FB: American Rivers Conference

[doolittledog]

Things I have learned about this board over the years. 

If you question rankings or All-American picks be prepared to have the hammer dropped on you 

[ExTartanPlayer]

Things I have learned about this board over the years. 

If you question rankings or All-American picks be prepared to have the hammer dropped on you 

In this case, the "questioning" was dumb.  The words "ridiculous" and "bias" and "complete joke" were used to describe the D3 poll, and the only thing that was a complete joke was the original post from WB_Knights.  A couple of teams in the same rankings neighborhood as Wartburg have common-opponent results that tip laughably against Wartburg (UST beat Augsburg by 49; Wartburg beat them by a touchdown.  UWO beat UW-Stout by 55; Wartburg beat them by a touchdown), and somehow the takeaway from all this is that it's "ridiculous" that UW-Oshkosh leapfrogged Wartburg after beating the two-time defending national champions?  That's some serious effort to be offended on behalf of your own team from WB_Knights, and shows a serious lack of awareness of the national D3 picture.

No doubt if Wartburg had been the ones to topple UWW this week, WB_Knights would have been in here crowing about the fact that they did not immediately shoot to #1 in the poll.

[doolittledog]

Yeah, that's kind of the point of a message board.  Everyone voicing an opinion.  I understand general posters coming on and replying why they think a poster doesn't have a valid argument.  As a fan of a team, you are often looking through rose colored glasses.  Other fans pointing out where a poster and their analysis if off is what is expected.  As an example - I will pick Dubuque to beat Wartburg this weekend.  Many here will question that pick as crazy (it is).  I have just always found it odd that the website owner is often the one leading the charge against posters on rankings and all-American picks.  I get it to a degree...but if I were a website owner, I want as many hits to my website as possible to drive ad revenue...however miniscule or high dollar that revenue may be.

But anyway, I love talking d3 sports with all the other fans on here, regardless.  We're an odd lot and I like there is a place where those of us with a love for D3 sports can congregate.   

[Pat Coleman]

Things I have learned about this board over the years. 

If you question rankings or All-American picks be prepared to have the hammer dropped on you 

I know you don't like when I defend the poll but as the face of the site, that's something I feel is part of my job. I've definitely softened my stance and tone in the past decade but the message remains the same -- we don't do these things at random, we take them seriously, and generally there's an explainable reason for it, even if a biased fan doesn't want to see it.

I didn't give up my right to be a fan of Division III football when I started the site in 1999. If I were just a bored, dispassionate person, frankly, this site probably wouldn't still be here.

(Though I still disapprove of the use of the word "dolt" to defend the poll.)

[doolittledog]

Yeah, I agree those that make up the d3 poll take it as seriously (probably more seriously) as the D1 poll, and there are probably those out there that think the d3 poll is a joke and it's a good idea to let those know this isn't something that is taken lightly. 

Me, slacking off during my work day, likely read posts in a tone of voice different that how it was written!

[WB_Knights13]

If you look back at my recent posts, you'll see me questioning a lot of what is going on at Wartburg right now. Am I surprised Wartburg fell back in the polls? No, absolutely not, and that's not my issue. Being ranked #8 in the country is a great thing for any program. You'll see me mention, if you look back, that a lot of what they have done has not been reminiscent of a what a #6 team in the country should be doing. To me, it was just odd that Oshkosh jumped them, being a one loss team.

[Pat Coleman]

I think that question got kind of lost in the characterization of the poll that followed it.

Yes, indeed, the one loss was to a scholarship team -- Robert Morris-Chicago is 4-1. I'd have preferred to see Oshkosh beat them, both last year and this year but it didn't happen. But it doesn't matter that they played Finlandia and North Park. They beat Whitewater, which nobody else has done since 2012. Oshkosh deserved that jump.

[NewKnightDad]

I guess what we could do is look at it more of a shot at the level of the competition in the IIAC as that would be more fun.  Look a 17 point win against Coe and we dropped 2 spots in the poll.   

[ExTartanPlayer]

(Pat, just for you, I won't use the word "dolt" this time)

I guess what we could do is look at it more of a shot at the level of the competition in the IIAC as that would be more fun.  Look a 17 point win against Coe and we dropped 2 spots in the poll.   

This, also, is the wrong way of looking at rankings.  There's this idea that "the voters" moved a team up or down based solely on what they did, but Wartburg's win over Coe this week didn't happen in a vacuum.  It happened in the same week UW-Oshkosh (who, again, has a 55-point win over a team Wartburg beat by 8 points) took down a Whitewater team on a 35-game winning streak that included a recent win over NAIA's #1 team.  Teams don't arbitrarily get "moved up" or "moved down" just based on what they did that week.  Further...well, here's a long post I wrote in a different thread on the same topic earlier this year.

A related tangent: when a team moves up or down in the polls, there's always this misunderstanding that "the voters" moved one team ahead of the other, as though it's some collective decision of the hivemind.  That's not how a poll works!  Some voters probably kept them in place.  Some may have leapfrogged another team or two ahead of Team X.  But a team jumping Team X in the poll does not necessarily indicate that the voter hivemind moved Team X ahead of Team Y.  It means that Team Y picked up enough total points to move ahead of Team X.  Consider the following hypothetical:

Team X enters the week ranked 10th with 400 voter points.  Voter #1 has them ranked 11th on his ballot.
Team Y enters the week ranked 11th with 395 voter points.  Voter #1 has them ranked 19th on his ballot.

Team X wins 28-3 against a so-so opponent.  Voter #1 keeps them where they are in 11th.
Team Y wins 48-0 against a good opponent.  Voter #1 moves them from 19th up to 12th based on this dominant performance.

If everyone else kept their ballots exactly the same as they were the week before, Team Y would now jump Team X in the rankings, even though not one single voter actually moved Team Y ahead of Team X this week (that didn't already have them there).  It just happened that this week, Team Y gained enough points to move ahead of Team X, not that "the voters" huddled and moved one team ahead of the other.

Now let's look at this specific to John Carroll's situation this week.  Even ignoring that nuance, let's take the blind, simple view that teams just move up and down relative to the teams around them based on the week's result, and take a look at these three teams this week:

St. John's beat Dubuque 45-9, in a game where they actually can play the "foot off the gas" excuse (led 31-0 in second quarter, played three different quarterbacks, starting QB left the game mid-3rd-quarter).  Dubuque was a 4-6 team last year in a decent conference, and has some relatively-recent history of success.

Wabash arguably notched the most impressive Week 1 result this side of Thomas More, demolishing a perennial playoff team 35-3 and posting a few "Holy ****" defensive stats like the fewest points HSC has ever scored under Favret, fewest yards gained, etc.  Or something like that.

John Carroll, as has been covered, won 26-3 against St. Vincent, with their starting QB throwing about 10 passes in the fourth quarter and getting INT'd in the endzone on the second-to-last drive of the game.  SVC was 4-6 last year and is at best a middling PAC team, with one winning season ever (2011) in the program's eight-year history, and is a team that JCU blasted 44-0 with their backup QB playing last year.

So, um, I'm curious why anyone would choose to keep John Carroll ahead of either St. John's or Wabash if they're actually ranking the teams based on Week 1 results?  Besides the aforementioned lazy "they won, so they should stay where they are in the poll" line of thinking.  It's pretty indisputable that JCU notched the least impressive result of the three.  Not just by final score, but by actual breakdown of what happened in the game.

Don't think of polls with "they won this week, so they should stay in spot X" or "Team X was penalized for winning by X points" logic.  Seriously.  It's dumb.  Leave that for SEC fans that can't read.  Use a little nuance.  JCU had a far less impressive game than the two teams that leapfrogged them in the poll.  It was totally justified.

[D3MAFAN]

At the end of the day, we have a playoff that gives each conference champ and others that qualify an opportunity to prove rankings wrong and right? Wartburg did it last year and whose to say they will not this year. Last years UWW escape of sub par team by 7 points and went on to win the National Championship.

[badgerwarhawk]

Why don't you wait until the real rankings come out in a few weeks?

[NewKnightDad]

You all don't understand sarcasm very well and the amount of ribbing that goes on between the IIAC teams and their fans.  That was not a shot at the rankings it was a shot at Coe.

Instead of you being on the IIAC board telling us how we need to look at things you can ignore us and we will both be happy.

[D3MAFAN]

You all don't understand sarcasm very well and the amount of ribbing that goes on between the IIAC teams and their fans.  That was not a shot at the rankings it was a shot at Coe.

Instead of you being on the IIAC board telling us how we need to look at things you can ignore us and we will both be happy.

No, I will not ignore the IIAC Board, I love you guys too much.    FWIW, last year I was actually rooting for Wartburg throughout the playoffs and to this day, believe that if healthy, Wartburg was the best team last year.

[NewKnightDad]

Sounds good to me. 

[badgerwarhawk]

You all don't understand sarcasm very well and the amount of ribbing that goes on between the IIAC teams and their fans.  That was not a shot at the rankings it was a shot at Coe.

Instead of you being on the IIAC board telling us how we need to look at things you can ignore us and we will both be happy.

Oh man, now you've hurt my feelings.  I'll just slink back into my cave and pout.