Top 25 talk

[ElRetornodelEspencio]

The problem for Marietta is how far down did some voters have them? They were slotted 17... and I know voters who had them higher than that which obviously means there are voters who had them lower. Those lower voters have to make a tough decision - pole vault the Pioneers into the Top 5 when they had reasons to not have them very high to begin with or move them up a bit less aggressively (say Top 10 instead of Top 5)... those decisions by those voters will dictate how this turns out.

As for number one votes, those who didn't vote for Amherst or Babson are the ones who will probably decide how many votes go Marietta's way. I am not sure if those who vote for Amherst or Babson, like myself, will jump ship based on a couple of weeks of games. Too many other variables and questions outside of just Marietta to consider. That said, they have certainly made a statement so Monday's poll will be fascinating to watch.

Per the comment about Wooster rattling off so many 20+ win seasons and thus should do well on the road, I do argue this: Wooster plays a lot of home games on their schedule and it is hard to get them out of their place (much like F&M and others), so the road games usually come down to conference games and a few out-of-conference and I have not known Wooster to usually schedule too many difficult games out-of-conference on the road. The fact they played at Marietta is a welcome sign, though the tub-thumping might have them resort back to their former days.

If someone wanted to vote Amherst and Babson ahead of them, I'd have no argument. North Central won at #6 and at home against #14, and went 3-0 in a 5 day period. I wouldn't put them ahead of Marietta, but there's at least some justification now. But that's as low as you can go, IMO.

But they beat #2 at neutral by a million and #7 at home and are +25 margin per game. #4 lost to an unranked team. #5 beat nobodies, #6 lost to #4, #7 has been covered, #8 lost to an unranked team, #9 played nobodies, and #10 and 11 both lost to mediocre teams.

Any lower than 4th and that voter shouldn't have a vote because they clearly aren't paying enough attention.

[(509)Rat]

pole vault the Pioneers into the Top 5 when they had reasons to not have them very high to begin with or move them up a bit less aggressively

This pollster logic is the absolute worst (and it happens in football and basketball at every level in college athletics). Especially when it comes to changing pre-season polls, where you are largely guessing on how good a team will be based on people you've maybe never seen play. Or you are guessing on how much a player or group of players have improved from the previous season. Anyone who is unwilling to blow up their rankings from week to week (or 'weeks' in the case of basketball), is the one who shouldn't be participating in the polls.

[Gregory Sager]

^^ This. ^^

[Mr. Ypsi]

pole vault the Pioneers into the Top 5 when they had reasons to not have them very high to begin with or move them up a bit less aggressively

This pollster logic is the absolute worst (and it happens in football and basketball at every level in college athletics). Especially when it comes to changing pre-season polls, where you are largely guessing on how good a team will be based on people you've maybe never seen play. Or you are guessing on how much a player or group of players have improved from the previous season. Anyone who is unwilling to blow up their rankings from week to week (or 'weeks' in the case of basketball), is the one who shouldn't be participating in the polls.

BINGO.  Exactly why when I ran ran the Fan Poll we didn't start until January.  I love the d3hoops.com Preseason Poll, but there are inevitably some clinkers, and by January  they are usually obvious.  (Both ranked teams who shouldn't have been, and unranked teams who should have been.)

[ElRetornodelEspencio]

This problem is even worse in baseball where some teams play 15 games before others have done much more than get started.

Very hard to dislodge the teams that are ranked early, which of course tend to be the ones that have played more games. If you're a southern school, you get it given to you; if you're from up north, you have to prove it.

There shouldn't be polls in baseball until April.

[(509)Rat]

Don't get me wrong, Pre-season polls aren't worthless (meaningless, sure). Media outlets need content, us fans need something to discuss...politely  and more often than not many of the teams everyone thought would be near the top end up there throughout the season. But if Marietta is still undefeated come time for the next poll, folks have to be ok with saying "I was way off, the Pioneers are a top 5 team right now." That's all.

[Titan Q]

pole vault the Pioneers into the Top 5 when they had reasons to not have them very high to begin with or move them up a bit less aggressively

This pollster logic is the absolute worst (and it happens in football and basketball at every level in college athletics). Especially when it comes to changing pre-season polls, where you are largely guessing on how good a team will be based on people you've maybe never seen play. Or you are guessing on how much a player or group of players have improved from the previous season. Anyone who is unwilling to blow up their rankings from week to week (or 'weeks' in the case of basketball), is the one who shouldn't be participating in the polls.

Agree 100%, (509)Rat.  If there are voters who are stuck on what their preseason guess was, and unwilling to shift from guess to evaluating actual results once the season starts, then they are really hurting the accuracy and credibility of the poll. 

[ElRetornodelEspencio]

It was pretty ridiculous that they were ranked so low anyway. How many other teams had a first-team all-American coming back from team with 53 wins the past 2 years?

I guess if you went by the horrible miss of D3hoops only making Edwards an honorable mention pick, you might think something different though.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

It was pretty ridiculous that they were ranked so low anyway. How many other teams had a first-team all-American coming back from team with 53 wins the past 2 years?

I guess if you went by the horrible miss of D3hoops only making Edwards an honorable mention pick, you might think something different though.

Two thoughts... lots of teams bring back individuals and lots of teams lose players... how many important players did Marietta lose besides the one player coming back? They also didn't get as far as others expected and didn't finish as strong last year which makes people give pause. Really hard to argue losing a bunch of players who clearly were important to the team that because of one played the team should be highly ranked. That is a very fair look at Marietta. And I would argue I don't think Marietta thought they would easily beat CNU or Wooster let alone win both games. So to say they were ranked so low was ridiculous... is ridiculous.

As for Edwards pre-season pick - I am fine with it. I don't see any reason last year having him ahead of those who were ahead of him. If you look at the guys who were ahead of him, it would be a difficult argument to put him above them. He moved up to first-team because he was that good and those ahead of him all graduated. Leaving him one of the best big men back this season. I do like how he plays, though he has some areas that I think will be exposed this season... I look forward to seeing him adjust his game to those challenges.

pole vault the Pioneers into the Top 5 when they had reasons to not have them very high to begin with or move them up a bit less aggressively

This pollster logic is the absolute worst (and it happens in football and basketball at every level in college athletics). Especially when it comes to changing pre-season polls, where you are largely guessing on how good a team will be based on people you've maybe never seen play. Or you are guessing on how much a player or group of players have improved from the previous season. Anyone who is unwilling to blow up their rankings from week to week (or 'weeks' in the case of basketball), is the one who shouldn't be participating in the polls.

Just sharing insight. I have seen many trends with voters over the years. Moving a team dramatically up and down a poll is something that seems hard to do for a lot of voters. Even I have struggled with the idea especially early in a season when you don't have enough data on all the teams involved. Sure, I see what Marietta has done against a good schedule, but I haven't had the chance to see what others have done and I for one have been burned FAR too many times by jumping on a team with little data and they fail miserably or jumping off a team and seeing them rally.

Not saying any of this is related to Marietta. I plan to move them up significantly in my poll. I am just sharing what I have seen the trend be. Yes, people can say they were wrong in pre-season and move a team... but it is that extra voice in your head that makes you wonder if you are just having a gunshot reaction and not looking at the entire picture. That last part is where I have seen voters, including myself, get a little gun shy.

Like it or hate it... I don't really care. Just sharing thoughts with you to give you an idea of where voters may come from. As I have stated numerous times, there are 25 voters out there and not one voter has the same mentality as any of the other 24.

[Darryl Nester]

How They Fared -- final report before the first in-season poll.

A few games are still in progress (and one has not yet started); I will edit those in when available.
One game missing (Marietta vs. Bethany, starting at 7:00)
COMPLETE

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	590	Amherst	3-0	def. Green Mountain, 83-41; def. St. Lawrence, 90-68; won at Anna Maria, 75-64
#2	582	Christopher Newport	3-1	def. Randolph-Macon, 70-47; def. (n) #35 UW-Stevens Point, 71-51; LOST to (n) #17 Marietta, 50-74; won at Dickinson, 76-56
#3	545	Babson	6-0	def. Albertus Magnus, 101-81; def. Lasell, 90-72; def. Anna Maria, 99-49; def. #26 Endicott, 72-60; def. Becker, 91-57; def. Bowdoin, 78-74
#4	531	St. Norbert	1-1	LOST at UW-Eau Claire, 67-68; won at #6 Benedictine, 71-70
#5	465	Tufts	4-0	def. (n) FDU-Florham, 91-81; def. (n) Southern Virginia, 80-69; won at MIT, 74-66; def. Emerson, 87-72
#6	457	Benedictine	2-2	won at Wheaton (Ill.), 86-76; LOST to #4 St. Norbert, 70-71; LOST to #13 North Central (Ill.), 69-72; def. #21 UW-Oshkosh, 68-55
#7	446	Wooster	3-1	def. Oberlin, 104-65; def. Defiance, 98-63; LOST at #17 Marietta, 70-99; def. St. John Fisher, 85-75
#8	388	Ohio Wesleyan	2-2	def. (n) Albion, 91-77; won at Trine, 79-72; LOST to Capital, 76-82; LOST to Illinois Wesleyan, 70-88
#9	384	Whitman	3-0	def. St. Olaf, 108-78; def. (n) Schreiner, 90-61; def. (n) #47 Texas Lutheran, 98-82
#10	344	St. Thomas	3-1	LOST to T#53 UW-River Falls, 65-74; def. (n) Pacific Lutheran, 80-72; won at Puget Sound, 78-74; def. St. Scholastica, 83-65
#11	306	John Carroll	1-2	LOST at Mount St. Joseph, 82-101; LOST to (n) Hanover, 89-90; def. La Roche, 107-82
#12	289	Whitworth	3-0	def. St. Olaf, 70-69; def. #47 Texas Lutheran, 95-87; def. Schreiner, 87-63
#13	286	North Central (Ill.)	3-0	won at #6 Benedictine, 72-69; def. #14 Alma, 78-59; def. Aurora, 88-78
#14	261	Alma	1-4	def. Ohio Northern, 80-72; LOST to #18 Augustana, 77-89; LOST to Finlandia, 85-89; LOST at #13 North Central (Ill.), 59-78; LOST to T#49 Elmhurst, 96-104
#15	254	Emory	3-2	LOST at Covenant, 70-74; def. (n) William Peace, 100-80; won at Guilford, 69-66; LOST to (n) LaGrange, 84-95; def. (n) Maryville (Tenn.), 71-62
#16	234	Virginia Wesleyan	3-2	def. Methodist, 99-61; def. Frostburg State, 78-62; def. Concordia (Texas), 101-94; LOST to T#45 Salisbury, 60-68; LOST to Emory and Henry, 77-79
#17	200	Marietta	5-0	def. La Roche, 101-75; def. (n) Albright, 74-56; def. (n) #2 Christopher Newport, 74-50; def. #7 Wooster, 99-70; def. Bethany, 87-71
#18	164	Augustana	4-1	won at MacMurray, 75-69; won at #14 Alma, 89-77; won at Calvin, 79-60; def. Fontbonne, 106-66; LOST to #20 Washington U., 61-68
#19	146	Keene State	4-0	def. Southern Vermont, 87-60; won at Hartwick, 79-63; def. (n) SUNY Oneonta, 104-90; def. Springfield, 107-84
#20	139	Washington U.	4-0	won at Webster, 60-59; won at DePauw, 84-77; def. Hanover, 81-61; won at #18 Augustana, 68-61
#21	128	UW-Oshkosh	2-2	def. (n) Iowa Wesleyan, 88-70; LOST at Wartburg, 72-83; won at Edgewood, 74-63; LOST at #6 Benedictine, 55-68
#22	127	Hope	3-1	won at UW-Stout, 70-50; def. (n) T#53 UW-River Falls, 90-81; def. Aquinas, 93-80; LOST to Cornerstone, 78-95
#23	117	Franklin and Marshall	3-1	def. Lancaster Bible, 94-91; def. York (Pa.), 91-71; LOST to Gettysburg, 54-57; won at Lebanon Valley, 73-67
#24	88	Middlebury	3-1	def. (n) Salem State, 82-55; won at Eastern Connecticut, 83-74; def. SUNY New Paltz, 94-62; LOST to #26 Endicott, 89-93
#25	86	Susquehanna	4-1	LOST to Misericordia, 116-120; def. Penn St.-Wilkes Barre, 91-58; def. King's, 78-65; def. #30 Lycoming, 75-74; won at Penn State-Harrisburg, 82-56

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	79	Endicott	2-1	def. (n) Anna Maria, 86-56; LOST at #3 Babson, 60-72; won at #24 Middlebury, 93-89
#27	74	Oswego State	4-2	LOST to Nazareth, 57-63; def. SUNY-Maritime, 104-69; def. SUNY-Canton, 83-75; def. Clarkson, 72-71; def. (n) Colby, 67-63; LOST at Hamilton, 70-78
#28	60	Skidmore	3-1	def. Castleton, 77-61; def. (n) Randolph-Macon, 80-60; won at Stevenson, 81-70; LOST at Ithaca, 85-89
#29	43	Swarthmore	4-0	def. Penn State-Abington, 69-52; won at Centenary (N.J.), 86-80; def. Washington College, 74-61; def. Misericordia, 83-75
#30	42	Lycoming	4-1	def. Fredonia, 80-66; def. Penn St.-Schuylkill, 111-81; def. Western Connecticut, 103-90; LOST at #25 Susquehanna, 74-75; def. Penn State-Altoona, 85-67
#31	36	Johnson and Wales	0-2	LOST to (n) St. Lawrence, 63-74; LOST to (n) Green Mountain, 70-73
#32	28	New Jersey City	4-1	won at York (N.Y.), 82-45; def. (n) Spalding, 59-53; LOST to (n) Baldwin Wallace, 61-64; def. Rutgers-Newark, 77-60; def. Staten Island, 88-62
#33	25	WPI	4-0	def. Eastern Connecticut, 76-62; def. Salve Regina, 59-55; def. #48 DeSales, 73-70; won at Worcester State, 91-54
#34	24	Lynchburg	4-1	def. Johns Hopkins, 67-61; won at Stevenson, 101-80; LOST to (n) #35 UW-Stevens Point, 73-83; won at Ferrum, 76-73; won at Washington and Lee, 81-63
#35	21	UW-Stevens Point	2-2	LOST at St. Olaf, 55-63; LOST to (n) #2 Christopher Newport, 51-71; def. (n) #34 Lynchburg, 83-73; won at Lawrence, 69-50
#36	18	Rochester	6-0	won at Ithaca, 104-94; def. Alfred, 71-62; def. Washington and Lee, 77-50; def. Hobart, 73-59; def. Waynesburg, 83-57; def. Elmira, 88-50
#37	16	UW-Whitewater	3-0	def. Colorado College, 90-71; def. Lindsey Wilson (Ky.), 85-78; won at Ohio Northern, 87-72
#38	14	Trinity (Conn.)	1-2	LOST at Mass-Dartmouth, 76-83; LOST to (n) Southern Vermont, 80-83; won at Elms, 88-59
#39	12	Birmingham-Southern	2-2	LOST at Baruch, 72-76; def. Rose-Hulman, 80-69; def. Wabash, 72-65; LOST to Covenant, 65-68
#40	11	Hardin-Simmons	2-2	LOST to Southwestern, 95-98; def. Schreiner, 93-72; LOST to #47 Texas Lutheran, 66-90; def. Trinity (Texas), 91-74
T#41	10	Stockton	1-1	def. SUNY-Old Westbury, 74-55; LOST to Rowan, 100-101
T#41	10	UW-La Crosse	4-0	won at Lakeland, 86-66; won at Viterbo, 72-59; won at Webster, 79-56; def. (n) MacMurray, 95-50
T#43	7	Northwestern (Minn.)	1-2	LOST to Hamline, 78-88; LOST to Central, 61-76; def. Macalester, 68-61
T#43	7	Roanoke	2-2	def. Worcester State, 78-60; def. Ferrum, 81-55; LOST at Bridgewater (Va.), 55-74; LOST at North Carolina Wesleyan, 69-76
T#45	6	Carroll	4-1	def. Principia, 75-57; def. Blackburn, 90-72; won at Rockford, 84-71; LOST at Chicago, 83-94; def. (n) East-West, 93-76
T#45	6	Salisbury	4-0	def. Goucher, 70-52; def. Staten Island, 83-65; def. Johns Hopkins, 74-49; won at #16 Virginia Wesleyan, 68-60
#47	5	Texas Lutheran	3-2	def. Mary Hardin-Baylor, 87-84; won at McMurry, 80-72; won at #40 Hardin-Simmons, 90-66; LOST at #12 Whitworth, 87-95; LOST to (n) #9 Whitman, 82-98
#48	3	DeSales	2-2	def. Rosemont, 94-60; def. (n) Bates, 71-70; LOST at #33 WPI, 70-73; LOST at Moravian, 92-105
T#49	2	Bethel	2-1	LOST to (n) Heidelberg, 87-89; def. (n) Luther, 88-78; def. Martin Luther, 95-46
T#49	2	Chapman	2-2	def. La Sierra, 88-63; LOST to San Diego Christian, 62-73; LOST at George Fox, 81-97; won at Lewis and Clark, 60-50
T#49	2	Elmhurst	2-3	LOST at Loras, 102-104; LOST to (n) Greenville, 98-110; LOST to (n) Westminster (Mo.), 81-88; def. Concordia-Chicago, 88-68; won at #14 Alma, 104-96
T#49	2	TCNJ	3-1	def. John Jay, 75-58; def. (n) T#53 SUNY Geneseo, 79-68; LOST to (n) Penn State-Harrisburg, 68-74; def. Rutgers-Camden, 106-66
T#53	1	Neumann	4-0	def. Rowan, 113-96; won at Eastern, 106-90; def. Keystone, 105-71; def. (n) Valley Forge, 87-58
T#53	1	SUNY Geneseo	3-1	def. Medaille, 79-64; LOST to (n) T#49 TCNJ, 68-79; def. (n) New Rochelle, 86-74; won at Morrisville State, 103-93
T#53	1	UW-River Falls	3-1	won at #10 St. Thomas, 74-65; def. (n) Robert Morris-Chicago, 103-98; LOST to (n) #22 Hope, 81-90; won at Carthage, 81-75

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Hoopsville returns to the air tonight - shortly - at 7pm ET! Join us as Dave McHugh takes a look at yet another crazy start to the Division III basketball season especially on the men's side. Dave will also bring back interviews conducted at this year's #Hoopsville Classic. There will also be plenty of time to answer your questions, so join us!

Guests include (recorded at Hoopsville Classic):
- Josh Merkel, Randolph-Macon men's coach
- Joe Burke, Skidmore men's coach
- Rick Ferry, Albright men's coach

Show hits the air at 7:00 PM ET here: http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2016-17/nov27 #d3h.

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

[ElRetornodelEspencio]

It was pretty ridiculous that they were ranked so low anyway. How many other teams had a first-team all-American coming back from team with 53 wins the past 2 years?

I guess if you went by the horrible miss of D3hoops only making Edwards an honorable mention pick, you might think something different though.

Two thoughts... lots of teams bring back individuals and lots of teams lose players... how many important players did Marietta lose besides the one player coming back? They also didn't get as far as others expected and didn't finish as strong last year which makes people give pause. Really hard to argue losing a bunch of players who clearly were important to the team that because of one played the team should be highly ranked. That is a very fair look at Marietta. And I would argue I don't think Marietta thought they would easily beat CNU or Wooster let alone win both games. So to say they were ranked so low was ridiculous... is ridiculous.

As for Edwards pre-season pick - I am fine with it. I don't see any reason last year having him ahead of those who were ahead of him. If you look at the guys who were ahead of him, it would be a difficult argument to put him above them. He moved up to first-team because he was that good and those ahead of him all graduated. Leaving him one of the best big men back this season. I do like how he plays, though he has some areas that I think will be exposed this season... I look forward to seeing him adjust his game to those challenges.

Hrm, whatever weaknesses you think can be exposed that you've found, you're the only one. Btw, was talking about the postseason awards last year where the NABC picked Edwards first team and D3sports didn't pick him for any of their teams.

Bethany is a really athletic and physical team that plays credible 6-5, 6-6, 6-6 and 6-8 guys and Edwards went 15-10 in 23 minutes. He's the 2nd best player I've ever seen at MC, and I'll be very pleasantly surprised to see one better than the first (who did not get anywhere near the accolades he deserved).

Btw, MC has beaten Wooster the last 3 times they've played. Won by 15 in their tournament last year.

How many other teams that won 25+ games the last two years and have their best player, an All-American, coming back are ranked outside the top 15 preseason? I bet not many.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

It was pretty ridiculous that they were ranked so low anyway. How many other teams had a first-team all-American coming back from team with 53 wins the past 2 years?

I guess if you went by the horrible miss of D3hoops only making Edwards an honorable mention pick, you might think something different though.

Two thoughts... lots of teams bring back individuals and lots of teams lose players... how many important players did Marietta lose besides the one player coming back? They also didn't get as far as others expected and didn't finish as strong last year which makes people give pause. Really hard to argue losing a bunch of players who clearly were important to the team that because of one played the team should be highly ranked. That is a very fair look at Marietta. And I would argue I don't think Marietta thought they would easily beat CNU or Wooster let alone win both games. So to say they were ranked so low was ridiculous... is ridiculous.

As for Edwards pre-season pick - I am fine with it. I don't see any reason last year having him ahead of those who were ahead of him. If you look at the guys who were ahead of him, it would be a difficult argument to put him above them. He moved up to first-team because he was that good and those ahead of him all graduated. Leaving him one of the best big men back this season. I do like how he plays, though he has some areas that I think will be exposed this season... I look forward to seeing him adjust his game to those challenges.

Hrm, whatever weaknesses you think can be exposed that you've found, you're the only one. Btw, was talking about the postseason awards last year where the NABC picked Edwards first team and D3sports didn't pick him for any of their teams.

AJ Edwards was an Honorable Mention AA last year - http://www.d3hoops.com/awards/all-americans/men/2016.  Given the immense talent and depth of d3h at that position last season, I think he's properly ranked, as he is this year, given how many post players graduated.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

It was pretty ridiculous that they were ranked so low anyway. How many other teams had a first-team all-American coming back from team with 53 wins the past 2 years?

I guess if you went by the horrible miss of D3hoops only making Edwards an honorable mention pick, you might think something different though.

Two thoughts... lots of teams bring back individuals and lots of teams lose players... how many important players did Marietta lose besides the one player coming back? They also didn't get as far as others expected and didn't finish as strong last year which makes people give pause. Really hard to argue losing a bunch of players who clearly were important to the team that because of one played the team should be highly ranked. That is a very fair look at Marietta. And I would argue I don't think Marietta thought they would easily beat CNU or Wooster let alone win both games. So to say they were ranked so low was ridiculous... is ridiculous.

As for Edwards pre-season pick - I am fine with it. I don't see any reason last year having him ahead of those who were ahead of him. If you look at the guys who were ahead of him, it would be a difficult argument to put him above them. He moved up to first-team because he was that good and those ahead of him all graduated. Leaving him one of the best big men back this season. I do like how he plays, though he has some areas that I think will be exposed this season... I look forward to seeing him adjust his game to those challenges.

Hrm, whatever weaknesses you think can be exposed that you've found, you're the only one. Btw, was talking about the postseason awards last year where the NABC picked Edwards first team and D3sports didn't pick him for any of their teams.

Bethany is a really athletic and physical team that plays credible 6-5, 6-6, 6-6 and 6-8 guys and Edwards went 15-10 in 23 minutes. He's the 2nd best player I've ever seen at MC, and I'll be very pleasantly surprised to see one better than the first (who did not get anywhere near the accolades he deserved).

Btw, MC has beaten Wooster the last 3 times they've played. Won by 15 in their tournament last year.

How many other teams that won 25+ games the last two years and have their best player, an All-American, coming back are ranked outside the top 15 preseason? I bet not many.

As Ryan noted - he was on the honorable mention team for D3hoops.com. Also, comparing the D3hoops.com team and the NABC team is like comparing apples and oranges. NABC selects one player from each region and puts them on the first team (notice there are eight players per team?). Then they select another player from each region and that makes up the second team. Then they selected another player from each region and that makes up the third team. It continues. One player, each region, each team. We don't do that. We do it like most other All-America selections and as Ryan and I have both mentioned, Edwards being an HM is not a knock on him with the amount of talent at forwards and centers last season. It was a thick crop of players - probably the deepest at that position in a number of years. He was an All-American Honorable Mention - considering how many players there are in Division III, that ain't bad.

Not sure why you mention that Marietta beat Wooster the last three times, now... I thought Marietta would beat Wooster in that game. I did say I didn't think the wins would be easy and that I didn't think they would win both games - I actually thought they would lose to CNU going in to the season. But I made sure that Marietta and CNU played each other at the Hoopsville Classic because I knew it could potentially be an outstanding game and a match-up of what many thought would have been an elite eight game last year. No brainer match-up. It was the only game we didn't change while going through five or six different versions of the schedule for this year's event. But again, we all know they have beaten Wooster three times now... I didn't actually say I thought they would lose to Wooster - heck, I argued that playing at Marietta was a benefit and after the Hoopsville Classic I thought Wooster was in deep trouble. The only thing I could foresee, and Jon Vander Wal said it to me as well, was that Marietta might overlook Wooster because of the CNU game. They clearly didn't and that is a testament to them. No one is arguing Marietta isn't a good team.

As for the weakness comment... I have no idea what you are trying to say.

Per your last question, we could go in circles on this... because how many teams won 25+ games the previous two years, lost three or more players that were part of those teams, returned one outstanding player, etc., etc., etc. ... we could show plenty of examples if you really look at all the data. Not to mention the fact, parity in Division III has made the Top 25 rather muddy. Voters are clearly all over the place which says a lot for how many good teams there are now in Division III. There are no "great" teams necessarily (though, last year showed a few rise to the top), but there are a ton of good teams. The difference between teams in the Top 25 poll on any given weak is razor thin. It probably isn't a surprise anymore that a #17 can beat a #2 (though, the margin in that game was a surprise). Five years ago... that would have been more shocking.

Marietta lost to John Carroll twice last season with that team - many voters felt JCU would be the better squad and with those players gone Marietta would still be good, but might not be as good especially considering that team wasn't able to get past Gwynedd-Mercy even though Edwards was on the floor for that game. That is probably why Marietta was down at 17 (their point total is an average of 22, I would contend that is too low; I had them 16). It is a fair assessment. Remember, they are still ranked. Only 5.5% of Division III teams can say they are in the Top 25 in any given week. Marietta is part of that conversation. Don't worry about where they are positioned right now. They aren't being ignored. They will move up in this week's poll. Enjoy it.

[HOPEful]

...Moving a team dramatically up and down a poll is something that seems hard to do for a lot of voters. Even I have struggled with the idea especially early in a season when you don't have enough data on all the teams involved....

Although I can understand this logic, I think the one exception should be between the preseason rankings and the 1st "actual" rankings. Preseason is a guess based on the year(s) prior and expectations. No one has a better resume right now than Marietta and not moving them up because a team ahead of them didn't lose is rediculous. Although I agree that voters should be blowing up their rankings every week, if ever there is a week to do so, it's between the preseason and week 1.