points of JCU. I'm happy to see Marietta off the mat, but I'm expecting them to end season 1-3. Still, a great season for Marietta to build from, but they're not ready for prime time yet.
I agree.
I would also be shocked if in a hypothetical world, Trine or Milikin played JC and kept it close. The distance between 2 and 8 significant.
The distance between 2 and 3 is huge, iyam.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 17, 2018, 12:50:14 PM
The distance between 2 and 3 is huge, iyam.
Agreed. That's why I'm thinking if Marietta somehow finds a way to keep the game close, I could envision a scenario where they lose and I move them up my rankings.
I think the huge gap is between 1 and 2, both regionally and maybe even nationally (ok 2-3 nationally). Somehow people have become enamored with JCU because they stayed close to Mount for 59 minutes. JCU showed no ability to score in that game and I don't think Mt was ever in any real danger to lose that game. I think there are 1-2 other teams that could lose by 10-14 to Mt.
Quote from: USee on October 17, 2018, 04:54:33 PM
I think the huge gap is between 1 and 2, both regionally and maybe even nationally (ok 2-3 nationally). Somehow people have become enamored with JCU because they stayed close to Mount for 59 minutes. JCU showed no ability to score in that game and I don't think Mt was ever in any real danger to lose that game. I think there are 1-2 other teams that could lose by 10-14 to Mt.
Not that I completely disagree, Mount's offense showed no ability to score in that game either. Let's remember that JCU's offense did score more points than Mount's. Our defense only allowed 9 whereas Mount's allowed 10.. The difference is obviously 2 defensive touchdown's on the part of Mount.
Quote from: USee on October 17, 2018, 04:54:33 PM
I think the huge gap is between 1 and 2, both regionally and maybe even nationally (ok 2-3 nationally). Somehow people have become enamored with JCU because they stayed close to Mount for 59 minutes. JCU showed no ability to score in that game and I don't think Mt was ever in any real danger to lose that game. I think there are 1-2 other teams that could lose by 10-14 to Mt.
If you will tell me who these gentlemen are.....
Quote from: USee on October 17, 2018, 04:54:33 PM
I think the huge gap is between 1 and 2, both regionally and maybe even nationally (ok 2-3 nationally). Somehow people have become enamored with JCU because they stayed close to Mount for 59 minutes. JCU showed no ability to score in that game and I don't think Mt was ever in any real danger to lose that game. I think there are 1-2 other teams that could lose by 10-14 to Mt.
I disagree with this too. JCU had the ball in Mount territory down 6 with over a minute to go. Save a crazy strip-steal from a blitzing DB return for TD, that's a 6 point game. Both offenses struggled to maintain anything. Both defenses played very well, but the difference was Mount's D scored. JCU's didn't.
Not saying either team is national championship caliber quite yet, but both will be a very tough out come playoff time.
Quote from: HScoach on October 17, 2018, 08:08:51 PM
Quote from: USee on October 17, 2018, 04:54:33 PM
I think the huge gap is between 1 and 2, both regionally and maybe even nationally (ok 2-3 nationally). Somehow people have become enamored with JCU because they stayed close to Mount for 59 minutes. JCU showed no ability to score in that game and I don't think Mt was ever in any real danger to lose that game. I think there are 1-2 other teams that could lose by 10-14 to Mt.
I disagree with this too. JCU had the ball in Mount territory down 6 with over a minute to go. Save a crazy strip-steal from a blitzing DB return for TD, that's a 6 point game. Both offenses struggled to maintain anything. Both defenses played very well, but the difference was Mount's D scored. JCU's didn't.
Not saying either team is national championship caliber quite yet, but both will be a very tough out come playoff time.
My original point was to refute the notion that there is a huge chasm between JCU at #2 and the rest of the North. I just don't think a 13 pt loss to Mt Union means JCU is leaps and bounds better than the other North teams. Their defense played Mt Union tough, no doubt. but their offense scored a TD on the opening drive in the first 3 minutes and managed 3 pts the rest of the way. The strip sack TD was not crazy at all. It was an unblocked blizter off the edge, AFTER a timeout by Mt Union with :44 seconds left. Great teams don't make that mistake down the stretch in a huge game. Different deal if a Mt Union player beat someone and made a strip sack. That was a mental error for an offense that didn't look to me like they belonged on the same field as Mt Union. And your right HSC, it was in Mounts territory, At the 43. The strip sack happened at the JCU 49.
I'll agree JCU's defense seems for real (21 pts to 2-5 UWSP notwithstanding) but their offense hasn't proven anything and wins against one team with a winning record and a collective record of 9-21 does not impress me as a team that has created a chasm with the rest of the North Region. They pulled away nicely from ONU in the second half and play some solid OAC teams down the stretch. They are still ranked #2 in the North for me but they are much closer to #3 than they are to #1.
Quote from: USee on October 17, 2018, 10:44:38 PM
Quote from: HScoach on October 17, 2018, 08:08:51 PM
Quote from: USee on October 17, 2018, 04:54:33 PM
I think the huge gap is between 1 and 2, both regionally and maybe even nationally (ok 2-3 nationally). Somehow people have become enamored with JCU because they stayed close to Mount for 59 minutes. JCU showed no ability to score in that game and I don't think Mt was ever in any real danger to lose that game. I think there are 1-2 other teams that could lose by 10-14 to Mt.
I disagree with this too. JCU had the ball in Mount territory down 6 with over a minute to go. Save a crazy strip-steal from a blitzing DB return for TD, that's a 6 point game. Both offenses struggled to maintain anything. Both defenses played very well, but the difference was Mount's D scored. JCU's didn't.
Not saying either team is national championship caliber quite yet, but both will be a very tough out come playoff time.
My original point was to refute the notion that there is a huge chasm between JCU at #2 and the rest of the North. I just don't think a 13 pt loss to Mt Union means JCU is leaps and bounds better than the other North teams. Their defense played Mt Union tough, no doubt. but their offense scored a TD on the opening drive in the first 3 minutes and managed 3 pts the rest of the way. The strip sack TD was not crazy at all. It was an unblocked blizter off the edge, AFTER a timeout by Mt Union with :44 seconds left. Great teams don't make that mistake down the stretch in a huge game. Different deal if a Mt Union player beat someone and made a strip sack. That was a mental error for an offense that didn't look to me like they belonged on the same field as Mt Union. And your right HSC, it was in Mounts territory, At the 43. The strip sack happened at the JCU 49.
I'll agree JCU's defense seems for real (21 pts to 2-5 UWSP notwithstanding) but their offense hasn't proven anything and wins against one team with a winning record and a collective record of 9-21 does not impress me as a team that has created a chasm with the rest of the North Region. They pulled away nicely from ONU in the second half and play some solid OAC teams down the stretch. They are still ranked #2 in the North for me but they are much closer to #3 than they are to #1.
Agree, unfortunately, about the offense. But this far into the season, my original theory of being "not a 1st quarter team" seems to be accurate. To be able to make a push in the playoffs will require our offense to be able to put points on the board early.
Quote from: USee on October 17, 2018, 04:54:33 PM
I think the huge gap is between 1 and 2, both regionally and maybe even nationally (ok 2-3 nationally). Somehow people have become enamored with JCU because they stayed close to Mount for 59 minutes. JCU showed no ability to score in that game and I don't think Mt was ever in any real danger to lose that game. I think there are 1-2 other teams that could lose by 10-14 to Mt.
JCU absolutely had a chance to win. They were 1st and G with under 5 min to play. They didn't get in, but it isn't correct to say Mount Union wasn't in danger. It was defcon 2 at least.
It's not correct to say there is a chasm between JCU and the rest of the North based on a 13 pt loss.
Quote from: USee on October 18, 2018, 12:08:08 AM
It's not correct to say there is a chasm between JCU and the rest of the North based on a 13 pt loss.
It certainly is based on a full reading game and not simply a score margin that you keep quoting like you're going to win something if you keep doing it. You haven't answered the question posed earlier- who else on our list can predictably take Mount Union inside one minute with a chance to win? And based on what?
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 18, 2018, 12:17:23 AM
Quote from: USee on October 18, 2018, 12:08:08 AM
It's not correct to say there is a chasm between JCU and the rest of the North based on a 13 pt loss.
It certainly is based on a full reading game and not simply a score margin that you keep quoting like you're going to win something if you keep doing it. You haven't answered the question posed earlier- who else on our list can predictably take Mount Union inside one minute with a chance to win? And based on what?
No need to insult me Wally. A full reading of the game includes the final minute of play. You don't get a pass for making the exact same mistake in the final minute you made in the first half (Berry sacked him earlier on the same blitz). In fact that's much, much worse. I watched the whole game and never had any worry Mt Union would win. A full reading of the game tells me Mt Union is a lot better than JCU and I think if they played again Mt wins by 3 Td's not just 2. A full reading of the game says JCU turned it over 4 times to Mt Union's zero. A full reading says Anthony Moeglin was 11-24 and gave up two fumbles for TD's, an INT in his own end of the field and couldn't make a play when he had a chance to affect the outcome at least 2, if not 3 times. I had absolutely no fear Mt Union would lose that game even when JCU got the ball with 1:44 left. In fact I would have given odds for a turnover vs a TD.
The question isn't who else can predictably take Mt Union inside a minute to play because neither you nor anyone else predicted it would happen in that game, and predictions aren't generally very accurate for anyone. What I said was there are 1-2 other teams that can lose to Mt Union by 2 scores. That doesn't require predictions of who, it simply illustrates what I believe, and you seem to need to insult me for it, which is JCU is closer to being the 3rd best team in the region right now than the #1 team. That's not a novel idea, it's been true of every team in the North for close to 2 decades. I simply disagree with people on here who think a loss to Mt Union makes a team better than everyone else. I am a big believer in Pat's idea of who you beat vs who you lost to.
Quote from: USee on October 18, 2018, 12:38:49 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 18, 2018, 12:17:23 AM
Quote from: USee on October 18, 2018, 12:08:08 AM
It's not correct to say there is a chasm between JCU and the rest of the North based on a 13 pt loss.
It certainly is based on a full reading game and not simply a score margin that you keep quoting like you're going to win something if you keep doing it. You haven't answered the question posed earlier- who else on our list can predictably take Mount Union inside one minute with a chance to win? And based on what?
No need to insult me Wally. A full reading of the game includes the final minute of play. You don't get a pass for making the exact same mistake in the final minute you made in the first half (Berry sacked him earlier on the same blitz). In fact that's much, much worse. I watched the whole game and never had any worry Mt Union would win. A full reading of the game tells me Mt Union is a lot better than JCU and I think if they played again Mt wins by 3 Td's not just 2. A full reading of the game says JCU turned it over 4 times to Mt Union's zero. A full reading says Anthony Moeglin was 11-24 and gave up two fumbles for TD's, an INT in his own end of the field and couldn't make a play when he had a chance to affect the outcome at least 2, if not 3 times. I had absolutely no fear Mt Union would lose that game even when JCU got the ball with 1:44 left. In fact I would have given odds for a turnover vs a TD.
I honestly think your lack of fear comes from the fact that Mount is Mount, and not based on anything else. I'm sure that had the 2016 game ended differently (if Mount had intercepted JCU's touchdown pass and won the game), many people would have been on here saying that Mount was never in any real danger.
It's also worth pointing out that there were many people who looked at UST's 7 turnover effort in a close loss to UWO in the 2016 quarterfinals as a sign that they were that good. They could turn the ball over that many times and still have a chance to win. But when a team like John Carroll has a -4 turnover margin in a close loss to Mount Union, people take that as a sign John Carroll isn't that good.
Make no mistake, Mount Union is a better team than John Carroll. They found a way to win the game, and that's the bottom line. But at the end of the day, John Carroll had an opportunity to score a go ahead touchdown with less than a minute left. And the fact that they had that opportunity (whether we want to assign arbitrary probabilities to the potential success/failure of that final drive) shows that the game was in question. And I absolutely agree that there is no other team in the region (and probably only a handful in the country) that would have had that opportunity at the end of the game. Not with the body of work every other team has shown so far.
Quote from: USee on October 18, 2018, 12:38:49 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 18, 2018, 12:17:23 AM
Quote from: USee on October 18, 2018, 12:08:08 AM
It's not correct to say there is a chasm between JCU and the rest of the North based on a 13 pt loss.
It certainly is based on a full reading game and not simply a score margin that you keep quoting like you're going to win something if you keep doing it. You haven't answered the question posed earlier- who else on our list can predictably take Mount Union inside one minute with a chance to win? And based on what?
No need to insult me Wally. A full reading of the game includes the final minute of play. You don't get a pass for making the exact same mistake in the final minute you made in the first half (Berry sacked him earlier on the same blitz). In fact that's much, much worse. I watched the whole game and never had any worry Mt Union would win. A full reading of the game tells me Mt Union is a lot better than JCU and I think if they played again Mt wins by 3 Td's not just 2. A full reading of the game says JCU turned it over 4 times to Mt Union's zero. A full reading says Anthony Moeglin was 11-24 and gave up two fumbles for TD's, an INT in his own end of the field and couldn't make a play when he had a chance to affect the outcome at least 2, if not 3 times. I had absolutely no fear Mt Union would lose that game even when JCU got the ball with 1:44 left. In fact I would have given odds for a turnover vs a TD.
The question isn't who else can predictably take Mt Union inside a minute to play because neither you nor anyone else predicted it would happen in that game, and predictions aren't generally very accurate for anyone. What I said was there are 1-2 other teams that can lose to Mt Union by 2 scores. That doesn't require predictions of who, it simply illustrates what I believe, and you seem to need to insult me for it, which is JCU is closer to being the 3rd best team in the region right now than the #1 team. That's not a novel idea, it's been true of every team in the North for close to 2 decades. I simply disagree with people on here who think a loss to Mt Union makes a team better than everyone else. I am a big believer in Pat's idea of who you beat vs who you lost to.
But to turn your above against you, with all of the above the game was much closer than it could've or maybe even should've been. You mention the mistakes that JCU had (which they did) and Mount was NEVER able to put that game away. Most teams that have a -4 TO ration against Mount go on to lose by over 35, but not this game. Why's that? Maybe that is because JCU has started to close (albeit still a ways to go to match) the gap on Mount? Now, I am not saying JCU is as good as Mount, we're not. We need to beat Mount somewhat consistently before that ever changes. But if JCU can have as bad of a game Offensively as they did against Mount and still have a chance to win with under 2 minutes to play, then JCU is in fact closing that gap.
Now, perfect teams don't make mistakes; great teams keep mistakes to a minimum; and good teams find a way to be competitive even in the face of multiple mistakes.
We still have a ways to go before we truly challenge Mount for conference supremacy; but taking that 8 of the previous 10 games have been decided in the 4th quarter, I am going to side on the fact that JCU is in fact much closer to Mount than essentially every other team in the North..
But then again, I may be biased.
Quote from: bluestreak66 on October 18, 2018, 12:59:47 AM
Quote from: USee on October 18, 2018, 12:38:49 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 18, 2018, 12:17:23 AM
Quote from: USee on October 18, 2018, 12:08:08 AM
It's not correct to say there is a chasm between JCU and the rest of the North based on a 13 pt loss.
It certainly is based on a full reading game and not simply a score margin that you keep quoting like you're going to win something if you keep doing it. You haven't answered the question posed earlier- who else on our list can predictably take Mount Union inside one minute with a chance to win? And based on what?
No need to insult me Wally. A full reading of the game includes the final minute of play. You don't get a pass for making the exact same mistake in the final minute you made in the first half (Berry sacked him earlier on the same blitz). In fact that's much, much worse. I watched the whole game and never had any worry Mt Union would win. A full reading of the game tells me Mt Union is a lot better than JCU and I think if they played again Mt wins by 3 Td's not just 2. A full reading of the game says JCU turned it over 4 times to Mt Union's zero. A full reading says Anthony Moeglin was 11-24 and gave up two fumbles for TD's, an INT in his own end of the field and couldn't make a play when he had a chance to affect the outcome at least 2, if not 3 times. I had absolutely no fear Mt Union would lose that game even when JCU got the ball with 1:44 left. In fact I would have given odds for a turnover vs a TD.
I honestly think your lack of fear comes from the fact that Mount is Mount, and not based on anything else. I'm sure that had the 2016 game ended differently (if Mount had intercepted JCU's touchdown pass and won the game), many people would have been on here saying that Mount was never in any real danger.
It's also worth pointing out that there were many people who looked at UST's 7 turnover effort in a close loss to UWO in the 2016 quarterfinals as a sign that they were that good. They could turn the ball over that many times and still have a chance to win. But when a team like John Carroll has a -4 turnover margin in a close loss to Mount Union, people take that as a sign John Carroll isn't that good.
Make no mistake, Mount Union is a better team than John Carroll. They found a way to win the game, and that's the bottom line. But at the end of the day, John Carroll had an opportunity to score a go ahead touchdown with less than a minute left. And the fact that they had that opportunity (whether we want to assign arbitrary probabilities to the potential success/failure of that final drive) shows that the game was in question. And I absolutely agree that there is no other team in the region (and probably only a handful in the country) that would have had that opportunity at the end of the game. Not with the body of work every other team has shown so far.
You stole my rant bro..
Quote from: USee on October 18, 2018, 12:38:49 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 18, 2018, 12:17:23 AM
Quote from: USee on October 18, 2018, 12:08:08 AM
It's not correct to say there is a chasm between JCU and the rest of the North based on a 13 pt loss.
It certainly is based on a full reading game and not simply a score margin that you keep quoting like you're going to win something if you keep doing it. You haven't answered the question posed earlier- who else on our list can predictably take Mount Union inside one minute with a chance to win? And based on what?
No need to insult me Wally.
I mean I didn't, but if you took offense to anything I said, I apologize for that.
I am still curious who you think can play a better game against Mount Union than John Carroll did. John Carroll with the ball under a minute to go and a chance to win at Mount Union is still the best result by any non-UMU team in the region. It just is. It isn't my preference to reward teams for losing, but Mount Union is such an outlier that the rules are a little different when assessing results against them. And it seems the voters here, including yourself, agree! JCU is the consensus #2 in our poll. So now I'm confused entirely about what you're digging in on here.
One final thought, am I the only one who thinks that this is an argument for the sake of having an argument? We all agree JCU is the 2nd best team in the region, but to argue that they are closer to 3rd than 1st doesn't seem to make sense to me..
I mean, someone who finishes 2nd in the Olympics, whether by half a second or by 4 seconds still stands on the same level platform next to 1st and 3rd. They receive the same color medal and their flag still raises up the rafters.
Quote from: JCUStreaks70 on October 18, 2018, 09:30:14 AM
One final thought, am I the only one who thinks that this is an argument for the sake of having an argument?
Welcome to d3boards.com!
Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 18, 2018, 10:32:11 AM
Quote from: JCUStreaks70 on October 18, 2018, 09:30:14 AM
One final thought, am I the only one who thinks that this is an argument for the sake of having an argument?
Welcome to d3boards.com!
(https://i.imgflip.com/14f1z3.jpg)
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 18, 2018, 08:51:31 AM
Quote from: USee on October 18, 2018, 12:38:49 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 18, 2018, 12:17:23 AM
Quote from: USee on October 18, 2018, 12:08:08 AM
It's not correct to say there is a chasm between JCU and the rest of the North based on a 13 pt loss.
It certainly is based on a full reading game and not simply a score margin that you keep quoting like you're going to win something if you keep doing it. You haven't answered the question posed earlier- who else on our list can predictably take Mount Union inside one minute with a chance to win? And based on what?
No need to insult me Wally.
I mean I didn't, but if you took offense to anything I said, I apologize for that.
I am still curious who you think can play a better game against Mount Union than John Carroll did. John Carroll with the ball under a minute to go and a chance to win at Mount Union is still the best result by any non-UMU team in the region. It just is. It isn't my preference to reward teams for losing, but Mount Union is such an outlier that the rules are a little different when assessing results against them. And it seems the voters here, including yourself, agree! JCU is the consensus #2 in our poll. So now I'm confused entirely about what you're digging in on here.
You said there is a chasm between #2 and #3 and I replied that I think JCU is closer to the #3 team than they are to the #1 team. That's the disagreement. I am not alone on this idea. The D3.com poll has JCU much closer to the next 4 North region teams than they do to Mt Union, by a margin.
I would also disagree JCU's result against Mt Union is the best result in the region. And it's certainly not true because you say "It just is". It's a loss. I think wins are better than losses. Another idea with which I am not alone. You want to boil the JCU/Mt game into a one score game with a minute to go as evidence of JCU's dominance against the North Region field. I see a JCU defense that is as good as any and an offense that is not championship level. Mt Unions Offense scored 9 pts, JCU's scored 10. Mt Unions defense scored 14 and JCU's scored 0.
I'll take the field against JCU in the playoffs. And if there is a rematch I'll take Mt and give whatever the points. JCU has done nothing to warrant separation from the rest of the North the way Mt Union has. That's my opinion and I'm not alone.
I'm just happy to see the OAC finally get the respect they deserve by getting 4 teams in this poll.
Quote from: Sir Battlescars on October 18, 2018, 12:35:56 PM
I'm just happy to see the OAC finally get the respect they deserve by getting 4 teams in this poll.
For one week at least. I find it very unlikely Marietta will still be ranked here after Saturday.
Quote from: USee on October 18, 2018, 11:30:46 AM
I would also disagree JCU's result against Mt Union is the best result in the region... It's a loss. I think wins are better than losses...
What is then? I would say maybe Wheaton's 52-30 win at North Central. But their losses at IWU and at WashU diminish that result quite a bit. And as you've admitted, there's a chasm between Mount and North Central.
In my opinion, JCU's result at Mount IS the best result so far this season in the region when paired with their record. Of course, other than Mount's win against JCU.
A loss is not the best result in the region in my opinion.
Quote from: USee on October 18, 2018, 04:54:39 PM
A loss is not the best result in the region in my opinion.
"See, losing is actually bad". Sorry, it just strikes me as funny to have to say that.
I know it's a bit of hyperbole, but let's say North Central were to travel east to Soldier Field and play the Chicago Bears. Let's say by some miracle, the Cardinals had the ball down 16-10 in the fourth quarter, with a very legitimate chance to win the game. Alas, they don't, and end up losing 23-10 because Khalil Mack rips the ball out of Broc Rutter's hands and takes it to the house with less than a minute left in the game.
This would be a loss. It would also be the greatest result in North Central, CCIW, and D3 history.
Clearly, a loss CAN be the best result in the region. Obviously Mount is not an NFL team. But we seem to agree, there is a chasm between them and the rest of the teams in the north, and perhaps even the country outside of MHB. A close loss is significant when it's against Goliath of Alliance. Outside of Mount Union's win in the same game, it is the best result in the region this season, IMO. Again IMO, the only other result that comes even close is Wheaton's 52-30 win in Naperville.
Using polls as a distance between two teams is quite imperfect. It's an ordinal rank - someone has to be 13th, 14th, 15th, etc. That's even if 13th is almost as good as 12th and much better than 14th. Teams don't line up in a neat order in real life even if polls make them so.
Quote from: smedindy on October 19, 2018, 12:03:45 PM
Using polls as a distance between two teams is quite imperfect. It's an ordinal rank - someone has to be 13th, 14th, 15th, etc. That's even if 13th is almost as good as 12th and much better than 14th. Teams don't line up in a neat order in real life even if polls make them so.
And then you can have quirks like in the Top 25 poll where earlier this year there was a "case" where the highest any of our 9 voters placed CWRU was 18th on their ballot yet they ended up 17th in the poll.
Quote from: HOPEful on October 19, 2018, 10:24:40 AM
I know it's a bit of hyperbole, but let's say North Central were to travel east to Soldier Field and play the Chicago Bears. Let's say by some miracle, the Cardinals had the ball down 16-10 in the fourth quarter, with a very legitimate chance to win the game. Alas, they don't, and end up losing 23-10 because Khalil Mack rips the ball out of Broc Rutter's hands and takes it to the house with less than a minute left in the game.
This would be a loss. It would also be the greatest result in North Central, CCIW, and D3 history.
Clearly, a loss CAN be the best result in the region. Obviously Mount is not an NFL team. But we seem to agree, there is a chasm between them and the rest of the teams in the north, and perhaps even the country outside of MHB. A close loss is significant when it's against Goliath of Alliance. Outside of Mount Union's win in the same game, it is the best result in the region this season, IMO. Again IMO, the only other result that comes even close is Wheaton's 52-30 win in Naperville.
I can understand this but there's also a limit, too. I've used this analogy before but if a team loses close games to each of the Top 5 teams in the D3FB Top 25 does that make them the #6 team even though they've not won a game? A close loss to a top ranked team is good information for differentiating between teams with equal number (but not necessarily quality) of losses but at some point an L is still an L.
Quote from: Li'l Giant on October 19, 2018, 01:45:21 PM
Quote from: HOPEful on October 19, 2018, 10:24:40 AM
I know it's a bit of hyperbole, but let's say North Central were to travel east to Soldier Field and play the Chicago Bears. Let's say by some miracle, the Cardinals had the ball down 16-10 in the fourth quarter, with a very legitimate chance to win the game. Alas, they don't, and end up losing 23-10 because Khalil Mack rips the ball out of Broc Rutter's hands and takes it to the house with less than a minute left in the game.
This would be a loss. It would also be the greatest result in North Central, CCIW, and D3 history.
Clearly, a loss CAN be the best result in the region. Obviously Mount is not an NFL team. But we seem to agree, there is a chasm between them and the rest of the teams in the north, and perhaps even the country outside of MHB. A close loss is significant when it's against Goliath of Alliance. Outside of Mount Union's win in the same game, it is the best result in the region this season, IMO. Again IMO, the only other result that comes even close is Wheaton's 52-30 win in Naperville.
I can understand this but there's also a limit, too. I've used this analogy before but if a team loses close games to each of the Top 5 teams in the D3FB Top 25 does that make them the #6 team even though they've not won a game? A close loss to a top ranked team is good information for differentiating between teams with equal number (but not necessarily quality) of losses but at some point an L is still an L.
Such a team wouldn't be ranked #6, but they could well actually be the 6th best team if none of the Top 5 had lost (or only to each other). I would be more confident about the strength of such a team than a team who builds up a gaudy record against weak opponents.
Quote from: Li'l Giant on October 19, 2018, 01:45:21 PM
Quote from: HOPEful on October 19, 2018, 10:24:40 AM
I know it's a bit of hyperbole, but let's say North Central were to travel east to Soldier Field and play the Chicago Bears. Let's say by some miracle, the Cardinals had the ball down 16-10 in the fourth quarter, with a very legitimate chance to win the game. Alas, they don't, and end up losing 23-10 because Khalil Mack rips the ball out of Broc Rutter's hands and takes it to the house with less than a minute left in the game.
This would be a loss. It would also be the greatest result in North Central, CCIW, and D3 history.
Clearly, a loss CAN be the best result in the region. Obviously Mount is not an NFL team. But we seem to agree, there is a chasm between them and the rest of the teams in the north, and perhaps even the country outside of MHB. A close loss is significant when it's against Goliath of Alliance. Outside of Mount Union's win in the same game, it is the best result in the region this season, IMO. Again IMO, the only other result that comes even close is Wheaton's 52-30 win in Naperville.
I can understand this but there's also a limit, too. I've used this analogy before but if a team loses close games to each of the Top 5 teams in the D3FB Top 25 does that make them the #6 team even though they've not won a game? A close loss to a top ranked team is good information for differentiating between teams with equal number (but not necessarily quality) of losses but at some point an L is still an L.
Maybe wouldn't end up #6 but I certainly would ranked them somewhere even though they're 0-5.
Quote from: HOPEful on October 18, 2018, 02:59:40 PM
Quote from: USee on October 18, 2018, 11:30:46 AM
I would also disagree JCU's result against Mt Union is the best result in the region... It's a loss. I think wins are better than losses...
What is then? I would say maybe Wheaton's 52-30 win at North Central. But their losses at IWU and at WashU diminish that result quite a bit. And as you've admitted, there's a chasm between Mount and North Central.
In my opinion, JCU's result at Mount IS the best result so far this season in the region when paired with their record. Of course, other than Mount's win against JCU.
This really is a great conversation as it allows for interesting opinion.
My two cents is the Best Single Game result in the North was Wheaton's dismantling of NCC. I don't recall exactly, but wasn't NCC ranked top 6 at the time? I'm only looking at one single game.
Wheaton's tendency to be ridiculously inconsistent is the reason JCU's loss seems like the best result.
If I were looking at it from the perspective of which team from the North has the best shot at beating Mt, I'd consider JCU, NCC and Wheaton. Of those three, I think Wheaton gets my pick based on the "any given day" theory. More than the other two, Wheaton is capable of rising to the top for one game. Of course they'd go on to lose the next game after beating Mt.
FWIW, Carthage played #4 UWO in week 1, was driving (at the UWO 35) with under a minute in a single digit game, and gave up a pick 6 to lose by double digits. The next week UWO was still #4 and Carthage received exactly zero votes in the top 25.
Emma, NCC was ranked #5 at the time of the Wheaton @NCC game.
Well, Carthage is Carthage and Oshkosh is Oshkosh. No one gets too hasty or over-reactive in Week 1, hopefully.
Oshkosh played to win the game. They won. Mt. Union wins the close games up to the Stagg Bowl, and everyone gets sore about it, but they win.
I had issues with Oshkosh and had them the third best (I think 4th best once when I ranked LAX ahead of them) in the WAC, but they showed themselves against Platteville who had a good loss at TMC and close calls against not-so-good teams. But I based my Oshkosh votes on a few results, not one game in week 1.
Quote from: HScoach on October 17, 2018, 12:20:23 PM
^ I'd be shocked if Marietta is within 20 points of JCU. I'm happy to see Marietta off the mat, but I'm expecting them to end season 1-3. Still, a great season for Marietta to build from, but they're not ready for prime time yet.
Color me shocked thru the first half.
Comparatively tame week in the North. I really wrestled with what to do with the JCU nail-biter (at home!) over previously undefeated, but untested, Marietta - I finally decided to leave them both exactly where they started (#2 and #9). My only changes from last week were moving Witt from 6 to 5 (their early win over Westminster suddenly looks quite impressive after they beat #11 W&J), replacing WashU, whose close loss to IWU cost them only 5 to 6. Plus, having tipped-my-hat to Kalamazoo on their best season in 25 years (and, arguably, their best ever in the entire history of the program!), I decided to rejoin reality - my #10 this week is Denison. (But I really think they have a shot at beating Olivet, and maybe even Hope, so reserve the right to re-instate them in the future! ;D)
Key games for voters to note this Saturday (aside from possible total upsets or unexpected nail-biters):
(6-1) Wabash @ (7-0) Witt
(6-1) Bald Wally @ (6-1) 'etta
(5-2) Albion @ (7-0) Trine
(7-0) Kazoo @ (4-3) Olivet
(6-1) IWU @ (6-1) Millikin
Biggest debates for me this week were whether to flip flop JCU and IWU at 2/3 and, as always, what to do with the last couple spots on my ballot. I did not watch any of the IWU/Wash U game, but on paper it looked like a very even game. I only dropped Wash U one spot this week for the loss. I ultimately decided to leave JCU at 2. Both teams won and short of a statement type win from IWU I decided to leave it as is.
I gave BW the boot from my ballot thanks to their 35-33 win at Wilmington. Wilm is definitely improving under their new HC, but they haven't improved that much. A good team needs to dispatch them pretty easily instead of avoiding a late 4th qtr tie thanks to a missed PAT.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 21, 2018, 06:29:53 PM
Key games for voters to note this Saturday (aside from possible total upsets or unexpected nail-biters):
(6-1) Wabash @ (7-0) Witt
(6-1) Bald Wally @ (6-1) 'etta
(5-2) Albion @ (7-0) Trine
(7-0) Kazoo @ (4-3) Olivet
(6-1) IWU @ (6-1) Millikin
If those voters are so inclined, they could also add (7-0) Eureka @ (6-1) Concordia Wisconsin to that list. 8-)
Quote from: Ryan Stoppable on October 22, 2018, 02:13:36 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 21, 2018, 06:29:53 PM
Key games for voters to note this Saturday (aside from possible total upsets or unexpected nail-biters):
(6-1) Wabash @ (7-0) Witt
(6-1) Bald Wally @ (6-1) 'etta
(5-2) Albion @ (7-0) Trine
(7-0) Kazoo @ (4-3) Olivet
(6-1) IWU @ (6-1) Millikin
If those voters are so inclined, they could also add (7-0) Eureka @ (6-1) Concordia Wisconsin to that list. 8-)
Good catch; I didn't notice that one.
sorry, I'm the slow poke again. I had a big deadline at work that took all my time.
I just sent my ballot in.
I've still got one out. I'll put the poll up tonight with or without the 12th ballot.
It was easier for me to fill out the North this week than wrestling with the West's 6-10. There, there's a split on where to put Bethel and St. Thomas
Light one ballot this week, alas, we forge ahead. Here is your 2018 Week 8 NRFP:
(https://i.imgur.com/iDgoRru.png)
click to enlarge
The NRFP is (usually) voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, thunderdog, USee, and wally wabash.
I'm column three this week. I exactly matched the overall poll, except having WashU and Wheaton above Trine. I certainly respect Trine, but that ain't Eric Watt taking the snaps. I've had them as high as 7, but 8 may be the limit unless and until they win a playoff game.
I watched the entire IWU @ WashU game - the Bears are very much for real! Their win over Wheaton was no fluke, and I think they would probably dismantle Trine (though admittedly I haven't watched a Trine game).
I had Millikin in for Wheaton - I'm column 6.
For the record, Wheaton did defeat Millikin 63-6 in 2018.
I'm row 10. My ranks moved very little from last week.
I'm column 1. I figured I'd be the low man for Trine and I'm okay with that right now. I'm just not overly impressed to be honest.
My ballot for week 9 is submitted. But Honestly, North region is a mess as far as rankings are concerned. I changed my ballot umpteen times before sending it. Hardest parts for me were:
1- how to rank the 3 NCAC teams. I don't think anyone can have much conviction behind any of the combos.
2- where does Trine fit in/deserve? IMO, they're a 3rd/4th place team in OAC, NCAC, and CCIW.
3- who deserves the #3 spot from the CCIW? Wheaton or WashU?
In the end I went with 3 OAC teams , 3 NCAC, 3 CCIW, and 1 MIAA
This is a week where you put Mount followed by JCU, then you take all the teams that are left in the North, put them on the wall and start throwing darts.
Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on October 28, 2018, 05:48:26 PM
This is a week where you put Mount followed by JCU, then you take all the teams that are left in the North, put them on the wall and start throwing darts.
Mount yes, JCU, no. They are part of the morass that is left
I don't see any evidence not to rank JCU #2.
I put in 4 CCIW teams, though I almost rolled a d20 between B-W and the other two CCIW teams to guage their strength.
Quote from: USee on October 28, 2018, 07:42:43 PM
Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on October 28, 2018, 05:48:26 PM
This is a week where you put Mount followed by JCU, then you take all the teams that are left in the North, put them on the wall and start throwing darts.
Mount yes, JCU, no. They are part of the morass that is left
Respectfully disagree. IMHO there is a clear top four (UMU, JCU, IWU, and NCC), THEN the morass begins.
Unless I overlooked a matchup this week, aside from any upset, the ONLY game in the north that affects ballots this week is NCC @ IWU (probably the game of the week for all of D3).
I don't disagree.
For me it's:
1. Mt Union
2-4 IWU/JCU/NCC
5+ The rest
I ranked JCU 3rd last week. Likely to stay in that position. Their QB has been absolutely awful in big games and their defense inconsistent to be consdered a clear #2. Both those other teams have had very consistent offenses , though gettable defenses vs good offenses.
My rankings...
1. Mount Union
2. John Carroll
3. The CCIW
4. Everyone else
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 28, 2018, 09:44:54 PM
Quote from: USee on October 28, 2018, 07:42:43 PM
Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on October 28, 2018, 05:48:26 PM
This is a week where you put Mount followed by JCU, then you take all the teams that are left in the North, put them on the wall and start throwing darts.
Mount yes, JCU, no. They are part of the morass that is left
Respectfully disagree. IMHO there is a clear top four (UMU, JCU, IWU, and NCC), THEN the morass begins.
Unless I overlooked a matchup this week, aside from any upset, the ONLY game in the north that affects ballots this week is NCC @ IWU (probably the game of the week for all of D3).
For me it's Mount then JCU. I still think the best result that defines that second spot is a close loss to Mount.
I'm more on the fence where to put Wabash vs. Witt. Witt was 3rd on mine, Wabash I had ranked two weeks ago as the lone person at 10 but then last week I dropped them off.
Back at full strength! Here is your 2018 Week 9 NRFP:
(https://i.imgur.com/LsG9bBC.png)
click to enlarge
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, thunderdog, USee, and wally wabash.
The NCAC trio is interesting...
5- Wabash-Witt-Denison #7, 9, 10, 11, 12
2- Denison-Wabash-Witt #4, 5
2- Denison-Witt-Wabash #3, 8
1- Witt-Denison-Wabash #1
1- Wabash-??-?? #2
1- Witt-??-?? #6
Those last two had two teams not ranked so we don't know their order. 6 Have Wabash on top, 4 have Denison, and 2 have Wittenberg as the best of the three.
Wabash over Witt 8 vs 4
Witt over Denison 7 vs 4 (1 unknown)
Wabash over Denison 6 vs 5 (1 unknown)
For the record I was column 8.
I'm column 11. I felt bad leaving off Denison (they'd be #11), but just ran out of room (memo to Denison: don't lose to a 4-4 Texas team next time!). I'd also like to vote for Franklin (who is now 7-1, losing only at underrated Albion), but the ballot ain't long enough! Eureka is also starting to grow on me, but with their schedule I think their only hope of ballot inclusion is a credible showing in the playoffs; alas, they will likely be the 8th seed and get pulverized.
I'm going out on a limb here and saying that USee is Column 1? lol
I'm column 6. I blundered and inexplicably forgot about Wabash when plugging in the 10 spot. They clearly have a better resume than Hope by their OT win against Witt alone...
That being said, I think we've all seen Wittenberg sliding for several weeks. They were once the clear #3 in the region... Giving up 66 points to Denison was pretty eye opening. I do question if the loss to Wabash says more about Wabash or Wittenberg.
Also, I understand that Trine is undefeated. But I firmly believe Wheaton and Washington would both beat the MIAA leader nine times out of ten.
Quote from: JCUStreaks70 on October 31, 2018, 12:21:34 AM
I'm going on a limb and saying that USee is Column 1? lol
Hahahaha
(https://cdn.playbuzz.com/cdn/de5605d2-7b27-433b-be89-267e0db2303f/87ffa4c3-09a8-41fe-be77-d3d4498fb456.JPG)
Quote from: HOPEful on October 31, 2018, 07:52:19 AM
I'm column 6. I blundered and inexplicably forgot about Wabash when plugging in the 10 spot. They clearly have a better resume than Hope by their OT win against Witt alone...
That being said, I think we've all seen Wittenberg sliding for several weeks. They were once the clear #3 in the region... Giving up 66 points to Denison was pretty eye opening. I do question if the loss to Wabash says more about Wabash or Wittenberg.
Also, I understand that Trine is undefeated. But I firmly believe both Wheaton and Washington would both beat the MIAA leader nine times out of ten.
I'm column 9 so I'm one of the low water marks for Trine for much the same reason. The simplest way I can put it is that I'm impressed by Carswell. I'm not that impressed by Trine.
This week the hardest thing for me was deciding where to slot Wabash into things. I agree that Witt may be trending the wrong direction a little before the loss, but I still view beating an undefeated Witt team in Springfield as a significant W. I understand that not everyone weights that win the same, but I don't understand how multiple people had BW on their ballot and left Wabash out. I'd get it if the BW resume belonged to someone who had earned some cred like JCU or one of the CCIW trio, but it's BW.
Quote from: HOPEful on October 31, 2018, 07:56:01 AM
Quote from: JCUStreaks70 on October 31, 2018, 12:21:34 AM
I'm going on a limb and saying that USee is Column 1? lol
Hahahaha
(https://cdn.playbuzz.com/cdn/de5605d2-7b27-433b-be89-267e0db2303f/87ffa4c3-09a8-41fe-be77-d3d4498fb456.JPG)
In fairness, losing big to Wheaton and losing to LaCrosse can't be as bad as a close loss to the perennial national champ, right? ;)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 30, 2018, 11:56:58 PM
I'm column 11. I felt bad leaving off Denison (they'd be #11), but just ran out of room (memo to Denison: don't lose to a 4-4 Texas team next time!). I'd also like to vote for Franklin (who is now 7-1, losing only at underrated Albion), but the ballot ain't long enough! Eureka is also starting to grow on me, but with their schedule I think their only hope of ballot inclusion is a credible showing in the playoffs; alas, they will likely be the 8th seed and get pulverized.
The GRIZ can live with no ratings love. 7-1 the train is rolling towards the HCAC autobid. Early September was eons ago when FC coughed it up on the road up in Michigan. Many of the HCAC scores are controlled. Coach Leonard is the master at getting younger players time and building depth. The reality is many of these "ranked" teams will be sitting home. FC holds it own in the playoffs.
Quote from: bluestreak66 on October 31, 2018, 09:30:34 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on October 31, 2018, 07:56:01 AM
Quote from: JCUStreaks70 on October 31, 2018, 12:21:34 AM
I'm going on a limb and saying that USee is Column 1? lol
Hahahaha
(https://cdn.playbuzz.com/cdn/de5605d2-7b27-433b-be89-267e0db2303f/87ffa4c3-09a8-41fe-be77-d3d4498fb456.JPG)
In fairness, losing big to Wheaton and losing to LaCrosse can't be as bad as a close loss to the perennial national champ, right? ;)
Again, I am not focused on who anyone lost to as I think its a flawed analytical tool. I am focused on who they beat. IWU is 4-1 against RRO's (using NRFP data) and has the 29th rated SOS. NCC is 2-1 against RRO's. JCU is 1-1 against RRO's and their 1 win is because Marietta went for it on their own 35 with a 4 pt lead. So I have to ask myself, is the real JCU the one where Fulford laid an egg and didn't play well (and was that because of the JCU Defense) and the Mt Union Defense did what they do to everyone, or is the real JCU the one that gave up 3 70+ yd drives and 24 pts to 2 loss Marietta. The JCU QB was a combined 23-49 (47%) zero TD's and 3 INTS in those two games. Thats some pretty bad football for a top North Region team against the best teams they have played.
I can't pick the data I want to use and ignore the data that hurts my bias. I see JCU as pretty even with the 2 CCIW schools and a significant notch below Mt Union. They are somewhere 2-4 in the region and right now the two CCIW schools have better results against better overall competition. That will obviously change this week with those two playing each other.
Quote from: GRIZ_BACKER on October 31, 2018, 10:08:29 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 30, 2018, 11:56:58 PM
I'm column 11. I felt bad leaving off Denison (they'd be #11), but just ran out of room (memo to Denison: don't lose to a 4-4 Texas team next time!). I'd also like to vote for Franklin (who is now 7-1, losing only at underrated Albion), but the ballot ain't long enough! Eureka is also starting to grow on me, but with their schedule I think their only hope of ballot inclusion is a credible showing in the playoffs; alas, they will likely be the 8th seed and get pulverized.
The GRIZ can live with no ratings love. 7-1 the train is rolling towards the HCAC autobid. Early September was eons ago when FC coughed it up on the road up in Michigan. Many of the HCAC scores are controlled. Coach Leonard is the master at getting younger players time and building depth. The reality is many of these "ranked" teams will be sitting home. FC holds it own in the playoffs.
Problem is, while September was a long time ago, it was still this season, so that result can't be thrown out. Likelihood of making the playoffs is no indicator on how high a team should be ranked, and unfortunately, losing to a middle of the road MIAA team combined with a weak HCAC schedule is not a recipe for a regional ranking. In reality, even though someone like BW or Wheaton (or at least one NCAC team) will be sitting at home, most of the region seems to think (accurately in my opinion) that those teams would probably beat Franklin in a game
Quote from: USee on October 31, 2018, 10:23:54 AM
Quote from: bluestreak66 on October 31, 2018, 09:30:34 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on October 31, 2018, 07:56:01 AM
Quote from: JCUStreaks70 on October 31, 2018, 12:21:34 AM
I'm going on a limb and saying that USee is Column 1? lol
Hahahaha
(https://cdn.playbuzz.com/cdn/de5605d2-7b27-433b-be89-267e0db2303f/87ffa4c3-09a8-41fe-be77-d3d4498fb456.JPG)
In fairness, losing big to Wheaton and losing to LaCrosse can't be as bad as a close loss to the perennial national champ, right? ;)
Again, I am not focused on who anyone lost to as I think its a flawed analytical tool. I am focused on who they beat. IWU is 4-1 against RRO's (using NRFP data) and has the 29th rated SOS. NCC is 2-1 against RRO's. JCU is 1-1 against RRO's and their 1 win is because Marietta went for it on their own 35 with a 4 pt lead. So I have to ask myself, is the real JCU the one where Fulford laid an egg and didn't play well (and was that because of the JCU Defense) and the Mt Union Defense did what they do to everyone, or is the real JCU the one that gave up 3 70+ yd drives and 24 pts to 2 loss Marietta. The JCU QB was a combined 23-49 (47%) zero TD's and 3 INTS in those two games. Thats some pretty bad football for a top North Region team against the best teams they have played.
I can't pick the data I want to use and ignore the data that hurts my bias. I see JCU as pretty even with the 2 CCIW schools and a significant notch below Mt Union. They are somewhere 2-4 in the region and right now the two CCIW schools have better results against better overall competition. That will obviously change this week with those two playing each other.
(https://i.imgflip.com/1aylyb.jpg)
Quote from: USee on October 31, 2018, 10:23:54 AM
Again, I am not focused on who anyone lost to as I think its a flawed analytical tool. I am focused on who they beat. IWU is 4-1 against RRO's (using NRFP data) and has the 29th rated SOS. NCC is 2-1 against RRO's. JCU is 1-1 against RRO's and their 1 win is because Marietta went for it on their own 35 with a 4 pt lead. So I have to ask myself, is the real JCU the one where Fulford laid an egg and didn't play well (and was that because of the JCU Defense) and the Mt Union Defense did what they do to everyone, or is the real JCU the one that gave up 3 70+ yd drives and 24 pts to 2 loss Marietta. The JCU QB was a combined 23-49 (47%) zero TD's and 3 INTS in those two games. Thats some pretty bad football for a top North Region team against the best teams they have played.
I can't pick the data I want to use and ignore the data that hurts my bias. I see JCU as pretty even with the 2 CCIW schools and a significant notch below Mt Union. They are somewhere 2-4 in the region and right now the two CCIW schools have better results against better overall competition. That will obviously change this week with those two playing each other.
How do you square that idea with 52-30 and then say that you're not actively avoiding information that hurts your CCIW bias?
Quote from: bluestreak66 on October 31, 2018, 10:30:54 AM
Quote from: GRIZ_BACKER on October 31, 2018, 10:08:29 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 30, 2018, 11:56:58 PM
I'm column 11. I felt bad leaving off Denison (they'd be #11), but just ran out of room (memo to Denison: don't lose to a 4-4 Texas team next time!). I'd also like to vote for Franklin (who is now 7-1, losing only at underrated Albion), but the ballot ain't long enough! Eureka is also starting to grow on me, but with their schedule I think their only hope of ballot inclusion is a credible showing in the playoffs; alas, they will likely be the 8th seed and get pulverized.
The GRIZ can live with no ratings love. 7-1 the train is rolling towards the HCAC autobid. Early September was eons ago when FC coughed it up on the road up in Michigan. Many of the HCAC scores are controlled. Coach Leonard is the master at getting younger players time and building depth. The reality is many of these "ranked" teams will be sitting home. FC holds it own in the playoffs.
Problem is, while September was a long time ago, it was still this season, so that result can't be thrown out. Likelihood of making the playoffs is no indicator on how high a team should be ranked, and unfortunately, losing to a middle of the road MIAA team combined with a weak HCAC schedule is not a recipe for a regional ranking. In reality, even though someone like BW or Wheaton (or at least one NCAC team) will be sitting at home, most of the region seems to think (accurately in my opinion) that those teams would probably beat Franklin in a game
possibly. Last year FC took undefeated and Top 10 Wartburg to OT in Iowa and then Wartburg blasted Trine at home. As there is no reliable way to compare teams and records (such as Ken Pom for NCAA basketball) its all speculation. Franklin accounts for themselves very well most years in the playoffs. We will find out this month.
Quote from: GRIZ_BACKER on October 31, 2018, 10:54:38 AM
Quote from: bluestreak66 on October 31, 2018, 10:30:54 AM
Quote from: GRIZ_BACKER on October 31, 2018, 10:08:29 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 30, 2018, 11:56:58 PM
I'm column 11. I felt bad leaving off Denison (they'd be #11), but just ran out of room (memo to Denison: don't lose to a 4-4 Texas team next time!). I'd also like to vote for Franklin (who is now 7-1, losing only at underrated Albion), but the ballot ain't long enough! Eureka is also starting to grow on me, but with their schedule I think their only hope of ballot inclusion is a credible showing in the playoffs; alas, they will likely be the 8th seed and get pulverized.
I absolutely agree with that. Certainly, of the "weak" conference teams, Franklin is about the only one that might have a shot at winning a post season game or 2. I think a lot of people look at this years teams as one of Franklin's weaker teams in recent memory. If not for the loss to Albion, they would likely be in the middle of the top 10!
The GRIZ can live with no ratings love. 7-1 the train is rolling towards the HCAC autobid. Early September was eons ago when FC coughed it up on the road up in Michigan. Many of the HCAC scores are controlled. Coach Leonard is the master at getting younger players time and building depth. The reality is many of these "ranked" teams will be sitting home. FC holds it own in the playoffs.
Problem is, while September was a long time ago, it was still this season, so that result can't be thrown out. Likelihood of making the playoffs is no indicator on how high a team should be ranked, and unfortunately, losing to a middle of the road MIAA team combined with a weak HCAC schedule is not a recipe for a regional ranking. In reality, even though someone like BW or Wheaton (or at least one NCAC team) will be sitting at home, most of the region seems to think (accurately in my opinion) that those teams would probably beat Franklin in a game
possibly. Last year FC took undefeated and Top 10 Wartburg to OT in Iowa and then Wartburg blasted Trine at home. As there is no reliable way to compare teams and records (such as Ken Pom for NCAA basketball) its all speculation. Franklin accounts for themselves very well most years in the playoffs. We will find out this month.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 31, 2018, 10:48:58 AM
Quote from: USee on October 31, 2018, 10:23:54 AM
Again, I am not focused on who anyone lost to as I think its a flawed analytical tool. I am focused on who they beat. IWU is 4-1 against RRO's (using NRFP data) and has the 29th rated SOS. NCC is 2-1 against RRO's. JCU is 1-1 against RRO's and their 1 win is because Marietta went for it on their own 35 with a 4 pt lead. So I have to ask myself, is the real JCU the one where Fulford laid an egg and didn't play well (and was that because of the JCU Defense) and the Mt Union Defense did what they do to everyone, or is the real JCU the one that gave up 3 70+ yd drives and 24 pts to 2 loss Marietta. The JCU QB was a combined 23-49 (47%) zero TD's and 3 INTS in those two games. Thats some pretty bad football for a top North Region team against the best teams they have played.
I can't pick the data I want to use and ignore the data that hurts my bias. I see JCU as pretty even with the 2 CCIW schools and a significant notch below Mt Union. They are somewhere 2-4 in the region and right now the two CCIW schools have better results against better overall competition. That will obviously change this week with those two playing each other.
How do you square that idea with 52-30 and then say that you're not actively avoiding information that hurts your CCIW bias?
I think my track record is pretty clear as it relates to any bias. I am about as biased toward CCIW as you are toward Wabash and NCAC.
My data is also in the post you quoted. It's cool if you come to a different conclusion. I see a JCU team with a single digit win and a double digit loss over RRO's. NCC has 2 double digit wins and a double digit loss to RRO's. The latter is better than the former for me. That said, I have JCU/IWU/NCC as a pickem for spots 2-4.
I find it funny people want to focus on JCU's double digit loss and whether they are #2 or #4 and we have things like Millikin still getting ranked over a team that beat them 63-6 but no one seems to wonder how that squares?
Voting for Millikin and not Wheaton is almost as strange as your continuing to categorize the JCU/UMU game as only a "double digit loss" without taking in any context about that game or JCU's opponent was (it was not just a generic ranked team).
Almost.
Quote from: USee on October 31, 2018, 11:37:07 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 31, 2018, 10:48:58 AM
Quote from: USee on October 31, 2018, 10:23:54 AM
Again, I am not focused on who anyone lost to as I think its a flawed analytical tool. I am focused on who they beat. IWU is 4-1 against RRO's (using NRFP data) and has the 29th rated SOS. NCC is 2-1 against RRO's. JCU is 1-1 against RRO's and their 1 win is because Marietta went for it on their own 35 with a 4 pt lead. So I have to ask myself, is the real JCU the one where Fulford laid an egg and didn't play well (and was that because of the JCU Defense) and the Mt Union Defense did what they do to everyone, or is the real JCU the one that gave up 3 70+ yd drives and 24 pts to 2 loss Marietta. The JCU QB was a combined 23-49 (47%) zero TD's and 3 INTS in those two games. Thats some pretty bad football for a top North Region team against the best teams they have played.
I can't pick the data I want to use and ignore the data that hurts my bias. I see JCU as pretty even with the 2 CCIW schools and a significant notch below Mt Union. They are somewhere 2-4 in the region and right now the two CCIW schools have better results against better overall competition. That will obviously change this week with those two playing each other.
How do you square that idea with 52-30 and then say that you're not actively avoiding information that hurts your CCIW bias?
I think my track record is pretty clear as it relates to any bias. I am about as biased toward CCIW as you are toward Wabash and NCAC.
My data is also in the post you quoted. It's cool if you come to a different conclusion. I see a JCU team with a single digit win and a double digit loss over RRO's. NCC has 2 double digit wins and a double digit loss to RRO's. The latter is better than the former for me. That said, I have JCU/IWU/NCC as a pickem for spots 2-4.
I find it funny people want to focus on JCU's double digit loss and whether they are #2 or #4 and we have things like Millikin still getting ranked over a team that beat them 63-6 but no one seems to wonder how that squares?
I think that while Wally is enthusiastic about Wabsh, I wouldn't call it a bias (same with the rest of the NCAC). I think he is fair enough to admit when Wabsh is having a down year, and doesn't throw votes at them because it's his team
Wally,
I am very comfortable with the entirety of my analysis and would compare it to anyone else who votes. You have a different view, which is fine. It was a double digit loss (that's not in dispute) and I watched the game and studied the outcome and had my analysis (much of which I have provided on this board). You suggested that meant they was a chasm between JCU and the rest of the north. My simple contention then was that JCU was closer to #3 than #1. As a result, I had JCU #2 at the time but was very suspicious. We now have a result against Marietta where a JCU team favored by 30 barely won by 4 (the losing team with the ball in JCU territory and a chance to win...that sounds familiar) which, for me, (along with the fact their QB play is below average) validates the fact they are not head and shoulders above the rest of the North Region. I choose not to ignore the single digit win while you conveniently fail to recognize or mention it.
If Mt Union gets a rematch in the playoffs with JCU (should JCU even make it) I will happily place a friendly wager with you on the outcome. I'll take Mt Union and give you the 13 pts from the first game and we will see what happens. I'd be even more excited for a JCU/CCIW matchup in the playoffs, which is more likely.
Quote from: bluestreak66 on October 31, 2018, 12:01:28 PM
Quote from: USee on October 31, 2018, 11:37:07 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 31, 2018, 10:48:58 AM
Quote from: USee on October 31, 2018, 10:23:54 AM
Again, I am not focused on who anyone lost to as I think its a flawed analytical tool. I am focused on who they beat. IWU is 4-1 against RRO's (using NRFP data) and has the 29th rated SOS. NCC is 2-1 against RRO's. JCU is 1-1 against RRO's and their 1 win is because Marietta went for it on their own 35 with a 4 pt lead. So I have to ask myself, is the real JCU the one where Fulford laid an egg and didn't play well (and was that because of the JCU Defense) and the Mt Union Defense did what they do to everyone, or is the real JCU the one that gave up 3 70+ yd drives and 24 pts to 2 loss Marietta. The JCU QB was a combined 23-49 (47%) zero TD's and 3 INTS in those two games. Thats some pretty bad football for a top North Region team against the best teams they have played.
I can't pick the data I want to use and ignore the data that hurts my bias. I see JCU as pretty even with the 2 CCIW schools and a significant notch below Mt Union. They are somewhere 2-4 in the region and right now the two CCIW schools have better results against better overall competition. That will obviously change this week with those two playing each other.
How do you square that idea with 52-30 and then say that you're not actively avoiding information that hurts your CCIW bias?
I think my track record is pretty clear as it relates to any bias. I am about as biased toward CCIW as you are toward Wabash and NCAC.
My data is also in the post you quoted. It's cool if you come to a different conclusion. I see a JCU team with a single digit win and a double digit loss over RRO's. NCC has 2 double digit wins and a double digit loss to RRO's. The latter is better than the former for me. That said, I have JCU/IWU/NCC as a pickem for spots 2-4.
I find it funny people want to focus on JCU's double digit loss and whether they are #2 or #4 and we have things like Millikin still getting ranked over a team that beat them 63-6 but no one seems to wonder how that squares?
I think that while Wally is enthusiastic about Wabsh, I wouldn't call it a bias (same with the rest of the NCAC). I think he is fair enough to admit when Wabsh is having a down year, and doesn't throw votes at them because it's his team
I agree and my point is that I have, over time, consistently given the CCIW (and my team) a fair assessment in the same regard. Yet Wally, for some reason, wanted to imply I have a CCIW bias. I have no more bias than he does and the evidence is pretty clear that's the case.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 31, 2018, 11:53:33 AM
Voting for Millikin and not Wheaton is almost as strange as your continuing to categorize the JCU/UMU game as only a "double digit loss" without taking in any context about that game or JCU's opponent was (it was not just a generic ranked team).
Almost.
BTW, The equivalent of voting for Millikin over Wheaton would be if someone voted for JCU over Mt Union. It's not even close to related to your disagreement with my analysis, which is completely subjective.
Quote from: USee on October 31, 2018, 12:16:35 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 31, 2018, 11:53:33 AM
Voting for Millikin and not Wheaton is almost as strange as your continuing to categorize the JCU/UMU game as only a "double digit loss" without taking in any context about that game or JCU's opponent was (it was not just a generic ranked team).
Almost.
BTW, The equivalent of voting for Millikin over Wheaton would be if someone voted for JCU over Mt Union. It's not even close to related to your disagreement with my analysis, which is completely subjective.
Was going for a little levity there, sorry. :)
JCU/Marietta certainly tempers JCU/UMU and what the Streaks really are is much more open to interpretation than I think it was between weeks 4 and 8.
Quote from: bluestreak66 on October 31, 2018, 09:30:34 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on October 31, 2018, 07:56:01 AM
Quote from: JCUStreaks70 on October 31, 2018, 12:21:34 AM
I'm going on a limb and saying that USee is Column 1? lol
Hahahaha
(https://cdn.playbuzz.com/cdn/de5605d2-7b27-433b-be89-267e0db2303f/87ffa4c3-09a8-41fe-be77-d3d4498fb456.JPG)
In fairness, losing big to Wheaton and losing to LaCrosse can't be as bad as a close loss to the perennial national champ, right? ;)
Here's what the North Region Committee Thinks as first rankings are out:
1 Mount Union 8-0
2 Illinois Wesleyan 7-1
3 John Carroll 7-1
4 Trine 8-0
5 North Central (Ill.) 7-1
6 Baldwin Wallace 7-1
7 Wabash 7-1
8 Wittenberg 7-1
9 Franklin 7-1
10 Eureka 8-0
Looks like Mr Ypsi is on the committee that votes there too.
Actually, I've had JCU ahead of IWU on my ballot all season. That will change this coming week, as the winner of NCC @ IWU will take over second place on my ballot.
just a thought... for the next two weeks (and for the final 3 weeks of the regular season starting 2019)... we should submit 2 sets of rankings: 1- our personal rankings and 2- our projections for what we believe the committee will present. Those are 2 very different rankings, IMO.
I am nearly complete with a database of all the teams that have a legit shot (porjected conference winners and those with a chance to tie/win or finish a strong at large) at making the playoffs with multiple filters. Send me you info private (others can too). I am putting in the regional ranks and SOS. easy way to rank multiple ways for those teams LIKELY to be in playoff.
To be fair to Chuck (and to USee as well), I interpreted this:
Quote from: USee on October 31, 2018, 01:54:05 PM
Here's what the North Region Committee Thinks as first rankings are out:
1 Mount Union 8-0
2 Illinois Wesleyan 7-1
3 John Carroll 7-1
4 Trine 8-0
5 North Central (Ill.) 7-1
6 Baldwin Wallace 7-1
7 Wabash 7-1
8 Wittenberg 7-1
9 Franklin 7-1
10 Eureka 8-0
Looks like Mr Ypsi is on the committee that votes there too.
... as a reference to Eureka being ranked, not to IWU being #2, since Chuck's been an outspoken champion of the Red Devils. For all of the flak that I give Chuck about his green-tinted glasses, he is usually an objective voter regarding his alma mater in the NRFP.
Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 31, 2018, 03:30:53 PM
To be fair to Chuck (and to USee as well), I interpreted this:
Quote from: USee on October 31, 2018, 01:54:05 PM
Here's what the North Region Committee Thinks as first rankings are out:
1 Mount Union 8-0
2 Illinois Wesleyan 7-1
3 John Carroll 7-1
4 Trine 8-0
5 North Central (Ill.) 7-1
6 Baldwin Wallace 7-1
7 Wabash 7-1
8 Wittenberg 7-1
9 Franklin 7-1
10 Eureka 8-0
Looks like Mr Ypsi is on the committee that votes there too.
... as a reference to Eureka being ranked, not to IWU being #2, since Chuck's been an outspoken champion of the Red Devils. For all of the flak that I give Chuck about his green-tinted glasses, he is usually an objective voter regarding his alma mater in the NRFP.
Yep. that's what I was referring to. It's no secret that I am the only one who voted JCU anything other than equal with Mt Union.
Quote from: USee on October 31, 2018, 03:45:02 PM
Yep. that's what I was referring to. It's no secret that I am the only one who voted JCU anything other than equal with Mt Union.
So voting JCU 2 and Mt. Union 1 is saying JCU = Mt. Union.
What crazy town math are you using?
I have Denison 6 leading the NCAC Troika. I KNOW they lost to SW but I'm putting more emphasis on recency in this case. I think NOW Denison is better than Witt or Wabash.
Quote from: USee on October 31, 2018, 03:45:02 PM
It's no secret that I am the only one who voted JCU anything other than equal with Mt Union.
Oh c'mon USee, me voting JCU @ #2 doesn't mean I view them as UMU's equal, nor does it mean the gap between #1 and #2 is less than the gap between #2 and #3. I chose not to jump into that fray, well, because I didn't know we had to clarify how much distance we have between our votes. It's no secret that UMU has distanced themselves from the rest of the North region, and from all of d3 for that matter, save UMHB. (Enter UWW, UST, and SJU fans with their rebuttal). To argue otherwise, means you've had your head in the sand for much of the past 25 years when it comes to d3 football.
So, for the record, (not that it matters), I'm with USee in regards to that argument
Quote from: thunderdog on October 31, 2018, 04:09:14 PM
Quote from: USee on October 31, 2018, 03:45:02 PM
It's no secret that I am the only one who voted JCU anything other than equal with Mt Union.
Oh c'mon USee, me voting JCU @ #2 doesn't mean I view them as UMU's equal, nor does it mean the gap between #1 and #2 is less than the gap between #2 and #3. I chose not to jump into that fray, well, because I didn't know we had to clarify how much distance we have between our votes. It's no secret that UMU has distanced themselves from the rest of the North region, and from all of d3 for that matter, save UMHB. (Enter UWW, UST, and SJU fans with their rebuttal). To argue otherwise, means you've had your head in the sand for much of the past 25 years when it comes to d3 football.
So, for the record, (not that it matters), I'm with USee in regards to that argument
I think Mount Union made themselves pretty clear in 2012 and 2015, not to mention other years when Mount advanced further than UST (Enter Wesley and Linfield fans to complain about the "easy" path Mount Union gets every year) in the playoffs. With Fulford, I fully expect Mount to take care of business the next 2 years as well. I'll be happy if the Tommies can overtake them at some point. I'll be cheering for it, and maybe even in attendance.
I'm sure the SJU folks will happily come in here and tell you all about how they had your number in 2003 though and how they had 3 championships before Mount Union even had 1 though.
;) :P
You guys are so easy. I was kidding. I had Smed's as even money to take the bait. No idea Thunderdog would bite for a bonus point. 8-) ;D
Let's get back to business. I have a problem with the committee including Franklin and, more so, Eureka on the poll. The reason you ask? Here goes:
Franklin lost to Albion 35-56
Albion lost to Hope 24-29
Hope lost to Millikin 21-25
Millikin lost to Wheaton 6-63
I know the transitive property is fail-proof, but it is something. It just seems to me the committee doesn't give much thought to SOS or even better, quality of schedule.
What the committee does want to do, generally, is get as many of its automatic bid conferences represented in the poll as is reasonable.
Which is fewer steps removed from Kevin Bacon: Franklin or Wheaton?
Quote from: thunderdog on October 31, 2018, 04:26:06 PM
Let's get back to business. I have a problem with the committee including Franklin and, more so, Eureka on the poll. The reason you ask? Here goes:
Franklin lost to Albion 35-56
Albion lost to Hope 24-29
Hope lost to Millikin 21-25
Millikin lost to Wheaton 6-63
I know the transitive property is fail-proof, but it is something. It just seems to me the committee doesn't give much thought to SOS or even better, quality of schedule.
certainly the rankings make for great conversation but they don't take into account only those teams with a material chance of making the playoffs. As an example Eureka is in barring some monumental meltdown. Franklin may not make some folks ranking due to a misstep early in the season and a weaker conference but the reality is that they are prob going to be a 6/7 seed as teams considered better wont make it in (UW Lacrosse, Wheaton, Wittenberg, or Baldwin Wallace)
Quote from: USee on October 31, 2018, 04:14:43 PM
You guys are so easy. I was kidding. I had Smed's as even money to take the bait. No idea Thunderdog would bite for a bonus point. 8-) ;D
(https://media1.tenor.com/images/1b833b49d3f65db33f0b495df2c7847f/tenor.gif?itemid=4407682)
Quote from: smedindy on October 31, 2018, 04:07:13 PM
I have Denison 6 leading the NCAC Troika. I KNOW they lost to SW but I'm putting more emphasis on recency in this case. I think NOW Denison is better than Witt or Wabash.
North Region Playoff Projection and Seeding as of 10/31/18 if projected conference winners hold suit. NC and ILW could flip and Wabash most likely last team in if Denison wins tiebreaker as expected. Obviously inter-regional brackets due occur as well and host teams have to apply. But based on the numbers this is close (IMO)
Griz_Backer,
Appreciate the effort, but you have 3 at large teams from the North going to the playoffs. That will never happen, at least not in 2018...
Quote from: thunderdog on October 31, 2018, 07:05:05 PM
Griz_Backer,
Appreciate the effort, but you have 3 at large teams from the North going to the playoffs. That will never happen, at least not in 2018...
Pretty sure he meant it to be a snapshot of today's position. Obviously 2 of BW/JCU/IWU/NCC will pick up an additional loss and drop off this board.
The committee laughs at the transitive property.
Quote from: thunderdog on October 31, 2018, 04:26:06 PM
Let's get back to business. I have a problem with the committee including Franklin and, more so, Eureka on the poll. The reason you ask? Here goes:
Franklin lost to Albion 35-56
Albion lost to Hope 24-29
Hope lost to Millikin 21-25
Millikin lost to Wheaton 6-63
I know the transitive property is fail-proof, but it is something. It just seems to me the committee doesn't give much thought to SOS or even better, quality of schedule.
Quote from: thunderdog on October 31, 2018, 07:05:05 PM
Griz_Backer,
Appreciate the effort, but you have 3 at large teams from the North going to the playoffs. That will never happen, at least not in 2018...
This is as of today, projected conference winners and some will drop off board. NCAC gets 1 only, CCIW 1 only.
Here is the short list at large.
Quote from: GRIZ_BACKER on October 31, 2018, 08:03:58 PM
Quote from: thunderdog on October 31, 2018, 07:05:05 PM
Griz_Backer,
Appreciate the effort, but you have 3 at large teams from the North going to the playoffs. That will never happen, at least not in 2018...
This is as of today, projected conference winners and some will drop off board. NCAC gets 1 only, CCIW 1 only.
Here is the short list at large.
You've listed 6 at large teams being in but there's only 5 spots (unless you're counting Pool B as a 6th spot but you don't have a Pool B team as one of the 6)
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 31, 2018, 10:54:22 PM
Quote from: GRIZ_BACKER on October 31, 2018, 08:03:58 PM
Quote from: thunderdog on October 31, 2018, 07:05:05 PM
Griz_Backer,
Appreciate the effort, but you have 3 at large teams from the North going to the playoffs. That will never happen, at least not in 2018...
This is as of today, projected conference winners and some will drop off board. NCAC gets 1 only, CCIW 1 only.
Here is the short list at large.
You've listed 6 at large teams being in but there's only 5 spots (unless you're counting Pool B as a 6th spot but you don't have a Pool B team as one of the 6)
You are correct. I just went through the DB and listed what 6 i thought would get in and a short list of those on the cusp. I have a complete DB file of all 64 or so odd teams that sill had a chance as of this week if any one wants it. (and excel file that is sortable and filterable). I will send via private email
Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 31, 2018, 04:32:45 PM
Which is fewer steps removed from Kevin Bacon: Franklin or Wheaton?
As far as I can figure, it's a tie.
Robert Wise attended Franklin and was in The Stupids with Tom Arnold, who was in We Married Margo with Kevin Bacon. (Wise > Arnold > Bacon)
Wes Craven attended Wheaton (does anyone else find that to be a very weird fit!?) and directed New Nightmare. W. Earl Brown was in New Nightmare and was also in Black Mass with Kevin Bacon. (Craven > Brown > Bacon)
^ well done.
Though it makes me think you really need a life
Quote from: HScoach on November 01, 2018, 08:00:18 AM
^ well done.
Though it makes me think you really need a life
To be fair, none of us have lives... that's why we're here! :D
Quote from: HScoach on November 01, 2018, 08:00:18 AM
^ well done.
Though it makes me think you really need a life
However, Illinois Wesleyan has both beat as Kevin Dunn was in Picture Perfect with Kevin Bacon.
Quote from: HOPEful on November 01, 2018, 07:47:07 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 31, 2018, 04:32:45 PM
Which is fewer steps removed from Kevin Bacon: Franklin or Wheaton?
As far as I can figure, it's a tie.
Robert Wise attended Franklin and was in The Stupids with Tom Arnold, who was in We Married Margo with Kevin Bacon. (Wise > Arnold > Bacon)
Wes Craven attended Wheaton (does anyone else find that to be a very weird fit!?) and directed New Nightmare. W. Earl Brown was in New Nightmare and was also in Black Mass with Kevin Bacon. (Craven > Brown > Bacon)
Nice. Karma all day for this.
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 01, 2018, 09:05:58 AM
Nice. Karma all day for this.
Football season really brings up my karma. I'd wager a guess that 95% of my bad karma is from 3 calvin fan posters. If they ever get a football team, I anticipate my bad karma skyrocketing :)
HOPEful
Gave ya a +k for the hell of it! I know how you feel. I wished various boards a Happy Father's Day a while back and got 2 -k's . Go figure. Hang in there!
Quote from: MUC57 on November 01, 2018, 10:08:53 AM
HOPEful
Gave ya a +k for the hell of it! I know how you feel. I wished various boards a Happy Father's Day a while back and got 2 -k's . Go figure. Hang in there!
Oh, I embraced the dark side a while back. Now I poke the bear for the fun of it. It's been pretty easy lately with all of calvin's struggles, both on the basketball court and with enrollment/financially.
But thank you! :)
Quote from: HOPEful on November 01, 2018, 07:47:07 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 31, 2018, 04:32:45 PM
Which is fewer steps removed from Kevin Bacon: Franklin or Wheaton?
As far as I can figure, it's a tie.
Robert Wise attended Franklin and was in The Stupids with Tom Arnold, who was in We Married Margo with Kevin Bacon. (Wise > Arnold > Bacon)
Wes Craven attended Wheaton (does anyone else find that to be a very weird fit!?)
Well, he was definitely the most famous atheist alumnus of Wheaton, but I'm pretty sure that there's been others. ;)
Quote from: HOPEful on November 01, 2018, 07:47:07 AMand directed New Nightmare. W. Earl Brown was in New Nightmare and was also in Black Mass with Kevin Bacon. (Craven > Brown > Bacon)
Nicely done!
Quote from: HOPEful on November 01, 2018, 09:03:07 AM
Quote from: HScoach on November 01, 2018, 08:00:18 AM
^ well done.
Though it makes me think you really need a life
However, Illinois Wesleyan has both beat as Kevin Dunn was in Picture Perfect with Kevin Bacon.
Thanks, iwu70. :D
Quote from: MUC57 on November 01, 2018, 10:08:53 AM
HOPEful
Gave ya a +k for the hell of it! I know how you feel. I wished various boards a Happy Father's Day a while back and got 2 -k's . Go figure.
Ah, yes, the ol' "I resent the fact that you still have a pulse" karma smite. I think that I've been dinged for that reason a few times myself. :D
Back to football...
I think an interesting argument is "who should be ranked higher, Wheaton or Washington?"
It's a great example for differing opinions on what a poll should be... If you believe a poll is "best resume", I think that Wheaton's 52-30 win at NC outshines Washington beating Wheaton by 7 in St. Louis. However, there are plenty of people who see the head to head result and won't consider placing Wheaton ahead of Washington. If you're asking simply who you believe is "better", you first have to define "better"... Does better mean when they're playing their best ball, their worst, or the average/median?
Quote from: HOPEful on November 01, 2018, 03:08:12 PM
Back to football...
I think an interesting argument is "who should be ranked higher, Wheaton or Washington?"
It's a great example for differing opinions on what a poll should be... If you believe a poll is "best resume", I think that Wheaton's 52-30 win at NC outshines Washington beating Wheaton by 7 in St. Louis. However, there are plenty of people who see the head to head result and won't consider placing Wheaton ahead of Washington. If you're asking simply who you believe is "better", you first have to define "better"... Does better mean when they're playing their best ball, their worst, or the average/median?
Due to h-to-h I had WashU over Wheaton until today's ballot, but 48-3 in Kenosha definitely outpoints 49-42 in Decatur. My only other change from last week's ballot was NCC jumping from #4 to #2 (which also helped Wheaton), with JCU and IWU each dropping one slot.
Quote from: HOPEful on November 01, 2018, 03:08:12 PM
Back to football...
I think an interesting argument is "who should be ranked higher, Wheaton or Washington?"
It's a great example for differing opinions on what a poll should be... If you believe a poll is "best resume", I think that Wheaton's 52-30 win at NC outshines Washington beating Wheaton by 7 in St. Louis. However, there are plenty of people who see the head to head result and won't consider placing Wheaton ahead of Washington. If you're asking simply who you believe is "better", you first have to define "better"... Does better mean when they're playing their best ball, their worst, or the average/median?
I'm one of those that has in the past ranked a team higher than a team it lost H2H. Not sure what I'm going to do here. I usually do my ballot sober, so. Of course, maybe it would make more sense now.
This deep into the season body of work is a bigger factor than H2H.
Quote from: smedindy on November 04, 2018, 03:39:35 PM
This deep into the season body of work is a bigger factor than H2H.
Well, sure (which is why I have Wabash higher than Denison). But "body of work" consists of many factors, of which the
single biggest one is (IMO) H2H. Until this week, I didn't think Wheaton's body of work outranked WashU's H2H; now I do.
What's crazy is if Wheaton QB Curtis McWilliams doesn't go down in the first half against WashU, it's entirely orobable the Thunder win that game and they would be the AQ with NCC one of the top rated Piol C teams.
Same scenario in the Wash U - IWU game. What's crazy is if Wash U QB Johnny Davidson doesn't go down in the beginning of the first quarter against IWU, it's entirely probable the Bears win that game - then what?!?!
WU actually dominated the Wheaton game - held them to -3 yards rushing...
Quote from: footballlover on November 04, 2018, 07:50:18 PM
Same scenario in the Wash U - IWU game. What's crazy is if Wash U QB Johnny Davidson doesn't go down in the beginning of the first quarter against IWU, it's entirely probable the Bears win that game - then what?!?!
WU actually dominated the Wheaton game - held them to -3 yards rushing...
No they didn't. 63 yds rushing and minus 66 on 10 sacks. Wheaton's defense dominated WashU's offense. 10 sacks is pretty impressive though, you guys must have a dominant DLine.
These are not my picks, this is my prediction for Wednesday's release of North Regional Rankings, week 2:
UMU
JCU
NCC
Trine
BW
Wabash
Witt
Franklin
IWU
Wheaton
I don't think IWU's spot at #2 in the first release keeps them from tumbling all the way below all the 1 loss teams. The same thing would have happened to NCC if IWU would have won this past Saturday's matchup. The same can be said for the JCU vs BW loser when the final rankings are released after next week's games.
The ordering for IWU vs Wheaton is much closer than you'd think, despite the h2h win by IWU. Wheaton currently has the stronger SOS (.606 - 4th in the country) to IWU's .588 - 15th in the country. Wheaton will be 2-1 in the RRO category (wins over NCC & Monmouth, loss to IWU) and IWU will be 1-2 (win over Wheaton, losses to NCC & UW-Lacrosse). UWL may or may not hang onto the #10 spot in the West region.
Quote from: thunderdog on November 05, 2018, 12:00:28 PM
These are not my picks, this is my prediction for Wednesday's release of North Regional Rankings, week 2:
UMU
JCU
NCC
Trine
BW
Wabash
Witt
Franklin
IWU
Wheaton
I don't think IWU's spot at #2 in the first release keeps them from tumbling all the way below all the 1 loss teams. The same thing would have happened to NCC if IWU would have won this past Saturday's matchup. The same can be said for the JCU vs BW loser when the final rankings are released after next week's games.
The ordering for IWU vs Wheaton is much closer than you'd think, despite the h2h win by IWU. Wheaton currently has the stronger SOS (.606 - 4th in the country) to IWU's .588 - 15th in the country. Wheaton will be 2-1 in the RRO category (wins over NCC & Monmouth, loss to IWU) and IWU will be 1-2 (win over Wheaton, losses to NCC & UW-Lacrosse). UWL may or may not hang onto the #10 spot in the West region.
They will. Or even sneak up a spot or two.
Thunderdog,
How is it you know so much about what the committee is going to do? You an insider?
Quote from: USee on November 04, 2018, 11:15:17 PM
Quote from: footballlover on November 04, 2018, 07:50:18 PM
Same scenario in the Wash U - IWU game. What's crazy is if Wash U QB Johnny Davidson doesn't go down in the beginning of the first quarter against IWU, it's entirely probable the Bears win that game - then what?!?!
WU actually dominated the Wheaton game - held them to -3 yards rushing...
No they didn't. 63 yds rushing and minus 66 on 10 sacks. Wheaton's defense dominated WashU's offense. 10 sacks is pretty impressive though, you guys must have a dominant DLine.
-3 yards is -3 yards, no matter rushing or sacks. 63 yards rushing isn't that great either.
The Thunder-Colored glasses must be working overtime...
Dog: I don't think the SoS difference is worth mentioning. With 200+ teams in D3 the 6th and 15th rankings are essentially the same number. If you're talking 6th and 50th then yes.
Quote from: smedindy on November 05, 2018, 01:49:53 PM
Quote from: USee on November 04, 2018, 11:15:17 PM
Quote from: footballlover on November 04, 2018, 07:50:18 PM
Same scenario in the Wash U - IWU game. What's crazy is if Wash U QB Johnny Davidson doesn't go down in the beginning of the first quarter against IWU, it's entirely probable the Bears win that game - then what?!?!
WU actually dominated the Wheaton game - held them to -3 yards rushing...
No they didn't. 63 yds rushing and minus 66 on 10 sacks. Wheaton's defense dominated WashU's offense. 10 sacks is pretty impressive though, you guys must have a dominant DLine.
-3 yards is -3 yards, no matter rushing or sacks. 63 yards rushing isn't that great either.
The Thunder-Colored glasses must be working overtime...
No it's not. It's widely understood by anyone that has a clue about football statistics that sack yards are not rush yards. They are called passes. It's one of the bigger flaws in college statistics.
Quote from: USee on November 05, 2018, 12:29:24 PM
Thunderdog,
How is it you know so much about what the committee is going to do? You an insider?
USee, if you really really want to know... well... I've been watching "Justified" on Amazon. So, I've got some Raylan Givens (said in a Boyd Crowder voice) going on at the moment and thus, I think I've got these regional committee's pegged.
Quote from: thunderdog on November 05, 2018, 02:45:51 PM
Quote from: USee on November 05, 2018, 12:29:24 PM
Thunderdog,
How is it you know so much about what the committee is going to do? You an insider?
USee, if you really really want to know... well... I've been watching "Justified" on Amazon. So, I've got some Raylan Givens (said in a Boyd Crowder voice) going on at the moment and thus, I think I've got these regional committee's pegged.
Underrated program. I will shamefully admit that I lost track of it before the series ended, but it was consistently good. I'll take Olyphant playing a cowboy-ish dude every day and twice on Sunday.
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 05, 2018, 02:56:53 PM
I'll take Olyphant playing a cowboy-ish dude every day and twice on Sunday.
;D ;D ;D For sure. All the words I'd use to describe him aren't allowed here...
Quote from: thunderdog on November 05, 2018, 03:00:16 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 05, 2018, 02:56:53 PM
I'll take Olyphant playing a cowboy-ish dude every day and twice on Sunday.
;D ;D ;D For sure. All the words I'd use to describe him aren't allowed here...
Tim Gutterson is the real star of that show though. Raylan is really just a supporting actor.
Quote from: USee on November 05, 2018, 02:27:59 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 05, 2018, 01:49:53 PM
Quote from: USee on November 04, 2018, 11:15:17 PM
Quote from: footballlover on November 04, 2018, 07:50:18 PM
Same scenario in the Wash U - IWU game. What's crazy is if Wash U QB Johnny Davidson doesn't go down in the beginning of the first quarter against IWU, it's entirely probable the Bears win that game - then what?!?!
WU actually dominated the Wheaton game - held them to -3 yards rushing...
No they didn't. 63 yds rushing and minus 66 on 10 sacks. Wheaton's defense dominated WashU's offense. 10 sacks is pretty impressive though, you guys must have a dominant DLine.
-3 yards is -3 yards, no matter rushing or sacks. 63 yards rushing isn't that great either.
The Thunder-Colored glasses must be working overtime...
No it's not. It's widely understood by anyone that has a clue about football statistics that sack yards are not rush yards. They are called passes. It's one of the bigger flaws in college statistics.
Yards are yards. 63 yards rushing still isn't great, as I said.
And it's not a pass if they never passed the ball, ya know. It's a pass PLAY.
Quote from: jamtoTommie on November 05, 2018, 03:04:00 PM
Tim Gutterson is the real star of that show though. Raylan is really just a supporting actor.
Hmmm... you're lucky, I won't tell Raylan you said that. What happens in the NRFP, stays in the NRFP.
And Wash U held Wheaton to 140 yards UNDER their average - their third lowest of the season.
Overall, yardage was close to even (.5 yards per play better for Wheaton). Wheaton had one more turnover, and a bad punt and penalties (10-114) hurt them.
Any chance we can institute a new rule where if you beat an RRO as an unranked team, you automatically get their ranking?* ;D
*This post may self-destruct in approximately 5 days from now if circumstances warrant.
Quote from: Ryan Stoppable on November 05, 2018, 05:03:49 PM
Any chance we can institute a new rule where if you beat an RRO as an unranked team, you automatically get their ranking?* ;D
*This post may self-destruct in approximately 5 days from now if circumstances warrant.
Ha! Then there will be a big upset one year and North Park or Anderson will be ranked!~
Hey! Why are you picking on us? NPU isn't going to be the last-place team in the CCIW this year. And the Vikings didn't finish last in 2017, either.
For that matter, neither did Anderson in the HCAC. In fact, Anderson's got two HCAC wins this season.
Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 05, 2018, 10:48:59 PM
Hey! Why are you picking on us? NPU isn't going to be the last-place team in the CCIW this year. And the Vikings didn't finish last in 2017, either.
For that matter, neither did Anderson in the HCAC. In fact, Anderson's got two HCAC wins this season.
Well, he didn't want to be
completely off-the-wall and use Earlham for the punchline!
Quote from: smedindy on November 05, 2018, 04:28:55 PM
Quote from: USee on November 05, 2018, 02:27:59 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 05, 2018, 01:49:53 PM
Quote from: USee on November 04, 2018, 11:15:17 PM
Quote from: footballlover on November 04, 2018, 07:50:18 PM
Same scenario in the Wash U - IWU game. What's crazy is if Wash U QB Johnny Davidson doesn't go down in the beginning of the first quarter against IWU, it's entirely probable the Bears win that game - then what?!?!
WU actually dominated the Wheaton game - held them to -3 yards rushing...
No they didn't. 63 yds rushing and minus 66 on 10 sacks. Wheaton's defense dominated WashU's offense. 10 sacks is pretty impressive though, you guys must have a dominant DLine.
-3 yards is -3 yards, no matter rushing or sacks. 63 yards rushing isn't that great either.
The Thunder-Colored glasses must be working overtime...
No it's not. It's widely understood by anyone that has a clue about football statistics that sack yards are not rush yards. They are called passes. It's one of the bigger flaws in college statistics.
Yards are yards. 63 yards rushing still isn't great, as I said.
And it's not a pass if they never passed the ball, ya know. It's a pass PLAY.
The NFL subtracts sack yardage from the team's PASSING yardage. Never understood why the NCAA continues to subtract them from rushing yards.
Because it's easier. Tracking it as negative passing yards requires the on site folks to evaluate whether it was intended to be a pass or run. With 300+ college teams playing with variable amounts of oversight and attention, it's much easier to track a pass if it's thrown forward and counting everything else as a rush.
Not saying it's overly logical, but it is easier.
Quote from: HScoach on November 06, 2018, 09:49:48 AM
Not saying it's overly logical, but it is easier.
But yards are yard right? SMH
Quote from: USee on November 06, 2018, 11:36:55 AM
Quote from: HScoach on November 06, 2018, 09:49:48 AM
Not saying it's overly logical, but it is easier.
But yards are yard right? SMH
Doesn't seem that difficult to make a quick judgment on whether the play appeared to be an intended run or pass. Even if they got it wrong from time to time, the end totals would still be a better representation than taking all sack yardage away from the rushing total.
Quote from: HOPEful on November 06, 2018, 11:43:31 AM
Quote from: USee on November 06, 2018, 11:36:55 AM
Quote from: HScoach on November 06, 2018, 09:49:48 AM
Not saying it's overly logical, but it is easier.
But yards are yard right? SMH
Doesn't seem that difficult to make a quick judgment on whether the play appeared to be an intended run or pass. Even if they got it wrong from time to time, the end totals would still be a better representation than taking all sack yardage away from the rushing total.
HS follows the college way on this. It makes a Non-Running QB look bad at the end of the season with a ton of negative rushing yards. In my opinion it should go against the offense. Hard to blame the QB if the Line doesn't block. Hard to blame the Line when the QB holds on to the ball too long. Hard to blame the Offense if the Defense has good coverage. Easiest to just have TEAM Negative Rushing Yards for Sacks.
Actually the NFL not only counts sacks as negative pass yds, they count as team sack yds and don't affect the QBs stat line
The NFL also has a zillion spotters in the press box and a production truck that can look at replays while the game continues. D1 football games tend to have an abundance of spotters as well. (Northwestern uses seven of 'em in the Ryan Field press box.)
HScoach hit the nail on the head when he mentioned "variable amounts of oversight and attention" -- and I'd add "resources" to that, since a lot of D3 press boxes have neither the hardware nor the manpower to review sacks via replay in order to fine-tune pass vs. run evaluation by the game's official scorer. Anyone who's ever worked in a D3 press box during a football game knows that the typical D3 football game can be pretty hard to track in real-time in all of its minutiae with the staff that most D3 schools have on hand.
Quote from: USee on November 06, 2018, 12:11:39 PM
Actually the NFL not only counts sacks as negative pass yds, they count as team sack yds and don't affect the QBs stat line
Advanced metrics do count it against the QB.
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on November 06, 2018, 12:08:16 PM
Quote from: HOPEful on November 06, 2018, 11:43:31 AM
Quote from: USee on November 06, 2018, 11:36:55 AM
Quote from: HScoach on November 06, 2018, 09:49:48 AM
Not saying it's overly logical, but it is easier.
But yards are yard right? SMH
Doesn't seem that difficult to make a quick judgment on whether the play appeared to be an intended run or pass. Even if they got it wrong from time to time, the end totals would still be a better representation than taking all sack yardage away from the rushing total.
HS follows the college way on this. It makes a Non-Running QB look bad at the end of the season with a ton of negative rushing yards. In my opinion it should go against the offense. Hard to blame the QB if the Line doesn't block. Hard to blame the Line when the QB holds on to the ball too long. Hard to blame the Offense if the Defense has good coverage. Easiest to just have TEAM Negative Rushing Yards for Sacks.
Yards ARE yards and you've deflected well, USee. The original argument has been lost.
K&J D - This is true for every type of yardage. There are INTs where the receiver screwed up. Fumbles where the line ran into the ball carrier. Negative carries when the QB messes up the exchange, or the line gets beat.
There are plenty of advanced metrics in the NFL that take all of that into account, by people who watch each play and chart it (think Football Outsiders). I've seen advanced metrics like this in College, too.
But the point is, yards were lost. Credit them. And don't whitewash a bad performance up front by shifting sacks to passing.
Greg: exactly. You said it better than I did.
Sacks up front are in fact a bad performance by the OLine. There aren't many credible coaches out there who thinks sack yds are rush yds as a measure of running game performance. They are certainly a measure of OLine or QBs performance (if he holds it too long).
Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 05, 2018, 10:48:59 PM
Hey! Why are you picking on us? NPU isn't going to be the last-place team in the CCIW this year. And the Vikings didn't finish last in 2017, either.
For that matter, neither did Anderson in the HCAC. In fact, Anderson's got two HCAC wins this season.
Anderson and Defiance hopes Earlham never folds their programs
Quote from: GRIZ_BACKER on November 06, 2018, 03:41:31 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 05, 2018, 10:48:59 PM
Hey! Why are you picking on us? NPU isn't going to be the last-place team in the CCIW this year. And the Vikings didn't finish last in 2017, either.
For that matter, neither did Anderson in the HCAC. In fact, Anderson's got two HCAC wins this season.
Anderson and Defiance hopes Earlham never folds their programs
Franklin doesn't either... a third non-conference game for everyone? Franklin's SoS may never see .400 again with the conference going around 3-21 every year ???
2018 Week 10 NRFP:
(https://i.imgur.com/eRdbelb.png)
click to enlarge
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, thunderdog, USee, and wally wabash.
Looks like we all agree on #1, who the next two are, and then it's just throwing darts from 4 on down.
I'm column 3 this week. I don't like having Trine at 4 but I can't justify putting anyone above them.
Just off my ballot are 11) Wabash 12) Marietta 13) Franklin 14) Hope
http://d3football.com/playoffs/2018/second-regional-ranking
https://www.ncaa.com/rankings/football/d3/regional-rankings
I'm row 9.
Quote from: USee on November 06, 2018, 02:44:43 PM
Sacks up front are in fact a bad performance by the OLine. There aren't many credible coaches out there who thinks sack yds are rush yds as a measure of running game performance. They are certainly a measure of OLine or QBs performance (if he holds it too long).
OR, the coverage by the DBs. Coverage sacks are a thing.
Again, yards are yards. Whether you call it rushing or passing, or magic voodoo yards, it's against the total yards and a sign of a defense that's doing its job.
I'm giving Denison the love. Not that discount Week 1, but Denison's playing so well.
I'm column 8. IMO their 18-point win AT IWU deserved to move them past JCU. If JCU absolutely dismantles BW I might switch again.
With the always necessary disclaimer about upsets, the only game in the North that definitely will affect voting is 8-1 Bald Wally @ 8-1 JCU, but there are others that plausibly COULD affect voting. 6-3 Millikin is at 8-1 NCC, 6-3 Hanover is at 8-1 Franklin, 7-2 Kazoo gets one final chance to prove their 7-0 start was not TOTALLY a mirage when they host 9-0 Trine, and then there is the 125th Moaning Bull (or whatever they call that thingy ;)) - DePauw is only 4-5 this season, but strange things can happen in rivalry games.
I'm 10. I also moved NCC to #2 this week on the strength of a very nice W improving their resume mightily. JCU can make a statement Saturday though. I continue to be the low man on Trine and I can live with that.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 06, 2018, 11:28:41 PM
Quote from: GRIZ_BACKER on November 06, 2018, 03:41:31 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 05, 2018, 10:48:59 PM
Hey! Why are you picking on us? NPU isn't going to be the last-place team in the CCIW this year. And the Vikings didn't finish last in 2017, either.
For that matter, neither did Anderson in the HCAC. In fact, Anderson's got two HCAC wins this season.
Anderson and Defiance hopes Earlham never folds their programs
Franklin doesn't either... a third non-conference game for everyone? Franklin's SoS may never see .400 again with the conference going around 3-21 every year ???
How about an impromptu HCAC-NACC Challenge series next year since Earlham has suspended their program? Might be pretty competitive! 8-)
Quote from: Captain_Joe08 on November 13, 2018, 04:23:12 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 06, 2018, 11:28:41 PM
Quote from: GRIZ_BACKER on November 06, 2018, 03:41:31 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 05, 2018, 10:48:59 PM
Hey! Why are you picking on us? NPU isn't going to be the last-place team in the CCIW this year. And the Vikings didn't finish last in 2017, either.
For that matter, neither did Anderson in the HCAC. In fact, Anderson's got two HCAC wins this season.
Anderson and Defiance hopes Earlham never folds their programs
Franklin doesn't either... a third non-conference game for everyone? Franklin's SoS may never see .400 again with the conference going around 3-21 every year ???
How about an impromptu HCAC-NACC Challenge series next year since Earlham has suspended their program? Might be pretty competitive! 8-)
That would be something... teams facing each other and both still find a way to lose? :D
https://cciw.org/sports/2018/11/13/FB_1113180014.aspx
Are we having a new poll?
Yes! Coming this afternoon evening. I promise. :)
2018 Week 11 NRFP:
(https://i.imgur.com/00qEYbq.png)
click to enlarge
And stay tuned- we'll do one more of these at the conclusion of the tournament!
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, thunderdog, USee, and wally wabash.
Interesting that Denison is ahead of BW. Will get a good measure of them this Saturday regardless of who plays QB for Mount. The key in my mind is how Denison handles Mount's speed on defense. BW had a good day offensively against Mount, they just couldn't stop them.
Column #4 for me.
I don't understand IWU behind Wheaton. Also nice to see a few more have come over to the dark side on NCC at #2. 8-)
Quote from: USee on November 14, 2018, 09:55:07 PM
Column #4 for me.
I don't understand IWU behind Wheaton. Also nice to see a few more have come over to the dark side on NCC at #2. 8-)
Even as a Titan fan, I've got no real problem with Wheaton ahead of IWU, despite the h2h (they beat NCC, we didn't). But IWU 6th, 7th, or 8th??! That's just bizarro-land! :o
I'm column 2 this week.
Quote from: USee on November 14, 2018, 09:55:07 PM
I don't understand IWU behind Wheaton.
I'm row 9, and I think Wheaton's resume is just slightly better with 2 close loses on the road to very good opponents and the best win in the region. The 52-30 win at North Central vs. a 20-38 loss at home was the difference for me. That game trumps a very close head-to-head game in Bloomington that could have easily gone the other way had the game been played in Wheaton.
I do think it's very interesting that we unanimously agree on the top 3 teams. And yet, don't agree on the value of Wheaton's win at North Central.
I'm column 10. After two weeks of having my ballot remain static, I did move North Central up to 2. Close calls with Marietta and BW have significantly diluted the earlier near miss with Mount Union.
I do find it interesting how in just a few weeks we've gone from having 16 teams named on ballots all the way down to just 11. We're not far from a consensus top 10 which is remarkable.
Quote from: HScoach on November 14, 2018, 08:22:49 PM
Interesting that Denison is ahead of BW. Will get a good measure of them this Saturday regardless of who plays QB for Mount. The key in my mind is how Denison handles Mount's speed on defense. BW had a good day offensively against Mount, they just couldn't stop them.
It's going to be a significant shock to the system. Nobody in the NCAC is playing the game even remotely close to Mount Union's level, and beyond that Denison hasn't played even a good NCAC team in five weeks. Denison hasn't gotten sloppy- they've stayed sharp through the less challenging back half of their schedule, but OWU/Hiram/Wooster/Kenyon is not the best way to ramp up for a game against #1.
Quote from: HOPEful on November 15, 2018, 09:13:50 AM
Quote from: USee on November 14, 2018, 09:55:07 PM
I don't understand IWU behind Wheaton.
I'm row 9, and I think Wheaton's resume is just slightly better with 2 close loses on the road to very good opponents and the best win in the region. The 52-30 win at North Central vs. a 20-38 loss at home was the difference for me. That game trumps a very close head-to-head game in Bloomington that could have easily gone the other way had the game been played in Wheaton.
I agree. Count me as someone who uses head-to-head results to differentiate equal resumes, but in my mind it isn't the end all be all. Upsets happen. The better team doesn't always win.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 14, 2018, 10:18:01 PM
Quote from: USee on November 14, 2018, 09:55:07 PM
Column #4 for me.
I don't understand IWU behind Wheaton. Also nice to see a few more have come over to the dark side on NCC at #2. 8-)
Even as a Titan fan, I've got no real problem with Wheaton ahead of IWU, despite the h2h (they beat NCC, we didn't). But IWU 6th, 7th, or 8th??! That's just bizarro-land! :o
I'm column 2 this week.
Not for me. I can't split the NCAC trio.
Quote from: HScoach on November 14, 2018, 08:22:49 PM
Interesting that Denison is ahead of BW. Will get a good measure of them this Saturday regardless of who plays QB for Mount. The key in my mind is how Denison handles Mount's speed on defense. BW had a good day offensively against Mount, they just couldn't stop them.
Whelp, the answer is in. BW is much better than Denison.
Quote from: HScoach on November 17, 2018, 01:42:36 PM
Quote from: HScoach on November 14, 2018, 08:22:49 PM
Interesting that Denison is ahead of BW. Will get a good measure of them this Saturday regardless of who plays QB for Mount. The key in my mind is how Denison handles Mount's speed on defense. BW had a good day offensively against Mount, they just couldn't stop them.
Whelp, the answer is in. BW is much better than Denison.
Which presumably means also much better than Witt or Wabash.
And after JCU totally crapped the bed against Randy Mac, I'm sure glad I'd already dropped them to third - I suspect they may go to fifth or sixth next ballot! And I'll wait to decide if Trine stays on at all! :(
Smedindy, I agree that the NCAC trio should stick together - but probably MUCH lower on the ballot!
Trine also presumably will be dropping after that anemic performance against St Norbert. The Thunder completed as many passes to opposing players as they did to their own players (3).
Wow. The North Region did not have a good showing.
With JCU getting upset, Trine getting crushed, and Hanover and Denison both being steam-rolled as expected, are UMU and NCC the only North teams still in the tourney? We could probably do the final North Region poll right now! :o
But I suppose we better hold off just in case the 'unthinkable' happens, and NCC knocks off UMU (would that be semis or the Stagg?) ;D
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 17, 2018, 06:02:20 PM
With JCU getting upset, Trine getting crushed, and Hanover and Denison both being steam-rolled as expected, are UMU and NCC the only North teams still in the tourney? We could probably do the final North Region poll right now! :o
But I suppose we better hold off just in case the 'unthinkable' happens, and NCC knocks off UMU (would that be semis or the Stagg?) ;D
If it happened, it would be the Stagg. NCC would have to beat (probably) UWW and UMHB to face off vs MTU in Shenandoah.
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on November 17, 2018, 06:11:38 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 17, 2018, 06:02:20 PM
With JCU getting upset, Trine getting crushed, and Hanover and Denison both being steam-rolled as expected, are UMU and NCC the only North teams still in the tourney? We could probably do the final North Region poll right now! :o
But I suppose we better hold off just in case the 'unthinkable' happens, and NCC knocks off UMU (would that be semis or the Stagg?) ;D
If it happened, it would be the Stagg. NCC would have to beat (probably) UWW and UMHB to face off vs MTU in Shenandoah.
If NCC can beat Bethel, UWW, UMHB/SJU, and UMU on consecutive Saturdays, they would deserve not just the #1 vote, but recognition as the greatest D3 team EVER! :o ;D
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 17, 2018, 06:31:03 PM
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on November 17, 2018, 06:11:38 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 17, 2018, 06:02:20 PM
With JCU getting upset, Trine getting crushed, and Hanover and Denison both being steam-rolled as expected, are UMU and NCC the only North teams still in the tourney? We could probably do the final North Region poll right now! :o
But I suppose we better hold off just in case the 'unthinkable' happens, and NCC knocks off UMU (would that be semis or the Stagg?) ;D
If it happened, it would be the Stagg. NCC would have to beat (probably) UWW and UMHB to face off vs MTU in Shenandoah.
If NCC can beat Bethel, UWW, UMHB/SJU, and UMU on consecutive Saturdays, they would deserve not just the #1 vote, but recognition as the greatest D3 team EVER! :o ;D
For Sure!!!!
I feel much better about being the low guy on Trine after today. I feel much worse about having JCU at 3 after today. The yin and yang of playoff football.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on November 17, 2018, 09:56:59 PM
I feel much better about being the low guy on Trine after today. I feel much worse about having JCU at 3 after today. The yin and yang of playoff football.
I haven't heard from any of those Trine fans who didn't like my stating publicly that I didn't have Trine on my Top 25 ballot.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 17, 2018, 10:00:44 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on November 17, 2018, 09:56:59 PM
I feel much better about being the low guy on Trine after today. I feel much worse about having JCU at 3 after today. The yin and yang of playoff football.
I haven't heard from any of those Trine fans who didn't like my stating publicly that I didn't have Trine on my Top 25 ballot.
Perhaps there's a power outage in Angola?? ;D
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 17, 2018, 10:00:44 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on November 17, 2018, 09:56:59 PM
I feel much better about being the low guy on Trine after today. I feel much worse about having JCU at 3 after today. The yin and yang of playoff football.
I haven't heard from any of those Trine fans who didn't like my stating publicly that I didn't have Trine on my Top 25 ballot.
Don't worry Pat. I haven't heard from anyone who ridiculed me for having JCU lower than 2nd for the last month either. 8-)
Quote from: USee on November 17, 2018, 11:34:27 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 17, 2018, 10:00:44 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on November 17, 2018, 09:56:59 PM
I feel much better about being the low guy on Trine after today. I feel much worse about having JCU at 3 after today. The yin and yang of playoff football.
I haven't heard from any of those Trine fans who didn't like my stating publicly that I didn't have Trine on my Top 25 ballot.
Don't worry Pat. I haven't heard from anyone who ridiculed me for having JCU lower than 2nd for the last month either. 8-)
I'm willing to admit. You were absolutely right about them. They are definitely top 10 Region, but after today, not nationally, and I'm not even sure about top 5 regionally.
Quote from: bluestreak66 on November 17, 2018, 11:50:33 PM
Quote from: USee on November 17, 2018, 11:34:27 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 17, 2018, 10:00:44 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on November 17, 2018, 09:56:59 PM
I feel much better about being the low guy on Trine after today. I feel much worse about having JCU at 3 after today. The yin and yang of playoff football.
I haven't heard from any of those Trine fans who didn't like my stating publicly that I didn't have Trine on my Top 25 ballot.
Don't worry Pat. I haven't heard from anyone who ridiculed me for having JCU lower than 2nd for the last month either. 8-)
I'm willing to admit. You were absolutely right about them. They are definitely top 10 Region, but after today, not nationally, and I'm not even sure about top 5 regionally.
On my top 25 fan ballot I didn't include Trine until halfway through the season. They were 16th on the last ballot. I hated having them that high. But undefeated teams tend to get a bit elevated because they keep winning while others drop. I expect a huge drop for them now.
Could the final poll here in the North just be Mount Union followed by the CCIW? If NCC get bounced next week maybe we just leave 2-8 empty and fill in a couple teams at the bottom.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 17, 2018, 10:00:44 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on November 17, 2018, 09:56:59 PM
I feel much better about being the low guy on Trine after today. I feel much worse about having JCU at 3 after today. The yin and yang of playoff football.
I haven't heard from any of those Trine fans who didn't like my stating publicly that I didn't have Trine on my Top 25 ballot.
That's okay. I haven't heard from Pat "The Stiletto Knife" Coleman since he denigrated my astonishment at St. Thomas being #7 vs. Bethel being #35 in the D3 national rankings a few weeks ago.
;)
Bethel won its way into contention, though. That's the part about having a backloaded schedule and coming off of three 5-5 seasons.
Quote from: USee on November 17, 2018, 11:34:27 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 17, 2018, 10:00:44 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on November 17, 2018, 09:56:59 PM
I feel much better about being the low guy on Trine after today. I feel much worse about having JCU at 3 after today. The yin and yang of playoff football.
I haven't heard from any of those Trine fans who didn't like my stating publicly that I didn't have Trine on my Top 25 ballot.
Don't worry Pat. I haven't heard from anyone who ridiculed me for having JCU lower than 2nd for the last month either. 8-)
OR your post about Moeglin? I thought of that yesterday after his third int.
I don't think the Moeglin thing was anything intuitive. I just looked at his stats against the top three and he completed less than 50% of his passes with no TD's and a few int's w a couple fumbles. It's not rocket science to see he was not playing well. And then looking at JCU, who can run the ball well but had a QB not playing well, they became one dimensional. You can't be one dimensional against teams In the playoffs.
Are we still voting through the playoffs?
One after the playoffs, or when we're down to the last North region team standing (the North took a Round 1 beating, so we're almost there!). Really, whenever you're all set on your final 2018 top 10, you can forward that along to me.
Going to toss out a last call for your last 2018 NRFP ballots. I'd like to put a bow on this by Wednesday if at all possible. :)
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 17, 2018, 09:14:59 AM
Going to toss out a last call for your last 2018 NRFP ballots. I'd like to put a bow on this by Wednesday if at all possible. :)
You got mine almost a month ago?
Yes, I do have a few. Majority still outstanding though. :)
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2018, 10:07:14 AM
Quote from: wally_wabash on December 17, 2018, 09:14:59 AM
Going to toss out a last call for your last 2018 NRFP ballots. I'd like to put a bow on this by Wednesday if at all possible. :)
You got mine almost a month ago?
That seems credible.
Mine is in.
I'm working on mine.
Still half of the Top 25 poll isn't in either. Just sent a reminder PM to them.
Just sent mine in. Still taken aback how poorly the North Region top ten did in the postseason.
When will the poll be going up?
Many apologies for the significant delay on this, gang. After the Stagg Bowl I got tied up with the holidays, travel, and illness. I want to thank you all for your patience and thank all of the voters again for their considerable effort and thoughtfulness put into this exercise. And now, from the better-late-than-never file, the final 2018 NRFP:
(https://i.imgur.com/G4rfpFr.png)
click to enlarge
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, Mr Ypsi, NCF, smedindy, thunderdog, USee, and wally wabash.
Don't know if anyone is still wanting to discuss the poll, but FWIW, I'm column 6. Despite the NCAC's tie-break rule, I found the NCAC order fairly easy to decide (Wabash>Witt>Denison). And I dropped JCU behind all three non-tourney CCIW teams for their loss to a team from a sub-par conference that I don't think had won a tourney game in a decade or so (I had already dropped them behind NCC before the tourney began).
I'm curious as to the NCAC reasoning in Column 1.
I'm in column 2 and I actually didn't touch my ballot from Week 11 to the end of the playoffs. Things that I think could have moved:
- JCU sliding below NCC (which I had already done prior to Week 11)
- Trine sliding back behind any number of CCIWs (which I had already done) and NCACs (which I ultimately didn't do)
I didn't penalize Denison for their round 1 game. I really can't say with certainty that other NCAC co-champs would have done better in that spot in a meaningful way.
I do think it's telling, and not in a good way, that half of the NRFP top 10 were not playoff participants. And after a year where only two North Region teams survived to the second round, and just one beyond that, the North RAC ought to take a long, hard look at what they're doing. The last team in the field (Muhlenberg) was a national quarterfinalist and there were North region options that would have challenged Muhlenberg's invitiation. In our pregame from the Johns Hopkins-RPI quarterfinal, Frank Rossi and I had the opportunity to interview J.J. Nekoloff from the ODAC. J.J. serves on the South RAC and he had some telling comments about the way that committee ranks teams in a way to maximize their opportunities for at-large invitations. The North RAC could and should be a little more nuanced with their rankings and be giving the best teams the best shot to get invited. [/rant]
Way late to responding to this, but I believe I'm row 6. I just think the CCIW was so good this season, and the margain of difference between NCC, IWU, Wheaton, and Washington was small. And the manner in which JCU was bounced from the playoffs was... not good.
My rankings could read...
1. Mount Union
2. CCIW's best
3. Ohio's second best (after Mount)
4. Best team from the best remaining conference (In this case, Trine and the MIAA)
Quick personal news note for Pick 'Em players and readers/participants of the NRFP- I am in the midst of a cross country relocation and am currently assessing what kind of personal bandwidth I may have to dedicate to Pick 'Em and NRFP related administrative functions this fall. I'll definitely commit to one of the two, possibly still both, but I've got to take a quick inventory and make sure I can put the time into these things that they deserve. I know we've got games coming next week, so I'll make a decision and let the board(s) know by EOB Friday.
So what's the verdict? It's slightly past Friday and I know you're doing the pickem but no word yet on the poll.
I've actually got my preseason ballot ready to go in plenty of time this year ::)
I've received word that wally is stepping down from running this and I'll be the new overlord poll runner this season. It was a peaceful exchange of power and he is definitely still alive. ;)
Anyways, I'll message everyone who voted last season. Anyone else who wants to join in this year let me know.
I know it's last minute but I'd like to try to get a preseason poll up before games kickoff on Thursday.
(https://media.giphy.com/media/TYfZuDl9tz3zy/giphy.gif)
Thank you to FCGG. Please pass your preseason polls along to him.
Sorry for holding this up until game week, but I'm glad we'll finally get this off the ground ASAP.
Woot! Glad to hear both Wally and this poll are still alive :)
Sent my preseason votes to you Grizz!
I immediately sent my ballot in once I saw the message.....
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 03, 2019, 01:30:58 AM
(https://media.giphy.com/media/TYfZuDl9tz3zy/giphy.gif)
Thank you to FCGG. Please pass your preseason polls along to him.
Sorry for holding this up until game week, but I'm glad we'll finally get this off the ground ASAP.
Hey wally:
Love your smoking chimney image! Great levity! Reminds me of that smoking windmill that sac posted a couple years ago when the discussion was about the age-old "Rumor Mill" in Holland/Hope College! You guys (and others) always make this posting fun!
I've received 10 ballots so far. 1 person has decided not to participate this season, and one hasn't responded but based on the top 25 poll I feel like they either won't participate or will join after week 1. With that said, I'll get the poll up in a little bit.
Hopefully this posts correctly as I don't normally do pictures but I think it'll work well. Let me know if the colors are too much.
(https://i.imgur.com/RDFtDKA.png)
https://i.imgur.com/RDFtDKA.png
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, NCF, smedindy, thunderdog, and wally wabash.
Well, this is different lol.
I am column #8 and was oh so close to hitting the nail on the head.
I'm column 9 - pessimistic about IWU and Wheaton, but only slightly.
I'm column 6. And as always I am still dry heaving from including BW on my ballot. Unfortunately, with a good HC at the helm these days I may have to get used to it more and more.
I love the colors. thanks FCGrizzliesGrad for that.
I'm column 1.
I was 3.
That may be the last time an MIAA team appears on my rankings this season :(
Waiting on one ballot, I'll post tomorrow whether it's in or not.
Week 1
(https://i.imgur.com/L7HzLo5.png)
https://i.imgur.com/L7HzLo5.png
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, NCF, smedindy, thunderdog, and wally wabash.
I'm column 3...the lonely Berg backer.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 11, 2019, 02:09:14 PM
I'm column 3...the lonely Berg backer.
+K for ranking Berg and not BW ;)
Quote from: bluestreak66 on September 11, 2019, 04:58:31 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 11, 2019, 02:09:14 PM
I'm column 3...the lonely Berg backer.
+K for ranking Berg and not BW ;)
If there's one thing you can count on me for it's that on my ballot BW loses every tie. But I didn't really even view it as a tie. I knew Denison was jumping them because DU's win was the most impressive in the NR, IMO. I watched the BW game and wasn't overly impressed. Berg pounded Adrian 57-7 in MI and Kickoff had Adrian (142) comfortably ahead of Alma (200). Good enough for me to (happily) back the Princes this week!
Week 2
(https://i.imgur.com/ChJ49oS.png)
https://i.imgur.com/ChJ49oS.png
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, NCF, smedindy, thunderdog, and wally wabash.
I'm row 1. I don't like putting Trine on my ballot, but too many teams lost last week...
Plus, it comes with the added benefit of if Hope beats Aurora and then beats Trine and Albion the following weeks, I will probably have enough justification to put them back in my rankings :)
At least I wasn't the only one to put AU on the ballot. Plus too many teams (Mainly the CCIW contingent) did not play so options were slim. Was figuring IWU wasn't as strong as advertised. They should have a great season regardless but the opening games are make or break IMO.
I'm column 6. I wasn't happy with Berg's performance against Wilm so I dropped them back out. Wilm was showing some signs of being a little better last year under the new HC, but you still need to dispatch them easily if you're a top regional team. I left Wabash in near the bottom for now (#9), but I will admit that watching their defense gave me some pause already. I thought offensively they looked fine especially with a freshman QB making his first start. IMO the hardest team to rank this week was IWU. In the end I opted to think they're still a very good team that had an outlier game. We'll find out soon enough.
I think you guys are mostly on the money with your picks. I think I would have Albion at this point, and Heidelberg. I would also drop Wittenberg down some.
I do think Aurora is legit. Looking at St. Norberts defensive stats over the years...no offense had put 50 points on them and throw for almost 500 yards. I believe 450 of those yards were in the first half. The win vs Norbert looks better as well as Norbert went on and beat at WIAC school the following week.
Aurora picked up a couple of solid WR's transfers. #81 came from Monmouth and has 7 td's in 2 games. #13 was a top WR for North Central last year and has been out with a foot injury. Think he will be back soon.
Quote from: BigRedScots on September 18, 2019, 12:24:21 PM
I do think Aurora is legit. Looking at St. Norberts defensive stats over the years...no offense had put 50 points on them and throw for almost 500 yards. I believe 450 of those yards were in the first half. The win vs Norbert looks better as well as Norbert went on and beat at WIAC school the following week.
Aurora picked up a couple of solid WR's transfers. #81 came from Monmouth and has 7 td's in 2 games. #13 was a top WR for North Central last year and has been out with a foot injury. Think he will be back soon.
SNC also beat an undefeated Trine team 31-7 in the first round of the playoffs last year. IMO, Aurora absolutely deserves to be ranked ahead of Trine at the moment.
I'm column 7. low man on Witt. only 1 of 2 to not rank Wabash. 1 of 3 to rank Aurora.
Quote from: thunderdog on September 18, 2019, 01:32:50 PM
SNC also beat an undefeated Trine team 31-7 in the first round of the playoffs last year. IMO, Aurora absolutely deserves to be ranked ahead of Trine at the moment.
My preseason rankings were pretty much...
1. Mount Union
2, 3, 4, 5. The top 4 CCIW teams
6. John Carroll
7, 8, 9. The top three NCAC teams
10. Best team in the MIAA.
Only two games in, I'm still having a difficult time ranking teams from perennial "lesser" conferences. This includes both the NACC and the MWC... I am intentionally holding out on ranking Aurora until after this week's game at Hope. It should be a good barometer on Aurora (as well as a good barometer for Hope and whether they'll ever reenter the conversation)...
I ranked Trine 10th this week, but honestly, it was really a posturing vote. I'm somewhat expecting Hope to beat Aurora this week. If that happens, Milliken will be first team to move into my rankings next week, perhaps replacing Trine if no one else loses.
If Aurora beats Hope this week, they will most likely be in my rankings next week.
These teams are NOT helping us with our pending ballots today!
JCU beats Ott 14-7. Woof. Their offense is not clicking. It was pouring in Columbus this afternoon, but at most that rain lasted the first half.
Witt stops Wooster's 2 pt conversion to tie it with 4:32 left and hangs on 14-12. Their offense is struggling.
Wabash's D appears to be struggling. Allegheny put up 35 points and a hair under 500 yds today in Wabash's 48-35 win.
Denison is predictably beating up on Hiram at the moment. But their performance against ONU, which I based a lot of their ranking on, took a big hit with ONU losing to freaking Wilm today.
I'm watching the IWU/Wheaton game and I'm underwhelmed by IWU so far, especially defensively.
And worst of all I thought BW looked very solid against Mount so I can't boot them!
Still waiting on two ballots and this poll is a doozy.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 24, 2019, 03:17:44 AM
Still waiting on two ballots and this poll is a doozy.
That I can believe! I got through the top 4 and didn't want to go any further. 5-10 was rough to try and rank.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 24, 2019, 03:17:44 AM
Still waiting on two ballots and this poll is a doozy.
I managed to send mine in before falling asleep last night during a livestream. Like Hopeful said, I had a hard time ranking the bottom half. Also I couldn't find a pen for a bit :P.
I believe this ties the record for teams in a single poll.
Week 3
(https://i.imgur.com/jZ5aqZU.png)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, NCF, smedindy, thunderdog, and wally wabash.
Quote from: HOPEful on September 24, 2019, 07:12:33 AM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 24, 2019, 03:17:44 AM
Still waiting on two ballots and this poll is a doozy.
That I can believe! I got through the top 4 and didn't want to go any further. 5-10 was rough to try and rank.
Exactly. I felt like there was a Grand Canyon between 4 and 5 and I could talk myself into about a dozen teams for those bottom 6 slots. I literally went from thinking I should drop IWU out altogether to thinking maybe I should just leave them at 5! It was a complete mess. I'm the high water guy for Trine (#5) and that was honestly just a shot in the dark because I had to put someone there to keep my ballot moving.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 24, 2019, 05:22:06 PM
Quote from: HOPEful on September 24, 2019, 07:12:33 AM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 24, 2019, 03:17:44 AM
Still waiting on two ballots and this poll is a doozy.
That I can believe! I got through the top 4 and didn't want to go any further. 5-10 was rough to try and rank.
Exactly. I felt like there was a Grand Canyon between 4 and 5 and I could talk myself into about a dozen teams for those bottom 6 slots. I literally went from thinking I should drop IWU out altogether to thinking maybe I should just leave them at 5! It was a complete mess. I'm the high water guy for Trine (#5) and that was honestly just a shot in the dark because I had to put someone there to keep my ballot moving.
Well, Dr., we'll see if your intuition is right in two weeks when Trine meets Hope at their place! :)
I'm column 5. My thoughts are...
1-3 - Same and everyone else.
4 - I went very high on Millikin. Reasoning is simple. I took the 2-0 CCIW team with a quality win over Hope. I also have the 1 week advantage of dropping them if they get obliterated by Wheaton, or leaving them if they win.
5 - John Carroll - That win was ugly. At least for one week, I felt the need to punish them in my rankings. And I can't erase the way they were bounced from the playoffs last season out of my mind. I can't drop them further and they'll very likely be my number 4 team next week when Wheaton beats Millikin, but I have little confidence in that offense right now. Of course, there's a chance they're number 1 on my list next week, but I don't really see how they pull off the upset right now.
6 - Denison - 2-0 team that has actually impressed me with their wins, although against ONU and Hiram.
7-8 - How low do you drop IWU and Wash U? For me it was to 7 and 8, giving benefit of the doubt to the CCIW. I still think these teams crush anyone left below them on a neutral field. For instance, as a fan, I want to rank Hope, but I think that IWU would beat them in Holland and do so comfortably.
9-10 - I went Wittenberg and Baldwin Wallace. I can't rank an MIAA team yet. I will. But it won't be until the winner of the Hope v. Trine game. And if Albion stays unbeaten and beats Hope the following week, it'll be them. From what I've seen from Hope and Trine this season, I'm currently expecting Hope to win that game and the game against Albion to be an unofficial MIAA championship game.
I was column 6. Glad to hear everyone struggled with their #5-#10 teams, in particular #8-#10. I was the lone vote for Heidelberg @ #8. I'm pretty convinced the OAC #3 team deserves this spot, just not sure if that's Berg or BW at this point (but we'll find out this weekend, won't we?
I struggled to keep WashU in the top 10. Losing to #2 NCC shouldn't (normally) knock them out, but it was a pretty convincing loss.
I am column 2. Not sure what you all are talking about, I thought 4-10 was pretty straightforward. [/sarcasm]
CCIW (6 teams; 241 points): North Central, Wheaton, Illinois Wesleyan, WashU, Millikin, Augustana
OAC (4 teams; 180 points): Mount Union, John Carroll, Baldwin Wallace, Heidelberg
NCAC (3 teams; 100 points): Denison, Wittenberg, Wabash
MIAA (3 teams; 28 points): Trine, Albion, Hope
NACC (1 team; 1 point): Aurora
HCAC (0): :( :'( :'(
When even the HCAC homer can't put an HCAC team in this mess of a Top 10.... ;)
Quote from: smedindy on September 25, 2019, 10:49:23 PM
When even the HCAC homer can't put an HCAC team in this mess of a Top 10.... ;)
Doubly bad because this has been the best non-conference performance (not counting the three "non-conference" games last week) since 2010. A mighty 6-10 so far (and MSJ finishes the season with SUNY Maritime who they should beat for a 7th win (not holding my breath for Rose against St John's). You'd have to go back to 2009, before Earlham left the NCAC, to find a season with 7 wins. The conference went 7-17 that year as they had 6 more non-conference games than this year.
Mount St Joseph is still unbeaten (hopefully not for much longer though) so if we get another chaotic week who knows.
I was 3 yards away from booting BW this week. But nooooo, Berg can't convert the 2 point try! That looked like (on paper) it was a great game though. Berg is definitely better than I expected.
Also, for the record I hate the NRFP this year beyond the top 3 spots. Every single team I look at their resume and think "no way, that's not a top 5 team" and then realize I just said that about every team except the top 3 and I still have to hold my nose and choose 2 of them.
Still one ballot missing. I'll have the poll up tonight regardless.
Sorry, guys. I am an awful person.
Week 4
(https://i.imgur.com/kUYAy0G.png)
https://i.imgur.com/kUYAy0G.png
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, NCF, smedindy, thunderdog, and wally wabash.
I'm column 5.
Right now, I'm of the opinion that either Hope or Albion will win the MIAA. Although Trine is 3-0, I think (wishfully maybe) that Hope is going to go down to Angola this weekend and take care of business. Barely holding on against Berg bumped BW from on my list to off it. Assuming they cruise by Allegheny, Denison will most like jump back onto my list next week.
I'm column 3. I was wondering if I'd be in the minority leaving JCU at 4 after a less-than-stellar game against Mount. Seems not. My guess is barring a complete blow out this weekend it'll be similar for the result of the NCC/WC game this weekend.
I am looking forward to the Hope/Trine game to give us a little clarity on the MIAA. We're not going to see anything special in the OAC as all the teams ranked (or considered) should win easily.
I thought Hope would beat Trine but did not see that double monkey-stomp coming: Hope 51, Trine 0! :o
Since previously-undefeated Albion also lost (28-32 to Alma), I wonder whether Hope will crack the top ten this week?
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 05, 2019, 04:12:58 PM
I thought Hope would beat Trine but did not see that double monkey-stomp coming: Hope 51, Trine 0! :o
Since previously-undefeated Albion also lost (28-32 to Alma), I wonder whether Hope will crack the top ten this week?
They definitely got my attention yesterday
I'm pretty sure I just spent the longest time I ever have deciding on the #10 spot.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 07, 2019, 06:06:12 PM
I'm pretty sure I just spent the longest time I ever have deciding on the #10 spot.
I really hope you picked Trine. :)
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 07, 2019, 06:25:20 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 07, 2019, 06:06:12 PM
I'm pretty sure I just spent the longest time I ever have deciding on the #10 spot.
I really hope you picked Trine. :)
LOL. I nearly drowned when that ship started taking on water Saturday! It was a long fall from that #5 spot.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 07, 2019, 07:13:54 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 07, 2019, 06:25:20 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 07, 2019, 06:06:12 PM
I'm pretty sure I just spent the longest time I ever have deciding on the #10 spot.
I really hope you picked Trine. :)
LOL. I nearly drowned when that ship started taking on water Saturday! It was a long fall from that #5 spot.
Them and top ten hopeful Albion. Man the NACC and the MIAA were a trainwreck on the first week of league play.
Everything is a bit odd this season. Not counting the two from the NESCAC, there's still 29 unbeaten teams in the country but only 4 of them in the north (Mount Union, Wheaton, Mount St Joseph, Olivet) and we're just now approaching the halfway mark. We had 8 last season at this point. Precisely 1/3 of the region (18 of 54) are sitting at 3-1 or 4-1.
Some of that may also be due to the fact that there have been, what seems like to me anyway, a boatload of games against top league contenders early in the season.
Quote from: Captain_Joe08 on October 08, 2019, 12:19:55 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 07, 2019, 07:13:54 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 07, 2019, 06:25:20 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 07, 2019, 06:06:12 PM
I'm pretty sure I just spent the longest time I ever have deciding on the #10 spot.
I really hope you picked Trine. :)
LOL. I nearly drowned when that ship started taking on water Saturday! It was a long fall from that #5 spot.
Them and top ten hopeful Albion. Man the NACC and the MIAA were a trainwreck on the first week of league play.
I somewhat disagree about the MIAA. I think everyone who's watched Trine this season has seen they're just not nearly as good as they were the last couple seasons. They lost a LOT of talent. They were picked by the MIAA coaches to finish 3rd in the conference. Hope was picked to finish first, and looked the part this week. I don't think anyone expected the man handling that happened in Angola, but I fully expected the Dutchmen to win.
I did not expect Albion to lose to Alma though.
I'm excited to see this weeks fan poll. I'm sure Wheaton bumps to #2, if not #1. That was a big win over NCC.
I agree that the MIAA is a mess, but Hope looked really strong and seem to be the team to beat now. Hope probably gets a good bump this week.
I'm guessing Marietta drops out and the rest of the OAC probably keeps its spot.
Impressive win for Wheaton, yes, but #1 in this region is reserved until something truly seismic happens.
Quote from: Captainred81 on October 08, 2019, 04:46:35 PM
I'm excited to see this weeks fan poll. I'm sure Wheaton bumps to #2, if not #1. That was a big win over NCC.
I agree that the MIAA is a mess, but Hope looked really strong and seem to be the team to beat now. Hope probably gets a good bump this week.
I'm guessing Marietta drops out and the rest of the OAC probably keeps its spot.
You must be new here.
Week 5
(https://i.imgur.com/GwseiNu.png)
https://imgur.com/a/HNNwqyJ
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, NCF, smedindy, thunderdog, and wally wabash.
I'm column 8.
I'm low guy on Wabash right now. We'll see in a couple weeks when they play Wittenberg.
Making the case for Augustana... Last week they cruised by Millikin. The same Millikin team that beat a Hope team that all but 1 of us ranked. The week before, Augustana went to IWU and kept it close all game. I'm excited to see how they play against North Central this week.
Albion at Hope for Homecoming this week feels like an unofficial MIAA Championship game. If Hope wins (and I think they will comfortably), they should run the table the rest of MIAA play.
It seems Augie is under rated relative to Hope with a common result that is dramatically different and equal 3-1 records.
Quote from: HOPEful on October 09, 2019, 07:34:51 AM
I'm column 8.
I'm low guy on Wabash right now. We'll see in a couple weeks when they play Wittenberg.
Making the case for Augustana... Last week they cruised by Millikin. The same Millikin team that beat a Hope team that all but 1 of us ranked. The week before, Augustana went to IWU and kept it close all game. I'm excited to see how they play against North Central this week.
Albion at Hope for Homecoming this week feels like an unofficial MIAA Championship game. If Hope wins (and I think they will comfortably), they should run the table the rest of MIAA play.
While I am not participating in this North Region Fan Poll with all of you, I just thought I would chime in here. Regarding the first topic, yes, it will be interesting to see how Augustana plays against North Central.
As to the second, our upcoming Homecoming game this Saturday against Albion indeed does have the feel of the unofficial MIAA Championship game-it could very well turn out to be that, depending on a couple of scenarios for sure as we all realize. However, while I am like you in that I hope and think that Hope does have a great chance at "running the table" thereafter if they win this week, that obviously is not a given and will still be a tough challenge. Your and Usee's example regarding the Millikin-Hope-Augustana comparison supports that thinking as well as Alma's huge upset against Albion. Those are just examples that show anyone can pull the upset. I do not count out Olivet, especially if they beat Adrian this weekend and while Hope should realistically beat Alma, if they win the Albion game, both Alma and Olivet cannot be taken for granted. Not saying Hope will do that, just saying that the intensity will need to be sustained.
Anyway, I enjoy seeing how all of you rate and predict the weekly outcomes here.
I'm column 5. I thought overall this week was a little easier than previous ones, but I'm still surprised I ran the table with my ballot.
As for Augie, I had my eye on them last week for my 10 spot so I really contemplated them this week. I just opted for Denison over Augie or BW this week. For me this week BW ended up being the #3 of that group because I frankly wasn't impressed with their performance against a very bad Cap team.
I have a question for the group. Do you guys treat a loss to Mount the same as any other loss when you're ranking teams? I do not, but I'm curious if I'm alone in that philosophy.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 09, 2019, 06:06:05 PM
I'm column 5. I thought overall this week was a little easier than previous ones, but I'm still surprised I ran the table with my ballot.
As for Augie, I had my eye on them last week for my 10 spot so I really contemplated them this week. I just opted for Denison over Augie or BW this week. For me this week BW ended up being the #3 of that group because I frankly wasn't impressed with their performance against a very bad Cap team.
I have a question for the group. Do you guys treat a loss to Mount the same as any other loss when you're ranking teams? I do not, but I'm curious if I'm alone in that philosophy.
Nope. TBQH, I don't even really pay attention to results vs. Mount Union for balloting purposes
unless a team wins or pushes Mount Union to the brink (see John Carroll, 2016, 2018). It's the same reason I never put Mount Union games in my NCAC Pick 'Em. Even when Mount Union plays a highly ranked team, they're going to be like 3+ TD favorites and why do I want to put an expected blowout in my pick 'em by choice? Mount Union just operates in a separate strata than the rest of the region (division).
I'm column 2. I guess I'm opened up for critique for ranking Hope so high and Augustana not at all. Augustana is probably just off of my top 10 and they've got plenty of opportunity to play in, starting this week.
If Augustana had beat Millikin by less than a touchdown while Hope lost to Millikin by less than a TD I think it's understandable but Augie pounded Millikin badly who beat Hope. Augie also has a result against IWU (1 play from the 10 yd line from winning in Bloomington) that is more evidence they are under rated.
So if Augie loses to NCC by 30 does that justify not ranking them in the top 10? Or if they only lose by 14 does that bump them up?
I like what y'all have done here. I have not voted on this pole, although it seems cool.
My critique is:
I think Witt is too high. Their wins have not been impressive against lesser opponents, and they have the loss to W&J which didn't seem that bad at first, but after W&J lost it seems worse.
I think I would have Augie, BW and Hope higher, and bumping Witt and Dennison down.
Nice work all
My over simplified, general voting philosophy going forward.
1. Mount Union.
2. Everyone in the CCIW I think is better than John Carroll.
3. John Carroll.
4. Everyone in the CCIW I think is better than everyone else.
5. Anyone left in Michigan or Ohio that I think is pretty good.
Quote from: USee on October 10, 2019, 01:31:11 AM
If Augustana had beat Millikin by less than a touchdown while Hope lost to Millikin by less than a TD I think it's understandable but Augie pounded Millikin badly who beat Hope. Augie also has a result against IWU (1 play from the 10 yd line from winning in Bloomington) that is more evidence they are under rated.
So if Augie loses to NCC by 30 does that justify not ranking them in the top 10? Or if they only lose by 14 does that bump them up?
I readily admit I took a "wait and see" approach re: Augie.
I'm #4. Week one games are always 'interesting', and Millikin beat Hope at home, and then lost to Augie at Augie. Hope seems to have improved greatly, with a nice win against Aurora and a monster win at Trine.
Right now I think Hope's better than either Augie or Millikin. Augie's win against Coe may not look impressive until we see their results against Simpson, Central, or Wartburg.
The difference between neutral site, road and home games is pretty statistically set at about 3 points.
Quote from: USee on October 10, 2019, 02:35:33 PM
The difference between neutral site, road and home games is pretty statistically set at about 3 points.
In the NFL. Where roster talent is fairly equal (certainly relative to NCAA Division III) and crowds in excess of 50,000 people can actually affect the playing environment for visitors. I'm not sure I buy into a significant home/away advantage at this level.
I'll freely admit (again) that I may be undervaluing Augustana this week vis a vis Hope, but there's also more information available than Hope-Millikin and Augustana-Millikin and some of that information is really valuable.
Quote from: USee on October 10, 2019, 01:31:11 AM
If Augustana had beat Millikin by less than a touchdown while Hope lost to Millikin by less than a TD I think it's understandable but Augie pounded Millikin badly who beat Hope. Augie also has a result against IWU (1 play from the 10 yd line from winning in Bloomington) that is more evidence they are under rated.
So if Augie loses to NCC by 30 does that justify not ranking them in the top 10? Or if they only lose by 14 does that bump them up?
I'm just interested to see the result. In my mind, how teams do against Mount doesn't count unless they keep it close. To a lesser degree, I feel the same way about NCC and Wheaton.
But it's an inexact barometer for sure! Last year, I was 100% on board the John Carroll kept it close against Mount, that defense is amazing, I've gotta rank them 2nd or 3rd in the region... and then they lost to Raldolph Macon in the first round.
There's a lot more to HFA than crowds and roster talent. But I agree with your point that horn/away is much less important than stastically proven spreads (which also factor into Cokkege football not just the NFL-this is well documented fact) for D3. Home Vs away at this level is not much of a reason for most results. Certainly not 26 pt differentials.
There is a lot more info than those 3 teams common result. And that information is quite valuable I agree.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 10, 2019, 02:49:56 PM
Quote from: USee on October 10, 2019, 02:35:33 PM
The difference between neutral site, road and home games is pretty statistically set at about 3 points.
In the NFL. Where roster talent is fairly equal (certainly relative to NCAA Division III) and crowds in excess of 50,000 people can actually affect the playing environment for visitors. I'm not sure I buy into a significant home/away advantage at this level.
I'll freely admit (again) that I may be undervaluing Augustana this week vis a vis Hope, but there's also more information available than Hope-Millikin and Augustana-Millikin and some of that information is really valuable.
I don't have the exact source but I could probably dig it up, but somebody looked at HFA pretty extensively and concluded that the difference was primarily a result of minor impacts to officiating. Officials were determined to be swayed (minimally but meaningfully) in favor of the home team.
In D3 I'm guessing that home/away advantages have a more to do with travel than home crowds or even officiating.
Quote from: Li'l Giant on October 10, 2019, 10:58:06 PM
In D3 I'm guessing that home/away advantages have a more to do with travel than home crowds or even officiating.
Especially if it involves an overnighter. I often don't sleep very well in the first day in a new bed (however comfortable) - I suspect I am not alone in this.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 10, 2019, 11:06:13 PM
Quote from: Li'l Giant on October 10, 2019, 10:58:06 PM
In D3 I'm guessing that home/away advantages have a more to do with travel than home crowds or even officiating.
Especially if it involves an overnighter. I often don't sleep very well in the first day in a new bed (however comfortable) - I suspect I am not alone in this.
All true. I think the study I found was at a professional level.
I actually think the HFA could be more significant in D3.
For fun I checked where Massey had the north teams. Here are Massey's ratings (with overall national rating in parenthesis)... they obviously reflect the CCIW's strength of schedule...
1. Wheaton (1)
2. Mount Union (2)
3. North Central (6)
4. Washington U. (17)
5. IWU (24)
6. Augustana (32)
7. John Carroll (39)
8. Carthage (41)
9. Baldwin Wallace (50)
10. Millikin (58)
Honorable Mentions: Monmouth (66), Hope (69), Denison (71), Wabash (72), Mt. St. Joseph (76)
I found this week to be somewhat easier than previous weeks. Not much happened to teams in or just out of my rankings that altered my opinions of them.
CCIW games all went as should have been expected for the most part. Although I would have liked to see it a little closer, even Augustana's 42-14 loss to North Central doesn't really tell me much.
Wabash's loss to Wooster made me feel justified in being low guy on them last week.
Week 6
(https://i.imgur.com/D9R8Hvo.png)
https://imgur.com/a/HNNwqyJ
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, NCF, smedindy, thunderdog, and wally wabash.
Interesting that undefeated Olivet doesn't have any votes.
Quote from: Sir Battlescars on October 17, 2019, 11:58:06 AM
Interesting that undefeated Olivet doesn’t have any votes.
I believe that's all about schedule. Their opponents have a combined 9-16 record this year, and Massey has their SOS as 207 out of 249 teams. For comparison, here is the Massey SOS for the ranked teams this Fan Poll.
Mt. Union - 66
Wheaton - 10
North Central - 8
John Carroll - 74
Illinois Wesleyan - 7
Wittenberg - 143
WashU - 34
Hope - 121
Denison - 175
Baldwin Wallace - 60
Aurora - 134
Wabash - 109
Auggie - 18
Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on October 17, 2019, 12:25:12 PM
I believe that's all about schedule & CONFERENCE
I'm column 4. This is the first time in ALL MY YEARS (all 1.5 years ;)) of doing the NRFP that I only have 1 NCAC team in the top 10. Wabash's overall inconsistency coupled with their convincing win over Denison keeps both of them outside my top 10. Hope's season opener loss to a mid-range CCIW school (Millikin) will likely keep them from climbing much higher than 8 or 9 all season, in my book. Aurora's competitive loss to said Hope will likely keep those 2 close in the rankings, for the time being. I think both the CCIW and OAC are stronger at the top (top 4) than previous seasons. I'm much closer to giving Heidelberg and their ultra-competitive 1 point loss to current NRFP #10 Baldwin Wallace a spot than either Wabash or Denison. Early in the season, I was a bit uncomfortable giving the CCIW 4 spots in the top 10, but getting more and more comfortable with it each week. If Wabash beats Witt, it's likely I'll insert OAC team #4 and not have any NCAC teams in my top 10.
Quote from: Sir Battlescars on October 17, 2019, 11:58:06 AM
Interesting that undefeated Olivet doesn't have any votes.
Olivet's 20-17 win over Wilmington doesn't do anything to convince me they won't end up 7-3 or 6-4 (losses to Hope, Alma, Albion and possibly Trine). But that's why we play the game and don't just let Logan Hansen determine the outcome... something that he, his megamind, and his super duper computer and statistical crunching algorithms are
incredibly good at!
Quote from: Sir Battlescars on October 17, 2019, 11:58:06 AM
Interesting that undefeated Olivet doesn't have any votes.
I didn't even consider Olivet and TBH won't unless they beat Hope. The MIAA just doesn't have that kind of currency.
I will say that as the resident OAC homer even I'm surprised a couple folks have JCU at 3.
Column 5 here. I'm still bullish on Hope even though they lost in Week 1.
I'm not bullish on John Carroll and intend to start a secret conversation with my other voters here to oust the Streaks from the NRFP permanently because we don't do that around here. :)
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 17, 2019, 06:10:35 PM
Quote from: Sir Battlescars on October 17, 2019, 11:58:06 AM
Interesting that undefeated Olivet doesn't have any votes.
I didn't even consider Olivet and TBH won't unless they beat Hope. The MIAA just doesn't have that kind of currency.
I will say that as the resident OAC homer even I'm surprised a couple folks have JCU at 3.
I have seen on a line of thinking on this board to just throw out most results against Mount Union unless they upset the Raiders or keep it very close. Anything that makes the pollsters
not throw out the game (such as Mount playing their starters the entire second half, not changing the play-calling much, yet still getting outscored) is significant.
Quote from: archgemini24 on October 18, 2019, 09:15:12 AM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 17, 2019, 06:10:35 PM
Quote from: Sir Battlescars on October 17, 2019, 11:58:06 AM
Interesting that undefeated Olivet doesn't have any votes.
I didn't even consider Olivet and TBH won't unless they beat Hope. The MIAA just doesn't have that kind of currency.
I will say that as the resident OAC homer even I'm surprised a couple folks have JCU at 3.
I have seen on a line of thinking on this board to just throw out most results against Mount Union unless they upset the Raiders or keep it very close. Anything that makes the pollsters not throw out the game (such as Mount playing their starters the entire second half, not changing the play-calling much, yet still getting outscored) is significant.
Yep, any game that isn't four touchdowns or more to zero (or the occasional seven) at halftime gets my attention. Of course, it would have to happen in order to get my attention.
Week 7
(https://i.imgur.com/yuWEnI7.png)
https://imgur.com/a/HNNwqyJ
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, NCF, smedindy, thunderdog, and wally wabash.
I'm row 4.
I agree with everyone else on 1-5. After that, I simply think the CCIW's 4th and 5th best teams are still better than most of the remaining teams. Augustana's losses are to IWU, in a very close contest, and North Central. They smoked a Millikin team that beat Hope. I just don't know how I rank Hope above Augustana right now, seeing as I can't envision them doing any better were they to play Augustana's schedule.
Washington is trickier. Their losses are to North Central and Wheaton and neither game was close. But again, how many team's in the North region to you feel confident would keep it close against those two? I don't think Hope would, nor any of the NCAC teams.
Quote from: HOPEful on October 23, 2019, 07:36:11 AM
I agree with everyone else on 1-5. After that, I simply think the CCIW's 4th and 5th best teams are still better than most of the remaining teams. Augustana's losses are to IWU, in a very close contest, and North Park. They smoked a Millikin team that beat Hope. I just don't know how I rank Hope above Augustana right now, seeing as I can't envision them doing any better were they to play Augustana's schedule.
I don't think anyone who loses to North Park is going to even be in the extended extended rankings ;) I also don't think too many people have mixed up North Central and North Park football teams in recent years. ???
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 23, 2019, 07:46:10 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on October 23, 2019, 07:36:11 AM
I agree with everyone else on 1-5. After that, I simply think the CCIW's 4th and 5th best teams are still better than most of the remaining teams. Augustana's losses are to IWU, in a very close contest, and North Park. They smoked a Millikin team that beat Hope. I just don't know how I rank Hope above Augustana right now, seeing as I can't envision them doing any better were they to play Augustana's schedule.
I don't think anyone who loses to North Park is going to even be in the extended extended rankings ;) I also don't think too many people have mixed up North Central and North Park football teams in recent years. ???
Haha! I had North Park on the brain. But certainly a team losing to North Park would keep them out of my rankings for a very very long time. Editted!
I'm column 10 this week. I threw Berg a #10 vote. They're 5-1 with their lone loss being 34-33 to BW where they went for 2 at the end and failed. With Mount coming to town tomorrow they'll be dropping out barring something miraculous occurring.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 25, 2019, 02:11:20 PM
I'm column 10 this week. I threw Berg a #10 vote. They're 5-1 with their lone loss being 34-33 to BW where they went for 2 at the end and failed. With Mount coming to town tomorrow they'll be dropping out barring something miraculous occurring.
I watched that Berg vs. BW game and still can't believe Heidelberg lost. Heidelberg should have won by 28 point but got lackadaisical on both sides of the ball that day instead of keeping their foot on the gas. Unfortunately, that BW loss will probably cost Heidelberg a spot in the playoffs.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 25, 2019, 02:11:20 PM
I'm column 10 this week. I threw Berg a #10 vote. They're 5-1 with their lone loss being 34-33 to BW where they went for 2 at the end and failed. With Mount coming to town tomorrow they'll be dropping out barring something miraculous occurring.
I struggle with this mentality. To me, losing to Mount shouldn't change your ranking. To a lesser extent, neither should losing to Wheaton or North Central.
The philosophy i use for my rankings could sound something like this...
1a. Mount
1b. The best team in the CCIW
Next. Any team that I think could keep from being embarrassed by Mount (if that team exists).
Next. Any team that I think could keep from being embarrassed by the best team in the CCIW.
Finally. Try to stay unbiased as a fill in the remaining teams based on how I think they would do against each other one on one.
I don't believe Hope or Denison would have any shot at keeping it close against Mount or Wheaton. So why should they be rewarded in my rankings over a CCIW or OAC team, simply because they don't have to play them? Or perhaps better argued, why should a CCIW or OAC team be penalized for getting waxed by a team that I believe would wax every team outside of the top 2 to 4.
Miraculous was an overstatement. Berg needs to play well and give a BW type competitive performance. A loss certainly isn't an automatic disqualification. I just meant that if they get housed and look like Ott they'll be gone and that's a pretty decent chance.
It looks like some people wrote off Denison a bit quickly.
It will be interesting when the RRs come out and evolve. Denison has a poor SOS that should improve and with one loss should be ranked somewhere. Where will Aurora or Hope shake out if they don't lose another game? What will they do with the HCAC winner (Hanover or maybe still MSJ)? Does Wash U get ranked with two losses? Does an 8-2 Wabash? A third OAC team?
Week 8
(https://i.imgur.com/9rkp86e.png)
https://imgur.com/a/HNNwqyJ
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, NCF, smedindy, thunderdog, and wally wabash.
Could whomever has Illinois Wesleyan above Wash U. explain your reasoning?
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 30, 2019, 02:35:35 AM
Week 8
(https://i.imgur.com/QJbeIGH.png)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, NCF, smedindy, thunderdog, and wally wabash.
Ice Bear says this may be a stupid ****ing question and he may be setting himself up here in case this is obvious
and he just doesn't see it but...where is the NRFP?
Ice always puts more faith in the fan polls and would love to see this one.
Quote from: Ice Bear on October 31, 2019, 10:44:06 AM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 30, 2019, 02:35:35 AM
Week 8
(https://i.imgur.com/QJbeIGH.png)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, NCF, smedindy, thunderdog, and wally wabash.
Ice Bear says this may be a stupid ****ing question and he may be setting himself up here in case this is obvious
and he just doesn't see it but...where is the NRFP?
Ice always puts more faith in the fan polls and would love to see this one.
Is the picture not showing up for you? Here's the link: https://i.imgur.com/QJbeIGH.png (https://i.imgur.com/QJbeIGH.png)
Why is he referring to himself in the 3rd person?
Quote from: Li'l Giant on October 31, 2019, 12:42:44 PM
Why is he referring to himself in the 3rd person?
Because the east region is a bizarre place that is rather different to the other three regions :D
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 31, 2019, 12:48:41 PM
Quote from: Li'l Giant on October 31, 2019, 12:42:44 PM
Why is he referring to himself in the 3rd person?
Because the east region is a bizarre place that is rather different to the other three regions :D
They've got a few people over there that refer to themselves in the 3rd person. I honestly can't tell if it's some local thing, some inside joke between a few posters, or one guy with multiple accounts/personalities.
to be fair, the West has a few 3rd person wacko's too.
If Post Patterns was the tournament, the LL board would get a top seed and Ice Bear is one reason why. He's a solid ****ing contributor.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 31, 2019, 01:55:49 PM
If Post Patterns was the tournament, the LL board would get a top seed and Ice Bear is one reason why. He's a solid ****ing contributor.
That's good stuff WW. We should have a regional fan poll of fans and put together a tournament to crown a poster's national champion.
Quote from: USee on October 31, 2019, 01:51:08 PM
to be fair, the West has a few 3rd person wacko's too.
I'll grant the wackos part (MIAC board is filled with Rev and a bunch of Johnnies after all), but I've never seen anyone refer to themselves in 3rd person.
Quote from: jamtod on October 31, 2019, 03:15:02 PM
Quote from: USee on October 31, 2019, 01:51:08 PM
to be fair, the West has a few 3rd person wacko's too.
I'll grant the wackos part (MIAC board is filled with Rev and a bunch of Johnnies after all), but I've never seen anyone refer to themselves in 3rd person.
Off the top of my head, Ice Bear, AUPepBand, and Dilp all do this. I can't tell if they/he are/is a comical genius, or completely cookoo for coco puffs. It does always make me laugh though!
Quote from: bluestreak66 on October 31, 2019, 03:32:09 PM
Quote from: jamtod on October 31, 2019, 03:15:02 PM
Quote from: USee on October 31, 2019, 01:51:08 PM
to be fair, the West has a few 3rd person wacko's too.
I'll grant the wackos part (MIAC board is filled with Rev and a bunch of Johnnies after all), but I've never seen anyone refer to themselves in 3rd person.
Off the top of my head, Ice Bear, AUPepBand, and Dilp all do this. I can't tell if they/he are/is a comical genius, or completely cookoo for coco puffs. It does always make me laugh though!
Those are all east region cookoos though. We were talking the West Region boards.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 31, 2019, 10:52:34 AM
Quote from: Ice Bear on October 31, 2019, 10:44:06 AM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 30, 2019, 02:35:35 AM
Week 8
(https://i.imgur.com/QJbeIGH.png)
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, NCF, smedindy, thunderdog, and wally wabash.
Ice Bear says this may be a stupid ****ing question and he may be setting himself up here in case this is obvious
and he just doesn't see it but...where is the NRFP?
Ice always puts more faith in the fan polls and would love to see this one.
Is the picture not showing up for you? Here's the link: https://i.imgur.com/QJbeIGH.png (https://i.imgur.com/QJbeIGH.png)
Ice says thanks FC and he appreciates the effort and time you guys put into this poll. It just wasn't showing up on IB's work computer. +k
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 31, 2019, 01:55:49 PM
If Post Patterns was the tournament, the LL board would get a top seed and Ice Bear is one reason why. He's a solid ****ing contributor.
Ice Bear says thank you Wally! Right back at you. +k
I'm column 10.
At this point, I think Wash U is better than Hope or any Ohio team after Mount and John Carroll. For now I'm leaving IWU in the rankings, but that'll probably change.
I'm getting dangerously close to ranking Aurora.
Quote from: HOPEful on October 31, 2019, 04:44:30 PM
I'm column 10.
At this point, I think Wash U is better than Hope or any Ohio team after Mount and John Carroll. For now I'm leaving IWU in the rankings, but that'll probably change.
I'm getting dangerously close to ranking Aurora.
WashU's visit to the top 10 may be short lived. They play Augustana in St Louis Saturday and I think Augie is a better team than WashU.
I'm column 2 this week. I'm tepid on WashU and tend to agree with USee. I'm looking for Augie to jump back in for me this week.
Quote from: jamtod on October 31, 2019, 03:15:02 PM
Quote from: USee on October 31, 2019, 01:51:08 PM
to be fair, the West has a few 3rd person wacko's too.
I'll grant the wackos part (MIAC board is filled with Rev and a bunch of Johnnies after all), but I've never seen anyone refer to themselves in 3rd person.
Nobody on the MIAC board could hold a candle to The White Silly. Before your time on here, but he was next level. And hilarious. Initially the regulars were a little offended by them. Then they got his schtick and came around.
Quote from: USee on October 31, 2019, 07:24:45 PM
Quote from: HOPEful on October 31, 2019, 04:44:30 PM
I'm column 10.
At this point, I think Wash U is better than Hope or any Ohio team after Mount and John Carroll. For now I'm leaving IWU in the rankings, but that'll probably change.
I'm getting dangerously close to ranking Aurora.
WashU's visit to the top 10 may be short lived. They play Augustana in St Louis Saturday and I think Augie is a better team than WashU.
If that happens, I'd probably consider keeping both ranked. I just think the CCIW so much better than every other North Region conference, and I give a heavy handed benefit of the doubt. I would love to see Aurora play a CCIW schedule and see where they end up. My opinion, they'd end up on par with Millikin and Carthage.
The suspense is killing me!! :)
Still waiting on 2 ballots... the usual suspect and one other. I'll send out reminders to see if we can actually get this up on a Tuesday.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 05, 2019, 01:28:58 PM
Still waiting on 2 ballots... the usual suspect and one other. I'll send out reminders to see if we can actually get this up on a Tuesday.
@ me next time
Week 9
(https://i.imgur.com/w0obZ3H.png)
https://imgur.com/a/HNNwqyJ
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, NCF, smedindy, thunderdog, and wally wabash.
I'm sure the Regional Rankings will make more sense than this does.
https://d3football.com/playoffs/2019/first-regional-ranking
I'm column 2. My rankings did not change from last week.
Can someone please explain to me how the committee can logically rank 7-1 Hope ahead of two 7-1 OAC teams? Hope is having a nice season, but come on! Everyone knows the MIAA is nowhere near the level of the OAC, just look at the scores of the 3 games played between the two conferences this year. Also throw in the fact that Hope's loss is to mediocre Millikan while JCU's and BW's loss is to Mount Union.
Quote from: Sir Battlescars on November 06, 2019, 07:32:40 PM
Can someone please explain to me how the committee can logically rank 7-1 Hope ahead of two 7-1 OAC teams? Hope is having a nice season, but come on! Everyone knows the MIAA is nowhere near the level of the OAC, just look at the scores of the 3 games played between the two conferences this year. Also throw in the fact that Hope's loss is to mediocre Millikan while JCU's and BW's loss is to Mount Union.
First, it doesn't matter because Hope is a Pool A team and BW/JCU are Pool C. 2nd, the criteria dictate these rankings, not anyones opinions about which league is better. The criteria clearly favors Hope in this spot.
Quote from: Sir Battlescars on November 06, 2019, 07:32:40 PM
Can someone please explain to me how the committee can logically rank 7-1 Hope ahead of two 7-1 OAC teams? Hope is having a nice season, but come on! Everyone knows the MIAA is nowhere near the level of the OAC, just look at the scores of the 3 games played between the two conferences this year. Also throw in the fact that Hope's loss is to mediocre Millikan while JCU's and BW's loss is to Mount Union.
John Carroll doesn't have a win against a team with a winning record. Baldwin Wallace does, so good on them. They also have an inferior SOS and do not have a win against a ranked team, which Hope does.
I think we're way past the time where OAC #2 gets waved through the door and into the NCAA tournament. It's time for those teams to earn it, and this year they really haven't. The winner of JCU/BW will have a shot, but right now the OAC runner up is looking at a last in/first out scenario.
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 06, 2019, 07:49:40 PM
Quote from: Sir Battlescars on November 06, 2019, 07:32:40 PM
Can someone please explain to me how the committee can logically rank 7-1 Hope ahead of two 7-1 OAC teams? Hope is having a nice season, but come on! Everyone knows the MIAA is nowhere near the level of the OAC, just look at the scores of the 3 games played between the two conferences this year. Also throw in the fact that Hope's loss is to mediocre Millikan while JCU's and BW's loss is to Mount Union.
John Carroll doesn't have a win against a team with a winning record. Baldwin Wallace does, so good on them. They also have an inferior SOS and do not have a win against a ranked team, which Hope does.
I think we're way past the time where OAC #2 gets waved through the door and into the NCAA tournament. It's time for those teams to earn it, and this year they really haven't. The winner of JCU/BW will have a shot, but right now the OAC runner up is looking at a last in/first out scenario.
How do they earn it?
Quote from: Dr. Acula on November 06, 2019, 08:56:54 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 06, 2019, 07:49:40 PM
Quote from: Sir Battlescars on November 06, 2019, 07:32:40 PM
Can someone please explain to me how the committee can logically rank 7-1 Hope ahead of two 7-1 OAC teams? Hope is having a nice season, but come on! Everyone knows the MIAA is nowhere near the level of the OAC, just look at the scores of the 3 games played between the two conferences this year. Also throw in the fact that Hope's loss is to mediocre Millikan while JCU's and BW's loss is to Mount Union.
John Carroll doesn't have a win against a team with a winning record. Baldwin Wallace does, so good on them. They also have an inferior SOS and do not have a win against a ranked team, which Hope does.
I think we're way past the time where OAC #2 gets waved through the door and into the NCAA tournament. It's time for those teams to earn it, and this year they really haven't. The winner of JCU/BW will have a shot, but right now the OAC runner up is looking at a last in/first out scenario.
How do they earn it?
I'm not sure they can given the quality of the league below Mount Union. The quality opponents just aren't there throughout the OAC right now.
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 06, 2019, 10:11:19 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on November 06, 2019, 08:56:54 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 06, 2019, 07:49:40 PM
Quote from: Sir Battlescars on November 06, 2019, 07:32:40 PM
Can someone please explain to me how the committee can logically rank 7-1 Hope ahead of two 7-1 OAC teams? Hope is having a nice season, but come on! Everyone knows the MIAA is nowhere near the level of the OAC, just look at the scores of the 3 games played between the two conferences this year. Also throw in the fact that Hope's loss is to mediocre Millikan while JCU's and BW's loss is to Mount Union.
John Carroll doesn't have a win against a team with a winning record. Baldwin Wallace does, so good on them. They also have an inferior SOS and do not have a win against a ranked team, which Hope does.
I think we're way past the time where OAC #2 gets waved through the door and into the NCAA tournament. It's time for those teams to earn it, and this year they really haven't. The winner of JCU/BW will have a shot, but right now the OAC runner up is looking at a last in/first out scenario.
How do they earn it?
I'm not sure they can given the quality of the league below Mount Union. The quality opponents just aren't there throughout the OAC right now.
I agree. I also think a bigger problem has been the recent performance of the 2nd place OAC team in the playoffs. There was a time when it was typical that the 2nd place team would advance until facing Mount again. That hasn't been the case lately. Which hurts their reputation and future chances. With so little crossover games between leagues and regions, history plays a bigger role in D3 football selections than it does in other sports.
As support for my position that the OAC has fallen off, I offer the following that I put together a while back:
OAC losses to Mount in the playoffs:
1997 – John Carroll lost to Mount in Round 2 (1 win)
1999 - Ohio Northern lost to Mount in Round 2 (1 win)
2000 - Ohio Northern lost to Mount in Round 1 (0 wins)
2002 - John Carroll lost to Mount in the SEMI-FINALS (3 wins)
2005 - Capital lost to Mount in the Round 3 (2 wins)
2006 - Capital lost to Mount in Round 3 (2 wins)
OAC losses against someone else:
2003 - Baldwin Wallace to Wheaton in 2nd round (1 win)
2007 - Capital at Whitewater in Round 1 (UWW was Nat Champs) (0 wins)
2008 - Otterbein to Franklin in Round 1 (Franklin beat NCC in 2nd round, lost to Wheaton in regional final) (0 wins)
2012 - Heidelberg to Wittenberg in Round 1 (horrible loss for the OAC as H'berg had a big lead) (0 wins)
2013 - John Carroll to SFJ in Round 1 (0 wins)
2018 - John Carroll to Randolph Macon in Round 1 (worst of the OAC losses, expected JCU to roll back to Mount in Round 3) (0 wins)
Mount playoff losses as OAC runner-up:
2016 – MHB in the semi-finals (MHB national champs) (3 wins)
Overall, the 2nd place OAC team (including Mount) is a respectable 13-13. The non-Mount OAC teams are 10-12 in the playoffs. Which I would assume historically compares well to Pool C's from other conference. Remove the OAC playoff losses to Mount and they're a very solid 10-6.
However I will acknowledge the most telling sign from the data above is that the OAC has really fallen off in the last decade. Prior to 2007 it was expected that the 2nd place OAC team would win out until reaching Mount again. Since 2007, the norm has been for the 2nd place OAC team to piss down their leg in the playoffs. Ala JCU in 2018 year. I believe this is the case from watching the conference too. The days of ONU, BW and JCU all being competitive are gone.
The OAC has never been as competitive top to bottom as the WIAC or CCIW, but unfortunately it appears the conference has been trending in the wrong direction over the last decade when it comes to the top teams right behind Mount.
There was also a time back in the late 1990's thru mid-2000's where the top of the OAC provided as stiff a test from ONU, B-W and/or JCU as they would face all season on their way to a championship. That hasn't been the case in quite a long time. There has been a random team step up every once in a while to push Mount, but nothing consistent nor most importantly expected. Recently it has felt more like a surprise that an OAC team hung with Mount for 60 minutes instead of expecting it like you did with the ONU teams of the late 1990's or Capital in mid-2000's. And it isn't because Mount is more dominant now, it's because the 2nd & 3rd OAC teams have fallen off.
I find HScoach's negativity rather offensive.
^ that's pretty funny. Nicely done.
Quote from: HScoach on November 07, 2019, 09:24:59 AM
As support for my position that the OAC has fallen off, I offer the following that I put together a while back:
OAC losses to Mount in the playoffs:
1997 – John Carroll lost to Mount in Round 2 (1 win)
1999 - Ohio Northern lost to Mount in Round 2 (1 win)
2000 - Ohio Northern lost to Mount in Round 1 (0 wins)
2002 - John Carroll lost to Mount in the SEMI-FINALS (3 wins)
2005 - Capital lost to Mount in the Round 3 (2 wins)
2006 - Capital lost to Mount in Round 3 (2 wins)
OAC losses against someone else:
2003 - Baldwin Wallace to Wheaton in 2nd round (1 win)
2007 - Capital at Whitewater in Round 1 (UWW was Nat Champs) (0 wins)
2008 - Otterbein to Franklin in Round 1 (Franklin beat NCC in 2nd round, lost to Wheaton in regional final) (0 wins)
2012 - Heidelberg to Wittenberg in Round 1 (horrible loss for the OAC as H'berg had a big lead) (0 wins)
2013 - John Carroll to SFJ in Round 1 (0 wins)
2018 - John Carroll to Randolph Macon in Round 1 (worst of the OAC losses, expected JCU to roll back to Mount in Round 3) (0 wins)
Mount playoff losses as OAC runner-up:
2016 – MHB in the semi-finals (MHB national champs) (3 wins)
Overall, the 2nd place OAC team (including Mount) is a respectable 13-13. The non-Mount OAC teams are 10-12 in the playoffs. Which I would assume historically compares well to Pool C's from other conference. Remove the OAC playoff losses to Mount and they're a very solid 10-6.
However I will acknowledge the most telling sign from the data above is that the OAC has really fallen off in the last decade. Prior to 2007 it was expected that the 2nd place OAC team would win out until reaching Mount again. Since 2007, the norm has been for the 2nd place OAC team to piss down their leg in the playoffs. Ala JCU in 2018 year. I believe this is the case from watching the conference too. The days of ONU, BW and JCU all being competitive are gone.
The OAC has never been as competitive top to bottom as the WIAC or CCIW, but unfortunately it appears the conference has been trending in the wrong direction over the last decade when it comes to the top teams right behind Mount.
There was also a time back in the late 1990's thru mid-2000's where the top of the OAC provided as stiff a test from ONU, B-W and/or JCU as they would face all season on their way to a championship. That hasn't been the case in quite a long time. There has been a random team step up every once in a while to push Mount, but nothing consistent nor most importantly expected. Recently it has felt more like a surprise that an OAC team hung with Mount for 60 minutes instead of expecting it like you did with the ONU teams of the late 1990's or Capital in mid-2000's. And it isn't because Mount is more dominant now, it's because the 2nd & 3rd OAC teams have fallen off.
Additional data points:
OAC losses to Mount in the playoffs:2014 - John Carroll lost to Mount Union in Round 3 (2-1). There are two close losses to Mount this year, too.
OAC losses to someone else in the playoffs:2010 - Ohio Northern lost to North Central in Round 2 (1-1).
2015 - Ohio Northern lost to UW-Oshkosh in Round 2 (1-1).
2016 - John Carroll lost to UW-Oshkosh in the Semi-finals (3-1).
This brings the non-Mount teams to 17-16 (10-12 + 7-4) counting their losses to Mount and 17-9 (10-6 + 7-3) (!) without them.
I am not sure I see the fall-off you have mentioned. There are a lot more points in favor of the newer crews that brings thing a bit more into balance, especially that 2016 JCU team (if you are looking at them as the champ, then Mount Union was the OAC runner-up... who also went 3-1, so the record doesn't change). Since 2009 (this allows for comparison against the conference records listed in d3.com's playoff FAQ), the "other" OAC team is 7-7, which percentage-wise would be good for a tie for 9th on the list with the MAC at .500.
I do see that there are more non-Mount Union losses, though, but that is unsurprising considering:
- Mount Union has been shipped out to 1-line the East more frequently, and the selection committee has tried harder where they could to avoid early-conference rematches (so more teams get a shot at the OAC runner-up before Mount does).
- Few of those are upsets (although some are fantastically bad).
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 06, 2019, 10:11:19 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on November 06, 2019, 08:56:54 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 06, 2019, 07:49:40 PM
Quote from: Sir Battlescars on November 06, 2019, 07:32:40 PM
Can someone please explain to me how the committee can logically rank 7-1 Hope ahead of two 7-1 OAC teams? Hope is having a nice season, but come on! Everyone knows the MIAA is nowhere near the level of the OAC, just look at the scores of the 3 games played between the two conferences this year. Also throw in the fact that Hope's loss is to mediocre Millikan while JCU's and BW's loss is to Mount Union.
John Carroll doesn't have a win against a team with a winning record. Baldwin Wallace does, so good on them. They also have an inferior SOS and do not have a win against a ranked team, which Hope does.
I think we're way past the time where OAC #2 gets waved through the door and into the NCAA tournament. It's time for those teams to earn it, and this year they really haven't. The winner of JCU/BW will have a shot, but right now the OAC runner up is looking at a last in/first out scenario.
How do they earn it?
I'm not sure they can given the quality of the league below Mount Union. The quality opponents just aren't there throughout the OAC right now.
That was my assumption. With only 1 OOC game you're tied to the strength of the rest of your conference. And unlike say the CCIW or NCAC in the OAC those teams are starting off 0-1 against RRO and shooting for 9-1 at best every single year. It feels like in the current climate the best case scenario seems to be you go 9-1 and your OOC ends up as a RRO so you finish 2-1 vs. RRO.
Just curious, does anyone know the playoff records of each North Region conference from the last 15 years or so? I'm interested to see how it compares with the OAC minus Mount Union. Thanks in advance!
Quote from: Sir Battlescars on November 07, 2019, 01:02:23 PM
Just curious, does anyone know the playoff records of each North Region conference from the last 15 years or so? I'm interested to see how it compares with the OAC minus Mount Union. Thanks in advance!
We do:
https://www.d3football.com/interactive/faq/playoffs#9
Archgemini: didn't realize that my list was that incomplete. Figured I had missed a few, but not multiple. I'll have to do a little more digging when I get a chance.
Quote from: archgemini24 on November 07, 2019, 11:59:17 AM
Quote from: HScoach on November 07, 2019, 09:24:59 AM
As support for my position that the OAC has fallen off, I offer the following that I put together a while back:
OAC losses to Mount in the playoffs:
1997 – John Carroll lost to Mount in Round 2 (1 win)
1999 - Ohio Northern lost to Mount in Round 2 (1 win)
2000 - Ohio Northern lost to Mount in Round 1 (0 wins)
2002 - John Carroll lost to Mount in the SEMI-FINALS (3 wins)
2005 - Capital lost to Mount in the Round 3 (2 wins)
2006 - Capital lost to Mount in Round 3 (2 wins)
OAC losses against someone else:
2003 - Baldwin Wallace to Wheaton in 2nd round (1 win)
2007 - Capital at Whitewater in Round 1 (UWW was Nat Champs) (0 wins)
2008 - Otterbein to Franklin in Round 1 (Franklin beat NCC in 2nd round, lost to Wheaton in regional final) (0 wins)
2012 - Heidelberg to Wittenberg in Round 1 (horrible loss for the OAC as H'berg had a big lead) (0 wins)
2013 - John Carroll to SFJ in Round 1 (0 wins)
2018 - John Carroll to Randolph Macon in Round 1 (worst of the OAC losses, expected JCU to roll back to Mount in Round 3) (0 wins)
Mount playoff losses as OAC runner-up:
2016 – MHB in the semi-finals (MHB national champs) (3 wins)
Overall, the 2nd place OAC team (including Mount) is a respectable 13-13. The non-Mount OAC teams are 10-12 in the playoffs. Which I would assume historically compares well to Pool C's from other conference. Remove the OAC playoff losses to Mount and they're a very solid 10-6.
However I will acknowledge the most telling sign from the data above is that the OAC has really fallen off in the last decade. Prior to 2007 it was expected that the 2nd place OAC team would win out until reaching Mount again. Since 2007, the norm has been for the 2nd place OAC team to piss down their leg in the playoffs. Ala JCU in 2018 year. I believe this is the case from watching the conference too. The days of ONU, BW and JCU all being competitive are gone.
The OAC has never been as competitive top to bottom as the WIAC or CCIW, but unfortunately it appears the conference has been trending in the wrong direction over the last decade when it comes to the top teams right behind Mount.
There was also a time back in the late 1990's thru mid-2000's where the top of the OAC provided as stiff a test from ONU, B-W and/or JCU as they would face all season on their way to a championship. That hasn't been the case in quite a long time. There has been a random team step up every once in a while to push Mount, but nothing consistent nor most importantly expected. Recently it has felt more like a surprise that an OAC team hung with Mount for 60 minutes instead of expecting it like you did with the ONU teams of the late 1990's or Capital in mid-2000's. And it isn't because Mount is more dominant now, it's because the 2nd & 3rd OAC teams have fallen off.
Additional data points:
OAC losses to Mount in the playoffs:
2014 - John Carroll lost to Mount Union in Round 3 (2-1). There are two close losses to Mount this year, too.
OAC losses to someone else in the playoffs:
2010 - Ohio Northern lost to North Central in Round 2 (1-1).
2015 - Ohio Northern lost to UW-Oshkosh in Round 2 (1-1).
2016 - John Carroll lost to UW-Oshkosh in the Semi-finals (3-1).
This brings the non-Mount teams to 17-16 (10-12 + 7-4) counting their losses to Mount and 17-9 (10-6 + 7-3) (!) without them.
I am not sure I see the fall-off you have mentioned. There are a lot more points in favor of the newer crews that brings thing a bit more into balance, especially that 2016 JCU team (if you are looking at them as the champ, then Mount Union was the OAC runner-up... who also went 3-1, so the record doesn't change). Since 2009 (this allows for comparison against the conference records listed in d3.com's playoff FAQ), the "other" OAC team is 7-7, which percentage-wise would be good for a tie for 9th on the list with the MAC at .500.
I do see that there are more non-Mount Union losses, though, but that is unsurprising considering:
- Mount Union has been shipped out to 1-line the East more frequently, and the selection committee has tried harder where they could to avoid early-conference rematches (so more teams get a shot at the OAC runner-up before Mount does).
- Few of those are upsets (although some are fantastically bad).
For the record, I was looking at only the OAC
runner-up which is why I didn't include JCU in 2016 in my tally. I did miss the others though.
I still think my overall premise is still accurate though. Prior to 2007 it was rare for the 2nd place OAC team to lose to anyone other than Mount. Post 2007 it is quite common for the 2nd place OAC team to lose to someone not name Mount.
Quote from: HScoach on November 07, 2019, 09:24:59 AM
As support for my position that the OAC has fallen off, I offer the following that I put together a while back:
OAC losses to Mount in the playoffs:
1997 – John Carroll lost to Mount in Round 2 (1 win)
1999 - Ohio Northern lost to Mount in Round 2 (1 win)
2000 - Ohio Northern lost to Mount in Round 1 (0 wins)
2002 - John Carroll lost to Mount in the SEMI-FINALS (3 wins)
2005 - Capital lost to Mount in the Round 3 (2 wins)
2006 - Capital lost to Mount in Round 3 (2 wins)
OAC losses against someone else:
2003 - Baldwin Wallace to Wheaton in 2nd round (1 win)
2007 - Capital at Whitewater in Round 1 (UWW was Nat Champs) (0 wins)
2008 - Otterbein to Franklin in Round 1 (Franklin beat NCC in 2nd round, lost to Wheaton in regional final) (0 wins)
2012 - Heidelberg to Wittenberg in Round 1 (horrible loss for the OAC as H'berg had a big lead) (0 wins)
2013 - John Carroll to SFJ in Round 1 (0 wins)
2018 - John Carroll to Randolph Macon in Round 1 (worst of the OAC losses, expected JCU to roll back to Mount in Round 3) (0 wins)
Mount playoff losses as OAC runner-up:
2016 – MHB in the semi-finals (MHB national champs) (3 wins)
Overall, the 2nd place OAC team (including Mount) is a respectable 13-13. The non-Mount OAC teams are 10-12 in the playoffs. Which I would assume historically compares well to Pool C's from other conference. Remove the OAC playoff losses to Mount and they're a very solid 10-6.
However I will acknowledge the most telling sign from the data above is that the OAC has really fallen off in the last decade. Prior to 2007 it was expected that the 2nd place OAC team would win out until reaching Mount again. Since 2007, the norm has been for the 2nd place OAC team to piss down their leg in the playoffs. Ala JCU in 2018 year. I believe this is the case from watching the conference too. The days of ONU, BW and JCU all being competitive are gone.
The OAC has never been as competitive top to bottom as the WIAC or CCIW, but unfortunately it appears the conference has been trending in the wrong direction over the last decade when it comes to the top teams right behind Mount.
There was also a time back in the late 1990's thru mid-2000's where the top of the OAC provided as stiff a test from ONU, B-W and/or JCU as they would face all season on their way to a championship. That hasn't been the case in quite a long time. There has been a random team step up every once in a while to push Mount, but nothing consistent nor most importantly expected. Recently it has felt more like a surprise that an OAC team hung with Mount for 60 minutes instead of expecting it like you did with the ONU teams of the late 1990's or Capital in mid-2000's. And it isn't because Mount is more dominant now, it's because the 2nd & 3rd OAC teams have fallen off.
Here are John Carroll's results against Mount Union since 2013:
8 point loss (13)
7 point loss (14 RS)
8 point loss (14 PS)
33 point loss (15, not great)
3 point win (16)
4 point loss (17)
13 point loss (18)
23 point loss (19, not great)
So with two exceptions, John Carroll, who has recently been consistently OAC number 2, has given Mount a close game. To say that that it is nothing consistent is false. It is also worth noting that the 15 Mount team that beat JCU by 33 beat Albright in the 2nd round by 59, and Whitewater in the semis by 30.
Yes, JCU has been close but few of those years did we go into the game expecting that Mount had to play almost perfect to win. JCU has played Mount tough, but few of those teams were looked at as legitimate threats pre-season or pre-game as being toss up type contests. The ONU teams of the late 90's with Roberson and Vagedas were every bit as talented as Mount and in some positions more so. Those games were scary going in. Same with the Pentello led Capital teams. That's the difference in my mind. The expectation and talent level across the board.
Quote from: HScoach on November 08, 2019, 10:16:27 AM
Yes, JCU has been close but few of those years did we go into the game expecting that Mount had to play almost perfect to win. JCU has played Mount tough, but few of those teams were looked at as legitimate threats pre-season or pre-game as being toss up type contests. The ONU teams of the late 90's with Roberson and Vagedas were every bit as talented as Mount and in some positions more so. Those games were scary going in. Same with the Pentello led Capital teams. That's the difference in my mind. The expectation and talent level across the board.
Looking only at regular season games from 1998-2018. We will start with 1998-2007
1998 MU vs 2nd place BW 30-21 (won by 9)
1999 MU vs 2nd place ONU 56-24 (won by 32)
2000 MU vs 2nd place ONU 59-28 (won by 21)
2001 MU vs 2nd place ONU 31-3 (won by 28)
2002 MU vs 2nd place JCU 35-16 (won by 19)
2003 MU vs 2nd place BW 24-0 (won by 24)
2004 MU vs
3rd place Cap with Pentello won 49-7 vs 2nd place ONU 41-27 (won by 14)
2005 MU vs 2nd place Cap 42-24 (won by 18)
2006 MU vs 2nd place Cap 38-12 (won by 26)
2007 MU vs 2nd place Cap won 37-0 (won by 37)
Over 10 years that is an average margin of victory of
22.5 points From 2009-2018
2009 MU vs 2nd place ONU won 30-10 (won by 20)
2010 MU vs 2nd place ONU won 27-0 (won by 27)
2011 MU vs 2nd place BW won 25-20 (won by 5)
2012 MU vs 2nd place Heidelberg won 33-14 (won by 19)
2013 MU vs 2nd place JCU won 42-34 (won by 8)
2014 MU vs 2nd place JCU won 31-24 (won by 7)
2015 MU vs 2nd place JCU won 36-3 (won by 33)
2016 MU vs
1s place JCU Lost 31-28 (Lost by 32017 MU vs 4th place JCU 31-27 - MU vs 2nd place ONU won 43-14 (won by 29)
2018 MU vs 2nd place JCU won 23-10 (won by 13)
Over the last 10 years that is an average margin of victory of
15.8 points almost a TD better per game and someone othr than Mount Union won the OACThe OAC is 30-5 in 1st round playoff games over the past 20 season! I am not sure why posters knock the OAC, it is a great Conference with Mount Union leading the way but still REALLY good league behind them. Look at this year where Wilmington lost 20-17 to Olivet who is 7-1 in the MIAA.
Thank you Kerry for your positive and accurate perspective on the OAC. And welcome to the boards!
I am not sure comparing Mt Union's 1st round margin of victory over 20 years to a 3 pt game this year between Olivet and Wilmington is incredibly revealing about the state of things in the OAC.
That was a rough week for pool C teams in the north... #3 North Central won and is still 1st in line for the region, #6 John Carroll survived Heidelberg, #9 Wabash won... but #5 Baldwin Wallace, #8 WashU, and #10 Denison all lost. Going to be a lot of shuffling around and potential for teams to gain/lose RRO.
Last week's games sure muddied the waters here in the NRFP. #'s 8- 10 could go any number of directions, IMO.
Saturday's results certainly made it seem like almost no one wants to be ranked in the NRFP. You get to the bottom part of your ballot and it's just a bunch of teams that just lost or don't have much of a resume.
Totally agree. I spent more time trying to place 8-10 than those teams have earned.
Quote from: Li'l Giant on November 12, 2019, 11:53:49 AM
Totally agree. I spent more time trying to place 8-10 than those teams have earned.
I don't remember who I plugged in at #10. All I remember is that they didn't deserve to be there, but neither did anyone else.
You could just put each name you think are candidates for 7-10 on an envelope and throw them down a flight of stairs. Whichever envelope goes the farthest is #7, 2nd farthest is #8, etc.
Its a proven process.
Ooof....
Quote from: USee on November 12, 2019, 12:06:02 PM
You could just put each name you think are candidates for 7-10 on an envelope and throw them down a flight of stairs. Whichever envelope goes the farthest is #7, 2nd farthest is #8, etc.
Its a proven process.
I like to assign numbers on a dartboard to teams and then throw four darts.
Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on November 12, 2019, 12:52:33 PM
Quote from: USee on November 12, 2019, 12:06:02 PM
You could just put each name you think are candidates for 7-10 on an envelope and throw them down a flight of stairs. Whichever envelope goes the farthest is #7, 2nd farthest is #8, etc.
Its a proven process.
I like to assign numbers on a dartboard to teams and then throw four darts.
Finlandia gets the bulls-eye, just to keep things interesting!
Quote from: HOPEful on November 12, 2019, 01:24:56 PM
Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on November 12, 2019, 12:52:33 PM
Quote from: USee on November 12, 2019, 12:06:02 PM
You could just put each name you think are candidates for 7-10 on an envelope and throw them down a flight of stairs. Whichever envelope goes the farthest is #7, 2nd farthest is #8, etc.
Its a proven process.
I like to assign numbers on a dartboard to teams and then throw four darts.
Finlandia gets the bulls-eye, just to keep things interesting!
Hey, they have the #1 pass defense in the nation :)
Week 10
(https://i.imgur.com/GwyRgPS.png)
https://imgur.com/a/HNNwqyJ
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, NCF, smedindy, thunderdog, and wally wabash.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 12, 2019, 02:38:53 PM
Week 10
(https://i.imgur.com/8C8NqjD.png)
https://i.imgur.com/8C8NqjD.png
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, NCF, smedindy, thunderdog, and wally wabash.
Apparently, the IWU coaching staff has compromising photos of someone ;)
When the MIAA has as many people ranked here as the OAC and CCIW....
This must be one of the rare occasions that each conference is represented in the Top 10. At least I can't recall one recently.
2nd Rankings are out
https://www.d3football.com/playoffs/2019/second-regional-ranking
Top 5 are the same as our poll with 6 and 7 flipped.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 13, 2019, 01:37:02 PM
2nd Rankings are out
https://www.d3football.com/playoffs/2019/second-regional-ranking
Top 5 are the same as our poll with 6 and 7 flipped.
JCU ranked ahead of Hope and Aurora this week doesn't make a lot of criteria sense to me. And if there was a time for North Central fans to get squirmy, this is it. BW stays ranked and if JCU wins this week, they'll have a vRRO win. North Central has a vRRO win this week thanks to WashU's standing last week, but won't have that when the rankings are finalized Saturday night. Maybe the actual gap between NCC and JCU is essentially insurmountable (it should be, frankly), but if not, they've set the table here to do the unthinkable.
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 13, 2019, 01:57:31 PMAnd if there was a time for North Central fans to get squirmy, this is it. BW stays ranked and if JCU wins this week, they'll have a vRRO win. North Central has a vRRO win this week thanks to WashU's standing last week, but won't have that when the rankings are finalized Saturday night. Maybe the actual gap between NCC and JCU is essentially insurmountable (it should be, frankly), but if not, they've set the table here to do the unthinkable.
I was just coming here to post that NCC fans are probably not happy right now.
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 13, 2019, 01:57:31 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 13, 2019, 01:37:02 PM
2nd Rankings are out
https://www.d3football.com/playoffs/2019/second-regional-ranking
Top 5 are the same as our poll with 6 and 7 flipped.
JCU ranked ahead of Hope and Aurora this week doesn't make a lot of criteria sense to me. And if there was a time for North Central fans to get squirmy, this is it. BW stays ranked and if JCU wins this week, they'll have a vRRO win. North Central has a vRRO win this week thanks to WashU's standing last week, but won't have that when the rankings are finalized Saturday night. Maybe the actual gap between NCC and JCU is essentially insurmountable (it should be, frankly), but if not, they've set the table here to do the unthinkable.
But if John Carroll wins, that will knock BW out of the rankings meaning they'd still be 0-1 vRRO wouldn't it?
Quote from: Li'l Giant on November 13, 2019, 02:00:51 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 13, 2019, 01:57:31 PMAnd if there was a time for North Central fans to get squirmy, this is it. BW stays ranked and if JCU wins this week, they'll have a vRRO win. North Central has a vRRO win this week thanks to WashU's standing last week, but won't have that when the rankings are finalized Saturday night. Maybe the actual gap between NCC and JCU is essentially insurmountable (it should be, frankly), but if not, they've set the table here to do the unthinkable.
I was just coming here to post that NCC fans are probably not happy right now.
Just did a quick run through the pool C teams on that board... even if NCC is first at the table I think it's going to be very tight to get in. Unless there's upsets the north is getting 1 team max and possibly not even that. ???
Yes but that would still give them an SOS advantage over NCC (increase after BW, with NCC decrease v Millikin). I also think Wally said the RRO results for selection Sunday are a combination of this week and the final, hidden RR's? If that's the case, NCC is toast.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 13, 2019, 02:19:06 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 13, 2019, 01:57:31 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 13, 2019, 01:37:02 PM
2nd Rankings are out
https://www.d3football.com/playoffs/2019/second-regional-ranking
Top 5 are the same as our poll with 6 and 7 flipped.
JCU ranked ahead of Hope and Aurora this week doesn't make a lot of criteria sense to me. And if there was a time for North Central fans to get squirmy, this is it. BW stays ranked and if JCU wins this week, they'll have a vRRO win. North Central has a vRRO win this week thanks to WashU's standing last week, but won't have that when the rankings are finalized Saturday night. Maybe the actual gap between NCC and JCU is essentially insurmountable (it should be, frankly), but if not, they've set the table here to do the unthinkable.
But if John Carroll wins, that will knock BW out of the rankings meaning they'd still be 0-1 vRRO wouldn't it?
No, BW is going to count for them no matter what. The final rankings are going to have vRRO data from today's rankings AND the rankings submitted by the RACs Saturday night.
Quote from: USee on November 13, 2019, 02:22:16 PM
Yes but that would still give them an SOS advantage over NCC (increase after BW, with NCC decrease v Millikin). I also think Wally said the RRO results for selection Sunday are a combination of this week and the final, hidden RR's? If that's the case, NCC is toast.
I do not think NCC is toast. I still think North Central will be the first at-large candidate from this region, but today's rankings opened the door for an alternative. My confidence on North Central as a Pool C has shifted from like 97% to 80%.
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 13, 2019, 02:25:33 PM
Quote from: USee on November 13, 2019, 02:22:16 PM
Yes but that would still give them an SOS advantage over NCC (increase after BW, with NCC decrease v Millikin). I also think Wally said the RRO results for selection Sunday are a combination of this week and the final, hidden RR's? If that's the case, NCC is toast.
I do not think NCC is toast. I still think North Central will be the first at-large candidate from this region, but today's rankings opened the door for an alternative. My confidence on North Central as a Pool C has shifted from like 97% to 80%.
I am saying if NCC gets leapfrogged by JCU, then they are toast. Which I think is accurate don't you?
Quote from: USee on November 13, 2019, 02:26:56 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 13, 2019, 02:25:33 PM
Quote from: USee on November 13, 2019, 02:22:16 PM
Yes but that would still give them an SOS advantage over NCC (increase after BW, with NCC decrease v Millikin). I also think Wally said the RRO results for selection Sunday are a combination of this week and the final, hidden RR's? If that's the case, NCC is toast.
I do not think NCC is toast. I still think North Central will be the first at-large candidate from this region, but today's rankings opened the door for an alternative. My confidence on North Central as a Pool C has shifted from like 97% to 80%.
I am saying if NCC gets leapfrogged by JCU, then they are toast. Which I think is accurate don't you?
No, I don't.
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 13, 2019, 02:40:37 PM
Quote from: USee on November 13, 2019, 02:26:56 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 13, 2019, 02:25:33 PM
Quote from: USee on November 13, 2019, 02:22:16 PM
Yes but that would still give them an SOS advantage over NCC (increase after BW, with NCC decrease v Millikin). I also think Wally said the RRO results for selection Sunday are a combination of this week and the final, hidden RR's? If that's the case, NCC is toast.
I do not think NCC is toast. I still think North Central will be the first at-large candidate from this region, but today's rankings opened the door for an alternative. My confidence on North Central as a Pool C has shifted from like 97% to 80%.
I am saying if NCC gets leapfrogged by JCU, then they are toast. Which I think is accurate don't you?
No, I don't.
Well I can't wait to see the mock selections then and see how you are gonna engineer that scenario.
It's probably worth pointing out that if John Carroll beating BW this weekend was a big enough deal to move JCU ahead of North Central, that's a thing that could happen whether JCU was ranked 4th today or 6th. Their data sheet is going to be the same at the end of Saturday regardless of where they got ranked today.
It may be that the North RAC is viewing Hope's loss to Millikin and Aurora's loss to Hope as more damaging than John Carroll's loss to Mount Union. Not a thing I agree with exactly, but it's not unheard for committees to go down the "worst loss" rabbit hole. And if they are riding that particular wave, North Central is going to compare very favorably.
I'm definitely not at all convinced that JCU is absolutely going to jump North Central if they win this weekend. I don't view those two teams as being neck and neck.
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 13, 2019, 03:03:33 PM
It's probably worth pointing out that if John Carroll beating BW this weekend was a big enough deal to move JCU ahead of North Central, that's a thing that could happen whether JCU was ranked 4th today or 6th. Their data sheet is going to be the same at the end of Saturday regardless of where they got ranked today.
It may be that the North RAC is viewing Hope's loss to Millikin and Aurora's loss to Hope as more damaging than John Carroll's loss to Mount Union. Not a thing I agree with exactly, but it's not unheard for committees to go down the "worst loss" rabbit hole. And if they are riding that particular wave, North Central is going to compare very favorably.
I'm definitely not at all convinced that JCU is absolutely going to jump North Central if they win this weekend. I don't view those two teams as being neck and neck.
Unfortunately your view/vote is about as relevant as mine!
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 13, 2019, 02:40:37 PM
Quote from: USee on November 13, 2019, 02:26:56 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 13, 2019, 02:25:33 PM
Quote from: USee on November 13, 2019, 02:22:16 PM
Yes but that would still give them an SOS advantage over NCC (increase after BW, with NCC decrease v Millikin). I also think Wally said the RRO results for selection Sunday are a combination of this week and the final, hidden RR's? If that's the case, NCC is toast.
I do not think NCC is toast. I still think North Central will be the first at-large candidate from this region, but today's rankings opened the door for an alternative. My confidence on North Central as a Pool C has shifted from like 97% to 80%.
I am saying if NCC gets leapfrogged by JCU, then they are toast. Which I think is accurate don't you?
No, I don't.
I'm not sure how... I see no way (without upsets knocking teams out) a NCC team 2nd on the board from the north gets in. First there's Wesley (1 loss, 2-1 RRO, .560 SOS), Redlands (1 loss, 1-1 RRO, ..596 SOS), and Wartburg (1 loss, 1-1 RRO, .576 SOS) who are all better than either north candidate. John Carroll might be 1-1 RRO but certainly not close in SOS even if the gap closes a bit. Then you have Susquehanna in the mix (1 loss, 0-1 RRO, .548 SOS) who's lone loss is in OT at unbeaten and South #2 Muhlenberg. A better loss than NCC's 14 point loss at north #2 and better SOS plus they'll have been at the table from the start. I think they'd be in before NCC.
This is why I think the adequate number of Pool C teams is around 9-10 (if time and money weren't a factor preventing expansion). I'd rather have a couple iffy teams get in (and if you're on the outside looking in at that point you don't have nearly as much of an argument of being left out) than a couple good teams get left out.
Looks like there was a correction made. Hope is at #4 and John Carroll at #5.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 13, 2019, 07:35:27 PM
Looks like there was a correction made. Hope is at #4 and John Carroll at #5.
Well, that sure changes things.
I think today's action/results show why picking the bottom 4 spots for the NRFP has been so difficult all season. Olivet & Wabash both lose (unexpectedly). BW losses, but shows they still probably deserve a spot... maybe-ish?
Week 11
(https://i.imgur.com/3V9qpQX.png)
https://imgur.com/a/HNNwqyJ
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, NCF, smedindy, thunderdog, and wally wabash.
I had Albion at 10 instead of B-W. Coin flips...
Column 4 for me. Seven through ten I swapped the order, but otherwise pretty much in sinc with everyone else. I have Washington a bit higher out of respect for the CCIW and Hanover a smidge lower out of lack of respect for the HCAC...
I swear the IWU vote has become bizarre by the week.
Quote from: Captain_Joe08 on November 20, 2019, 01:09:43 PM
I swear the IWU vote has become bizarre by the week.
That was me. I had CCIW on my mind and accidentally typed in Illinois Wesleyan rather than Washington U...dumbfounded at what crossed my mind when I did that.
Everything would have stayed the same though regardless.
I told you Hope wasn't that good.
Quote from: Sir Battlescars on November 23, 2019, 09:23:59 PM
I told you Hope wasn't that good.
Okay, FWIW, here is my assessment. I will be the first to admit that Wartburg was the much better, more experienced playoff tested team than Hope-I already said (posted) that elsewhere. However, Hope is really better than you believe (I think I'm qualified to say that after having seen them play-up close-all season🙂 and honestly putting my bias aside.) They simply did not play like they had the past 4 games. Too many missed assignments such as in the secondary (wide open receivers, and simply just not making the plays despite being in position), poor offensive blocking unlike they had been doing in recent games (essentially none as the second half progressed). Hope had one of those games that happens to a lot of good teams when it comes to a big game i.e. having a bad, an off day.
Personally, I think that as the game went on-and unfortunately this happened very early in the game-Hope's players were kind of "shellshocked" in the mindset of playing in their first post season game of their careers as compared to Wartburg's players. You could see that especially after the false start penalty that forced having to settle for a field goal instead of a potential TD from the 1 yard line. I'm not making excuses because obviously the great teams rise above such game situations, and again, Wartburg was the better team. Our (Hope's) players just did not play up to their potential and giving Wartburg a more competitive, close game as initially predicted and possibly even pulling the upset.
Yet, in the overall view of this, it once again comes back to what I (and some others) have been saying for several years now. And that is, until our MIAA decides to go back to allowing its teams to independently schedule their non-conference games such that schools can choose to play more upper tier teams (such as Hope going back to playing old, tough rivalries such as Wheaton, Wabash and perhaps an occasional DII team like we did years ago), the mindset in helping our teams being able to compete and go beyond the first round of the playoffs is not going to happen. That takes a long time to develop but is something that does occur as has been proven by several examples in all four sub-divisions in the NCAA.
Anyway, again congratulations to Wartburg and best of luck to them as they continue on. And congratulations to Hope's players and Coach Stuursma and his staff for a very fine season. At least we are back to very successful seasons similar to years ago. But, the goal is to "press on" to even better results.🙂
Edit: for spelling/punctuation. I really need to stop posting from my cell phone-too small of a keyboard, which leads to that well known "fat finger syndrome."🙂
Quote from: formerd3db on November 25, 2019, 09:02:20 AM
Yet, in the overall view of this, it once again comes back to what I (and some others) have been saying for several years now. And that is, until our MIAA decides to go back to allowing its teams to independently schedule their non-confetence games such that schools can choose to play more upper tier teams (such as Hope going back to playing old, tough rivalries such as Wheaton, Wabash and perhaps an occasional DII team like we did years ago), the mindset in helping our teams being able to compete and go beyond the first round of the playoffs is not going to happen. That takes a long time to develop but is something that does occur as has been proven by several examples in all four sub-divisions in the NCAA.
I've thought for a while that a NACC/HCAC week would be a good idea but that won't happen while there's still a NACC/MIAA one. Also, who gets left out when St Norbert joins the NACC and they have 9 teams to the MIAA's 8? If Earlham resumes football (no idea if they will) that'd put the HCAC back to 9 as well.
Quote from: formerd3db on November 25, 2019, 09:02:20 AM
Wartburg was the much better ... team than Hope.
Quote from: formerd3db on November 25, 2019, 09:02:20 AM
They simply did not play like they had the past 4 games.
These two things go together. Playing Olivet, Alma, Kalamazoo and Adrian is not the same as playing a 9-1 Top 25 team.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 25, 2019, 10:31:35 AM
Quote from: formerd3db on November 25, 2019, 09:02:20 AM
Yet, in the overall view of this, it once again comes back to what I (and some others) have been saying for several years now. And that is, until our MIAA decides to go back to allowing its teams to independently schedule their non-confetence games such that schools can choose to play more upper tier teams (such as Hope going back to playing old, tough rivalries such as Wheaton, Wabash and perhaps an occasional DII team like we did years ago), the mindset in helping our teams being able to compete and go beyond the first round of the playoffs is not going to happen. That takes a long time to develop but is something that does occur as has been proven by several examples in all four sub-divisions in the NCAA.
I've thought for a while that a NACC/HCAC week would be a good idea but that won't happen while there's still a NACC/MIAA one. Also, who gets left out when St Norbert joins the NACC and they have 9 teams to the MIAA's 8? If Earlham resumes football (no idea if they will) that'd put the HCAC back to 9 as well.
That is a good question, FCGrizz if the current NACC/MIAA arrangement were to be in place. However, it appears like that won't happen or need to be addressed as according to the a link posted over on the MWC board, Monmouth is scheduled to play Hope next year on September 12, 2020 at Hope. So perhaps an NACC/HCAC arrangement could be done. I have not heard anything about that and for some reason, apparently missed that the MWC/MIAA arrangement has been made? At least I haven't heard anything about this being an independently scheduled game and would assume, until I find out otherwise, that an MWC/MIAA arrangement for the next probably 4 years has been agreed to. I have also tried to find out online about Hope's future football schedules, however, none are posted like they were a few years ago, the last being 2017. I will just have to ask our HC and AD! :)
BTW, any guesses on who your FC might be considering for the new HC? Current staff member or will they decide to bring on board someone from the outside?
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 25, 2019, 12:37:45 PM
Quote from: formerd3db on November 25, 2019, 09:02:20 AM
Wartburg was the much better ... team than Hope.
Quote from: formerd3db on November 25, 2019, 09:02:20 AM
They simply did not play like they had the past 4 games.
These two things go together. Playing Olivet, Alma, Kalamazoo and Adrian is not the same as playing a 9-1 Top 25 team.
I didn't say it was Pat, obviously it is not. My point was that they were playing better fundamentally than they did on Saturday and had they done so, I believe it would have been a closer game like you and your colleagues had thought it initially might be.
BTW Pat, do you perhaps know if there has been a MWC/MIAA arrangement made? You, understandably, usually know those things well before most of us and, as I mentioned, if that has been previously announced, somehow I missed it. Thanks.
I don't think there is an arrangement in place, no. My understanding is that the MIAA only "controls" the two NACC games and the schools are free to do what they like with the other. That would be the date with which Olivet scheduled Wilmington, Finlandia scheduled Ripon and Hope scheduled Millikin this year.
Quote from: formerd3db on November 25, 2019, 12:47:32 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 25, 2019, 10:31:35 AM
Quote from: formerd3db on November 25, 2019, 09:02:20 AM
Yet, in the overall view of this, it once again comes back to what I (and some others) have been saying for several years now. And that is, until our MIAA decides to go back to allowing its teams to independently schedule their non-confetence games such that schools can choose to play more upper tier teams (such as Hope going back to playing old, tough rivalries such as Wheaton, Wabash and perhaps an occasional DII team like we did years ago), the mindset in helping our teams being able to compete and go beyond the first round of the playoffs is not going to happen. That takes a long time to develop but is something that does occur as has been proven by several examples in all four sub-divisions in the NCAA.
I've thought for a while that a NACC/HCAC week would be a good idea but that won't happen while there's still a NACC/MIAA one. Also, who gets left out when St Norbert joins the NACC and they have 9 teams to the MIAA's 8? If Earlham resumes football (no idea if they will) that'd put the HCAC back to 9 as well.
That is a good question, FCGrizz if the current NACC/MIAA arrangement were to be in place. However, it appears like that won't happen or need to be addressed as according to the a link posted over on the MWC board, Monmouth is scheduled to play Hope next year on September 12, 2020 at Hope. So perhaps an NACC/HCAC arrangement could be done. I have not heard anything about that and for some reason, apparently missed that the MWC/MIAA arrangement has been made? At least I haven't heard anything about this being an independently scheduled game and would assume, until I find out otherwise, that an MWC/MIAA arrangement for the next probably 4 years has been agreed to. I have also tried to find out online about Hope's future football schedules, however, none are posted like they were a few years ago, the last being 2017. I will just have to ask our HC and AD! :)
BTW, any guesses on who your FC might be considering for the new HC? Current staff member or will they decide to bring on board someone from the outside?
Right now, no idea. Very few people even knew he was going to retire. I've heard no indication yet of how things will go. Right now listed as the interim HC is Ryan McElwain who has been with Franklin for a couple years. He was the DC at Kalamazoo from 09-17.
Thanks Pat. If I find out anything otherwise in the next week or two when I see the Hope staff (or I may just email someone ahead of time), I will forward the info on to you. But, again, you might even know before me if anything has changed or changes! Likely, however, it remains the same as you have outlined.
Thanks also FCGrizz.
Well, NCC is going to make the end of the season ballot interesting.
Quote from: Li'l Giant on December 01, 2019, 04:46:38 PM
Well, NCC is going to make the end of the season ballot interesting.
How? NCC #1, Wheaton #2 - depending on finish, Mount #3,
Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on December 01, 2019, 09:22:49 PM
Quote from: Li'l Giant on December 01, 2019, 04:46:38 PM
Well, NCC is going to make the end of the season ballot interesting.
How? NCC #1, Wheaton #2 - depending on finish, Mount #3,
Hmmm. Seems to me your #2 already beat your #1. Though you and Smed went to the same school right? That explains it.
Quote from: USee on December 01, 2019, 09:33:43 PM
Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on December 01, 2019, 09:22:49 PM
Quote from: Li'l Giant on December 01, 2019, 04:46:38 PM
Well, NCC is going to make the end of the season ballot interesting.
How? NCC #1, Wheaton #2 - depending on finish, Mount #3,
Hmmm. Seems to me your #2 already beat your #1. Though you and Smed went to the same school right? That explains it.
Yeah, right now it would be #1 Wheaton, #2 NCC, #3 UMU.
IF NCC and Wheaton meet in the Stagg, winner is #1. ;D
Quote from: USee on December 01, 2019, 09:33:43 PM
Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on December 01, 2019, 09:22:49 PM
Quote from: Li'l Giant on December 01, 2019, 04:46:38 PM
Well, NCC is going to make the end of the season ballot interesting.
How? NCC #1, Wheaton #2 - depending on finish, Mount #3,
Hmmm. Seems to me your #2 already beat your #1. Though you and Smed went to the same school right? That explains it.
Things can change here on Walton's Mountain, and this late H2H isn't so relevant. We shall see though.
Quote from: USee on December 01, 2019, 09:33:43 PM
Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on December 01, 2019, 09:22:49 PM
Quote from: Li'l Giant on December 01, 2019, 04:46:38 PM
Well, NCC is going to make the end of the season ballot interesting.
How? NCC #1, Wheaton #2 - depending on finish, Mount #3,
Hmmm. Seems to me your #2 already beat your #1. Though you and Smed went to the same school right? That explains it.
You must have misunderstood. NCC and Wheaton 1/2 depending on finish. If Wheaton loses next game and NCC makes it to the E8 or farther then obviously they are likely the better team, regardless of H2H months ago. I had a "- depending on finish" in there you must have glossed over in order to get to your jab.
I agreed that if NCC advances farther that can open things up for me. Head to head can be a great tie breaker, if records are equal. When they're not, sometimes it's not.
Quote from: Li'l Giant on December 02, 2019, 03:56:30 PM
I agreed that if NCC advances farther that can open things up for me. Head to head can be a great tie breaker, if records are equal. When they're not, sometimes it's not.
Regardless, I think most, if not all, of us can agree that MU is #3. I haven't dove into the poll yet honestly, but I feel like I'll stick them at #3. Not sure what #4/#5 on my ballot did.
Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on December 03, 2019, 05:45:55 PM
Quote from: Li'l Giant on December 02, 2019, 03:56:30 PM
I agreed that if NCC advances farther that can open things up for me. Head to head can be a great tie breaker, if records are equal. When they're not, sometimes it's not.
Regardless, I think most, if not all, of us can agree that MU is #3. I haven't dove into the poll yet honestly, but I feel like I'll stick them at #3. Not sure what #4/#5 on my ballot did.
As the resident Mount and OAC voter I can assure you Mount will be #3 on my ballot.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on December 03, 2019, 06:22:41 PM
Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on December 03, 2019, 05:45:55 PM
Quote from: Li'l Giant on December 02, 2019, 03:56:30 PM
I agreed that if NCC advances farther that can open things up for me. Head to head can be a great tie breaker, if records are equal. When they're not, sometimes it's not.
Regardless, I think most, if not all, of us can agree that MU is #3. I haven't dove into the poll yet honestly, but I feel like I'll stick them at #3. Not sure what #4/#5 on my ballot did.
As the resident Mount and OAC voter I can assure you Mount will be #3 on my ballot.
As a long-time voter on the NRFP, I'm sorry I decided not to join in this year. I can't recall EVER having a ballot that didn't have UMU (or maybe MUC - don't recall when I first started voting ;)) at the top.
And being a CCIW guy, it would especially have been a pleasure to have CCIW teams in the top TWO spots! ;D
Quick diversion here...BTW, Mr. Ypsi, I was disappointed that Eastern Mich faltered in their last game (although I guess that was good for Kent State and their new coach.) Eastern was up and down this year throughout the season, but at least they made it 6-6. Cc still has been great for them and attendance finally meeting the real criteria for DI the past 3 years.🙂Do you think they will get a bowl bid this year?
Also, glad to see that Buffalo salvaged a good season, not as good as on the recent past, but okay, including their attendance as well. LL and his former WW staff have been good there.
Now back to DIII and the playoffs and this NR poll.🙂
Quote from: formerd3db on December 03, 2019, 06:50:23 PM
Quick diversion here...BTW, Mr. Ypsi, I was disappointed that Eastern Mich faltered in their last game (although I guess that was good for Kent State and their new coach.) Eastern was up and down this year throughout the season, but at least they made it 6-6. Cc still has been great for them and attendance finally meeting the real criteria for DI the past 3 years.🙂Do you think they will get a bowl bid this year?
I never had a doubt CC would turn things around. My only question is where does he go next. Because he's been there 6 seasons after spending 6 at Drake and 7 at Wabash. I'm guessing he's due for a change of scenery.
Quote from: Li'l Giant on December 04, 2019, 11:45:15 AM
Quote from: formerd3db on December 03, 2019, 06:50:23 PM
Quick diversion here...BTW, Mr. Ypsi, I was disappointed that Eastern Mich faltered in their last game (although I guess that was good for Kent State and their new coach.) Eastern was up and down this year throughout the season, but at least they made it 6-6. Cc still has been great for them and attendance finally meeting the real criteria for DI the past 3 years.🙂Do you think they will get a bowl bid this year?
I never had a doubt CC would turn things around. My only question is where does he go next. Because he's been there 6 seasons after spending 6 at Drake and 7 at Wabash. I'm guessing he's due for a change of scenery.
I thought about that, too, LG. However, with only having the 6-6 season this year, I am not sure that other schools would be as anxious to court him away right now. Yet, that does happen. I would think that if he has another good season, say 7-5 next year, then it might be a time when some schools start inquiring. Then again, perhaps he does like it there and would end up staying for quite some time. As I mentioned, they really have improved interest in the program such that even attendance has increased, which is something that Mr. Ypsi and I did not think possible. The question is...is that sustainable in the longer term-I hope it is and think it is possible if CC or a coach like him stays for a long time. Mr. Ypsi is right, though, that Eastern will always be playing in the shadow of the Big House just a few miles down the road.
For those of you who participate in this NRFP, for sure, it will be interesting to see how you vote/rate the teams if there are some additional upsets this weekend. I will look forward to your results.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 03, 2019, 06:41:21 PM
As a long-time voter on the NRFP, I'm sorry I decided not to join in this year. I can't recall EVER having a ballot that didn't have UMU (or maybe MUC - don't recall when I first started voting ;)) at the top.
And being a CCIW guy, it would especially have been a pleasure to have CCIW teams in the top TWO spots! ;D
I'm not the Commish of the NRFP, but I'd have no problem at all with you (or any dedicated d3 fan, for that matter) voting for the end of year vote...
I would like to vote on the end of the year final. I'm a big Mount fan, and sad that they lost...but I can be unbiased in my opinions here and vote fairly.
Right now, I would still rank Wheaton at #1, and NCC at #2 and Mount @ #3. I can see anyone else in the NR beating any of these 3 teams. Although, depending on how St. John's finishes up and considering Mount gave up 59 points and over 500 yards passing to NCC, Aurora would be a close #4 to Mount.
If Wheaton and NCC make it to the Stagg, the winner will obviously be #1 here. If Wheaton loses before NCC, NCC will have to be very convincing in its wins and will most likely need to advance to the Stagg to steal the vote from Wheaton. Wheaton demolished them in 4th quarter of the little brass bell and they are going to play way better competition on the way to the Stagg.
Go Raiders!!! (Next Year)
Just a reminder that we will have a poll after the Stagg. Ballots can come in whenever they're ready.
I'm curious for those who haven't made their mind up on the top 2 (is there a scenario that Mount isn't #3?)... what's the line that would determine that order?
I've sent in my ballot. I already have North Central #1, and losing to UWW Friday night wouldn't change that.
Another interested question might be... how will next season's preseason rankings look?
Just heard on the d3fb podcast that Rutter had a broken rib during the Wheaton game. I think if NCC wins the Stagg UMU should be strongly considered for #2 in the north region poll
Quote from: WRMUalum13 on December 20, 2019, 03:22:47 PM
Just heard on the d3fb podcast that Rutter had a broken rib during the Wheaton game. I think if NCC wins the Stagg UMU should be strongly considered for #2 in the north region poll
He broke the rib when he got hit by our MLB on the first series. Wheaton beat them by 14 and Mt Union lost by 7 and you think UMU is ranked higher than Wheaton because of a broken rib? Seriously? I guess people can rationalize anything.
Quote from: USee on December 20, 2019, 03:29:06 PM
Quote from: WRMUalum13 on December 20, 2019, 03:22:47 PM
Just heard on the d3fb podcast that Rutter had a broken rib during the Wheaton game. I think if NCC wins the Stagg UMU should be strongly considered for #2 in the north region poll
He broke the rib when he got hit by our MLB on the first series. Wheaton beat them by 14 and Mt Union lost by 7 and you think UMU is ranked higher than Wheaton because of a broken rib? Seriously? I guess people can rationalize anything.
I'm a Mount Union fan of course I'm going to rationalize... however it's not crazy to think that an NCC team with a fully healthy Rutter doesn't lose to Wheaton right? Not to mention the fact That teams change from week to week they tend to get better or worse, and don't always play to the same ability. NCC has been rolling on all cylinders since the playoffs started. I don't think Wheaton would beat the week 16 version. But then again if they loseto UWW this post will sound pretty dumb :)
Quote from: WRMUalum13 on December 20, 2019, 05:23:55 PM
Quote from: USee on December 20, 2019, 03:29:06 PM
Quote from: WRMUalum13 on December 20, 2019, 03:22:47 PM
Just heard on the d3fb podcast that Rutter had a broken rib during the Wheaton game. I think if NCC wins the Stagg UMU should be strongly considered for #2 in the north region poll
He broke the rib when he got hit by our MLB on the first series. Wheaton beat them by 14 and Mt Union lost by 7 and you think UMU is ranked higher than Wheaton because of a broken rib? Seriously? I guess people can rationalize anything.
I'm a Mount Union fan of course I'm going to rationalize... however it's not crazy to think that an NCC team with a fully healthy Rutter doesn't lose to Wheaton right? Not to mention the fact That teams change from week to week they tend to get better or worse, and don't always play to the same ability. NCC has been rolling on all cylinders since the playoffs started. I don't think Wheaton would beat the week 16 version. But then again if they loseto UWW this post will sound pretty dumb :)
You realize Rutter broke his rib before he threw for a single yard in the Wheaton game? He then went on (in the first half) to throw for 3 TD's and 250+ yds. He finished with somewhere near 390 and Wheaton shut them out in the second half. Wheaton manhandled their front on both sides of the ball. Thats why the Thunder won. I don't care where you rank these teams as its all for fun but to suggest Rutter was in any way limited in the Wheaton game, or that had anything to do with the outcome would be as much lunacy as me saying the only reason StJ won was because we had our db's trip and fall down on 3 of 5 TD passes for the first time all year (which is true).
I'm as big a Mount homer as there is, but I can't see anyway a Mount team that surrendered 59 points at home should be ranked higher than a Wheaton team that beat NCC. I'm fully aware that teams change over the course of a season and the better team doesn't always win, but Mount had multiple chances to put NCC away and didn't. And had chances late to get back in it and couldn't. Mount wasn't anywhere near the better team that day. It wasn't a fluke win by NCC. They owned the Mount D that day. And the Mount O faded after halftime. Clear NCC win.
I can see an argument for who should be #1, but not #2. #2 is whichever of Wheaton or NCC ins't #1. In my mind it's 1 vs 2 or 2 vs 1, but after that it's easily Mount 3rd. Unless NCC steamrolls UWW tonight, I would still put Wheaton above NCC. Wheaton was every bit as good as SJU which was every bit as good as UWW. So I think they're all basically equal. If UWW wins then NCC is clearly #2. If NCC wins a squeaker like UWW did over SJU and SJU did over Wheaton, then it gets interesting. If NCC wins going away, then they're #1 in my mind.
#1 Wheaton or NCC
#2 Wheaton or NCC
#3 Mount
#4 thru #10 meh......
Quote from: HScoach on December 20, 2019, 05:47:21 PM
I'm as big a Mount homer as there is, but I can't see anyway a Mount team that surrendered 59 points at home should be ranked higher than a Wheaton team that beat NCC. I'm fully aware that teams change over the course of a season and the better team doesn't always win, but Mount had multiple chances to put NCC away and didn't. And had chances late to get back in it and couldn't. Mount wasn't anywhere near the better team that day. It wasn't a fluke win by NCC. They owned the Mount D that day. And the Mount O faded after halftime. Clear NCC win.
I can see an argument for who should be #1, but not #2. #2 is whichever of Wheaton or NCC ins't #1. In my mind it's 1 vs 2 or 2 vs 1, but after that it's easily Mount 3rd. Unless NCC steamrolls UWW tonight, I would still put Wheaton above NCC. Wheaton was every bit as good as SJU which was every bit as good as UWW. So I think they're all basically equal. If UWW wins then NCC is clearly #2. If NCC wins a squeaker like UWW did over SJU and SJU did over Wheaton, then it gets interesting. If NCC wins going away, then they're #1 in my mind.
#1 Wheaton or NCC
#2 Wheaton or NCC
#3 Mount
#4 thru #10 meh......
That 59 points is pretty damning, I'll certainly admit. I'm just saying when your all-American QB has broken ribs I don't think it's a fair comparison compared to when he's at full strength. Rutter only threw two tds in the first half against Wheaton and 1 in the 2nd btw. If NCC beats Wheaton 42-35 in the regular season are we still having this discussion?
I don't necessarily think UMU is #2 I just think it's worth considering
And I don't mean to disrespect Wheaton at all! They represented the north region well this year, and I really would love to have seen them play against UWW. I was rooting for a LBB game rematch after UMU lost.
Broc Rutter's ribs had nothing to do with them losing to Wheaton. That's insane. Rutter threw for 250 yds in the first half. He also threw a 55 yd TD bomb in that game. Wheaton sacked him 7 times. Was that Rutter's fault?
Wheaton won up front on both sides and that's why they won.
1. NCC
2. Wheaton
3. Mount Union
Quote from: HScoach on December 20, 2019, 11:19:10 PM
1. NCC
2. Wheaton
3. Mount Union
Cmon, Wheaton lost to the team that lost to the team that got DOMINATED in this years Stagg, we saw the real title game in Alliance.
I haven't put any thought yet into which teams will be 4-10 on my end of the year ballot but I'll tell you right now my 1-3 will look just like this.
Quote from: HScoach on December 20, 2019, 11:19:10 PM
1. NCC
2. Wheaton
3. Mount Union
I will say that North Central pretty much had to win tonight to be #1 on my ballot over Wheaton. They certainly did that. I could see someone trying to stick Mount ahead of Wheaton but it won't be me. However I think they ended up closer than I expected if we were rating them rather than ranking.
My 4 and 5 are also locked in. Now to try to figure out what teams who shouldn't even sniff the rankings end up in there because someone has to.
Quote from: WRMUalum13 on December 20, 2019, 11:22:30 PM
Quote from: HScoach on December 20, 2019, 11:19:10 PM
1. NCC
2. Wheaton
3. Mount Union
Cmon, Wheaton lost to the team that lost to the team that got DOMINATED in this years Stagg, we saw the real title game in Alliance.
I thought I already posted this, but apparently not. The transitive principal (especially THIRD hand) does not outweigh the fact that Wheaton beat NCC. The final standings are clearly NCC, Wheaton, UMU. #4 is an issue I haven't yet addressed, but I am currently leaning to Aurora, who gave fits to SJU.
This ones easy. What do you do with the national poll? That's crazy town.
Quote from: USee on December 21, 2019, 12:18:49 AM
This ones easy. What do you do with the national poll? That's crazy town.
Well the national poll looks crazy to me. UMU #3 and Wheaton #5. UWW #2???? Did the pollsters not watch the Stagg bowl?
Sent my ballot in. Pretty straightfoward in my book.
Quote from: WRMUalum13 on December 22, 2019, 02:47:07 PM
Quote from: USee on December 21, 2019, 12:18:49 AM
This ones easy. What do you do with the national poll? That's crazy town.
Well the national poll looks crazy to me. UMU #3 and Wheaton #5. UWW #2???? Did the pollsters not watch the Stagg bowl?
Putting UWW in the 2 slot is lazy.
2019 Final North Region Fan Poll
(https://i.imgur.com/s82NnUT.png)
https://imgur.com/a/HNNwqyJ
The NRFP is voted on by: Captain_Joe08, CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGrizzliesGrad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, NCF, smedindy, thunderdog, and wally wabash.
I went and put all the polls from this season into one album (which is the link beneath the picture in the post) and updated all the old posts here. Maybe next year I'll remember how to do that from the start of the season.
You chumps doing this again? ;)
I'm trying to decide what to do with the West Fan Poll, considering the directional regions are no longer a thing. As many of you probably already know it's broken down into Regions 1-6.
West is broken into regions 5 and 6, along with other ASC and CCIW teams. I'm half tempted to just say the hell with it, I'll stick to what was the West...and ignore the realignment.
Curious to hear your thoughts
I have no idea... the north is split into region 4 (HCAC, MIAA, OAC, NCAC) and region 5 (CCIW and NACC)
I think us poll runners need to get together and figure it out as a group so we're all on the same page.
If there's going to be a poll I would certainly like to participate again.
As the show says: "The North Remembers"
Whenever we decide to do this again, count me in!
I am down to do this problem is as Grizz said, is the logistics because the region split.
I'd be inclined to agree with 02 Warhawk and just leave the regional fan polls based on the old directional regions. Obviously it wouldn't align with actual regional polling, but I always viewed this as more of us ranking "our own" anyway.
Yeah. That might be the best plan. Just stick with what we did in the past. I'll tell my guys to just use the old "West" teams
Poll is up and running... if you're interested go ahead and send those ballots in. I've messaged all the 2019 voters now so hopefully we have a decent turnout as we wake from our polling hibernation. We will stick with the north region teams (CCIW, HCAC, MIAA, NACC, NCAC, OAC).
I'd like to have the poll up Mon/Tues during the season but due to the lateness the first week could be later.
I just sent my ballot in. I knew my top 4. After that? Pretty much throwing darts this week.
Sent mine in. After the top 5, it turned into a dumpster fire.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 06, 2021, 05:42:12 PM
I just sent my ballot in. I knew my top 4. After that? Pretty much throwing darts this week.
Quote from: Captain_Joe08 on September 06, 2021, 11:35:00 PM
Sent mine in. After the top 5, it turned into a dumpster fire.
I'm not really following football this season (at least not yet), but I'm curious: I would guess that for both of you the top three are UMU, NCC, and Wheaton (in whatever order), but after that? JCU? Franklin? Wabash? ??
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 06, 2021, 11:44:37 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 06, 2021, 05:42:12 PM
I just sent my ballot in. I knew my top 4. After that? Pretty much throwing darts this week.
Quote from: Captain_Joe08 on September 06, 2021, 11:35:00 PM
Sent mine in. After the top 5, it turned into a dumpster fire.
I'm not really following football this season (at least not yet), but I'm curious: I would guess that for both of you the top three are UMU, NCC, and Wheaton (in whatever order), but after that? JCU? Franklin? Wabash? ??
Yes for the top 3. I didn't punish Aurora that much for their game against St. John's.
Yeah I didn't punish Aurora at all. Same with JCU. A close loss to W&J is a quality loss, imo.
I think one voter may have voted a preseason poll. Everything should be ironed out for next week.
2021 Week 1 North Region Fan Poll
(https://i.imgur.com/4UV2nPf.png)
https://imgur.com/4UV2nPf (https://imgur.com/4UV2nPf)
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 09, 2021, 03:45:21 AM
I think one voter may have voted a preseason poll. Everything should be ironed out for next week.
Column 4 is identical to my preseason poll and I don't see my post week 1 poll... maybe I forgot to hit send... That being said, admittedly I think I still had Hanover on my list having not seen they lost to Centre.
I will try a little harder in both submitting and researching each team's performance this week :/
Quote from: HOPEful on September 09, 2021, 08:39:20 AM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 09, 2021, 03:45:21 AM
I think one voter may have voted a preseason poll. Everything should be ironed out for next week.
Column 4 is identical to my preseason poll and I don't see my post week 1 poll... maybe I forgot to hit send... That being said, admittedly I think I still had Hanover on my list having not seen they lost to Centre.
I will try a little harder in both submitting and researching each team's performance this week :/
Yeah, you were column 4. That was the only ballot I received from you. I figured it was a preseason poll when you had IWU and not Franklin. But you never responded to my reply so I went with what I had.
It's week 1 after a looooong layoff. We'll get the kinks ironed out.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 09, 2021, 08:55:40 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on September 09, 2021, 08:39:20 AM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 09, 2021, 03:45:21 AM
I think one voter may have voted a preseason poll. Everything should be ironed out for next week.
Column 4 is identical to my preseason poll and I don't see my post week 1 poll... maybe I forgot to hit send... That being said, admittedly I think I still had Hanover on my list having not seen they lost to Centre.
I will try a little harder in both submitting and researching each team's performance this week :/
Yeah, you were column 4. That was the only ballot I received from you. I figured it was a preseason poll when you had IWU and not Franklin. But you never responded to my reply so I went with what I had.
It's week 1 after a looooong layoff. We'll get the kinks ironed out.
100% my bad. I did actually fill out another... but clearly never hit send. Oh well... next week I'll be better :)
Quote from: Li'l Giant on September 08, 2021, 04:17:01 PM
Yeah I didn't punish Aurora at all. Same with JCU. A close loss to W&J is a quality loss, imo.
I had Aurora at 4 on my ballot. I thought they showed very well against a top 10 team. JCU I dinged slightly because I was underwhelmed with the complete lack of offense against W&J (historically not a defensive juggernaut).
Just waiting on one ballot. So far 15 teams receiving a vote, 4 of whom didn't receive one last week.
After the carnage of the first few weeks, 5-10 should be very interesting.
Didn't receive a ballot from one voter this week.
2021 Week 2 North Region Fan Poll
(https://i.imgur.com/yARAVmN.png)
https://imgur.com/yARAVmN (https://imgur.com/yARAVmN)
Yeah I had a hard time with the ballot this week. Hopefully conference play can sort a few things out starting this week for many teams.
Someone else voted for Musky! I'm going to frame this week's poll and send it to New Concord so they can hang it in the new rec center.
Quote from: Captain_Joe08 on September 16, 2021, 08:52:18 AM
Yeah I had a hard time with the ballot this week. Hopefully conference play can sort a few things out starting this week for many teams.
I think we all had the same hard time. And we all came to the same end conclusions...
We all agree there are three teams at #1a #1b and #1c.
Then a huge gap.
Then whatever order you have the rest of the Ohio teams with Franklin in there somewhere. Albion at 2-0 can be placed in somewhere at the bottom if desired.
Aurora you could argue placing anywhere from 5th to unranked. I just wish they put up a little more of a fight against North Central. But I'm not sure that any team on this list outside the top 4 puts up a better fight against the Cardinals. If Wabash had Mount, Wheaton, or North Central on their schedule, I'm not convinced they'd avoid a similar fate.
I think we're down to 7 voters now.
(https://i.imgur.com/Ooq2TAj.png)
https://imgur.com/a/UuSewZB
My bad this week. I'm the jacka$$ who thought Musky was on bye and didn't even look for a score on them. So that would be me that voted them 10 after getting shut out.
I'm interested in hearing how someone thinks Olivet is worthy of being ranked above Albion. Albion was the MIAA coaches vote to win the conference and has impressive wins over Mt. St. Joe and Hanover. Olivet was preseason picked to finish fourth and although 2-0, those wins were to Eureka and Manchester.
Also, didn't Marietta lose their first game to Dubuque? (Not a statement against them being ranked, just that I don't believe they are 2-0 as listed)
Quote from: HOPEful on September 24, 2021, 11:17:34 AM
I'm interested in hearing how someone thinks Olivet is worthy of being ranked above Albion. Albion was the MIAA coaches vote to win the conference and has impressive wins over Mt. St. Joe and Hanover. Olivet was preseason picked to finish fourth and although 2-0, those wins were to Eureka and Manchester.
Also, didn't Marietta lose their first game to Dubuque? (Not a statement against them being ranked, just that I don't believe they are 2-0 as listed)
Looks like we had another mistake in voting... and it was me. For some reason I thought the Pioneers were 2-0. :-[
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 24, 2021, 04:58:08 PM
Quote from: HOPEful on September 24, 2021, 11:17:34 AM
I'm interested in hearing how someone thinks Olivet is worthy of being ranked above Albion. Albion was the MIAA coaches vote to win the conference and has impressive wins over Mt. St. Joe and Hanover. Olivet was preseason picked to finish fourth and although 2-0, those wins were to Eureka and Manchester.
Also, didn't Marietta lose their first game to Dubuque? (Not a statement against them being ranked, just that I don't believe they are 2-0 as listed)
Looks like we had another mistake in voting... and it was me. For some reason I thought the Pioneers were 2-0. :-[
They should be. They had about 17 chances in the red zone late at Dubuque and couldn't get it over the line.
2021 Week 4 North Region Fan Poll
(https://i.imgur.com/smfe5gJ.png)
https://imgur.com/a/UuSewZB
1. I don't know how anyone can argue for ranking Mount ahead of North Central right now.
2. I don't know how one voter can rank John Carroll 8th but Aurora 4th... feels like if you punish John Carroll for competitive losses to W&J and Mount, you'd punish Aurora more for losing to St. Johns and getting crushed by North Central. I can understand being high or low on both teams based on how to feel about those 2 loses... It just feel like if you're going to be high on Aurora, you should be even higher on John Carroll.
As the lone Mount voter I will disclose that it was not me who voted Mount #1. I'd be more inclined to vote them #3 than #1 given what I've watched of their games to date.
I was relieved to see the 9-10 spots kind of spread out with a big drop off from 8 in terms of points. I had a hard time with those last couple spots. I watched the majority of OWU's games against Otterbein and Allegheny. They aren't good. I think those two opponents were both bad teams this year and those games seemed fairly evenly matched. I should have maybe put Denison in that spot on my ballot because I think they're better than OWU. There's always next week.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 29, 2021, 10:33:50 AM
As the lone Mount voter I will disclose that it was not me who voted Mount #1. I'd be more inclined to vote them #3 than #1 given what I've watched of their games to date.
I was relieved to see the 9-10 spots kind of spread out with a big drop off from 8 in terms of points. I had a hard time with those last couple spots. I watched the majority of OWU's games against Otterbein and Allegheny. They aren't good. I think those two opponents were both bad teams this year and those games seemed fairly evenly matched. I should have maybe put Denison in that spot on my ballot because I think they're better than OWU. There's always next week.
Agreed on both accounts. My critique was not meant as an indictment on Mount, but that I don't believe that any team can do more than North Central has done to firmly place themselves as #1, both regionally and nationally. They are the reigning champions, absolutely demolished a ranked Aurora team, and beat a Wheaton team that might just be worthy of the #2 ranking nationally, at their place...
I am much more open to the argument that Mount should be ranked #2 in the nation than I am to #1 in the region. To me, North Central is the clear #1 team in the country currently, and the debate starts at 2-5 over where MHB, WW, Mount, and Wheaton should be placed.
Quote from: HOPEful on September 29, 2021, 09:05:53 AM
2. I don't know how one voter can rank John Carroll 8th but Aurora 4th... feels like if you punish John Carroll for competitive losses to W&J and Mount, you'd punish Aurora more for losing to St. Johns and getting crushed by North Central. I can understand being high or low on both teams based on how to feel about those 2 loses... It just feel like if you're going to be high on Aurora, you should be even higher on John Carroll.
It's me. I've been off of JCU really since they got pantsed by Randolph Macon in the tournament a few years ago. Have they beaten anybody that's really good since 2016?
I do think Aurora being one yard and a tremendous defensive play away from winning at St. John's is a better result than JCU not giving up 45 to Mount Union. I understand the POV that it was "competitive" but from what I saw of UMU/JCU, UMU was always under control even if the scoreboard didn't light up- and maybe that informs us more about Mount Union than it does John Carroll.
Maybe I'm too harsh on JCU and too forgiving on Aurora, but really what my ballot indicates is that there are three national championship contenders in this region and then there is a massive (and I mean massive) separation, and then you can cover the next 12 or so teams with a postage stamp because they're all kind of interchangeably ok. There's more space on my ballot here between 3 and 4 than there is from 4 to like the next 10-12 teams I considered.
This is why I asked. Great answer that I fully accept. Thanks Wally!
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 29, 2021, 01:26:10 PM
Quote from: HOPEful on September 29, 2021, 09:05:53 AM
2. I don't know how one voter can rank John Carroll 8th but Aurora 4th... feels like if you punish John Carroll for competitive losses to W&J and Mount, you'd punish Aurora more for losing to St. Johns and getting crushed by North Central. I can understand being high or low on both teams based on how to feel about those 2 loses... It just feel like if you're going to be high on Aurora, you should be even higher on John Carroll.
It's me. I've been off of JCU really since they got pantsed by Randolph Macon in the tournament a few years ago. Have they beaten anybody that's really good since 2016?
I do think Aurora being one yard and a tremendous defensive play away from winning at St. John's is a better result than JCU not giving up 45 to Mount Union. I understand the POV that it was "competitive" but from what I saw of UMU/JCU, UMU was always under control even if the scoreboard didn't light up- and maybe that informs us more about Mount Union than it does John Carroll.
Maybe I'm too harsh on JCU and too forgiving on Aurora, but really what my ballot indicates is that there are three national championship contenders in this region and then there is a massive (and I mean massive) separation, and then you can cover the next 12 or so teams with a postage stamp because they're all kind of interchangeably ok. There's more space on my ballot here between 3 and 4 than there is from 4 to like the next 10-12 teams I considered.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 29, 2021, 01:26:10 PM
Quote from: HOPEful on September 29, 2021, 09:05:53 AM
2. I don't know how one voter can rank John Carroll 8th but Aurora 4th... feels like if you punish John Carroll for competitive losses to W&J and Mount, you'd punish Aurora more for losing to St. Johns and getting crushed by North Central. I can understand being high or low on both teams based on how to feel about those 2 loses... It just feel like if you're going to be high on Aurora, you should be even higher on John Carroll.
It's me. I've been off of JCU really since they got pantsed by Randolph Macon in the tournament a few years ago. Have they beaten anybody that's really good since 2016?
I do think Aurora being one yard and a tremendous defensive play away from winning at St. John's is a better result than JCU not giving up 45 to Mount Union. I understand the POV that it was "competitive" but from what I saw of UMU/JCU, UMU was always under control even if the scoreboard didn't light up- and maybe that informs us more about Mount Union than it does John Carroll.
Maybe I'm too harsh on JCU and too forgiving on Aurora, but really what my ballot indicates is that there are three national championship contenders in this region and then there is a massive (and I mean massive) separation, and then you can cover the next 12 or so teams with a postage stamp because they're all kind of interchangeably ok. There's more space on my ballot here between 3 and 4 than there is from 4 to like the next 10-12 teams I considered.
This is so true. The drop off after the top 3 is as big as I can recall. And from 4 on down there really wouldn't be any team in there that would surprise me beating any other team ranked above them (aside from OWU as I mentioned earlier). This week Berg is 9 and JCU 4. It wouldn't surprise me if Berg beat JCU. I don't think they will, but if they did I wouldn't even give it a second thought. I wish I could say that's because the region is that deep with quality teams, but...
Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 30, 2021, 12:02:02 PM
This is so true. The drop off after the top 3 is as big as I can recall. And from 4 on down there really wouldn't be any team in there that would surprise me beating any other team ranked above them (aside from OWU as I mentioned earlier). This week Berg is 9 and JCU 4. It wouldn't surprise me if Berg beat JCU. I don't think they will, but if they did I wouldn't even give it a second thought. I wish I could say that's because the region is that deep with quality teams, but...
I too agree. Although you could argue the dropoff isn't any bigger than it's ever been, it's just from 3 to 4 instead of from Mount to 2.
I think what I'm guilty of attempting to do is find that "next tier" of teams... teams that are well below the top 3 but a step above the rest of the pack. John Carroll and Aurora feel closer to that place for me... still, it would be nice to see them win a close one to a superior opponent vs. keeping it close but ultimately losing.
When I'm reaching around for that next tier of teams below the national title contenders, I'm hunting for teams that I think can win a playoff game or two. The region usually has a handful of those. Two have graduated to the upper tier and that thins the next tier herd a little- but even after that, is there one team below the top three the NRFP that you trust to win a playoff game? I'm not sure the region has that right now, and that's a pretty new development.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 30, 2021, 04:46:27 PM
When I'm reaching around for that next tier of teams below the national title contenders, I'm hunting for teams that I think can win a playoff game or two. The region usually has a handful of those. Two have graduated to the upper tier and that thins the next tier herd a little- but even after that, is there one team below the top three the NRFP that you trust to win a playoff game? I'm not sure the region has that right now, and that's a pretty new development.
JCU, the greatest 1-2 team of all time, probably beats an east coast/midwest conference champ. BW is the better of the two other OAC teams, but BW will BW and lose to Musky or ONU. If BW plays to their potential, they can win a 1st rd game and be right there in the 2nd rd game
Quote from: D3fanboy on September 30, 2021, 05:08:27 PM
JCU, the greatest 1-2 team of all time, probably beats an east coast/midwest conference champ. BW is the better of the two other OAC teams, but BW will BW and lose to Musky or ONU. If BW plays to their potential, they can win a 1st rd game and be right there in the 2nd rd game
This is so dependent on the draw to me... The Ohio teams have the geographic advantage of potentially getting a Randolph Macon or Muhlenberg vs. the rest of the region, that are much more likely to be sent to the slaughter in Naperville, Alliance, Wheaton, or Whitewater. Even the teams that have been "lucking out" and getting sent to Iowa to play Central or Wartburg haven't really had success. So again, my next tier still looks like Aurora and John Carroll, because they've been right there against teams like St. Johns and Washington and Jefferson both this year and in the playoffs recently (Aurora in 2019 and JC in 2018 and the deep run in 2016 isn't THAT far off past)
2021 Week 5 North Region Fan Poll
(https://i.imgur.com/95GkRNL.png)
https://imgur.com/a/UuSewZB
Still now used to having nearly a half dozen ORV's nearly halfway through the season. But the results for most have been semi-murky. I had to resist dropping Wabash further that 8 after needing OT to win.
Quote from: Captain_Joe08 on October 06, 2021, 12:37:02 AM
Still now used to having nearly a half dozen ORV's nearly halfway through the season. But the results for most have been semi-murky. I had to resist dropping Wabash further that 8 after needing OT to win.
I dropped them to 9. Usually, I'm more of the mindset of gearing towards resume vs. "the eye test"... but after the top 4, with the exception of a couple head-to-head results and close loses to elite teams, there are no clear differentiating wins/loses to go by resume alone. So my rankings lean towards, who do I think right now would beat who on a neutral site...
By that metric, I'm willing to elevate John Carroll and Aurora higher than their records would indicate.
I've got to admit, I'm a little surprised by the sentiment for Aurora.
They lost to a good team, they lost BIG to North Central, and they've run up the score on three bad teams.
The rest of their schedule is filled with average teams.
They should walk through their generally weak conference and go to the playoffs, but that's about it.
And also (admittedly, I'm still trying to figure out the new regional structures), but isn't Aurora along with the NACC in Region 5?
Quote from: Whitecarrera on October 07, 2021, 12:04:27 PM
I've got to admit, I'm a little surprised by the sentiment for Aurora.
They lost to a good team, they lost BIG to North Central, and they've run up the score on three bad teams.
The rest of their schedule is filled with average teams.
They should walk through their generally weak conference and go to the playoffs, but that's about it.
And also (admittedly, I'm still trying to figure out the new regional structures), but isn't Aurora along with the NACC in Region 5?
The NACC is in Region 5 -- so is the CCIW. But this is a North Region poll, so ...
Quote from: Whitecarrera on October 07, 2021, 12:04:27 PM
I've got to admit, I'm a little surprised by the sentiment for A
Aurora is kind of in no mans land for the remainder of the NC schedule. Is the Aurora we saw against SJU or vs North Central the real AU? Won't know until playoffs.
Quote from: Whitecarrera on October 07, 2021, 12:04:27 PM
I've got to admit, I'm a little surprised by the sentiment for Aurora.
They lost to a good team, they lost BIG to North Central, and they've run up the score on three bad teams.
The rest of their schedule is filled with average teams.
They should walk through their generally weak conference and go to the playoffs, but that's about it.
And also (admittedly, I'm still trying to figure out the new regional structures), but isn't Aurora along with the NACC in Region 5?
Who hasn't lost big to North Central in 20+ or so games? It's a very short list of Wheaton (twice) and Mount Union. In that stretch, NC crushed Whitewater in the National Championship game, Muhlenberg in the semis, Delaware Valley in the quarters, Wabash in the first round, and has whooped everyone not named Wheaton so far this year. Losing to NC big doesn't mean much to me because I'm convinced that Mount and Wheaton are the only two teams on this poll that wouldn't get crushed by the Cardinals.
Aurora has in that stretch now twice had 4th quarter leads against a top 10 St. John's team. John Carroll has had close games against Washington and Jefferson and Mount Union. IMO, those results tell me much more about them than all the other north regional team's wins against Hiram, Kenyan, Wilmington, Otterbein, Kalamazoo, or pretty much any team in the HCAC this year, etc.
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 07, 2021, 12:16:47 PM
Quote from: Whitecarrera on October 07, 2021, 12:04:27 PM
I've got to admit, I'm a little surprised by the sentiment for Aurora.
They lost to a good team, they lost BIG to North Central, and they've run up the score on three bad teams.
The rest of their schedule is filled with average teams.
They should walk through their generally weak conference and go to the playoffs, but that's about it.
And also (admittedly, I'm still trying to figure out the new regional structures), but isn't Aurora along with the NACC in Region 5?
The NACC is in Region 5 -- so is the CCIW. But this is a North Region poll, so ...
(https://c.tenor.com/9QijNQV4fA8AAAAC/jon-snow-got.gif)
Quote from: Whitecarrera on October 07, 2021, 12:04:27 PM
And also (admittedly, I'm still trying to figure out the new regional structures), but isn't Aurora along with the NACC in Region 5?
Due to the lateness of the change here on the boards and the fact that it had been a while due to the pandemic, the North (now region 4 and 5) and West (now region 5 and 6) polls decided to stay with the old format. The East is basically Region 1 and 2 and they've kept them combined in one poll. The South got off to a late start with a new runner and have decided to use just Region 3 which leaves the ASC without a poll this season since they're now Region 6.
Maybe next year we'll split the polls into the new regions.
Quote from: Whitecarrera on October 07, 2021, 12:04:27 PM
I've got to admit, I'm a little surprised by the sentiment for Aurora.
They lost to a good team, they lost BIG to North Central, and they've run up the score on three bad teams.
The rest of their schedule is filled with average teams.
They should walk through their generally weak conference and go to the playoffs, but that's about it.
And also (admittedly, I'm still trying to figure out the new regional structures), but isn't Aurora along with the NACC in Region 5?
I'm pretty sure that even JCU (the best 2-2 team ever) would put up over 500 yards on Aurora. But hey, they have a good QB, chalk up an impressive win for St Johns
Quote from: D3fanboy on October 07, 2021, 06:48:31 PM
Quote from: Whitecarrera on October 07, 2021, 12:04:27 PM
I've got to admit, I'm a little surprised by the sentiment for Aurora.
They lost to a good team, they lost BIG to North Central, and they've run up the score on three bad teams.
The rest of their schedule is filled with average teams.
They should walk through their generally weak conference and go to the playoffs, but that's about it.
And also (admittedly, I'm still trying to figure out the new regional structures), but isn't Aurora along with the NACC in Region 5?
I'm pretty sure that even JCU (the best 2-2 team ever) would put up over 500 yards on Aurora. But hey, they have a good QB, chalk up an impressive win for St Johns
I do wish there was a greater sample size of cross region, cross conference games. I love that Hope went out to Coe this year. I'd love to see more ARC and WIAC teams on the schedule in future seasons.
It's very difficult to judge how good a team like Central is when their non-conference wins were to St. Olaf and Kalamazoo. The eye-test tells me they're very good. But are they compete with the best of the CCIW/WIAC good? I can ask that same type of question down the rankings too... How good is Aurora comparatively? Albion?
Quote from: HOPEful on October 08, 2021, 09:15:41 AM
Quote from: D3fanboy on October 07, 2021, 06:48:31 PM
Quote from: Whitecarrera on October 07, 2021, 12:04:27 PM
I've got to admit, I'm a little surprised by the sentiment for Aurora.
They lost to a good team, they lost BIG to North Central, and they've run up the score on three bad teams.
The rest of their schedule is filled with average teams.
They should walk through their generally weak conference and go to the playoffs, but that's about it.
And also (admittedly, I'm still trying to figure out the new regional structures), but isn't Aurora along with the NACC in Region 5?
I'm pretty sure that even JCU (the best 2-2 team ever) would put up over 500 yards on Aurora. But hey, they have a good QB, chalk up an impressive win for St Johns
I do wish there was a greater sample size of cross region, cross conference games. I love that Hope went out to Coe this year. I'd love to see more ARC and WIAC teams on the schedule in future seasons.
It's very difficult to judge how good a team like Central is when their non-conference wins were to St. Olaf and Kalamazoo. The eye-test tells me they're very good. But are they compete with the best of the CCIW/WIAC good? I can ask that same type of question down the rankings too... How good is Aurora comparatively? Albion?
Central seems great! I mean they put up 84 points on Simpson, something that earned UMHB a couple of extra first place votes in the d3fb poll from preseason to week 1. Must have been impressive!
10th spot on my ballot is for sale since no one seems to want it!
Albion losing to Adrian, Lakeland losing to Benedictine, Olivet losing to Trine, DePauw getting skunked for 3 quarters and needing 17 in the 4th to sneak past Wittenberg, ...
I wrote down a team's name at 10. I don't feel like they deserve it though...
Still no rankings?
Week 6
(https://i.imgur.com/wo6IBwz.png)
https://imgur.com/a/UuSewZB
Sorry for the delay, ballots have been a bit slow this week both here and Top 25.
I ran the table this week. I didn't think that would happen for a couple more weeks with as unsure as the ballot is after #3.
Haha, this is awesome. There is a very clear line after 8. We unanimously believe the teams 1-8 should be ranked. Then, 8 different schools were written down with those 14 other votes...
You could maybe say that line is drawn after #7.
Unfortunately, it might get muddier with John Carroll playing ONU and OWU playing DePauw this weekend.
I am one of the voters still not ranking DePauw. If they take care of business at home against Ohio Wesleyan, they will be in my rankings next week. Same goes for the Polar Bears, although winning in University Heights is a much taller task.
(https://i.redd.it/mcn51mw8f1141.png)
Oops. Thought I had posted it already. Even had the image ready to go. :-[
Week 7
(https://i.imgur.com/6im0c38.png)
https://imgur.com/a/UuSewZB
Haha, fair enough. I get a strange satisfaction seeing the new poll so much appreciated! :)
It looks like it was my turn to run the table this week.
I think that we are collectively ranking half of the OAC says less about the OAC and more about the state of the North region at the moment.
Outside of Hope getting beat by Adrian or Heidelberg pulling off the extreme upset and beating Mount, I'm not sure there's a game this weekend that'll shift these rankings much.
Not so hypothetical question to the group, if Heidelberg loses to Mount 40-7, do they move in your rankings?
If this was just a Region 4 poll, the top 4 spots would all be OAC teams.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 21, 2021, 02:11:39 PM
If this was just a Region 4 poll, the top 4 spots would all be OAC teams.
And as someone who has watched all of them play I can tell you that's not a testament to how strong the OAC is this year.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 21, 2021, 03:38:47 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 21, 2021, 02:11:39 PM
If this was just a Region 4 poll, the top 4 spots would all be OAC teams.
And as someone who has watched all of them play I can tell you that's not a testament to how strong the OAC is this year.
Really? I thought both BW And JCU looked exceptionally good this year
I feel big on BW this year...Their offense is starting to come around and their D is the real deal. They gave up only 31 to Mount, but a lot of that due to their offense not sustaining drive and giving Mount more chances. JCU needs a little more power on offense. Their D is also exceptional but can't be on the field with the game on their =shoulders the whole time.
As for Heidelberg this week, if they get shut out, they should move down... fi they score 7-10 points, and lose by 35 they should stand still, if they lose by more than 35 it will depend on the other outcomes, but theyt should move down
Quote from: Captainred81 on October 21, 2021, 05:06:48 PM
As for Heidelberg this week, if they get shut out, they should move down... fi they score 7-10 points, and lose by 35 they should stand still, if they lose by more than 35 it will depend on the other outcomes, but theyt should move down
I feel differently. Losing 14-45 is no different than losing 35-0 in my eyes. And I feel like where I have them, I don't have any faith that the teams below them would suffer a more bearable fate against the Purple Raiders, even if they lose by 50+...
Unless we have a shockingly unexpected result this weekend, my rankings next week will most likely be a cut and paste of this weeks vote.
Quote from: HOPEful on October 21, 2021, 01:51:27 PM
Outside of Hope getting beat by Adrian or Heidelberg pulling off the extreme upset and beating Mount, I'm not sure there's a game this weekend that'll shift these rankings much.
Not so hypothetical question to the group, if Heidelberg loses to Mount 40-7, do they move in your rankings?
I don't think any team below team would do any better, and no team above them would do any worse. A score like that would probably leave them where they are (and said score we got: 49-14). I had been thinking that the only team left that could move up in spite of a "good" loss to Mount would be Ohio Northern, but they just lost to Capital...
Quote from: WRMUalum13 on October 21, 2021, 03:52:15 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 21, 2021, 03:38:47 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 21, 2021, 02:11:39 PM
If this was just a Region 4 poll, the top 4 spots would all be OAC teams.
And as someone who has watched all of them play I can tell you that's not a testament to how strong the OAC is this year.
Really? I thought both BW And JCU looked exceptionally good this year
I guess I just don't think either are exceptionally good. BW is definitely better than they've been in years and Hilvert has them trending in the right way, but they're limited offensively IMO. I question their ability to throw the ball. JCU I think lacks the level of skill players their top teams have had especially at QB. They're strong on D as usual, but again their exceptional teams have had AA caliber difference makers. I just didn't see anyone like that.
After all my talk about my rankings not moving, they moved...
I finally gave in to the urge to move John Carroll down for yet another close game to an opponent I expected them to beat with more ease.
I've remembered to do it without Mr. Bean getting bored this week 8-)
Week 8
(https://i.imgur.com/sDUEr13.png)
https://imgur.com/a/UuSewZB
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/1c/c0/79/1cc079fab52c8a1bf3457fbd20f3030a.gif)
I am one of the voters that has Trine ahead of Albion. As a Hope and MIAA fan, I am excited for the game this weekend between the two. And I'm kinda pulling for Trine because I'd love to see the regular season finale between Hope and Trine play out to be an MIAA Championship game.
Quote from: archgemini24 on October 23, 2021, 05:54:18 PM
Quote from: HOPEful on October 21, 2021, 01:51:27 PM
Outside of Hope getting beat by Adrian or Heidelberg pulling off the extreme upset and beating Mount, I'm not sure there's a game this weekend that'll shift these rankings much.
Not so hypothetical question to the group, if Heidelberg loses to Mount 40-7, do they move in your rankings?
I don't think any team below team would do any better, and no team above them would do any worse. A score like that would probably leave them where they are (and said score we got: 49-14). I had been thinking that the only team left that could move up in spite of a "good" loss to Mount would be Ohio Northern, but they just lost to Capital...
And, of course, Ohio Northern gets their close loss to Mount. Thank goodness scoreboard is what matters, because beside that and turnovers, the Bears won everything else and were
game today: pass yards, rush yards, total yards, first downs, time-of-possession, and fewer penalties. I know a lot of folks may not be super high on Mount Union, but any team that can do that to the Raiders should have had few issues with most of their schedule, let alone Capital the week before.
I am probably being paranoid, but this whole thing feels like the OAC is down and dragging Mount with it.
I'm excited to see this weeks ranking and how many #2 votes Wheaton gained from Mount's close win against ONU.
I can tell you I know for sure they gained at least 1.
It has been posted on the OAC board that 13 of the Two Deep (including the punter) depth chart for Mount Union were not playing vs. ONU. Most of the Offensive Starters were there, but I think some of the DBs were out.
Take it for what it's worth. At least we have a playoff system so the games can be determined on the turf/grass.
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on November 03, 2021, 10:05:40 AM
Take it for what it's worth. At least we have a playoff system so the games can be determined on the turf/grass.
Yes. And let's not forget that we're splitting hairs here between not just the #2 and #3 team in the region, but arguably the country. With all due respect to Mount Union, Whitewater, and Mary Hardin Baylor, at this point in the season I personally think Wheaton is the second best team in the country. They just got beat early on to the best team in the country.
I wouldn't agree with that. The Thunder have a great team and their strength lies in their DLine and OLine, which is a great place to be strong for a deep run in the playoffs. I think this is the best Dline and Oline (together) I have ever seen at Wheaton. But they have flaws that will only be revealed against another team with a top 5 Oline and Dline who can minimize their advantage up front.
I think the Thunder at #4-6 nationally is the right spot.
Quote from: USee on November 03, 2021, 11:37:08 AM
I wouldn't agree with that. The Thunder have a great team and their strength lies in their DLine and OLine, which is a great place to be strong for a deep run in the playoffs. I think this is the best Dline and Oline (together) I have ever seen at Wheaton. But they have flaws that will only be revealed against another team with a top 5 Oline and Dline who can minimize their advantage up front.
I think the Thunder at #4-6 nationally is the right spot.
I didn't expect a unanimous agreement. Your point is actually exactly why I think they ARE the number 2 team in the country. UWW, Mount, and MHB all have flaws too. As a rule of thumb, I'll take the team with two dominant lines. I'm not sure North Central has any flaws :P
Also, I don't think Central is getting enough love yet. That team is really good and I wouldn't be shocked to see them beat someone "they shouldn't" in the playoffs.
Quote from: HOPEful on November 03, 2021, 12:17:06 PM
Quote from: USee on November 03, 2021, 11:37:08 AM
I wouldn't agree with that. The Thunder have a great team and their strength lies in their DLine and OLine, which is a great place to be strong for a deep run in the playoffs. I think this is the best Dline and Oline (together) I have ever seen at Wheaton. But they have flaws that will only be revealed against another team with a top 5 Oline and Dline who can minimize their advantage up front.
I think the Thunder at #4-6 nationally is the right spot.
I didn't expect a unanimous agreement. Your point is actually exactly why I think they ARE the number 2 team in the country. UWW, Mount, and MHB all have flaws too. As a rule of thumb, I'll take the team with two dominant lines. I'm not sure North Central has any flaws :P
Also, I don't think Central is getting enough love yet. That team is really good and I wouldn't be shocked to see them beat someone "they shouldn't" in the playoffs.
I think there's a ceiling for Central that they've more or less hit because of how they went out in 2019. Beating UW-O was impressive certainly, but they were dominated and beaten in one quarter in Round 2 vs. Wheaton. I can't really go much higher with Central on my ballot until they do something that erases that last thing I saw them do against a team in the top tier.
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 03, 2021, 12:51:26 PM
I think there's a ceiling for Central that they've more or less hit because of how they went out in 2019. Beating UW-O was impressive certainly, but they were dominated and beaten in one quarter in Round 2 vs. Wheaton. I can't really go much higher with Central on my ballot until they do something that erases that last thing I saw them do against a team in the top tier.
Totally fair. And I even agree to a certain extent.
But that was a Wheaton team that beat North Central earlier that season. The same North Central that spanked Delaware Valley, Muhlenberg, and Whitewater on their way to a National Championship. I guess for me, I have a little more tolerance for bad losses because just about everyone has one. Mary Hardin Baylor got spanked by Whitewater the last time we saw them in the playoffs. Unless you're North Central or Mount Union, I can find a bad loss to hold against you.
North Central has flaws. If you can stop the run and run the ball you can beat them. Wheaton has both, unfortunately, for some reason, they decided to pass the ball 44 times and run it 27 (for 120 yds) against NCC, despite the fact they have run it 60% and passed 40% in every other game for the last 2 years. NCC's greatest strength on Defense is their secondary. They are elite. Solid Dline with a 1 DE that is great and 2 very good Linebackers. Wheaton played championship defense as they held them to 14 pts (Ethan Greenfield had 55 yds) until the last 90 seconds when they were sending people to try and get the ball back and NCC scored.
There are a couple teams in the top tier that have that profile. I think NCC is the strong favorite, but they aren't unbeatable.
Quote from: USee on November 03, 2021, 04:20:42 PM
North Central has flaws. If you can stop the run and run the ball you can beat them. Wheaton has both, unfortunately, for some reason, they decided to pass the ball 44 times and run it 27 (for 120 yds) against NCC, despite the fact they have run it 60% and passed 40% in every other game for the last 2 years. NCC's greatest strength on Defense is their secondary. They are elite. Solid Dline with a 1 DE that is great and 2 very good Linebackers. Wheaton played championship defense as they held them to 14 pts (Ethan Greenfield had 55 yds) until the last 90 seconds when they were sending people to try and get the ball back and NCC scored.
There are a couple teams in the top tier that have that profile. I think NCC is the strong favorite, but they aren't unbeatable.
no doubt, I remember a few "unbeatable" Mount teams back in the day that didnt win the last game. We're dealing with 18-22 (25 in WI) year olds, anything can happen. Thankfully the NCAA cares so little about D3 that we can have an actual playoff
Just waiting on one more ballot who says they'll get it in tonight.
Quote from: D3fanboy on November 03, 2021, 04:31:12 PM
Quote from: USee on November 03, 2021, 04:20:42 PM
North Central has flaws. If you can stop the run and run the ball you can beat them. Wheaton has both, unfortunately, for some reason, they decided to pass the ball 44 times and run it 27 (for 120 yds) against NCC, despite the fact they have run it 60% and passed 40% in every other game for the last 2 years. NCC's greatest strength on Defense is their secondary. They are elite. Solid Dline with a 1 DE that is great and 2 very good Linebackers. Wheaton played championship defense as they held them to 14 pts (Ethan Greenfield had 55 yds) until the last 90 seconds when they were sending people to try and get the ball back and NCC scored.
There are a couple teams in the top tier that have that profile. I think NCC is the strong favorite, but they aren't unbeatable.
no doubt, I remember a few "unbeatable" Mount teams back in the day that didnt win the last game. We're dealing with 18-22 (25 in WI) year olds, anything can happen. Thankfully the NCAA cares so little about D3 that we can have an actual playoff
Lol "25" in WI 😂. From a d3fb podcast interview I think Wheaton is actually the oldest team IIRC. I think I remember a 26 year old on the roster
Quote from: WRMUalum13 on November 03, 2021, 06:27:42 PM
Quote from: D3fanboy on November 03, 2021, 04:31:12 PM
Quote from: USee on November 03, 2021, 04:20:42 PM
North Central has flaws. If you can stop the run and run the ball you can beat them. Wheaton has both, unfortunately, for some reason, they decided to pass the ball 44 times and run it 27 (for 120 yds) against NCC, despite the fact they have run it 60% and passed 40% in every other game for the last 2 years. NCC's greatest strength on Defense is their secondary. They are elite. Solid Dline with a 1 DE that is great and 2 very good Linebackers. Wheaton played championship defense as they held them to 14 pts (Ethan Greenfield had 55 yds) until the last 90 seconds when they were sending people to try and get the ball back and NCC scored.
There are a couple teams in the top tier that have that profile. I think NCC is the strong favorite, but they aren't unbeatable.
no doubt, I remember a few "unbeatable" Mount teams back in the day that didnt win the last game. We're dealing with 18-22 (25 in WI) year olds, anything can happen. Thankfully the NCAA cares so little about D3 that we can have an actual playoff
Lol "25" in WI 😂. From a d3fb podcast interview I think Wheaton is actually the oldest team IIRC. I think I remember a 26 year old on the roster
Wheaton has a boatload of superseniors. One of the main reasons I had them at #1 on my preseason ballot and would (still) not at all be surprised if were they were the last team standing.
26 year old TE Trey McJunkin is, unfortunately, out for the year after injuring his knee against Carroll. They (and NCC) both have a lot of superseniors. Wheaton's defense has 11 seniors and I believe all but 2 of them are 5th or 6th year seniors. Wheaton's Offense has 7 of 11 seniors and 5 of those are either 5th or 6th year guys I think.
Quote from: USee on November 03, 2021, 04:20:42 PM
North Central has flaws....
There are a couple teams in the top tier that have that profile. I think NCC is the strong favorite, but they aren't unbeatable.
I was definitely being facetious with the comment that NC lacks flaws ;)
The ballots are finally all in. :)
Week 9
(https://i.imgur.com/gP9qRtn.png)
Almost consensus! Amazing.
I'll raise my hand as column 1 as the only OAC (and Mount) pollster. I watched the entire ONU game and felt anything other than dropping Mount to 3 was disingenuous on my part. Injuries and good ONU game plan be damned, that's a team that lost to Cap the week before. I expect more from Mount. Sure the OAC is a tough slate, but not that tough IMO. ONU lost to Musky earlier also. Maybe I'm too hard but I'd take Wheaton on a neutral field over Mount right now so I voted accordingly.
I think this might be the first time that I've ever had my ballot be the same as the final result
Quote from: Dr. Acula on November 04, 2021, 10:37:01 PM
I'll raise my hand as column 1 as the only OAC (and Mount) pollster. I watched the entire ONU game and felt anything other than dropping Mount to 3 was disingenuous on my part. Injuries and good ONU game plan be damned, that's a team that lost to Cap the week before. I expect more from Mount. Sure the OAC is a tough slate, but not that tough IMO. ONU lost to Musky earlier also. Maybe I'm too hard but I'd take Wheaton on a neutral field over Mount right now so I voted accordingly.
As one would have guessed, I am the other pollster to drop Mount to 3. You hit on the head my reasoning. Right now, I'd take Wheaton on a neutral field.
If JCU beats BW next week, it probably keeps both of them out of the playoffs right?
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on November 05, 2021, 07:53:24 AM
If JCU beats BW next week, it probably keeps both of them out of the playoffs right?
Yes. But to be brutally honest, I think both are out regardless. Even if Baldwin Wallace wins out, I don't see them getting in. With only five pool C bids, odds are...
1. Goes to the WIAC #2.
2. Goes to Hardin Simmons.
3-5 will go to some order of Randolph Macon, Wheaton, Whitworth, or John Hopkins. If Bethel were to beat St. John's in the MIAC Championship, they'd take one of these. If a bunch of dominos fall, I think Washington and Jefferson comes off the table before BW. And I could see a two loss Oshkosh team coming off before them too.
I just don't see any scenario in which Baldwin Wallace is selected.
With Whitworth losing, I will amend my no chance scenario to a slim chance...
I think Baldwin Wallace has a better chance of being selected than Wheaton right now. My five picks as of now are La Crosse, LL #2 (Ithaca or Union), Birmingham-Southern, Baldwin Wallace, Hardin-Simmons.
Baldwin Wallace (8-1, .515, 1-1) vs Wheaton (8-1, .495, 0-1) plus BW should have their SoS increase while Wheaton will decrease next week. Not having a 3rd CCIW team ranked plus that sub-.500 SoS is going to cost Wheaton which sucks because they should definitely be in.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 07, 2021, 01:57:37 PM
I think Baldwin Wallace has a better chance of being selected than Wheaton right now. My five picks as of now are La Crosse, LL #2 (Ithaca or Union), Birmingham-Southern, Baldwin Wallace, Hardin-Simmons.
Baldwin Wallace (8-1, .515, 1-1) vs Wheaton (8-1, .495, 0-1) plus BW should have their SoS increase while Wheaton will decrease next week. Not having a 3rd CCIW team ranked plus that sub-.500 SoS is going to cost Wheaton which sucks because they should definitely be in.
On paper, I agree. But I just don't think the committee will keep them out. If they're going on just the computer data, then why even have a committee in the first place. I still think Wheaton gets in.
Quote from: HOPEful on November 07, 2021, 08:11:29 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 07, 2021, 01:57:37 PM
I think Baldwin Wallace has a better chance of being selected than Wheaton right now. My five picks as of now are La Crosse, LL #2 (Ithaca or Union), Birmingham-Southern, Baldwin Wallace, Hardin-Simmons.
Baldwin Wallace (8-1, .515, 1-1) vs Wheaton (8-1, .495, 0-1) plus BW should have their SoS increase while Wheaton will decrease next week. Not having a 3rd CCIW team ranked plus that sub-.500 SoS is going to cost Wheaton which sucks because they should definitely be in.
How do they stack up against regionally ranked opponents?
On paper, I agree. But I just don't think the committee will keep them out. If they're going on just the computer data, then why even have a committee in the first place. I still think Wheaton gets in.
due to severe underperformance in a down year in the CCIW, the Thunder will have only the game against North Central as an RRO result most likely.
Quote from: WRMUalum13 on November 07, 2021, 09:20:06 PM
How do they stack up against regionally ranked opponents?
The numbers after a team are D3 record, Strength of Schedule, and vs Regionally Ranked Opponents. So Wheaton is 8-1, have a SoS of .495, and are 0-1 vRRO.
The order I have teams being selected...
Round 1: La Crosse (6-1, .608, 1-1)
Round 2: Ithaca (8-1, .596, 1-1) (the LL is still completely undecided. If RPI beats Union and Ithaca beats Cortland, Ithaca is one loss pool C, if Union beats RPI then Ithaca is pool A and Union would be one loss pool C. If RPI wins and Ithaca loses that opens up a pool C bid)
Round 3: Birmingham-Southern (7-1, .525, 1-1)
Round 4: Baldwin Wallace (8-1, .515, 1-1)
Round 5: Hardin-Simmons (7-1, .528, 0-1)
Left at the table would be
Region 1: Salve Regina (8-2, .492, 1-1)
Region 2: Union (8-1, .530, 0-1) (Union would have a 2nd loss if Ithaca was in pool C... if they win Ithaca wouldn't take a pool C above but Union would probably be picked there instead with a RRO win and SoS boost) or Johns Hopkins (8-1, .510, 0-1)
Region 4: Heidelberg (6-2, .552, 1-2)
Region 5: Wheaton (8-1, .495, 0-1)
Region 6: Bethel (8-1, .541, 0-1) (would pick up a 2nd loss to St John's to be pool C) or Oshkosh (5-2, .587, 0-2)
While I think Wheaton should definitely be in, who are you kicking out to fit them? The only one I selected without a RRO win was Hardin-Simmons... who have a better SoS, and their only loss was also to a region #1 by a closer amount than Wheaton.
Imagine if Bethel beats St John's (9-0, .615, 2-0) and knocks the Johnnies into pool C... they'd be first off the board and move the bubble line up a spot.
Quote from: HOPEful on November 07, 2021, 08:11:29 PM
On paper, I agree. But I just don't think the committee will keep them out. If they're going on just the computer data, then why even have a committee in the first place. I still think Wheaton gets in.
Even going just on the computer data, someone has to determine how the different data line up with each other. A computer can't really compare (8-2, .600, 0-2) vs (9-1, .540, 0-1) vs (9-1, .485, 1-0). That's what the committee is for.
We could go the other way and say if the committee isn't going to use the criteria, why have the criteria in the first place? Then we'd just let the committee pick whoever they felt like as FBS does for their "playoff". I don't think that's much better.
FWIW, I don't think Baldwin Wallace is better than Wheaton. But maybe the past performance of OAC teams will linger in the Committees minds.
It will be interesting for sure.
Totally agree. I don't think there's a "right answer". And yes, if St. John's loses to Bethel, a really really good team is going to get knocked out of the playoffs.
Assuming St. John's wins, I agree with your round 1 and 2. The discussion around Birmingham Southern, Baldwin Wallace, Hardin Simmons, and Wheaton will certainly center around those RROs or lack there of and their value. Does a win against Centre mean the same as a win against Heidelberg? Does John Carroll drop off the list with another loss? It would be fun to be a fly on the wall to hear the full discussion.
If I were on the committee, I would lobby hard for Wheaton in the 5th spot. That being said, I feel like a .500 SOS is kinda an easy line to draw.
My current prediction...
1. La Crosse
2. LL #2
3. Birmingham Southern
4. Hardin Simmons (I think the .528 vs .515 SOS trumps the win against Heidelberg. I am assuming John Carroll drops off as a RRO.. two wins against RROs would place BW here)
5. Baldwin Wallace or Wheaton. And if the conversation is centered around just the two, I think it's a lengthy debate that could go either direction. But as much as I'd like to think that the committee picks Wheaton (just because I think they're a much better team) that sub .500 SOS is so damning without a statement win to fall back onto.
If the committee is going to ignore criteria to let Wheaton in, because similar to Mt Union in 2016, Wheaton will have a sub .500 SOS and a 9-1 record with 0-1 RRO. The difference is Mt Unions loss was to John Carroll and they had 1 loss to Oshkosh earlier that year and were not in the playoffs the year before. Wheaton's loss is a close loss to the defending, and undefeated national champ, and they are the only team to beat NCC or be close to them this year. That's the path both the regional and national committee will likely have to take.
Wheaton might get passed up by HSU due to the Cowboys week 1 opponent being a garbage NAIA team (doesnt count) instead of a 2-7 D3 team that counts in the SOS.
Quote from: D3fanboy on November 08, 2021, 11:46:10 AM
Wheaton might get passed up by HSU due to the Cowboys week 1 opponent being a garbage NAIA team (doesnt count) instead of a 2-7 D3 team that counts in the SOS.
Wheaton's SOS will get worse given the likelihood of another loss by their 2-6 non-conference opponent, and a date with 3-6 Millikin on tap.
Team that could wedge its way into serious consideration, IMO, is Oshkosh. They finish with 7-2 River Falls, which looks like it could find itself regionally ranked this week. Their D3 NC opponent, Huntingdon, is 7-2 and IMO likely to be regionally ranked this week (not sure how they left them off the list last week, but wuddev). SOS will get jacked over .600 this week, and they could be 2-2 vs RRO with a win over UWRF.
Just got a hunch Bethel is gonna make some of this irrelevant though...
Quote from: WW on November 08, 2021, 12:07:10 PM
Just got a hunch Bethel is gonna make some of this irrelevant though...
Right there with you. I have this gut feeling the first team off the board ends up being St. John's. And I think it's a pretty quick conversation that St. John's, LaCross, and whoever out of the Liberty League go 1, 2, 3.
In which case, the conversation would be around Wheaton, BW, and Birmingham Southern, and Oshkosh (assuming a win over River Falls). And if/when they give the 4th one to Birmingham Southern, Hardin Simmons for the final spot. I actually think a multiple team conversation works against Wheaton. It is easier to formulate an argument on why they deserve to be in over a single other team. They could argue that between just BW and Wheaton, it's "close enough" to bring previous years into consideration. When it's multiple other teams, it's easier to rule them out based off being the only SOS under .500 and lack of vRROs. The same argument could get turned around as to why Oshkosh should be in, a team that most likely won't get to the table if Bethel is ahead of them...
Or did you mean Bethel makes it irrelevant because they never come off the board and Oshkosh never makes it to the table?
Quote from: HOPEful on November 08, 2021, 01:36:12 PM
Or did you mean Bethel makes it irrelevant because they never come off the board and Oshkosh never makes it to the table?
No, as you first interpreted it — that they kick SJU into Pool C. Should they lose, I don't know that Bethel queues up ahead of Oshkosh should the Titans beat River Falls. Bethel's NC schedule was junk from SOS perspective (although SOS will get a boost from playing SJU twice) and they'll be 0-2 vs RRO.
Quote from: WW on November 08, 2021, 01:52:49 PM
Quote from: HOPEful on November 08, 2021, 01:36:12 PM
Or did you mean Bethel makes it irrelevant because they never come off the board and Oshkosh never makes it to the table?
No, as you first interpreted it — that they kick SJU into Pool C. Should they lose, I don't know that Bethel queues up ahead of Oshkosh should the Titans beat River Falls. Bethel's NC schedule was junk from SOS perspective (although SOS will get a boost from playing SJU twice) and they'll be 0-2 vs RRO.
Agreed. I didn't think that through. A loss by Bethel definitely puts them behind Oshkosh should they beat River Falls.
And for what it's worth, I really want Baldwin Wallace to get in. Playing in the same conference as Mount Union the last 25 years should get any team bonus points.
Week 10
(https://i.imgur.com/J2MF0Rf.png)
https://imgur.com/a/UuSewZB
Column 3 and I are pretty identical in our thinking. Same rankings exactly other than the 10 spot.
Quote from: HOPEful on November 11, 2021, 07:42:08 AM
Column 3 and I are pretty identical in our thinking. Same rankings exactly other than the 10 spot.
That's me. And they should have been the exact same because I didn't mean to leave Hope off completely. I was going fast and just messed up.
Sorry for the lateness, everyone starts disappearing once Saturday's games end. We've got 6 ballots this week
(https://i.imgur.com/sqgBdCz.png)
https://imgur.com/a/UuSewZB
Quote from: HOPEful on November 03, 2021, 12:17:06 PM
Also, I don't think Central is getting enough love yet. That team is really good and I wouldn't be shocked to see them beat someone "they shouldn't" in the playoffs.
I didn't think it would be Wheaton, but still...
Wait long enough and all the ballots make it in. It's the final 2021 North Region Poll. Thanks to Captain_Joe08, Dr. Acula, FCGG, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, NCF, and wally_wabash for taking part this season.
(https://i.imgur.com/h7HZ0MZ.png)
https://imgur.com/a/UuSewZB
YES! One last chance to nitpick...
4-6 Ohio Northern getting a vote seems fishy...
Also, Rose Hulman over a Hope team that beat them?
Are we doing this again this season? If so, are we keeping the same geography?
I'll participate this year if allowed.
Yeah, I'll run it again.
I believe this year we're getting the polls split up into their new regions. West poll becomes region 6, north poll becomes region 4, and someone would need to run a new region 5 poll. The south and east were already organized last season since they were divided up pretty cleanly into regions 1-3.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on August 24, 2022, 12:56:13 PM
Yeah, I'll run it again.
I believe this year we're getting the polls split up into their new regions. West poll becomes region 6, north poll becomes region 4, and someone would need to run a new region 5 poll. The south and east were already organized last season since they were divided up pretty cleanly into regions 1-3.
Region 4 for me please.
Would we still do 10 teams?
Official rankings only ranked 7 last season. If everyone wants to do 10 we can, otherwise we'll do 7.
Dear lord, the fewer the better IMO. It was painful trying to fill out the last couple spots a lot of the time.
I don't think it'll change much at the bottom going to 7 since we don't have North Central, Wheaton, or Aurora who all finished in the poll last year.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on August 25, 2022, 08:09:46 PM
I don't think it'll change much at the bottom going to 7 since we don't have North Central, Wheaton, or Aurora who all finished in the poll last year.
Agreed. Seven feels like a good number. After Mount Union, the leaders of the NCAC, MIAA, and HCAC, we should be able to come up with 3 other teams that deserve ranking.
Last call for any ballots. I'll have the poll posted later tonight if no one else is joining in. So far I've got 6 ballots from myself, Dr. Acula, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, HOPEful, Li'l Giant, and smedindy.
I felt bad being late. I can't believe I wasn't last. Sorry, FC.
Week 1
(https://i.imgur.com/ANJjiLK.png)
https://i.imgur.com/ANJjiLK.png
Voters: CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, and smedindy
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 07, 2022, 11:48:01 PM
Week 1
(https://i.imgur.com/ANJjiLK.png)
https://i.imgur.com/ANJjiLK.png
Voters: CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, and smedindy
I'm voter number 5 this week. First time doing this. I had a hard time ranking 2-7. Need more Data.
I'm column 1.
2-7 for me was based in part by coach's polls. The MIAA coaches voted Hope ahead of Albion in the preseason rankings, so so did I.
Hope's next two games are against a solid Coe team and then down to Mount St. Joseph. Trine gets Rose-Hulman this week and Albion gets them next week. My point... we should have a little more clarity sooner rather than later as to who does and does not belong in the 2-7 spots.
Totally whiffed on this in Week 1! I'll get back in this week.
Quote from: HOPEful on August 26, 2022, 08:03:00 AM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on August 25, 2022, 08:09:46 PM
I don't think it'll change much at the bottom going to 7 since we don't have North Central, Wheaton, or Aurora who all finished in the poll last year.
Agreed. Seven feels like a good number. After Mount Union, the leaders of the NCAC, MIAA, and HCAC, we should be able to come up with 3 other teams that deserve ranking.
Region 4 accepts your challenge.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 09, 2022, 02:00:58 PM
Totally whiffed on this in Week 1! I'll get back in this week.
Quote from: HOPEful on August 26, 2022, 08:03:00 AM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on August 25, 2022, 08:09:46 PM
I don't think it'll change much at the bottom going to 7 since we don't have North Central, Wheaton, or Aurora who all finished in the poll last year.
Agreed. Seven feels like a good number. After Mount Union, the leaders of the NCAC, MIAA, and HCAC, we should be able to come up with 3 other teams that deserve ranking.
Region 4 accepts your challenge.
Haha, so true! I did not foresee Baldwin Wallace, Franklin, Hanover, Ohio Northern, and Rose Hulman all losing their first game. John Carroll losing wasn't a huge surprise, but then again, it wasn't that long ago we were looking at them as a legitimate challenge to Mount.
(https://i.imgur.com/UzE6pzq.gif)
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 07, 2022, 11:48:01 PM
Week 1
(https://i.imgur.com/ANJjiLK.png)
https://i.imgur.com/ANJjiLK.png
Voters: CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, and smedindy
I'm slot 7. An oversight on my part to omit Berg and rank JCU.
Added an 8th voter but had one abstain this week so still 7 ballots. Hopefully we'll have the full 8 next week.
Week 2
(https://i.imgur.com/cRJwYac.png)
https://imgur.com/a/pdECS3l
Voters: CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, wally_wabash
I'm voter 4 this week. I don't remember why I chose Alma over Trine.
I'm column 3. Baldwin Wallace barely holding on against Wilmington diminished MSJ's victory against them in week 1. That, along with the HCAC's abysmal start to the season, and I couldn't rank the Lions this week. If they beat Hope at home this week, they'll skyrocket up my rankings.
Heidelberg, Hope, Albion, and DePauw feel interchangeable at this point in the season. Without more data, I'm sticking with Hope ahead of Albion still based on the MIAA coaches pre-season poll. I think Aurora and Coe were significantly stronger opponents than Carthage and Bluffton, but I can't fault anyone for seeing the combined score of 103-2 and ranking the Brits ahead of Hope.
Also, I would rank the #8 team in region 6 ahead of the #2 team in region 4, and by a good amount. Five of those teams are WIAC schools, but still...
I'm column 5. I agree with HOPEful that Heidi, Hope, Albion, DPU all feel kind of interchangeable. That Hope/MSJ game will have my attention as well.
LG
Column 7 for me. Mount Union is great and might be the best team in the division. We'll sort that out in a few months. After the Purple Raiders, the OAC and MIAA have a group of solid looking teams. The North Coast and HCAC as a whole are WAY behind their other Region 4 counterparts. The North Coast's best result this year is either a late, come from behind win over 0-2 Hampden-Sydney that featured below average defense or a late, come from behind win over 0-2 RHIT that featured below average offense. The rest of the NCAC's non-league schedule is Hilbert and a number of other non-notable games. Opportunities to impress against Cortland and Illinois Wesleyan went sideways very, very quickly. Then the HCAC is also struggling, with the exception of MSJ, who are exciting to watch, particularly offensively. This list could wind up being populated exclusively by OAC and MIAA teams at some point this fall.
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 15, 2022, 01:36:11 PM
This list could wind up being populated exclusively by OAC and MIAA teams at some point this fall.
As early as next week with a lopsided Hope win on Saturday?
Then again, if MSJ wins on Saturday, as you've already pointed out, they would be undefeated and have arguably the best win in the region.
Also, we may be a little harsh in our punishing John Carroll for their 9 point loss at a very good Washington and Jefferson. They were down 28-7... so I get why... but wins against BW and Heidelberg should certainly place them firmly in our rankings. I feel like the list of teams that legitimately could finish the year as #2 on this list is long.
I always forget about this poll. I enjoy it and the explanations.
I agree with Wally, that Mount might be the best in the division this year. I watched the UMHB game against SW...and Mount against Marietta... IT's a little scary how similar those 2 teams look. Tough O-Line, great Qb play and tons of receiving threats. If it is a Cru - Raider Stagg this year... I think there's gonna be a lotta points put up and a lotta passing yards.
We all agree Mount #1, who should be 2-5, then just filling out the last two spots.
Week 3
(https://i.imgur.com/zpDYMxK.png)
https://imgur.com/a/pdECS3l
Voters: CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, and wally_wabash
I've already forgotten a little, but I believe I'm column 1 this week.
As promised, I significantly upgraded my ranking of MSJ after their win against Hope. They led the whole game, gave Hope some chances to get back into it, but Hope never capitalized on them until it was too late. I dropped Hope out of my rankings, but would probably have them 8th if we were ranking 8.
I'm really excited to see how Albion does against UW-Eau Claire. The way they've been blowing out teams has me worried that there's more distance between them and the rest of the MIAA than I want to admit. I'm also excited for Heidelberg v John Carroll. Feels like a great barometer on whether we're sleeping on John Carroll and whether Heidelberg belongs as the number 1 team in the region not in Alliance.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 21, 2022, 08:36:51 PM
We all agree Mount #1, who should be 2-5, then just filling out the last two spots.
Week 3
(https://i.imgur.com/zpDYMxK.png)
https://imgur.com/a/pdECS3l
Voters: CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, and wally_wabash
I'm Column 2 this week. I threw a dart for spots 2-5 and then 6-7.
I'm column 5 this week after my hiatus last week. I had Mount as the clear 1, Albion as my clear 2 at this point. 3-5 I could have picked out of a hat in the group of Berg/MSJ/DPU. I felt like those were interchangeable. As HOPEful mentioned, the Berg JCU game should shed some light on those two. I went Wabash 6 mainly because I really like their QB/offense and I almost throw out their loss and view them as 2-0. Playing NCC is such an outlier compared to any other game played so far it's hard for me to ding them too much there. IMO the biggest surprise has been MSJ. I did not see this coming.
I'm #6. I still don't trust MSJ but as of right now they're 5th for me. I still feel that they will either get blown out by whoever wins the conference (RHIT or Hanover) or win the conference but pick up a loss to someone like Bluffton or Manchester.
Column 3 for me this week. Albion has a real shot to eclipse Heidelberg for me. This weekend's results will inform that for me next week. I've kind of reluctantly got John Carroll in the 7 spot and I don't really have a good reason for it other than I'm not really sure who else goes there. Maybe Wabash, but I'm kind of wanting to see Wabash string together a couple of games like the one they had last week. Denison is 3-0, but Capital/Hilbert/Oberlin is not very informative. We'll get some JCU clarity this weekend in any case.
Looks Like we're gonna have some big changes this week.
Week 4
(https://i.imgur.com/GUrigpb.png)
https://imgur.com/a/pdECS3l
Voters: CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, and wally_wabash
I'm either 4 or 6. I left Heidelberg at 7 and Denison off my rankings. That will obviously change if they beat DePauw this week.
Quote from: HOPEful on September 28, 2022, 10:19:19 AM
I'm either 4 or 6. I left Heidelberg at 7 and Denison off my rankings. That will obviously change if they beat DePauw this week.
(https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/mobile/000/023/397/C-658VsXoAo3ovC.jpg)
I'm column 8. A WIAC win further cemented Albion at #2 on my ballot. DPU blowing Wooster's doors off in a shutout also caught my eye. JCU I thought I may be a spot lower at #5 than others may be, but it appears I'm in line with the group. That was an absolutely dominant defensive effort by the Streaks against Berg. Berg mounted a 66 yd drive to tie the game 7-7 in the first half and outside of that had 0 points and 39 yds of offense.
I'm column 3. DPU blowing out Wooster is what got them to #2 in my ballot. Like a lot of us I'll be watching how the game with Denison goes.
I think 3-7 could basically be in any order and be defensible. But to me the 1 and 2 are clear. Maybe I'm oversimplifying things.
I'm voter 1. I'm not high on 2nd place OAC teams this year. It's disappointing because Mount won't get tested till week 2 of the playoffs. I need to research better on the rest.
Just turned in my poll for the week. Well, it's getting easier to pare down into 7 teams but the order of those 7, who knows.
Week 5
(https://i.imgur.com/t7jGD95.png)
https://imgur.com/a/pdECS3l
Voters: CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, and wally_wabash
I'm column 3. The MIAA is the most intriguing race and the hardest one to prognosticate.
I forgot to save my poll this week but I know I'm either 1 or 6 because I had DePauw at 2 and Denison at 7.
It appears I'm column 1. Curious to see how Depauw does against Witt. I kept Denison in at 7 because I really expected DPU to win that one by more.
The MIAA is going to be kinda fun to watch.
I'm column 2 this week. I'm not moving JCU up until I see how they fare against MTU.
We also get to see MTU against Heidelberg this week. Hopefully the Student Princes can make the Raiders work for it.
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on October 06, 2022, 08:39:34 AM
I'm column 2 this week. I'm not moving JCU up until I see how they fare against MTU
To me, the result of that game is somewhat moot unless JCU surprises and makes it a game. Where JCU stands in relation to Mount St. Joseph, DePauw, Denison, and Alma is impossible to determine by getting beat by Mount Union, because I don't believe any of those teams would stay close with the Purple Raiders. A small piece of me thinks maybe Albion could, hence ranking them 2nd, but should they meet in the playoffs, it would not surprise me at all if Mount wins a lot to a little. Mount is just so far ahead of anyone else in the region, I have a difficult time punishing anyone regionally for being sacrificial lambs to the slaughter. Similarly, I don't hold Wabash's loss to North Central against them when considering them on this list and have them as my 8th or 9th team currently.
I haven't forgotten this, still waiting on one ballot. The preview I'll give is that the top 2 are Mount Union and Albion ;)
We're a voter short this week.
Week 6
(https://i.imgur.com/SyQyyDS.png)
https://imgur.com/a/pdECS3l
Voters: CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, and wally_wabash
Column 6 for me. No NCACs in my top 7 this week. DePauw getting wiped out by Wittenberg coupled with Denison getting wiped out by OWU (which takes all of the shine off of DePauw's win over Denison) made it pretty impossible to find a place for an NCAC team this week. MIAA attrition will make space for an NCAC team later, but this week I just didn't see it.
I'm #3 this week. I didn't think that I would be the high man on DePauw, however, if their QB is out for an extended period of time this they'll likely drop off my ballot completely. 1 and 2 were easy, 3-5 is a pick 'em, and 6-7 is kind of a DePauw or HBerg choice for most it appears.
Only one game I'm watching for my poll this week:
Alma vs Hope - a big test for Alma. Hope is 3-3 but can't be taken lightly.
Few teams are on their bye week this week so I suspect that unless something crazy happens, the poll will be relatively similar next week.
Column 4. I debated Olivet vs. Trine vs. DePauw vs. Heidelberg. Probably needed to get a d8 out or something.
Apologies to all for not getting a ballot in last week. The beginning of the week was wild at work and I just didn't get to handle it. I've turned one in for this week.
LG
Week 7
(https://i.imgur.com/KVikiH2.png)
https://imgur.com/a/pdECS3l
Voters: CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, and wally_wabash
I'm column Five this week.
Not much going on this weekend in the way of games that could move the needle. I believe Albion will roll Trine, but definitely appears to be the Region 4 Game of the Week.
The NCAC has some interesting matchups if your intrigued by the fact that the conference is very much up for grabs after DePauw's loss to Wittenberg. Wittenberg v. Denison and DePauw v. OWU both have big implications on who will win the conference.
I'm in column 6 this week to be the only one to match the rankings ;)
I thought about swapping in Wabash for DePauw because I think they are better but I couldn't do it this week.
Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on October 21, 2022, 04:20:31 PM
I'm in column 6 this week to be the only one to match the rankings ;)
I thought about swapping in Wabash for DePauw because I think they are better but I couldn't do it this week.
There's some more common opponent information coming tomorrow.
I'm column 7. Still not ranking any NCAC teams, but Wabash is trending up.
Week 8
(https://i.imgur.com/HMs1Uex.png)
https://imgur.com/a/pdECS3l
Voters: CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, and wally_wabash
I'm either Column 1 or 8. The only change I made in my ballot was flipping Wabash in for DePauw based on how each team has looked in the past two weeks.
I'm column 3 this week.
I bumped up Alma and DePauw over Trine.
I'm column 2.
If you don't already know how I feel about RR's, just head over to the Pool C board. I think the 6th and 7th spot in Region 4 are the perfect example of why RR's shouldn't exist. Why in the world would we want to elevate wins and losses against Heidelberg and DePauw as though they're crowning achievements?
Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on October 28, 2022, 02:18:13 AM
I'm either Column 1 or 8. The only change I made in my ballot was flipping Wabash in for DePauw based on how each team has looked in the past two weeks.
I'm also 1/8. I moved Wabash in. I'm not sure they're going to hit my 14ppg allowed goal during the Oberlin/Hiram/Kenyon stretch, but they've been improving defensively and Liam Thompson is doing historic things that we probably don't talk nearly enough about. Last week he smashed the NCAC consecutive completions record and I'm not sure people noticed. He's made the exceptional look routine.
Some other adjustments I made- I moved JCU and Alma ahead of MSJ. I didn't love MSJ trailing in the 4th quarter at Hanover- that result obscures the closeness of that game. MSJ had been 3 on my ballot for a while, but barely. I needed to see them play again against somebody not in the bottom half of the HCAC.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 28, 2022, 11:49:02 AM
I didn't love MSJ trailing in the 4th quarter at Hanover- that result obscures the closeness of that game. MSJ had been 3 on my ballot for a while, but barely. I needed to see them play again against somebody not in the bottom half of the HCAC.
MSJ was very high in my rankings after beating Baldwin Wallace and Hope teams that are just not as good as we thought they'd be this season. They then played Manchester, Defiance, and Anderson... opponents that really tell you little to nothing about MSJ. Being down 29-23 in the fourth quarter to Hanover is problematic.
Kudos to the schedulers for giving us Alma v. Albion, MSJ v. Rose Hulman, and DePauw v. Wabash as the final games of the regular season in what all look to be de facto conference championship games!
Calvin might get a point in this poll next week.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 28, 2022, 04:58:21 PM
Calvin might get a point in this poll next week.
Or Earlham... ok, maybe it's not quite
that bad.
Edit: I just noticed Calvin is finally willing to play (foot)ball with the rest of the conference. Now if we can get Earlham to end their hiatus and Transylvania to join in... it probably won't make that much difference for rankings. :-[
Week 9
(https://i.imgur.com/U5NO3oz.png)
https://imgur.com/a/pdECS3l
Voters: CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, and wally_wabash
So we're all in relative agreement that there are 6 teams worth ranking and the seventh is a game of eenie meenie miney moe? lol
And to beat a dead horse, this is exactly why I hate RRs. Why in the world would you elevate a result against Baldwin Wallace to special RR status?! I'm sure they'll lose to Mount and fall of this list, but I would say the same thing about DePauw, Wabash, Trine, or any other team...
Quote from: HOPEful on November 02, 2022, 08:03:12 AM
So we're all in relative agreement that there are 6 teams worth ranking and the seventh is a game of eenie meenie miney moe? lol
And to beat a dead horse, this is exactly why I hate RRs. Why in the world would you elevate a result against Baldwin Wallace to special RR status?! I'm sure they'll lose to Mount and fall of this list, but I would say the same thing about DePauw, Wabash, Trine, or any other team...
BW has to finish with @Berg and Mount, 6-4 and far from RR status is the most likely outcome for the Yellow Jackets
Quote from: D3fanboy on November 02, 2022, 08:32:32 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on November 02, 2022, 08:03:12 AM
So we're all in relative agreement that there are 6 teams worth ranking and the seventh is a game of eenie meenie miney moe? lol
And to beat a dead horse, this is exactly why I hate RRs. Why in the world would you elevate a result against Baldwin Wallace to special RR status?! I'm sure they'll lose to Mount and fall of this list, but I would say the same thing about DePauw, Wabash, Trine, or any other team...
BW has to finish with @Berg and Mount, 6-4 and far from RR status is the most likely outcome for the Yellow Jackets
Agreed. But whoever moves into that spot will be equally undeserving of RR status. The point isn't really about BW, but the arbitrary line being drawn between 7 and 8....
Any type of ranking or slotting system will have a team above the line and below. I think the RRs work well with the Pool C process, such as it is.
I had B-W sixth and Heidelberg 7th. I think B-W can beat 'Berg, and play Mount reasonably okay.
I'm one of the three who had Wabash at 7 this week. I moved them in at 7 in place of DePauw this week after debating it a lot last week. With both Wabash and Berg I view them as 1 loss teams still since no one else in consideration has played Mount/NCC.
BW @ Berg and JCU @ Mount this weekend should help clarify things in the OAC.
Quote from: Dr. Acula on November 02, 2022, 04:10:27 PM
BW @ Berg and JCU @ Mount this weekend should help clarify things in the OAC.
Or make a holy mess of it like the WAC
Quote from: smedindy on November 02, 2022, 04:52:46 PM
Quote from: Dr. Acula on November 02, 2022, 04:10:27 PM
BW @ Berg and JCU @ Mount this weekend should help clarify things in the OAC.
Or make a holy mess of it like the WAC
lol
BW looks to be 6-4 again, which is celebrated in Berea
The first official "rankings" are out. Not that they're actually ranked.
Region 4
Albion 8-0 8-0
Alma 8-0 8-0
DePauw 7-1 7-1
John Carroll 7-1 7-1
Mount Union 8-0 8-0
Mount St. Joseph 8-0 8-0
Trine 6-2 6-2
Committee has DePauw and Trine rather than our Heidelberg and whoever
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 02, 2022, 07:30:00 PM
Region 4
Albion 8-0 8-0
Alma 8-0 8-0
DePauw 7-1 7-1
John Carroll 7-1 7-1
Mount Union 8-0 8-0
Mount St. Joseph 8-0 8-0
Trine 6-2 6-2
Committee has DePauw and Trine rather than our Heidelberg and whoever
There's obviously time for teams on this list to lose, but let's pretend DePauw wins out and stays put, Trine beats Hope and Kzoo and stays, MSJ gets past Rose Hulman and stays undefeated, and Alma and John Carroll both stay ranked after losing to Albion and Mount respectively.
That would give Albion a (2-0) record against RRs and Mount a (1-0) record. And Mount would have a significantly worse SOS... I'm not advocating that Albion is actually better than Mount, they're not. But is it possible Albion ends up above Mount in the regional rankings with the better SOS and additional win against an RR?
And this is once again why the arbitrary location of that line matters! We all have Heidelberg easily in our RRs above Trine and DePauw. With Heidelberg in and Trine out, those records are flipped. I'm not against using RRs to figure out who all is at the table. But I am against using records against RRs as though it's a valuable statistic.
Quote from: HOPEful on November 03, 2022, 02:01:46 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 02, 2022, 07:30:00 PM
Region 4
Albion 8-0 8-0
Alma 8-0 8-0
DePauw 7-1 7-1
John Carroll 7-1 7-1
Mount Union 8-0 8-0
Mount St. Joseph 8-0 8-0
Trine 6-2 6-2
Committee has DePauw and Trine rather than our Heidelberg and whoever
There's obviously time for teams on this list to lose, but let's pretend DePauw wins out and stays put, Trine beats Hope and Kzoo and stays, MSJ gets past Rose Hulman and stays undefeated, and Alma and John Carroll both stay ranked after losing to Albion and Mount respectively.
That would give Albion a (2-0) record against RRs and Mount a (1-0) record. And Mount would have a significantly worse SOS... I'm not advocating that Albion is actually better than Mount, they're not. But is it possible Albion ends up above Mount in the regional rankings with the better SOS and additional win against an RR?
And this is once again why the arbitrary location of that line matters! We all have Heidelberg easily in our RRs above Trine and DePauw. With Heidelberg in and Trine out, those records are flipped. I'm not against using RRs to figure out who all is at the table. But I am against using records against RRs as though it's a valuable statistic.
Reported.
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 03, 2022, 02:53:49 PM
...There's obviously time for teams on this list to lose, but let's pretend DePauw wins out and stays put, Trine beats Hope and Kzoo and stays, MSJ gets past Rose Hulman and stays undefeated, and Alma and John Carroll both stay ranked after losing to Albion and Mount respectively....
Fair Wally! It was just for the sake of my argument though! If DePauw drops out, then Heidelberg probably jumps in... and the argument is moot.
Quote from: HOPEful on November 03, 2022, 04:22:49 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on November 03, 2022, 02:53:49 PM
...There's obviously time for teams on this list to lose, but let's pretend DePauw wins out and stays put, Trine beats Hope and Kzoo and stays, MSJ gets past Rose Hulman and stays undefeated, and Alma and John Carroll both stay ranked after losing to Albion and Mount respectively....
Fair Wally! It was just for the sake of my argument though! If DePauw drops out, then Heidelberg probably jumps in... and the argument is moot.
Or Trine and Heidelberg both lose and none of it matters.
HCAC, MIAA, NCAC, and OAC all with de facto conference championship games this weekend! Pretty awesome way to finish. Thanks schedule makers!
As gross as this is to say. But BW could very well be team #7 in this week's rankings. Only a three point loss to MSJ (#3 or 4?) and a road loss to JCU (#5 or 6?)
Quote from: D3fanboy on November 07, 2022, 09:09:48 AM
As gross as this is to say. But BW could very well be team #7 in this week's rankings. Only a three point loss to MSJ (#3 or 4?) and a road loss to JCU (#5 or 6?)
Not only could, but I would expect it. By beating Heidelberg, they bolstered their record and handed a loss to their competition for that spot. Hope knocked off Trine, so Wabash and Rose Hulman feel like the other logical options. Question is... who gets it if all three lose this weekend? (Don't be mad Wally! It's just a hypothetical!)
Quote from: HOPEful on November 07, 2022, 09:22:10 AM
Quote from: D3fanboy on November 07, 2022, 09:09:48 AM
As gross as this is to say. But BW could very well be team #7 in this week's rankings. Only a three point loss to MSJ (#3 or 4?) and a road loss to JCU (#5 or 6?)
Not only could, but I would expect it. By beating Heidelberg, they bolstered their record and handed a loss to their competition for that spot. Hope knocked off Trine, so Wabash and Rose Hulman feel like the other logical options. Question is... who gets it if all three lose this weekend? (Don't be mad Wally! It's just a hypothetical!)
it looks like Denison has an easy path to 8-2, or does Berg backdoor in at 7-3 with "better loses" (all three to RRO)?
Week 10
(https://i.imgur.com/8BsB0IK.png)
https://imgur.com/a/pdECS3l
Voters: CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, and wally_wabash
Wow. Albion falls. And Mount Union just had the luckiest play I've ever seen on a Hail Mary to win it. It was thrown short and bounced off the head of the defender and into the arms of a WR. Will be interesting to see who ends up #1 this week.
Not so fast my friend.
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on November 12, 2022, 04:25:59 PM
Not so fast my friend.
(https://i0.wp.com/www.quickmeme.com/img/ae/ae4c3b06e04de74b8bf0c472eaf6d79e0314280b5e7aa22c2486af79f1c4d9b2.jpg?w=640)
Mount probably stays #1 (either unanimous or all but one voter) because next in line is a 2 loss John Carroll who Mount beat and then unbeaten Alma and MSJ who everyone has been waiting for an excuse to drop out of the rankings but haven't been able to.
Are we voting this week!
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on November 13, 2022, 10:46:27 AM
Are we voting this week!
Yes. Poll this week then one final poll after the tournament.
We will have one final poll after the tournament
Week 11
(https://i.imgur.com/Byl3nea.png)
https://imgur.com/a/pdECS3l
Voters: CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, and wally_wabash
Are we doing this Poll this year?
Yeah, I'll get messages sent this weekend. No preseason poll. First poll after week 1.
I have 5 ballots so far. Try to get them in today if you can.
Week 1
(https://i.imgur.com/oxgrLqB.png)
https://i.imgur.com/oxgrLqB.png
Voters: CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, and wally_wabash
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 06, 2023, 01:21:38 AM
Week 1
(https://i.imgur.com/oxgrLqB.png)
https://i.imgur.com/oxgrLqB.png
Voters: CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, and wally_wabash
I'm Voter 3 this week.
I'm column 5 and an outlier...
I flip flopped with number 2 and 3. I went with the team that won, but a four-point loss to Whitewater is noteworthy.
I know they went to Berea and knocked off BW, but two things I've learned to not trust in this region are the HCAC and the Yellow Jackets. I'm low man on MSJ for now...
As a Hope, and therefore, MIAA fan, I will tell you I believe Trine is stronger this season that Albion. The MIAA coaches agreed in the preseason coaches' poll. Then again, they thought Alma last year was second from bottom, so...
I'm too high on Wabash. I think I may have confused Hampton Sydney with Randolph Macon when considering the close win. Next week, my rankings will almost certainly include Heidelburg, Wittenburg, Albion, etc. over Wabash.
Quote from: HOPEful on September 06, 2023, 10:34:47 AM
I'm column 5 and an outlier...
I flip flopped with number 2 and 3. I went with the team that won, but a four-point loss to Whitewater is noteworthy.
I know they went to Berea and knocked off BW, but two things I've learned to not trust in this region are the HCAC and the Yellow Jackets. I'm low man on MSJ for now...
As a Hope, and therefore, MIAA fan, I will tell you I believe Trine is stronger this season that Albion. The MIAA coaches agreed in the preseason coaches' poll. Then again, they thought Alma last year was second from bottom, so...
I'm too high on Wabash. I think I may have confused Hampton Sydney with Randolph Macon when considering the close win. Next week, my rankings will almost certainly include Heidelburg, Wittenburg, Albion, etc. over Wabash.
I had Wabash 8 and BW 9 in my rankings. I think Heidelburg will push JCU for #2 in the OAC this year, if they don't lose focus and lose to BW this year.
I'm column 2. I put Wittenberg in the 7 spot because I think going over to Dubuque and winning is pretty significant. Dubuque might be the third or fourth best team in the ARC, but I think the ARC is generally underappreciated as a league. That was the best week 1 win by any NCAC team.
I'm holding on Wabash for the time being. I want to see Carter Sido play a few more games before I can really assess Wabash's performance against H-SC. He's a difficult QB to prepare for, which of course Wabash couldn't prepare at all for because it's week 1, H-SC didn't name a starter, and Sido played very sparingly last year. If he does to other teams what he did to Wabash, I think that's a really good win and there's no way H-SC is the #5 team in the ODAC.
Really impressed by MSJ in a kind of "prove it" game at B-W. That game was 1) a must win for B-W and 2) no way they could be surprised by MSJ this time around. And they did it without getting a ton from Cornell Beacham, so they can be better. Josh Taylor is really, really good you guys.
Like you, Wally, I am very impressed with Sido. He shredded the Wabash D, which depending on your opinion of the D is either spectacular or merely good. I attended the game on Saturday, and he was exceptional, if frustrating, to watch I am trying to think if I've seen a better running performance by a QB going back many years. A few come to mind: in his early years at Woo, Barnes; at Wabash about a decade ago, Belton; and then, Gebele, at Denison. None of these, however, impressed me the way Sido did. I'm waiting to see if it was the Wabash D, or his athleticism, or some of both. He was a handful.
I'm column 6. I went with JCU over Alma only because I watched some of both games and thought JCU looked every bit like a top 10-12 team. That was a back and forth game that JCU just couldn't get the ball downfield quickly enough to try to win it at the end.
I had Berg a little higher mainly due to inherent bias from watching most of their game at Hiram. Obviously it's Hiram, but Berg looked really good. On both sides of the ball. They have a good shot at 8-2 or maybe if JCU slips up 9-1 this year.
I only picked Albion over Trine (my first out) because I was giving some credit for beating a decent CCIW team I guess. Reading the comments I should have probably given Witt a harder look I think.
I am column 8 this week - my reasoning below.
1 - Mount Union - I think the obvious pick until its not.
2 - John Carroll - Like a few others, I caught a bit of their game and despite the lost just looked like a Top 10-15 team in the country.
3 - Alma - Thought they looked strong, but just did not think they looked as solid as JCU.
4 - Heidelberg - I could be drinking the kool-aid here but I watched the Hiram game on Thursday and they looked dominating (as much as you can be against Hiram.) I think they'll prove this year to be a tough foe every week.
5 - Mount St. Joe - That was a very good win against B-W. I think they'll be very good this year but didn't look to me like they should be a Top 4 team....yet.
6 - DePauw - They are the frontrunner in the NCAC this season. Their defense will be stout and they have a ton of experience. The offense should be improved this season too.
7 - Trine - I had about 3 teams vying for this spot, but I went with Trine.I thought that they looked the best (but again it was Anderson).
Close to making it in:
Wabash - Defense looked much better in coverage but it's tough to really tell against a running QB who is very good. But, their defense is improved this year and the offense should be just as good if not better.
Wittenberg - I just wasn't too impressed with Witt. They were only 4/13 on 3rd down and had to come back from 14 down in the 4th to win, one drive of which started at the 50 after a 13 yard punt. I am in wait and see on them this year.
Albion - They were my first out but just thought that the teams in front looked better. They will move in likely soon.
Column 7. I threw Wabash at #7 because....I had to pick one.
JCU's stock should be on the rise today. Damn.
(https://i.imgur.com/tfXjilk.png)
https://imgur.com/a/qBL9F3K
Voters: CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, and wally_wabash
I'm voter 1 this week. My only change was flip flopping John Carroll and Alma.
I am column 7.
We seem to be in almost full consensus that the rankings are...
1. Mount
2-3. JCU and Alma
4-5. MSJ and DePauw
6-7. Heidelberg and Albion
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 06, 2023, 12:39:41 PM
I'm holding on Wabash for the time being. I want to see Carter Sido play a few more games before I can really assess Wabash's performance against H-SC. He's a difficult QB to prepare for, which of course Wabash couldn't prepare at all for because it's week 1, H-SC didn't name a starter, and Sido played very sparingly last year. If he does to other teams what he did to Wabash, I think that's a really good win and there's no way H-SC is the #5 team in the ODAC.
Sido vs Wabash W1 - 15/23, 153 yards, 1 TD, 20 rushes, 186 yards, 3 TD
Sido vs Brevard W2 - 15/25, 151 yards, 2 TD, 6 rushes, 26 yards
HOWEVER
RB Frost v Wabash W1 - 20 rushes, 63 yards
RB Front v Brevard W2 - 23 rushes, 103 yards, 1 TD
Through two games, I think Sido is vey good. I think that the Wabash D is improved but it's always tough to stop a running QB...ESPECIALLY when you don't necessarily have a scheme to stop it since you don't know the starter Week 1.
I'm column 6 this week. My Sensational Seven are the same as after week 1. Week 2 for this group was loaded up with byes and games that I can't really learn anything from. Like a 5 of diamonds on the flop that missed everything, I decided to check and see the next card. :)
I made sure to get a ballot in this week. I apologize for missing last week. I was in trial and just didn't have time.
Quote from: Li'l Giant on September 18, 2023, 05:51:49 PM
I made sure to get a ballot in this week. I apologize for missing last week. I was in trial and just didn't have time.
I'm not bragging, but I'm a lawyer. LOL Just Kidding Li'l Giant. ;)
Quote from: Li'l Giant on September 18, 2023, 05:51:49 PM
I was in trial and just didn't have time.
Although only one letter difference between seemingly insignificant prepositions, there is a VERY big difference between being IN and being ON trial.
(https://i.imgur.com/l66wpSU.png)
Voters: CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, and wally_wabash
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 19, 2023, 11:09:38 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/l66wpSU.png)
Voters: CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, and wally_wabash
I am voter 4 this week. I didn't even have Dennison, Hope and Hanover on my board. I've added them to my watch list.
I'm not high on Wittenberg. 5-5 last year and two wins over subpar opponents this year. This week will show if they can play with Alma.
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on September 20, 2023, 07:35:50 AM
I am voter 4 this week. I didn't even have Dennison, Hope and Hanover on my board. I've added them to my watch list.
I'm not high on Wittenberg. 5-5 last year and two wins over subpar opponents this year. This week will show if they can play with Alma.
I'm voter 2. Still rolling with Alma ahead of JCU. I'll have to adjust this if JCU shellacks Heidelberg this weekend.
The 7th spot was a dart throw for seemingly everyone. Like you, I'm not high on Wittenberg, I don't understand still voting for MSJ and not Hope, elevating Hanover to 7 as the new best team in the HCAC seemed unwarranted, so for me it was between Hope and Denison. I went with the team with the biggest win last week and whose only loss was first game of the season @ the current #16 in the country. I think Hope might still be the second-best team in the MIAA.
Also, my rankings look something like this...
1. Mount
(huge chasm)
2. Alma and JCU
(huge chasm)
Everyone else. There is a lot of distance between 1 and 2 and between 3 and 4.
Quote from: HOPEful on September 20, 2023, 09:25:19 AM
Also, my rankings look something like this...
1. Mount
(huge chasm)
2. Alma and JCU
(huge chasm)
Everyone else. There is a lot of distance between 1 and 2 and between 3 and 4.
JCU may be closer to Mount Union than we think.
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on September 20, 2023, 09:37:51 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on September 20, 2023, 09:25:19 AM
Also, my rankings look something like this...
1. Mount
(huge chasm)
2. Alma and JCU
(huge chasm)
Everyone else. There is a lot of distance between 1 and 2 and between 3 and 4.
JCU may be closer to Mount Union than we think.
I do think this weekends results (John Carroll vs. Heidelberg and Mount Union vs. Muskingum) could be very revealing for the top three OAC teams. I'll be interested to see how John Carroll looks and if Berg is a team that can legitimately challenge the perceived top 2. And I'm sure Mount will win, but will it be another much closer than expected finish?
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on September 20, 2023, 09:37:51 AM
JCU may be closer to Mount Union than we think.
In terms of quality of teams, maybe. But Mount has earned the right to be #1 undisputed until someone knocks them off that spot. Every year I hear that this might be the year JCU beats them, yet they've lost one conference game in the last 23 years...
Quote from: HOPEful on September 20, 2023, 11:38:22 AM
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on September 20, 2023, 09:37:51 AM
JCU may be closer to Mount Union than we think.
In terms of quality of teams, maybe. But Mount has earned the right to be #1 undisputed until someone knocks them off that spot. Every year I hear that this might be the year JCU beats them, yet they've lost one conference game in the last 23 years...
They've lost two conference games in the past 23 years (Unfortunately I was at both). They've lost 4 conference games since 1990.
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on September 20, 2023, 11:57:15 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on September 20, 2023, 11:38:22 AM
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on September 20, 2023, 09:37:51 AM
JCU may be closer to Mount Union than we think.
In terms of quality of teams, maybe. But Mount has earned the right to be #1 undisputed until someone knocks them off that spot. Every year I hear that this might be the year JCU beats them, yet they've lost one conference game in the last 23 years...
They've lost two conference games in the past 23 years (Unfortunately I was at both). They've lost 4 conference games since 1990.
I wasn't counting ONU in 2005, but yes... the point remains the same. And they were semi-finalists and national champions in those years.
Quote from: HOPEful on September 20, 2023, 12:46:01 PM
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on September 20, 2023, 11:57:15 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on September 20, 2023, 11:38:22 AM
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on September 20, 2023, 09:37:51 AM
JCU may be closer to Mount Union than we think.
In terms of quality of teams, maybe. But Mount has earned the right to be #1 undisputed until someone knocks them off that spot. Every year I hear that this might be the year JCU beats them, yet they've lost one conference game in the last 23 years...
They've lost two conference games in the past 23 years (Unfortunately I was at both). They've lost 4 conference games since 1990.
I wasn't counting ONU in 2005, but yes... the point remains the same. And they were semi-finalists and national champions in those years.
Looking back, I was also in attendance in 1991 for the loss. The only one I didn't witness in person is the 1994 loss.
Based on this year's performances so far. I expect the JCU game to be very close whomever wins.
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on September 20, 2023, 01:39:15 PM
Quote from: HOPEful on September 20, 2023, 12:46:01 PM
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on September 20, 2023, 11:57:15 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on September 20, 2023, 11:38:22 AM
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on September 20, 2023, 09:37:51 AM
JCU may be closer to Mount Union than we think.
In terms of quality of teams, maybe. But Mount has earned the right to be #1 undisputed until someone knocks them off that spot. Every year I hear that this might be the year JCU beats them, yet they've lost one conference game in the last 23 years...
They've lost two conference games in the past 23 years (Unfortunately I was at both). They've lost 4 conference games since 1990.
I wasn't counting ONU in 2005, but yes... the point remains the same. And they were semi-finalists and national champions in those years.
Looking back, I was also in attendance in 1991 for the loss. The only one I didn't witness in person is the 1994 loss.
Based on this year's performances so far. I expect the JCU game to be very close whomever wins.
Lou Berry isn't walking through that door...
Hope this isn't an overreaction to one game, but does anyone think that the MIAA has overtaken the NCAC in terms of overall conference strength?
Quote from: bluestreak66 on September 23, 2023, 02:07:20 PM
Hope this isn't an overreaction to one game, but does anyone think that the MIAA has overtaken the NCAC in terms of overall conference strength?
I think the NCAC has been down for a number of years now on the whole. I don't think you're incorrect at all.
Quote from: bluestreak66 on September 23, 2023, 02:07:20 PM
Hope this isn't an overreaction to one game, but does anyone think that the MIAA has overtaken the NCAC in terms of overall conference strength?
ATN has ranked the MIAA higher (https://www.d3football.com/columns/around-the-nation/2022/re-ranking-the-conferences-for-2022) than the NCAC each of the last two years. Historically, it's pretty even and back and forth on which is ranked higher.
Will it be three years in a row?? We'll let that suspense build for another week or so. :)
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 23, 2023, 05:31:53 PM
ATN has ranked the MIAA higher (https://www.d3football.com/columns/around-the-nation/2022/re-ranking-the-conferences-for-2022) than the NCAC each of the last two years....
For what it's worth, this week I ranked 3 MIAA in region 4 and only one NCAC team.
It's slightly difficult and perhaps unfair to compare a 7-team conference to a 9-team conference. The NCAC has Hiram, Kenyon, and Oberlin at the bottom really dragging down their numbers. For the sake of argument, I'll drop Kenyon and Oberlin for my comparison to make it an even 7 vs 7. Using Massey numbers...
Albion (43) to DePauw (55)
Alma (53) to Wabash (87)
Hope (59) to Denison (90)
Trine (104) to Wittenberg (98)
Olivet (141) to OWU (106)
Kzoo (169) to Wooster (158)
Adrian (179) to Hiram (222)
I understand that Massey is just one rating system and has it's obvious flaws. But the point is, the MIAA wins the comparison even after removing the bottom two teams from the NCAC. I don't think the debate over NCAC vs. MIAA is really even close. Honestly, the debate between the NCAC and the HCAC is closer...
Hanover (56) to DePauw (55)
MSJ (76) to Wabash (87)
Rose Hulman (89) to Denison (90)
Franklin (170) to Wittenberg (98)
Defiance (184) to OWU (106)
Bluffton (193) to Wooster (158)
Anderson (224) to Hiram (222)
Manchester (225) to Kenyon (228) and Oberlin (231)
The top 3 and bottom 3 from each are about the same. It's the drop off from Rose to Franklin that just destroys the strength of the HCAC.
(https://i.imgur.com/qhMyiZn.png)
https://i.imgur.com/qhMyiZn.png
Voters: CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, and wally_wabash
I'm voter 7 this week. 1-5 were the same for me from last week.
I dropped Heidelberg from 6-7 (not out of the poll yet as JCU is playing tough this year.
I bumped Wabash from 8-6 this week. One loss to a FCA team and a handy beat down of Oberlin.
I'm 8.
I finally moved JCU to 2 and Alma to 3. We are all in agreement now. Alma has done nothing to deserve the demotion, but 34-7 against Heidelberg was enough to make the change.
Similarly, I moved Albion ahead of DePauw. DePauw's opponents are now 1-12 collectively. And the team with the 1 win was beat by Albion too, by a wider margin (both teams struggled in the first half and pulled away in the second). On paper, Albion's resume is stronger than DePauw's.
Of the remaining teams, I put Hope at 6 because they have the best win of the group over MSJ and a forgivable loss @ #15 in the country Aurora.
I was between Hanover and Denison for the last spot. Arguably, Denison's best result is their loss, as the other team's they've beat are collectively 1-11. Their next 3 are Wittenberg, DePauw, and Wabash... so the path to moving up in a hurry is there...
We all agree on 1-2-3, almost unanimous on 4-5 but agree they're in some order, then it's throw a dart for 6 and 7.
Two agree Hope 6 and Hanover 7, two think Hanover and Denison but disagree on order, two say Wabash and Heidelberg but disagree on order, one said Hope and Denison, and I said Hanover and Marietta. I expect them to pick up a couple votes if they beat Baldwin Wallace this week.
The bottom 6 through 9 didn't do themselves any favors this week... I have a feeling Wabash, Wittenberg, and Etta will increase their vote totals this week...
Hanover - LOST to Definace 27-21
Hope - WON at Adrian 30-21 (way closer than it should have been)
Denison - LOST to Wittenberg 27-24
Heidelberg - WON at Muskingum 20-17
Wabash - WON at Ohio Wesleyan 31-13
Marietta - WON at Baldwin Wallace 42-21
Wittenberg - WON at Denison 27-24
Week 5
(https://i.imgur.com/85Djq3Z.png)
https://i.imgur.com/85Djq3Z.png[
Voters: CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, and wally_wabash
I'm column 4. Same rationale as last week. That being said, DePauw hosts Denison this week and Albion is @ Hope. Results will greatly impact the 4-7 spots.
I am Column 1 or 5.
My top 7 didn't change this week, but my 8-16 (not on ballot) had some shuffling.
Marietta plays John Carroll and Mount Union plays Heidelberg this week, so that should (hopefully) clear some of the OAC stuff up.
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on October 04, 2023, 08:09:51 AM
If you are Column 4 then I am Column 1...
Marietta plays John Carroll and Mount Union plays Heidelberg this week, so that should (hopefully) clear some of the OAC stuff up.
As an OAC guy, you think Heidelberg is better/more deserving of being ranked than Marietta?
Quote from: HOPEful on October 04, 2023, 10:35:37 AM
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on October 04, 2023, 08:09:51 AM
If you are Column 4 then I am Column 1...
Marietta plays John Carroll and Mount Union plays Heidelberg this week, so that should (hopefully) clear some of the OAC stuff up.
As an OAC guy, you think Heidelberg is better/more deserving of being ranked than Marietta?
Based on History, YES. This weekends results may force me to make a change in the order.
I'm in the 8 spot. Love it when my rankings match the poll almost exactly.
I leaped off of the Hanover bandwagon just as quickly as I hopped on. If Wabash can consistently play defense the way they did at Selby, they're absolutely one of the best 7 in the region. And HOPEful 100% talked me into flipping Albion and DePauw- totally right about DePauw's schedule (softer than room temp butter) and Albion has a decidedly better result vs. the common opponent.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 04, 2023, 12:32:03 PM
And HOPEful 100% talked me into flipping Albion and DePauw- totally right about DePauw's schedule (softer than room temp butter) and Albion has a decidedly better result vs. the common opponent.
I'm hoping you flip back on that one too after Albion's game this weekend :)
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on October 04, 2023, 10:38:10 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on October 04, 2023, 10:35:37 AM
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on October 04, 2023, 08:09:51 AM
If you are Column 4 then I am Column 1...
Marietta plays John Carroll and Mount Union plays Heidelberg this week, so that should (hopefully) clear some of the OAC stuff up.
As an OAC guy, you think Heidelberg is better/more deserving of being ranked than Marietta?
Based on History, YES. This weekends results may force me to make a change in the order.
Agreed based on history, although looking objectively, I would say Marietta has been a little more impressive so far (looking at non-conference opponent strength and Marietta knocking of BW). I feel like this weekend is going to reveal a lot about the relative strength of the teams at the top of the OAC
Quote from: HOPEful on October 04, 2023, 12:41:36 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 04, 2023, 12:32:03 PM
And HOPEful 100% talked me into flipping Albion and DePauw- totally right about DePauw's schedule (softer than room temp butter) and Albion has a decidedly better result vs. the common opponent.
I'm hoping you flip back on that one too after Albion's game this weekend :)
This game is going to be so good. Have to find a way to keep PJP from going bonkers on the specials, but if Hope does that, they've got a great chance.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 04, 2023, 04:17:21 PM
This game is going to be so good. Have to find a way to keep PJP from going bonkers on the specials, but if Hope does that, they've got a great chance.
Hope needs to figure out how to start better. They went down 14-0 against Loras and MSJ and down both 7-0 and 14-7 to Adrian. Even the Aurora game, take away the 3-17 start and the final is a much more competitive 21-14. They came back and won against the other three obviously, but they can't afford to spot Albion 14 points and expect to come back.
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on October 04, 2023, 08:09:51 AM
I am Column 1 or 5.
My top 7 didn't change this week, but my 8-16 (not on ballot) had some shuffling.
Marietta plays John Carroll and Mount Union plays Heidelberg this week, so that should (hopefully) clear some of the OAC stuff up.
I am the same as you. My top 7 didn't change...just flipped H-Berg / Wabash because of what I saw defensively from Wabash this past weekend (and honestly against Butler too). OWU score was 31-13 but it so very easily could have been 56-0 if the backups didn't play the entire 4th Q and had Liam attempted more than 5 passes in the 2H (after leading 31-0 at half).
Marietta jumps Heidelberg in my rankings.
1 Mount Union wins at ORV Heidelberg 41-3
2 John Carroll wins at ORV Marietta 31-28
3 Alma Off
4 DePauw beats Denison 17-3
6 Hope beats 5 Albion 14-6
7 Wabash beats Wooster 45-35
ORV Wittenberg beats Hiram 21-7
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 07, 2023, 04:26:19 PM
1 Mount Union wins at ORV Heidelberg 27-3
2 John Carroll wins at ORV Marietta 31-28
3 Alma Off
4 DePauw beats Denison 17-3
6 Hope beats 5 Albion 14-6
7 Wabash leads Wooster 38-28 in the 4th
ORV Wittenberg beats Hiram 21-7
Mount won 41-3 (D3Football.com score is incorrect)
I had to roll a d8 to get my team #7.
Quote from: smedindy on October 09, 2023, 01:06:39 AM
I had to roll a d8 to get my team #7.
I had the opposite... I actually thought the teams that lost "proved" they belonged.
For example, hard to bump Albion out of the rankings for losing a close one @ Hope. Hope now has beaten MSJ and Albion, btw. And Marietta's 28-31 loss to John Carroll may just be the single most impressive performance of any Region 4 team this season outside of Mount and JCU.
Personally, I had a much harder time figuring out how to order 2 through 7. How much do you punish a team for losing a game where both teams lived up to their billing? How much do you reward a team for being undefeated even if they haven't really impressed a ton in those games? (I'm not sure I'm going to be willing to give the same love as everyone else to DePauw until after the Wittenberg game)
Quote from: HOPEful on October 09, 2023, 10:22:01 AM
Quote from: smedindy on October 09, 2023, 01:06:39 AM
I had to roll a d8 to get my team #7.
I had the opposite... I actually thought the teams that lost "proved" they belonged.
For example, hard to bump Albion out of the rankings for losing a close one @ Hope. Hope now has beaten MSJ and Albion, btw. And Marietta's 28-31 loss to John Carroll may just be the single most impressive performance of any Region 4 team this season outside of Mount and JCU.
Personally, I had a much harder time figuring out how to order 2 through 7. How much do you punish a team for losing a game where both teams lived up to their billing? How much do you reward a team for being undefeated even if they haven't really impressed a ton in those games? (I'm not sure I'm going to be willing to give the same love as everyone else to DePauw until after the Wittenberg game)
I've still got DePauw at #4. My top four stayed the same. Five-Seven have one new team and some reshuffling.
I started a post explaining my rationale this week... but I'll wait till the rankings come out before defending myself lol
I feel like we are some of the most mellow poll groups. In other spots they bicker back and forth all week ;D
Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on October 09, 2023, 07:07:55 PM
I feel like we are some of the most mellow poll groups. In other spots they bicker back and forth all week ;D
Byproduct of a couple decades of being dominated by a single school and knowing that unless you win your conference, your school wont be playing in the post season. The debate over who is better, DePauw or Hope is fun, but ultimately moot.
Just submitted my poll...with two new teams...AND dropped a team that won.
1-3 are pretty solid IMO but 4-7 (4-10 for that matter)...are a true cluster.
Week 6
(https://i.imgur.com/8dpIh4h.png)
https://i.imgur.com/8dpIh4h.png
Voters: CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, and wally_wabash
I'm column 1.
I hinted towards it earlier this week, but I put Hope ahead of DePauw. With wins against MSJ and Albion, I just think their resume is much better than DePauw's and makes up for the loss @ now #16 Aurora.
I put Marietta at 6 because that game against JCU proved to me that they're legit.
And I finished with Albion at 7 because I didn't think they should be punished too harshly for a very close game on the road to another ranked team.
I'm voter 3 this week.
I've got Marietta 8th in my rankings. Didn't want to drop Albion too much for losing a close game to Hope. I'm still favoring Wabash with their only loss to Butler (FCS). If one Hope, Albion or Wabash begin to falter and Marietta gets back to winning, I will probably move the Pioneers up in the future.
For what they're worth...
Massey's rankings...
1. Mount Union (2)
2. John Carroll (12)
3. Marietta (38)
4. Alma (40)
5. DePauw (42)
6. Hope (43)
7. Heidelberg (45)
8. Albion (47)
Versus Sports Simulator Rankings...
1. Mount Union (5)
2, John Carroll (11)
3. Hope (20)
4. Alma (25)
5. DePauw (34)
6. Albion (43)
7. Marietta (49)
8. Wabash (51)
9. Mount St Joseph (52)
Quote from: HOPEful on October 11, 2023, 09:54:17 AM
For what they're worth...
Massey's rankings...
1. Mount Union (2)
2. John Carroll (12)
3. Marietta (38)
4. Alma (40)
5. DePauw (42)
6. Hope (43)
7. Heidelberg (45)
8. Albion (47)
Versus Sports Simulator Rankings...
1. Mount Union (5)
2, John Carroll (11)
3. Hope (20)
4. Alma (25)
5. DePauw (34)
6. Albion (43)
7. Marietta (49)
8. Wabash (51)
9. Mount St Joseph (52)
Hansen Ratings
1) Mount Union (2)
2) John Carroll (11)
3) Alma (21)
4) Marietta (35)
5) DePauw (37)
6) Mount St Joseph (40)
7) Albion (45)
8) Hope (46)
9) Heidelberg (56)
I gave MSJ a vote again.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 11, 2023, 11:57:49 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on October 11, 2023, 09:54:17 AM
For what they're worth...
Massey's rankings...
1. Mount Union (2)
2. John Carroll (12)
3. Marietta (38)
4. Alma (40)
5. DePauw (42)
6. Hope (43)
7. Heidelberg (45)
8. Albion (47)
Versus Sports Simulator Rankings...
1. Mount Union (5)
2, John Carroll (11)
3. Hope (20)
4. Alma (25)
5. DePauw (34)
6. Albion (43)
7. Marietta (49)
8. Wabash (51)
9. Mount St Joseph (52)
Hansen Ratings
1) Mount Union (2)
2) John Carroll (11)
3) Alma (21)
4) Marietta (35)
5) DePauw (37)
6) Mount St Joseph (40)
7) Albion (45)
8) Hope (46)
9) Heidelberg (56)
Looking at the teams, it seems there are some that are ranked pretty evenly across the systems, while others have some significant variation - kind of like you voters do :).
Ranked by all 3 systemsMount Union 2-5 (3)
John Carroll 11-12 (1)
Marietta 35-49 (14)
Alma 21-40 (19)
DePauw 34-42 (8)
Hope 20-46 (26)
Albion 43-47 (4)
Ranked by 2 systemsHeidelberg 45-56 (11)
Mount St Joseph 40-52 (12)
Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on October 11, 2023, 01:02:36 PM
Looking at the teams, it seems there are some that are ranked pretty evenly across the systems, while others have some significant variation - kind of like you voters do :).
Computer rankings are flawed. Although the data itself isn't biased, there was bias in determining which data to use and how to weigh it within the algorithm. Much has been said over all the bball boards about the SOS algorithm D3 uses for basketball and it's many, many flaws. D3 is particularly difficult because of the 240 teams in football with much less overlap and mutual opponents than the 129 in FBS.
But if you understand what criteria the computers are looking at, and what they deem to be most valuable, they definitely help to highlight certain teams, both positively and negatively.
Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on October 11, 2023, 01:02:36 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 11, 2023, 11:57:49 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on October 11, 2023, 09:54:17 AM
For what they're worth...
Massey's rankings...
1. Mount Union (2)
2. John Carroll (12)
3. Marietta (38)
4. Alma (40)
5. DePauw (42)
6. Hope (43)
7. Heidelberg (45)
8. Albion (47)
Versus Sports Simulator Rankings...
1. Mount Union (5)
2, John Carroll (11)
3. Hope (20)
4. Alma (25)
5. DePauw (34)
6. Albion (43)
7. Marietta (49)
8. Wabash (51)
9. Mount St Joseph (52)
Hansen Ratings
1) Mount Union (2)
2) John Carroll (11)
3) Alma (21)
4) Marietta (35)
5) DePauw (37)
6) Mount St Joseph (40)
7) Albion (45)
8) Hope (46)
9) Heidelberg (56)
Looking at the teams, it seems there are some that are ranked pretty evenly across the systems, while others have some significant variation - kind of like you voters do :).
Ranked by all 3 systems
Mount Union 2-5 (3)
John Carroll 11-12 (1)
Marietta 35-49 (14)
Alma 21-40 (19)
DePauw 34-42 (8)
Hope 20-46 (26)
Albion 43-47 (4)
Ranked by 2 systems
Heidelberg 45-56 (11)
Mount St Joseph 40-52 (12)
John Carroll (11.3)
Marietta has always been a bottom of the OAC (IMO) with brief glances of OK seasons (7-3, 6-4, 5-5).
It's hard for me to believe that they are a Region 4 Top Team yet. If they keep winning (and win decisively) then they will move up in my rankings.
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on October 11, 2023, 02:40:03 PM
John Carroll (11.3)
The numbers I put in parentheses is the spread between each teams low to high ranking, but yes JCU would average 11.3.
Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on October 11, 2023, 03:18:28 PM
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on October 11, 2023, 02:40:03 PM
John Carroll (11.3)
The numbers I put in parentheses is the spread between each teams low to high ranking, but yes JCU would average 11.3.
Gotcha, thanks.
#1 Mount Union defeats Capital 76-0
#2 John Carroll defeats Ohio Northern 44-14
#3 Alma wins at #5 Hope 35-17
#4 DePauw wins at Wooster 53-7
#5 Hope loses to #3 Alma 17-35
#6 Marietta wins at Wilmington 45-15
#7 Wabash loses at Denison 24-28
ORV Albion was OFF
Mount St Joseph defeats Anderson 77-14
Wittenberg plays at Oberlin (currently 42-0 in the 2nd)
No fan poll this week?
Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on October 19, 2023, 09:30:38 AM
No fan poll this week?
FCGrizzliesGrad posted on another page that he had his Gallbladder removed on 10/16 and was just released from the hospital yesterday.
Hope you're recovering quickly FCGG! Let me know if you want to forward me the votes and I'll tally them up for you.
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on October 19, 2023, 09:46:05 AM
Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on October 19, 2023, 09:30:38 AM
No fan poll this week?
FCGrizzliesGrad posted on another page that he had his Gallbladder removed on 10/16 and was just released from the hospital yesterday.
Hope you're recovering quickly FCGG! Let me know if you want to forward me the votes and I'll tally them up for you.
Thanks for sharing - sending up prayers for a speedy recovery for you FCGG!
Slowly getting a little better every day.
We'll have a poll this week so be sure to send those ballots. I'll get last week's poll up sometime in the next couple days for historical purposes.
Here's last week's results. Only 5 ballots came in.
Rank Team Points Prev
1 Mount Union 35 1
2 John Carroll 30 2
3 Alma 25 3
4 DePauw 20 4
5 Marietta 11 6
6 Hope 7 5
7 Albion 5 NR
8 Wittenberg 4
9 Mount St Joseph 3
10 Wabash 0 7
My bad, I did not submit a ballot for last week. I will be back on track this week.
I missed this week. I've been avalanched with work all week and had an all day Power BI training session yesterday...
Only 6 voters this week
Week 8
(https://i.imgur.com/PPHM8Dq.png)
Well that got very tidy very quickly.
I'm voter 1, 2, 3 or 4 this week. LOL
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on October 27, 2023, 09:45:00 AM
I'm voter 1, 2, 3 or 4 this week. LOL
I was thinking... it's easier to figure out which one I'm not. I'm not voter 6. I know MSJ was my last team. I think I'm 1-4 too... but as a Hope slappy, it's possible I put them ahead of Marietta...
Internally, my rankings go...
1. Mount
2a. JCU
2b. Alma
(very large gap)4a. DePauw
4b. Marietta
4c. Hope
(gap)7. MSJ
I'm the weirdo in column 6 LOL.
My evaluation of the Bottom 3-4 teams:
Marietta has two "good" losses to Mount Union (28-0) and John Carroll (31-28) and have beaten Heidelberg and BWU (teams usually ahead of them although they are having down years.)
Hope has two "good" losses to Aurora (38-17) and Alma (35-17) and has beaten Mt. St. Joes and Adrian.
Mt. St. Joes only has the loss to Hope (40-35) and handled the rest of their opponents (including BWU).
Albion has lost to Hope (14-6) and Trine (35-28). They do have a good win against Rose-Hulman though.
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on October 27, 2023, 10:08:30 AM
My evaluation of the Bottom 3-4 teams:
Marietta has two "good" losses to Mount Union (28-0) and John Carroll (31-28) and have beaten Heidelberg and BWU (teams usually ahead of them although they are having down years.)
Hope has two "good" losses to Aurora (38-17) and Alma (35-17) and has beaten Mt. St. Joes and Adrian.
Mt. St. Joes only has the loss to Hope (40-35) and handled the rest of their opponents (including BWU).
Albion has lost to Hope (14-6) and Trine (35-28). They do have a good win against Rose-Hulman though.
BW isn't having a down year.. They're just on the bad end of their every other year thing, so this should've been expected! lol
But, they did shutout a mighty Otterbein team last week, so things are starting to turn around... according to their coaches and fan on twitter.
Quote from: JCUStreaks70 on October 27, 2023, 10:45:07 AM
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on October 27, 2023, 10:08:30 AM
My evaluation of the Bottom 3-4 teams:
Marietta has two "good" losses to Mount Union (28-0) and John Carroll (31-28) and have beaten Heidelberg and BWU (teams usually ahead of them although they are having down years.)
Hope has two "good" losses to Aurora (38-17) and Alma (35-17) and has beaten Mt. St. Joes and Adrian.
Mt. St. Joes only has the loss to Hope (40-35) and handled the rest of their opponents (including BWU).
Albion has lost to Hope (14-6) and Trine (35-28). They do have a good win against Rose-Hulman though.
BW isn't having a down year.. They're just on the bad end of their every other year thing, so this should've been expected! lol
But, they did shutout a mighty Otterbein team last week, so things are starting to turn around... according to their coaches and fan on twitter.
;D ;D ;D ;D
BW being discussed in the Region 4 fan poll board? I bet that makes next week's game notes in Berea
Quote from: D3fanboy on October 27, 2023, 12:19:48 PM
BW being discussed in the Region 4 fan poll board? I bet that makes next week's game notes in Berea
I can see it now.. "Even Mount and JCU fans know that this team is relevant"
Quote from: JCUStreaks70 on October 27, 2023, 03:32:34 PM
Quote from: D3fanboy on October 27, 2023, 12:19:48 PM
BW being discussed in the Region 4 fan poll board? I bet that makes next week's game notes in Berea
I can see it now.. "Even Mount and JCU fans know that this team is relevant"
50 straight seasons of being somewhat relevant
B-W was on national TV though. In 1982. ;D
Nothing happened this week to change my votes... (although I was tempted to drop Marietta a spot)
Quote from: HOPEful on October 30, 2023, 08:51:58 AM
Nothing happened this week to change my votes... (although I was tempted to drop Marietta a spot)
Same.
With DePauw off this week, and everyone else playing games they should win... what would have to happen in the Mount Union v John Carroll matchup for you to move them from 1 and 2?
Would a Mount Union blowout win bump JCU down... to 3? My point is that there's a really good chance my rankings next week are the same once again lol
I shifted mine a skosh thanks to missing last week and re-evaluating the bottom 3.
But only something egregious in the Mt Union vs. JCU game could move them from 1 and 2.
Quote from: HOPEful on October 30, 2023, 10:29:50 AM
With DePauw off this week, and everyone else playing games they should win... what would have to happen in the Mount Union v John Carroll matchup for you to move them from 1 and 2?
Would a Mount Union blowout win bump JCU down... to 3? My point is that there's a really good chance my rankings next week are the same once again lol
If MTU blows out JCU this week and finishes 10-0 after BWU, and Alma handles their business in weeks 10 and 11 against Adrion and Albion, I would consider moving Alma to 2 over JCU.
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on October 30, 2023, 10:53:56 AM
If MTU blows out JCU this week and finishes 10-0 after BWU, and Alma handles their business in weeks 10 and 11 against Adrion and Albion, I would consider moving Alma to 2 over JCU.
This is kind of where I'm at... I'm trying to pre-assess how poorly JCU would have to play against Mount for me to flop them and Alma in my rankings...
Quote from: HOPEful on October 31, 2023, 08:04:04 AM
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on October 30, 2023, 10:53:56 AM
If MTU blows out JCU this week and finishes 10-0 after BWU, and Alma handles their business in weeks 10 and 11 against Adrion and Albion, I would consider moving Alma to 2 over JCU.
This is kind of where I'm at... I'm trying to pre-assess how poorly JCU would have to play against Mount for me to flop them and Alma in my rankings...
I have a feeling that the MTU vs JCU game will be close though.
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on October 31, 2023, 08:28:42 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on October 31, 2023, 08:04:04 AM
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on October 30, 2023, 10:53:56 AM
If MTU blows out JCU this week and finishes 10-0 after BWU, and Alma handles their business in weeks 10 and 11 against Adrion and Albion, I would consider moving Alma to 2 over JCU.
This is kind of where I'm at... I'm trying to pre-assess how poorly JCU would have to play against Mount for me to flop them and Alma in my rankings...
I have a feeling that the MTU vs JCU game will be close though.
Almost always is..
When dose the region rankings come out
Quote from: hope1 on October 31, 2023, 01:32:41 PM
When dose the region rankings come out
Wed afternoon, alphabetically
Just a hope fan like to know where they ranked in region
NCAA Region 4 Rankings (Alphabetical)
Alma 8-0 8-0
DePauw 9-0 9-0
Hope 7-2 7-2
JCU 7-1 7-1
Marietta 6-2 6-2
MTU 8-0 8-0
MSJ 7-1 7-1
? When do the number region rankings come out
Only missing one voter this week rather than two. Can you guess which ballot returned this week? :D
Week 9
(https://i.imgur.com/CP6ufJ6.png)
Voters: CollegeGolf18, Dr. Acula, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, and wally_wabash
Quote from: hope1 on November 01, 2023, 05:19:38 PM
? When do the number region rankings come out
Next week.
I'm one of 1, 2, 4, or 7. I was very, very close to mimicking 3 and placing Hope ahead of Marietta. If Hope handles Trine this weekend, I still might. I don't know what I'll do with DePauw or Wabash if DePauw doesn't win that game next week.
Quote from: HOPEful on November 02, 2023, 09:55:20 AM
I'm one of 1, 2, 4, or 7. I was very, very close to mimicking 3 and placing Hope ahead of Marietta. If Hope handles Trine this weekend, I still might. I don't know what I'll do with DePauw or Wabash if DePauw doesn't win that game next week.
Pretty much the same for me.
I don't really count the game against Butler... so, effectively for my rankings, Wabash has one close loss at Denison. I still think two losses against Mount Union and John Carroll (Marietta) or Aurora and Alma (Hope) are collectively "better" than the one loss to Denison. But Wabash is still a "one loss team" in my eyes. Should they win the Monon Bell game, and Hope, Marietta, and MSJ all win out, I will be adding Wabash to my rankings and the team to fall off the list would potentially (and most likely) be DePauw.
That was a long-winded way of leading into... DePauw feels destined to be either the #4 team or not ranked at all, with no real in-between landing spot unless someone else stumbles.
Or in other words, the distance between Alma and DePauw is greater than the distance between DePauw and unranked.
Thoughts?
The lambasting of Wittenberg was enough for me, especially since Witt took DPU to overtime the week before.
The loss to Dennison still get's me. I don't count the Butler loss either. One of my former players is a backup OL for Wabash. His dad is driving up for the Depauw game and I may tag along if my wife gives me a kitchen pass.
Question of the week...
Do I believe that Alma would do better against Mount Union than 49-14?
Quote from: HOPEful on November 06, 2023, 09:26:37 AM
Question of the week...
Do I believe that Alma would do better against Mount Union than 49-14?
I do not, but I've not seen Alma play this year.
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on November 06, 2023, 09:32:41 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on November 06, 2023, 09:26:37 AM
Question of the week...
Do I believe that Alma would do better against Mount Union than 49-14?
I do not, but I've not seen Alma play this year.
I asked the question last week what would it take for Alma to jump ahead on JCU? Internally, my answer was 5 TDs... so if it's exactly 35 points, then...
Quote from: HOPEful on November 06, 2023, 10:14:07 AM
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on November 06, 2023, 09:32:41 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on November 06, 2023, 09:26:37 AM
Question of the week...
Do I believe that Alma would do better against Mount Union than 49-14?
I do not, but I've not seen Alma play this year.
I did bump Alma over JCU on my ballot this week, so I guess I do feel Alma would do better than that. LOL
I think NCC and MTU are the top two this year and then there's a gap until you get to the next group of teams.
I asked the question last week what would it take for Alma to jump ahead on JCU? Internally, my answer was 5 TDs... so if it's exactly 35 points, then...
What you think the order will be this week
Alma is pretty good maybe go pretty far
Quote from: hope1 on November 06, 2023, 12:30:12 PM
What you think the order will be this week
Alma is pretty good maybe go pretty far
I'll reveal my vote, when the pool is released this week. ;)
It all depends on who they'll face in the 2nd round...
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on November 06, 2023, 12:55:57 PM
It all depends on who they'll face in the 2nd round...
100%. I'm really hoping Alma gets to play a team like Aurora or John Carroll before going to Mount Union, North Central, Wartburg, or a UW juggernaut. I'm not saying they'll win, I'd just like to see it.
They have a grudge match against Aurora...
Don't they take 8 teams from each region
Quote from: hope1 on November 08, 2023, 02:20:50 PM
Don't they take 8 teams from each region
There is not a set number of teams from each region. There are 28 Automatic Bids from Conference champions and 4 At large (Pool C) Bids.
The 4 At large can come from any Region and also have multiple regions.
There are actually 6 Regions now (used to be 4) so they couldn't take 8 from each region, as that would be 48 teams.
The Regions rank their top Seven teams (by regional committees) and these rankings are supposed to assist the national committee in making their At Large Selections.
Week 10
(https://i.imgur.com/ekQZRq0.png)
Voters: Dr. Acula, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, and wally_wabash
more flopped Alma and JCU than I expected... Not much to debate lol
That also caused a couple people to flip Marietta and Hope which was enough for them to swap spots.
In my Top 25 I have Alma at 13, John Carroll at 18 and DePauw at 19.
My ballot stayed the same as last week. I had JCU at 2 and I had Hope over MSJ and Marietta last week as well.
Quote from: HOPEful on November 06, 2023, 09:26:37 AM
Question of the week...
Do I believe that Alma would do better against Mount Union than 49-14?
Yes.
Are we voting this week?
Alma vs DePauw round 1.
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on November 12, 2023, 04:27:50 PM
Are we voting this week?
Yep. One this week and one final after the playoffs
- I like the Alma v DePauw matchup. I do wish that game wasn't immediately followed by Mount, but geography wins most of the time, so I get it.
- I was tempted to drop DePauw in my personal rankings for yet another OT game. However, I gave the benefit of the doubt being a rivalry. If Alma crushes them, I will most likely be dropping them a spot on my rankings.
- Shy of Alma or DePauw beating Mount, or MSJ beating Wheaton, I don't see my rankings changing much post playoffs.
I sincerely appreciate this board specifically in the fall. With the exception of the MIAA basketball board, this one is my favorite.
I also don't [applaud] Grizz enough, or Kira and Jaxon's Dad... I also don't [smite] Calvin fans enough...
Quote from: HOPEful on November 13, 2023, 08:57:14 AM
- I like the Alma v DePauw matchup. I do wish that game wasn't immediately followed by Mount, but geography wins most of the time, so I get it.
- I was tempted to drop DePauw in my personal rankings for yet another OT game. However, I gave the benefit of the doubt being a rivalry. If Alma crushes them, I will most likely be dropping them a spot on my rankings.
- Shy of Alma or DePauw beating Mount, or MSJ beating Wheaton, I don't see my rankings changing much post playoffs.
I also like the match-up. I've seen Alma play three times this season and they are very good, very explosive and well coached. While, admittedly, I have not seen DePauw play, I believe they are very good; a 10-0 record supports that. However, I do not believe that Alma will crush DePAuw. Do I think they can beat DePauw? Yes, but I anticipate a close, tough game. I would be very surprised if either tean wins by a blow out.
Week 11
(https://i.imgur.com/ebieYey.png)
Voters: Dr. Acula, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, and wally_wabash
we're about as close to unanimous as it gets! Fun ponderings...
If Alma beats DePauw, do they need to keep the following game closer than 49-14 to not get hopped by John Carroll?
If DePauw beats Alma, do they swap spots on the list with Alma and also need to keep the following game closer than 49-14 to not get re-hopped by John Carroll?
Does any result other than a win help/hurt MSJ? Do they hop Hope with a close loss to Wheaton, despite losing to them head-to-head? Do they fall below Marietta if they get crushed?
Quote from: HOPEful on November 16, 2023, 08:06:59 AM
we're about as close to unanimous as it gets! Fun ponderings...
If Alma beats DePauw, do they need to keep the following game closer than 49-14 to not get hopped by John Carroll?
If DePauw beats Alma, do they swap spots on the list with Alma and also need to keep the following game closer than 49-14 to not get re-hopped by John Carroll?
Does any result other than a win help/hurt MSJ? Do they hop Hope with a close loss to Wheaton, despite losing to them head-to-head? Do they fall below Marietta if they get crushed?
If Alma beats DePauw and then get's blown out by MTU, I would move JCU up over Alma.
If DePauw beats Alma (Depending on Round 2) I would move JCU to 2nd, DePauw to 3rd and Alma to 4th.
If MSJ wins, they stay the same. If they lose, I probably move Marietta up one slot. Hope beat MSJ head to head, so I would probably keep them above MSJ. But would have to look at all the playoff results to make a final decision.
we getting a final standings this season?
Quote from: HOPEful on December 19, 2023, 12:56:33 PM
we getting a final standings this season?
We'll see how many ballots come in. Gotten a couple so far. I'll send a reminder later tonight.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on December 19, 2023, 04:58:40 PM
Quote from: HOPEful on December 19, 2023, 12:56:33 PM
we getting a final standings this season?
We'll see how many ballots come in. Gotten a couple so far. I'll send a reminder later tonight.
It's not often (or ever) that I team other than Mount Union is seated at 1. I kinda want to see it, officially lol.
Mine is in! Sorry for being a bit late. I tend to unplug for a few days after the Stagg Bowl. :)
Also, definitely going to rewatch the Stagg Bowl probably tonight.
I turned mine in as well. I appreciate the patience. Thanks again for having me this year. It was a fun season and I look forward to next year.
I just sent mine. Sorry for the delay. I thought about moving the middle around all kinds of ways then ended up back where I started I think.
Are we doing this again this year? I'm in if we do.
Same.
I'm in as well.
Yup. In too
I guess if FCGrizzliesGrad doesn't want to head it up, I can take the reins.
I'll get in gear soon. No preseason poll so we still have a few weeks before the first ballot.
#1 Mount
#2 Alma
#3 JCU
#4 Depauw
#5 Hope
#6 BW
#7 MSJ
(https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/866/838/cdc.jpg)
I jest of course... I actually took some joy in seeing someone's rankings lol
In the spirit of the first set of regional rankings, I present my week 0 R4 rankings:
Albion
Alma
DePauw
Hope
John Carroll
Mount St. Joseph
Mount Union
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 05, 2024, 03:32:30 PMIn the spirit of the first set of regional rankings, I present my week 0 R4 rankings:
Albion
Alma
DePauw
Hope
John Carroll
Mount St. Joseph
Mount Union
I was trying to make sense of this until I realized it was in alphabetical order.
I'll play along! And I like the alphabetical order part for week 0.
Albion
Alma
DePauw
Hope
John Carroll
Marietta
Mount Union
Alma
DePauw
Hope
John Carroll
Marietta
Mount Union
Mount St. Joseph
Albion
Alma
DPU
John Carroll
Marietta
Mount Union
MSJ
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 05, 2024, 03:32:30 PMIn the spirit of the first set of regional rankings, I present my week 0 R4 rankings:
Albion
Alma
DePauw
Hope
John Carroll
Mount St. Joseph
Mount Union
I like it.
Between waiting on ballots and the board having its issues, I never posted a final poll last year.
Rank Team Points
1 Alma (12-1) 42
2 Mount Union (11-1) 36
3 John Carroll (8-2) 25
4 DePauw (10-1) 24
5 Hope (8-2) 20
6 Mount St Joseph (9-2) 15
7 Marietta (8-2) 6
Week 1 ballots are open. All are welcome to participate. If you're going to vote, please commit to the entire season. Same rules as last year. PM me your top 7. The quicker you submit, the sooner I can check if there are any errors and ultimately get the poll posted.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 08, 2024, 02:03:30 PMWeek 1 ballots are open. All are welcome to participate. If you're going to vote, please commit to the entire season. Same rules as last year. PM me your top 7. The quicker you submit, the sooner I can check if there are any errors and ultimately get the poll posted.
Set PM
My poll in.
Ballot submitted.
I have 4.5 ballots (one ballot needs fixing) so far. There's still time if you want to be a voter this season.
Fixed my faulty ballot.
Last call for anyone who wants to participate. We currently have 8 ballots. I'll be posting later tonight if I don't hear from anyone else.
2024 Week 1
(https://i.imgur.com/APdbVYd.png)
https://i.imgur.com/APdbVYd.png
Voters: #1OacFan, CollegeGolf18, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, wally_wabash
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 11, 2024, 08:08:42 AM2024 Week 1
(https://i.imgur.com/APdbVYd.png)
https://i.imgur.com/APdbVYd.png
Voters: #1OacFan, CollegeGolf18, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, wally_wabash
I had:
Mount Union
DePauw
John Carroll
Alma
Hope
Marietta
Wabash
I'm column 6. I think the difference between #7 and ORVs is minimal. Also, assessing Alma and JCU in losses vs. Hope and DePauw in wins against far lesser opponents is difficult. I give the nod to the teams willing to schedule top 10 opponents.
#2 for me. Almost hit the order of the poll exactly!
I'm happy to see Musky get a vote. That had to be their biggest win in years.
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on September 11, 2024, 08:08:42 AM2024 Week 1
(https://i.imgur.com/APdbVYd.png)
https://i.imgur.com/APdbVYd.png
Voters: #1OacFan, CollegeGolf18, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, wally_wabash
Column 4 for me.
Week 1 R4 Poll
Mount Union
Alma
John Carroll
Depauw
Hope
Albion
Marietta
I almost threw Wabash in at 7 but would like to see 1-2 more games of being able to move the ball.
I had Marietta at #3. I thought that was an impressive result.
Had a couple late ballots this week. Also having issues with image hosting. Anyone know a good alternative to imgur?
2024 Region 4 Fan Poll Week 2
Rank Team Points Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 Mount Union (1-0) 56 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
2 DePauw (2-0) 47 3 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 2
3 Alma (1-1) 37 2 3 4 2 4 3 3 3 5
4 John Carroll (0-1) 29 4 5 6 4 3 5 5 4 3
5 Hope (2-0) 21 5 4 5 5 4 5 4
6 Marietta (1-0) 18 6 6 3 6 6 4 7 6
7 Albion (2-0) 8 7 7 7 5 7 6
ORV Baldwin Wallace (2-0) 5 6 6 7
Wabash (2-0) 2 7 7
Muskingum (2-0) 1 7
Voters: #1OacFan, CollegeGolf18, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, wally_wabash
I'm #4 this week. I didn't see anything last weekend to change my order of top 7.
My more accurate feelings go....
1. Mount
2a. DePauw, Alma
2b. Hope, JCU, Marietta
7. Flip a coin...
I was column 7 this week. Had the first five in order and then have 6/7 flipped from the consensus.
Moved Depauw up to #2 from #4 after their result @ Berry but that was the only change.
Everyone got their ballot in so we don't have to wait for the next week of games to start to get the poll up.
I'm column 3.
Hope @ Alma for homecoming this weekend. Could very well be the MIAA Championship game.
I have a hard time with DePauw and JCU. One just doesn't play anyone good. The other lost to the #4 and #6 teams in the country. For now, I put DePauw 2. The winner in Holland this weekend will almost certainly hop them in my rankings next week. JCU went toe to toe with Mount for 3.5 quarters. I just can't bring myself to put them lower until Hope or Alma shows me more.
Quote from: HOPEful on September 25, 2024, 08:53:30 AMI'm column 3.
Alma @ Hope for homecoming this weekend. Could very well be the MIAA Championship game.
I have a hard time with DePauw and JCU. One just doesn't play anyone good. The other lost to the #4 and #6 teams in the country. For now, I put DePauw 2. The winner in Holland this weekend will almost certainly hop them in my rankings next week. JCU went toe to toe with Mount for 3.5 quarters. I just can't bring myself to put them lower until Hope or Alma shows me more.
The game is at Alma on Saturday.
I'm Poller 7 this week.
4-7 could be interchangeable for me.
The game is at Alma on Saturday.
[/quote]
Yes it was! And what a glorious Saturday. I don't know why I had it in my head it was in Holland.
I have 6 out of 8 ballots so far. I'd love to get this up earlier in the week but I can only post the poll as fast as I receive the votes.
I will be instituting stricter deadlines for this going forward so we don't have such a delay.
Week 4| Rank | Team | Points | Prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
| 1 | Mount Union (3-0) | 56 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 2 | DePauw (4-0) | 47 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| 3 | Hope (4-0) | 40 | T4 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| 4 | Marietta (3-0) | 29 | 6 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 6 | 4 | 6 |
| 5 | John Carroll (1-2) | 25 | T4 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 5 |
| 6 | Alma (2-2) | 16 | 3 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 6 | 4 |
| 7 | Muskingum (3-0) | 4 | NR | 6 | - | - | - | 7 | 7 | - | - |
| ORV | Ohio Northern (3-0) | 3 | | - | - | - | 6 | - | - | 7 | - |
| Adrian (4-0) | 2 | | - | 6 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Albion (3-1) | 2 | | - | - | 7 | - | - | - | - | 7 |
| Baldwin Wallace (3-1) | 0 | 7 | | | | | | | | |
Voters: #1OacFan, CollegeGolf18, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, wally_wabash
WOW - 4 MIAA teams getting votes, which I'm sure will change quickly as they start beting up on one another
not to nit-pick or try to make anyone explain themselves lol, but what exactly is the thought process behind the two Albion voters?
It seems to me BW was punished for being run over by Mount Union last week, while the fact that two weeks ago Albion got run over by Mt. St. Joseph is being ignored.
Quote from: bluestreak66 on October 04, 2024, 10:14:01 AMnot to nit-pick or try to make anyone explain themselves lol, but what exactly is the thought process behind the two Albion voters?
It seems to me BW was punished for being run over by Mount Union last week, while the fact that two weeks ago Albion got run over by Mt. St. Joseph is being ignored.
My Ballot this week:
1. Mount Union 3-0
2. DePauw 3-0
3. Hope 3-0
4. Marietta
5. John Carroll
6. Adrian 4-0
7. Alma 2-2
I rank up to 15 teams. Albion is mythologically 10th in my top 15.
I'm looking forward to seeing Albion play Adrion and Alma these next two weeks.
For what it's worth, Massey has the order Mount Union, Hope, DePauw, John Carroll, Marietta, Alma, Ohio Northern followed by Baldwin Wallace, Wabash, Albion, Muskingum, Wittenberg
Hansen has Mount Union, DePauw, Hope, John Carroll, Marietta, Alma, Ohio Northern followed by Wabash, Baldwin Wallace, Mount St Joseph, Albion, Muskingum
Quote from: bluestreak66 on October 04, 2024, 10:14:01 AMbut what exactly is the thought process behind the two Albion voters?...
Admittedly, I was one. I was trying to quickly get my votes in while tailgating for the MNF game in Detroit. I hastily made my vote at 7 for Albion. I spent more time and consideration this week and fixed the "error".
Week 5| Rank | Team | Points | Prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| 1 | Mount Union (4-0) | 49 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 2 | DePauw (5-0) | 41 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| 3 | Hope (5-0) | 35 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 3 |
| 4 | Marietta (4-0) | 25 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 6 | 4 | 6 | 3 | 4 |
| 5 | John Carroll (2-2) | 22 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| 6 | Alma (3-2) | 17 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 6 | 4 | 6 | 6 |
| T7 | Baldwin Wallace (3-1) | 3 | NR | 7 | - | - | 7 | - | 7 | - |
| T7 | Wabash (3-1) | 3 | NR | - | 7 | 7 | - | - | - | 7 |
| ORV | Albion (4-1) | 1 | - | - | - | - | - | 7 | - | - |
| Muskingum (3-1) | 0 | 7 | | | | | | | |
Voters: #1OacFan, CollegeGolf18, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, wally_wabash
I'm voter 1, 4 or 6 this week.
Anyone have insight on DePauw's win against Berry and how I should be quantifying it? Admittedly, I have zero knowledge of Berry football. Should I be giving that win more value than I currently am?
Quote from: HOPEful on October 10, 2024, 07:41:32 AMAnyone have insight on DePauw's win against Berry and how I should be quantifying it? Admittedly, I have zero knowledge of Berry football. Should I be giving that win more value than I currently am?
Berry is a fairly solid team. After the DePauw loss they won at Randolph-Macon who went to the semifinals last year. The Region 3 Fan Poll (https://www.d3boards.com/index.php?msg=2115679) has Berry ranked 3rd. They went 9-1 last season with their only loss by 9 to Trinity who were quite good themselves.
Barry is a very good football team. Been in the playoffs for multiple years.
Can confirm that 33-0 at Berry is an extremely impressive result. That's a team with a ton of offensive firepower (over 50ppg last year). I think they've had some inconsistent play with a new starting QB, but shutting that team out is really impressive.
IMO, that's the best non-con win on the board in Region 4 this year.
Berry lost their OC in the offseason (to Bethel I think).
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on October 10, 2024, 09:40:19 PMBerry list their OC in the offseason (to Bethel I think).
This is true and contributes, but still that 33-0 result shouldn't be significantly downgraded.
One of the drawbacks to having an OC at all is that they can get hired away. Teams don't have to worry about losing an OC if they simply don't have one. :)
I was the lone Hope vote at 2 and DePauw at 3. I flipped them this week. But... I reserve the right to flip back if Trinity beats the tar out of Berry next week. I'm still skeptical at how good of a win Berry is. And without that win, their resume is suspect.
Week 6| Rank | Team | Points | Prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| 1 | Mount Union (5-0) | 49 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 2 | DePauw (5-0) | 42 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| 3 | Hope (5-0) | 34 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| 4 | Marietta (5-0) | 28 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
| 5 | John Carroll (3-2) | 20 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| 6 | Alma (3-2) | 14 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 4 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 6 |
| 7 | Wabash (4-1) | 5 | T7 | 7 | - | - | - | 6 | 7 | 7 |
| ORV | Baldwin Wallace (4-1) | 3 | T7 | - | 7 | - | 6 | - | - | - |
| Albion (4-1) | 1 | | - | - | 7 | - | - | - | - |
Voters: #1OacFan, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, wally_wabash
I'm voter 1, 6 or 7 this week. I flip flopped Wabash and BW this week. Tough week to move anyone with the MIAA off last Saturday.
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on October 16, 2024, 07:27:42 AMI'm voter 1, 6 or 7 this week. I flip flopped Wabash and BW this week. Tough week to move anyone with the MIAA off last Saturday.
Same on being 1, 6, or 7. I moved Hope and DePauw based on a reassessment of DePauw's win over Berry. I also bumped Marietta ahead of JCU and Alma, rationale being the losses of UWW and UWRF... still think JCU and Alma might actually be better, but, for now...
I think the teams are right up there, but not sure why albion is getting a vote... Considering the result against MSJ, and MSJ losing to Muskingum. Marietta is certainly putting up the #'s to be ranked that high.
I was totally shocked by Depauw shutting out Berry. Not surprised they won, but a shutout? Hope's win over Alma is definitely impressive and coupling that with their impressive D for the season, I might be pressured to rank them ahead of Mount. Taking into account that Alma and JCU are neck and neck in this ranking, and Alma beat Mount last year and Hope wiped the floor with them this year. Also, Mount has shown some inconsistency this year. Any who, I think those top 3 teams are pretty good and it will all shake out in the end
Week 7| Rank | Team | Points | Prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| 1 | Mount Union (6-0) | 49 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 2 | DePauw (6-0) | 41 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| 3 | Hope (6-0) | 35 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 3 |
| 4 | Marietta (6-0) | 29 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 4 |
| 5 | John Carroll (4-2) | 21 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| 6 | Alma (4-2) | 12 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 7 |
| 7 | Wabash (5-1) | 8 | 7 | - | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 6 |
| ORV | Baldwin Wallace (4-2) | 1 | - | 7 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Voters: #1OacFan, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, wally_wabash
I'm 2/3/4 this week. Full disclosure- my ballot hasn't changed in three weeks. We've had a dearth of results among this group that, for me at least, warrant moving the needle. Could I try and parse DePauw's 53-34 result vs. Denison and Hope's 49-18 (or whatever it was this week) result against Kalamazoo? I mean maybe. For the most part, this group is hammering teams they're supposed to hammer, no warning flags really, and I'm waiting for some higher leverage games, which we're about to start getting this week.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 22, 2024, 01:31:14 PMI'm 2/3/4 this week. Full disclosure- my ballot hasn't changed in three weeks. We've had a dearth of results among this group that, for me at least, warrant moving the needle. Could I try and parse DePauw's 53-34 result vs. Denison and Hope's 49-18 (or whatever it was this week) result against Kalamazoo? I mean maybe. For the most part, this group is hammering teams they're supposed to hammer, no warning flags really, and I'm waiting for some higher leverage games, which we're about to start getting this week.
Ditto, same, what he said.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 22, 2024, 01:31:14 PMI'm 2/3/4 this week.
Same.
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 22, 2024, 01:31:14 PMFor the most part, this group is hammering teams they're supposed to hammer, no warning flags really, and I'm waiting for some higher leverage games, which we're about to start getting this week.
Agree with this as well.
According to the current NPI ranking (https://stats.ncaa.org/selection_rankings/nitty_gritties/39608), the Region 4 order is DePauw, Hope, Mount Union, Marietta, Adrian, Alma, John Carroll, Albion, Wabash, Mount St Joseph in the top 10.
I'm the contrarian this week. I flopped back to Hope 2 and DePauw 3. I just think they remind me a lot of last year DePauw and Alma. As for the seven spot, I game my vote to BW. Holding a two score lead over John Carroll at halftime impressed me in a spot no one really had yet...
Quote from: HOPEful on October 23, 2024, 10:42:16 PMI'm the contrarian this week. I flopped back to Hope 2 and DePauw 3. I just think they remind me a lot of last year DePauw and Alma. As for the seven spot, I game my vote to BW. Holding a two score lead over John Carroll at halftime impressed me in a spot no one really had yet...
I don't remember why specifically, but I remember the D3 Experts talking about how NPI doesn't work well for football because the small sample size of games. I think the "Right" 40 teams will get into the playoffs, but the actual ranking probably doesn't reflect the real strengths of each team.
I haven't watched it yet, but this podcast may explain the issues: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94_NTM2k1nc
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 23, 2024, 08:24:07 PMAccording to the current NPI ranking (https://stats.ncaa.org/selection_rankings/nitty_gritties/39608), the Region 4 order is DePauw, Hope, Mount Union, Marietta, Adrian, Alma, John Carroll, Albion, Wabash, Mount St Joseph in the top 10.
Hope's next two are Adrian and Albion. Mount still has Marietta. Let's say both teams win out. Is it possible a potential playoff game between the two would be in Holland and not Alliance?!
Quote from: HOPEful on October 24, 2024, 11:33:20 AMQuote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 23, 2024, 08:24:07 PMAccording to the current NPI ranking (https://stats.ncaa.org/selection_rankings/nitty_gritties/39608), the Region 4 order is DePauw, Hope, Mount Union, Marietta, Adrian, Alma, John Carroll, Albion, Wabash, Mount St Joseph in the top 10.
Hope's next two are Adrian and Albion. Mount still has Marietta. Let's say both teams win out. Is it possible a potential playoff game between the two would be in Holland and not Alliance?!
Follow Logan Hanson on X. His latest projection has Mount Union with the #6 Seed and Hope at #11.
Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on October 24, 2024, 08:02:33 AMQuote from: HOPEful on October 23, 2024, 10:42:16 PMI'm the contrarian this week. I flopped back to Hope 2 and DePauw 3. I just think they remind me a lot of last year DePauw and Alma. As for the seven spot, I game my vote to BW. Holding a two score lead over John Carroll at halftime impressed me in a spot no one really had yet...
I don't remember why specifically, but I remember the D3 Experts talking about how NPI doesn't work well for football because the small sample size of games. I think the "Right" 40 teams will get into the playoffs, but the actual ranking probably doesn't reflect the real strengths of each team.
I haven't watched it yet, but this podcast may explain the issues: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94_NTM2k1nc
That episode of the Datacast is required viewing for anybody who has a passing interest in this stuff. They really break it down very well, including sharing an example of how, in this version of NPI, losing to the best team in the division (by any margin) is worse than beating the worst team in the division (by any margin)...but also how beating the worst team in the division isn't particularly helpful, which I think is an important and overlooked note in all of the hand-wringing over NPI.
Totally agree that NPI isn't perfect and I think they need to do better with the win%/SOS ratio (though no algorithm that completely ignores MOV is going to be very good), but in the end it'll get more or less the right 40. The bigger shock to the system (IMO) will be the seeding situation. For instance, UMU at a #6 seed, is likely to play on the road in the QF if the top seeds hold. I think in Logan's most recent mock bracket, Mount Union would travel to Salisbury for a QF game, which is a thing that would almost never have happened previously.
Week 8| Rank | Team | Points | Prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| 1 | Mount Union (7-0) | 49 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 2 | DePauw (7-0) | 40 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| 3 | Hope (7-0) | 35 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| 4 | Marietta (7-0) | 30 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
| 5 | John Carroll (5-2) | 20 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 5 |
| 6 | Alma (5-2) | 13 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 5 | 6 |
| 7 | Wabash (6-1) | 9 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 7 | 7 |
Voters: #1OacFan, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, wally_wabash
My vote matches the Poll. No results last week to shake much up.
This week's meaningful games:
MIAA
Albion at Hope
OAC
Nothing of note (Mount Union, JCU and Marietta should all cruise)
NCAC
Dennison at Wabash
HCAC
Mt. St. Joseph Off
I'm still the outlier in column 4. I debated long and hard putting Marietta at 2, not 3. That beat down of BW was impressive. I decided they'll have their chance to move up the last two games of the season.
The most points Hope has given up this season is 18 against Kalamazoo (and that was after going up 35-3 and treating the rest of the game like a scrimmage)... When splitting hairs trying to decide who should be ranked higher between Marietta, Hope, and DePauw, I really start splitting hairs. Berry lost again and Denison dropping 34 on DePauw both make me lean Hope. If Hope struggles against Albion or DePauw blows Wabash out of the water, I'll surely flop again. I'm slightly surprised I'm the only one that's voting Hope and now Marietta ahead of DePauw. Perhaps and orange and blue tinted glasses are distorting things for me.
DePauw shutting out Berry on the road and Hope dismantling Alma, also on the road, are both way more impressive wins than anything Marietta has done to date. Which is not to say that Marietta couldn't be better than those two, but the other two have an actual result that makes me take notice. Marietta gets their chance in a couple of weeks.
Current NPI Data
7. Hope
8. DePauw
11. Mount Union
15. Marietta
51. Wabash
56. Alma
57. Albion
64. John Carroll
75. Mt. St. Joseph
79. Adrian
Only received 6 ballots this week. Every single voter had the exact same ballot as last week. At least we finally have a game between two teams in the rankings.
Updated NPI Data
6. Mount Union
7. Hope
12. DePauw
27. Marietta
30. Wabash
45. Alma
50. John Carroll
62. Albion
75. Mt. St. Joseph
91. Adrian
Week 10
| Rank | Team | Points | Prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| 1 | Mount Union (9-0) | 49 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 2 | DePauw (9-0) | 41 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| 3 | Hope (9-0) | 35 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| 4 | Marietta (8-1) | 29 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
| 5 | John Carroll (7-2) | 21 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| 6 | Wabash (8-1) | 12 | 7 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 6 |
| 7 | Alma (7-2) | 8 | 6 | - | 7 | 6 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 7 |
| ORV | Baldwin Wallace (6-3) | 1 | | 7 | | | | | | |
Voters: #1OacFan, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, wally_wabash
This is it right here. Except for the BW receiving votes, this is it.
Do we have a final regular season poll?
Only 5 ballots came in. I'll post it later tonight.
Week 11| Rank | Team | Points | Prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| 1 | Mount Union (10-0) | 34 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 2 | DePauw (10-0) | 30 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| 3 | Hope (10-0) | 26 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| 4 | John Carroll (8-2) | 20 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
| T5 | Alma (8-2) | 12 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 6 |
| T5 | Marietta (8-2) | 12 | 4 | 5 | 7 | 5 | 6 | 5 |
| 7 | Wabash (8-2) | 4 | 6 | - | 6 | 7 | - | 7 |
| ORV | Baldwin Wallace (7-3) | 1 | | 7 | - | - | - | - |
| Mount St Joseph (8-2) | 1 | | - | - | - | 7 | - |
Voters: #1OacFan, FCGG, HOPEful, Kira & Jaxon's Dad, Li'l Giant, smedindy, wally_wabash
I'm ballot #2. Subpar results on the Road for the Raiders finally got me to drop them.
I like Wabash results vs UWW and DePauw more than Marietta vs MTU and JCU.
I was in trial last week and did not ever get a chance to send in my ballot. It would have looked like this:
1. Mount Union
2. Depauw
3. Hope
4. John Carroll
5. Marietta
6. Alma
7. Wabash
I'll have my (redacted) together for the final poll after the playoffs.