Top 25 rankings

[pg04]

I just don't think anybody can base thier entire arguement on playing surface.  That totally overlooks the team.  That is like saying drinking a glass of water without the glass.  It is absurd. That arguement has clearly been a one sided arguement.  I threw out numbers and when that was argued with "playing surface"  I began to point out why I playing surface doesn't matter.  I haven't heard anyone argue against numbers. Why does 90.9% offense returning not matter at all, when teams like capital are losing a big number. I guess it has to be that thier turf must be better than Springfield's turf. (In my case thier turf isn't as good based on my ranking.)  That is what that entire arguement showing me, players not matter but playing surface does. 

Playing surface not an issue.  Every team plays outside.  Springfield plays on turf they went 10-2 last year (9-1 in regular season).  They play on turf every year and will continue to play on turf until they don't.  Why is this year any different?  They return 90.9% of thier offensive yards.  So what if they play on turf. Even if everyone argues they are better on turf then on grass.  They aren't playing on grass this year and are still on turf.  How should that reflect where they stand?

Sidenote:  I have never played on turf, but what happens when it gets wet?  Does it get slick?  What happens when it gets cold outside?  Does the surface become even harder?  If yes to any of those, well grass does the same thing in a different way.  I am sure Springfield has played it when it was cold and when it was wet.

With this team, you almost CAN base your entire argument on playing surface.  I don't care what 90.9 % is returned of anything.  The point is that in the playoffs when they play on grass in the bad conditions they will most likely lose, and Therefore in my opinion cannot be considered a top tier team. 

Look, I agree that they are a very good team and that their option is very hard to stop.  However, if you do stop it...no matter how, they won't even score. 

[Pat Coleman]

My question is, how can any publication rank a team with Springfield's mentality in their Top 10??

I could see them in the top 10. At this point in the season it's tough to say who would replace them.

To the poster earlier (sorry, too busy to go back and look) that suggested Rowan ... I'm not sold. They have to prove themselves all over to me. Last year's offense never got it together with all the young receivers, and now they lose their quarterback. That's a big load for a second-string quarterback, who struggled with all-star receivers, to carry.

[union89]

My question is, how can any publication rank a team with Springfield's mentality in their Top 10??

I could see them in the top 10. At this point in the season it's tough to say who would replace them.

To the poster earlier (sorry, too busy to go back and look) that suggested Rowan ... I'm not sold. They have to prove themselves all over to me. Last year's offense never got it together with all the young receivers, and now they lose their quarterback. That's a big load for a second-string quarterback, who struggled with all-star receivers, to carry.

Pat, even with that non-existant defense an inability to play catch-up?

[Pat Coleman]

In June, how do you know it won't get better?

[pg04]

I guess the same could be said about their ability to play on Grass too!  It could happen.

[PrideSportBBallGuy]

Union-

I am clearly with 'gro.  Whatever they play on everyone else plays on too, even with all those negative intangables.  Even spread offenses want days that wind won't be a factor, but that to has potential to be a negative as well.

pg04
Tell it to the pollster's, Springfield finished in the top 10 last year, to me that makes them a top tier team. Whatever they play on everyone else plays on too.  If they aren't a top tier team anybody would be able to go in there and beat them.  You can't argue that what they do isn't good and what they have coming back isn't good.

It has been pointed out to me before even if they make the playoffs doesn't make them a top tier team with all those AQ's. A team from the USASouth may make it to the NCAA tournament but that doesn't mean they will be ranked.

[pg04]

I'm not arguing that what they do isn't  good.  I'm saying that they have a huge gaping (fatal?) flaw.  Union89 reminded me of another, their inability to play from behind and/or play defense. 

[union89]

Union-

I am clearly with 'gro.  Whatever they play on everyone else plays on too, even with all those negative intangables.  Even spread offenses want days that wind won't be a factor, but that to has potential to be a negative as well.

pg04
Tell it to the pollster's, Springfield finished in the top 10 last year, to me that makes them a top tier team. Whatever they play on everyone else plays on too.  If they aren't a top tier team anybody would be able to go in there and beat them.  You can't argue that what they do isn't good and what they have coming back isn't good.

It has been pointed out to me before even if they make the playoffs doesn't make them a top tier team with all those AQ's. A team from the USASouth may make it to the NCAA tournament but that doesn't mean they will be ranked.

As I remember Springfields home field has a monster crown on it as well.  Obviously, very conducive to to the option.

['gro]

the bad news is only one person agrees with my "doesn't matter" stance on playing surface. The good news is that RPI has both grass and turf fields. They can study film and pick which field would give them an advantage over their opponent. I'll also look into day/night games and home/away jerseys.

[K-Mack]

My question is, how can any publication rank a team with Springfield's mentality in their Top 10??  There are too many external factors for a triple option offense with NO defense to go wrong.  Rain...turnovers...field conditions....injuries to 1 of 3 guys....getting out scored early....any of these factors against a decent team will completely take the Pride out of their game....they can not throw the ball, nor can they stop you.

The above points have been brought up many times on various boards with PP.  Again, with all these negative intangables....how can a team with this many obvious nagative possiblilities be ranked in anyones top 10?

Well, people have their reasons, like for instance if you think SJF is the No. 2 team in the nation this year, and Springfield beat them last year and lost by six in the playoffs ... I'd hope you can understand why someone with limited knowledge of the above issues would slot them in the top 10.

This also sounds a lot like Augustana.

That said, Mary Hardin-Baylor can hardly throw the ball, and they rammed it down Mount Union's throat trailing by double figures in the fourth quarter. In all the years I've been doing this, I've never seen anything like it.

Part of the run it all the time strategy is to wear teams down in the fourth quarter.

Also, most of those factors you listed (weather, injuries to key players) can take teams that play different styles out of their games.

Not completely disagreeing, just throwing that stuff out there.

[PrideSportBBallGuy]

the bad news is only one person agrees with my "doesn't matter" stance on playing surface.

Where have you been gro'  I have been out here fighting the wolves. 

My k has been hit hard today.

As someone mentioned earlier if you stop Springfield's offense you stop them.  That is true with any team though.  I am not going to keep arguing my point, because it doesn't seem to matter at all. No one has in my mind has clearly refuted it either.  If any other team in any other sport in any other division, returns starters there usually no questions of the ability of that team. I still don't know how this is any different.  They are going to be playing at the same home stadium.

The only thing Pat and I agreed on tonight is that Springfield could be in the top 10 right now.  (I have them 5th, Pat might have elsewhere).

[JT]

My question is, how can any publication rank a team with Springfield's mentality in their Top 10??

I could see them in the top 10. At this point in the season it's tough to say who would replace them.

To the poster earlier (sorry, too busy to go back and look) that suggested Rowan ... I'm not sold. They have to prove themselves all over to me. Last year's offense never got it together with all the young receivers, and now they lose their quarterback. That's a big load for a second-string quarterback, who struggled with all-star receivers, to carry.

Rowan does have a lot to prove.  Insiders are supporting the second-string QB (Joe Rankin).  I've gotten waivering support info on other players in the past, so I think that is a positive. On defense alone, I'd put Rowan in the top 20, but outside the top 10 somewhere.

Now Rankin looked bigger and stronger in 2006, but Orihel had completed his senior year w/o major injury, so Rankin only mopped up.  The big keys are replacing AA DE Keith Heimerl, QB Orihel, and three DB's (heavy DB rotation in the past will help the transition).  Wr's have real raw talent, but have lacked focus.  Wr's need to play up to ablility and Rankin needs a few more MPH's on his fastball for top 10.  I think Rankin is a good DIII QB.... I've just been spoiled by strong armed Rowan QB's since 1992.  Rankin's arm is equal or better than Rowan's regular season competators, except for the kid from Kean.

[Pat Coleman]

He needs a quicker release and a better move to first, too.

(As in, he was slow on the trigger and doesn't look off his primary target.)

[union89]

the bad news is only one person agrees with my "doesn't matter" stance on playing surface.

Where have you been gro'  I have been out here fighting the wolves. 

My k has been hit hard today.

As someone mentioned earlier if you stop Springfield's offense you stop them.  That is true with any team though.  I am not going to keep arguing my point, because it doesn't seem to matter at all. No one has in my mind has clearly refuted it either.  If any other team in any other sport in any other division, returns starters there usually no questions of the ability of that team. I still don't know how this is any different.  They are going to be playing at the same home stadium.

The only thing Pat and I agreed on tonight is that Springfield could be in the top 10 right now.  (I have them 5th, Pat might have elsewhere).

What I said was if you are marginally successful stopping their run you win....not entire offense.....their pass offense is nonexitant.

[union89]

My question is, how can any publication rank a team with Springfield's mentality in their Top 10??  There are too many external factors for a triple option offense with NO defense to go wrong.  Rain...turnovers...field conditions....injuries to 1 of 3 guys....getting out scored early....any of these factors against a decent team will completely take the Pride out of their game....they can not throw the ball, nor can they stop you.

The above points have been brought up many times on various boards with PP.  Again, with all these negative intangables....how can a team with this many obvious nagative possiblilities be ranked in anyones top 10?

Well, people have their reasons, like for instance if you think SJF is the No. 2 team in the nation this year, and Springfield beat them last year and lost by six in the playoffs ... I'd hope you can understand why someone with limited knowledge of the above issues would slot them in the top 10.

This also sounds a lot like Augustana.

That said, Mary Hardin-Baylor can hardly throw the ball, and they rammed it down Mount Union's throat trailing by double figures in the fourth quarter. In all the years I've been doing this, I've never seen anything like it.

Part of the run it all the time strategy is to wear teams down in the fourth quarter.

Also, most of those factors you listed (weather, injuries to key players) can take teams that play different styles out of their games.

Not completely disagreeing, just throwing that stuff out there.

Never said you had limited knowledge of anything....you said that....maybe you're smarter than you think....