FB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[79jaybird]

I am making the trip to Olivet so the EC/Olivet game can be heard locally on 88.7 FM.

[AndOne]

Help please!
I post regularly on the basketball board, so I'm not as familiar with how things work on the football side. Accordingly, I'm wondering if someone can educate me on something.

North Central was ranked 14, played, and won 41-7. However, they dropped 2 places in the new poll. How does this happen when not only did they win by 35 points, but most, if not all, of the other winners rose in the rankings? Is this usual?

I'm especially confused over the fact that 4 teams didn't even play and by doing so actually went up in the new poll. This seems ridiculous.

As such, any help anyone can give me as to how the poll works/possible reasoning on this is appreciated.
Thanks!

AndOne,

It appears you are not alone in your rankings bewilderment. This week's Around the Midwest features Evan Jones from Carthage and AndOne!

http://www.d3football.com/columns/around-the-region/midwest/2010/Catching+up+with+Jones

Thanks USee
I didn't think my puzzlement and subsequent question was that outrageous.
Its nice to know that a journalist associated with D3Football was also confused about the criteria associated with the rankings.

[usee]

It wasn't outrageous at all. Very valid question and observation. We all faked an explanation without much conviction in our answers. I think the D3 poll is the best poll out there but it doesn't mean it always makes sense, especially early in the season.

[AndOne]

And One,

Check out my post above.  Did you really expect credit for whupping Cornell?!!

NCC went down just one point, but the consolidation of votes left them down two slots.  (The teams that passed them did not play Cornell!)  Next year, open the season by whupping Mount Union - I guarantee you will rise in the poll

Mr.----

No, I certainly didn't expect the Cardinals to garner much extra credit for "whupping" the likes of Cornell as you succinctly state. However, I was definitely surprised that a 35 point victory resulted in a drop from #14 to #16.

So, while I didn't really expect much credit, I also didn't expect a 35 point win would result in their account being debited.

Perhaps if they had "whupped" a powerhouse like Hope by 4 points we would have seen a well deserved rise in the rankings!    

[Mr. Ypsi]

And One,

Check out my post above.  Did you really expect credit for whupping Cornell?!!

NCC went down just one point, but the consolidation of votes left them down two slots.  (The teams that passed them did not play Cornell!)  Next year, open the season by whupping Mount Union - I guarantee you will rise in the poll

Mr.----

No, I certainly didn't expect the Cardinals to garner much extra credit for "whupping" the likes of Cornell as you succinctly state. However, I was definitely surprised that a 35 point victory resulted in a drop from #14 to #16.

So, while I didn't really expect much credit, I also didn't expect a 35 point win would result in their account being debited.

Perhaps if they had "whupped" a powerhouse like Hope by 4 points we would have seen a well deserved rise in the rankings!    

NCC basically stayed dead even (they lost one measly point).  You can't look at the ranking of a team without considering other teams.  They 'fell' two slots because Willamette (on the road) beat a ranked UWSP team and Hardin-Simmons (on the road) beat an unranked but highly regarded Whitman team - those team passed NCC, as opposed to NCC 'falling'.

As for IWU, they DID lose 23 points for that uninspiring performance.  They 'rose' two slots because UWSP and Monmouth were both beaten and fell below them.

[AndOne]

I guess I tend to place more importance on the ranking number than the number of votes rec'd. And apparently at least 1 national correspondent with no special ties to either the CCIW or NCC agrees as evidenced by his questioning of the wisdom of the latest poll placements.

[Mr. Ypsi]

I assume you are talking about Clyde Hughes (Around the Midwest)?  I tried to email him an explanation, but the email didn't go through, so I replied on the Top 25 thread of General Football.

[Titan Q]

Alma (0-1) @ IWU (1-0) preview articles...

http://www.pantagraph.com/sports/college/football/article_410b2198-bd3d-11df-9d97-001cc4c002e0.html

http://www.themorningsun.com/articles/2010/09/11/sports/srv0000009352152.txt


It terms of IWU potentially contending for the CCIW title, it would be very concerning if this game is not a huge blowout.

[matblake]

Alma (0-1) @ IWU (1-0) preview articles...

http://www.pantagraph.com/sports/college/football/article_410b2198-bd3d-11df-9d97-001cc4c002e0.html

http://www.themorningsun.com/articles/2010/09/11/sports/srv0000009352152.txt


It terms of IWU potentially contending for the CCIW title, it would be very concerning if this game is not a huge blowout.

Q, I don't think the Titans will have any problems.  However, Alma does run one of those crazy offenses, they call it the Scotgun I think, which I'm sure you remember from last year.

[Stagg Again!!]

And One,

Check out my post above.  Did you really expect credit for whupping Cornell?!!

NCC went down just one point, but the consolidation of votes left them down two slots.  (The teams that passed them did not play Cornell!)  Next year, open the season by whupping Mount Union - I guarantee you will rise in the poll

----

No, I certainly didn't expect the Cardinals to garner much extra credit for "whupping" the likes of Cornell as you succinctly state. However, I was definitely surprised that a 35 point victory resulted in a drop from #14 to #16.

So, while I didn't really expect much credit, I also didn't expect a 35 point win would result in their account being debited.

Perhaps if they had "whupped" a powerhouse like Hope by 4 points we would have seen a well deserved rise in the rankings!    

NCC basically stayed dead even (they lost one measly point).  You can't look at the ranking of a team without considering other teams.  They 'fell' two slots because Willamette (on the road) beat a ranked UWSP team and Hardin-Simmons (on the road) beat an unranked but highly regarded Whitman team - those team passed NCC, as opposed to NCC 'falling'.

As for IWU, they DID lose 23 points for that uninspiring performance.  They 'rose' two slots because UWSP and Monmouth were both beaten and fell below them.

I think that Mr. Ypsi has hit the nail on the head in terms of NCC doing exactly what the voters thought that they would do (winning big over a bottom half of the conference IIAC team).  I also think he hit the nail on the head regarding Willamette's road win over UW-SP.  My only question had to do with Hardin-Simmons move.  They beat a Whitworth team (by a score of 27-7) that was 5-5 last year and 6-3 in 2008.  Additionally, H-S beat Whitworth 48-31 last year.  Didn't the voters think that H-S would win again this year?  I would think that they would have given the fact that H-S was ranked and Whitworth was not. 

I should note that, as was already said, this should shake itself out by the fourth game of the year given the amount of interleague play between the CCIW, IIAC, WIAC, MIAC; and MIAA (coupled with the Wittenberg win over Olivet; the MUC game against UW-O (today); and the (utterly uninspiring) Ohio Northern win over UW-RF).

[Stagg Again!!]

I think that Mr. Ypsi has hit the nail on the head in terms of NCC doing exactly what the voters thought that they would do (winning big over a bottom half of the conference IIAC team).  I also think he hit the nail on the head regarding Willamette's road win over UW-SP.  My only question had to do with Hardin-Simmons move.  They beat a Whitworth team (by a score of 27-7) that was 5-5 last year and 6-3 in 2008.  Additionally, H-S beat Whitworth 48-31 last year.  Didn't the voters think that H-S would win again this year?  I would think that they would have given the fact that H-S was ranked and Whitworth was not. 

I should note that, as was already said, this should shake itself out by the fourth game of the year given the amount of interleague play between the CCIW, IIAC, WIAC, MIAC; and MIAA (coupled with the Wittenberg win over Olivet; the MUC game against UW-O (today); and the (utterly uninspiring) Ohio Northern win over UW-RF).

Originally, I was going to put the Wartburg win over Monmouth in my list of other relevant games, but I wasn't sure that Monmouth had returned enough of its team to warrant its original ranking.  On second thought, any team with an All-American QB shouldn't be disregarded.  Let's add that one to the list.

[Pat Coleman]

Help please!
I post regularly on the basketball board, so I'm not as familiar with how things work on the football side. Accordingly, I'm wondering if someone can educate me on something.

North Central was ranked 14, played, and won 41-7. However, they dropped 2 places in the new poll. How does this happen when not only did they win by 35 points, but most, if not all, of the other winners rose in the rankings? Is this usual?

I'm especially confused over the fact that 4 teams didn't even play and by doing so actually went up in the new poll. This seems ridiculous.

As such, any help anyone can give me as to how the poll works/possible reasoning on this is appreciated.
Thanks!

AndOne,

It appears you are not alone in your rankings bewilderment. This week's Around the Midwest features Evan Jones from Carthage and AndOne!

http://www.d3football.com/columns/around-the-region/midwest/2010/Catching+up+with+Jones

Thanks USee
I didn't think my puzzlement and subsequent question was that outrageous.
Its nice to know that a journalist associated with D3Football was also confused about the criteria associated with the rankings.

Actually he was just trying to stir up conversation. Clyde doesn't have a Top 25 ballot, either, for what it's worth.

[Pat Coleman]

I guess I tend to place more importance on the ranking number than the number of votes rec'd. And apparently at least 1 national regional correspondent with no special ties to either the CCIW or NCC agrees as evidenced by his questioning of the wisdom of the latest poll placements.

Corrected.

[Pat Coleman]

And One,

Check out my post above.  Did you really expect credit for whupping Cornell?!!

NCC went down just one point, but the consolidation of votes left them down two slots.  (The teams that passed them did not play Cornell!)  Next year, open the season by whupping Mount Union - I guarantee you will rise in the poll

----

No, I certainly didn't expect the Cardinals to garner much extra credit for "whupping" the likes of Cornell as you succinctly state. However, I was definitely surprised that a 35 point victory resulted in a drop from #14 to #16.

So, while I didn't really expect much credit, I also didn't expect a 35 point win would result in their account being debited.

Perhaps if they had "whupped" a powerhouse like Hope by 4 points we would have seen a well deserved rise in the rankings!    

NCC basically stayed dead even (they lost one measly point).  You can't look at the ranking of a team without considering other teams.  They 'fell' two slots because Willamette (on the road) beat a ranked UWSP team and Hardin-Simmons (on the road) beat an unranked but highly regarded Whitman team - those team passed NCC, as opposed to NCC 'falling'.

As for IWU, they DID lose 23 points for that uninspiring performance.  They 'rose' two slots because UWSP and Monmouth were both beaten and fell below them.

I think that Mr. Ypsi has hit the nail on the head in terms of NCC doing exactly what the voters thought that they would do (winning big over a bottom half of the conference IIAC team).  I also think he hit the nail on the head regarding Willamette's road win over UW-SP.  My only question had to do with Hardin-Simmons move.  They beat a Whitworth team (by a score of 27-7) that was 5-5 last year and 6-3 in 2008.  Additionally, H-S beat Whitworth 48-31 last year.  Didn't the voters think that H-S would win again this year?  I would think that they would have given the fact that H-S was ranked and Whitworth was not. 

I think there is still more value in beating No. 56 Whitworth than beating No. 188 Cornell, even if the win would be expected.

[Stagg Again!!]

Enough said.  It will all play out over the next few weeks anyway.  I must say though that it is hard for me to have the clarity between #56 and #188 without any games in hand Pat.