Top 25 rankings

[smedindy]

Well, I'm sure in a few weeks Wesley and Linfield will be where they are supposed to be in my compendium. It's just a little static right now since Linfield has played just three games.

Being a database guy I trust neutral computer observations myself.

[wally_wabash]

Thanks for the follow up, Keith.  And you're right, it's fun fun to think about whether or not your team is on ATN's radar or in ATN's top 25.  I couldn't help but notice my Little Giants moved off the watch list this week...now I have to figure out if you're voting for them or have stopped paying attention.  I think I have a decent idea. 

Another sweet column this week.  Thanks for the contribution! 

[Mr. Ypsi]

smedindy,

No sane person is going to blame the computer - what counts is who PROGRAMMED the computer.  I've seen some awfully bizarre results on the BCS 'computer programs'.

Assuming your computer has not blown a circuit, whether or not we trust your rankings has eveything to do with whether or not we trust your algorhythm.

Computers are no more (or less) neutral than their programmers! 

[smedindy]

I'm satisfied with the results and that's all I care about. Becuase I use three different power ratings and combine them, I think I've covered all of the bases.

It actually works better for hoops because of the larger sample size. It was developed to help me in the NCAA D-1 tourney.

[DutchFan2004]

The trouble with the polls that are out there is no one and I mean no one goes by head to head wins.  How can you say that Augustana should be ranked ahead of Central.  They lost to them the first game of the year.  I know that Central has since lost, but head to head it was proved on the field the first game of the year.  Yes Augustana won the battle of stats and moved the ball up and down the field on Central.  But does one yard of offensive stats put one point on the scoreboard.  The score is the only stat that counts.  Which brings me back to my original point.  Till pollsters look at the game results objectively and take all games into the mix its only people voting with their hearts and not their heads.  It also occurs to me that voters vote with agendas of their own not facts.  If you think I am blowing smoke just say so.  I am biased for Central I am upfront about that, but when a team beats another they should not be ranked behind the losing team should they?

[Mr. Ypsi]

Dutch,

Ever hear of the term UPSETS?  Of course head-to-head should be (and I'm sure is) considered, but the overall better team does NOT always win.  If an 0-8 team beats an 8-0 team, would you immediately place them higher?

You're talking STANDINGS, not POLLS - a poll (properly) takes into account 'so what else have you done?').

[Pat Coleman]

If that were the only game that took place all season ...
If no game had been played to change voters' opinions ...
... then yes.

[DutchFan2004]

I agree with that.  Upsets do happen.  But the point I was trying to make is that the voters in the polls sometimes have agendas and do not look at head to head games.  They vote their hearts and are not always objective in how they vote.  That was the point i was trying to make.  Look at what happened today MHB loses.  Do I think that that team should now be ranked ahead of them not at all nor do I think that MHB should drop out of the polls.  I just don't think that voters always look at the what happens on the head to head. Thats all I was trying to say. 

[wally_wabash]

So it's ok for voters to allow for upsets and rank accordingly except for when said upsets involve Central?

[Mr. Ypsi]

I'm sorry, Dutch, but I have no clue what you are attempting to say - could you clarify?

Do you have any SPECIFIC complaint about voters not dealing with head-to -head (on d3 or elsewhere), or is this just a vague, general complaint?

[smedindy]

Dutchfan -

MH-Baylor will be ranked and Howard Payne will not be ranked.

If you run a computer simulation I bet 85 times out of 100 MH-Baylor would win that game.

If you ran a computer simulation Wooster beats Kenyon 85 times out of 100.

But yet, MH-Baylor and Wooster lost today. And while Wooster will not be ranked, if pollsters had to rank all of the teams Wooster would still be way ahead of Kenyon on the ballots.

The voters look at head to head but also look at the big picture. Who is really the better team. Time will always tell that.

[DutchFan2004]

How about when Iowa which I am a supporter of was ranked ahead of Iowa State after Iowa State had beaten them.  Thats for D-1.  Now do you see what I am talking about.

[Mr. Ypsi]

Um, Dutch, you may want to choose a different example!

Presumably the voters felt that the result WAS an upset, and that Iowa was the better team (a decision clearly justified yesterday when Iowa beat a solid Purdue team, while ISU lost at home to a dreadful Baylor team - BU's first-EVER road win in the Big 12)!

Head-to-head is obviously a factor, but not if the teams are CLEARLY mismatched and the result was CLEARLY an upset.

[DutchFan2004]

So Augustana is an upset? See it happened again.  Carthage is ahead of Auggie today.  I don't understand it.  Iowa State man handled Iowa (which I was sorry to see) but they did.  Thats what i mean about voters.  They don't always look at the victories they say its an upset but that is not always an objective opinion.  Now a question was Augustana's victory an upset? I ask because I really do not know.  I don't follow Illinois football. 

[DutchFan2004]

Wally Wabash that comment is a low blow.  I do not think that the sun rises and sets over the Dutch.  I follow them as they are a local team and I have a personal interest as my son plays for them.  I am making an observation about polls in general and I think that my point was made again this week.  With Auggies win over Carthage.  An upset? by whos opinion? ask an Auggie fan and they may say it wasn't.  I am just saying that polls are skewed by personal feelings and nothing concrete.