Top 25 talk

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

With so many of the highly ranked teams taking a recent loss, or losses, the next poll should be highly interesting!   

Should blow it up and start over, with a bigger emphasis on quality wins and not getting so hung up about who took a random loss to another good team by a couple of points.

I'll be starting to work on my ballot in about twenty minutes or so. I don't typically blow up the whole thing at this time of year, but I probably will be today, just because things have been so unpredictable.  As always, I'll use any many sources of information as possible to gauge which teams I think are the best.

[me]

With so many of the highly ranked teams taking a recent loss, or losses, the next poll should be highly interesting!   

Should blow it up and start over, with a bigger emphasis on quality wins and not getting so hung up about who took a random loss to another good team by a couple of points.

I'll be starting to work on my ballot in about twenty minutes or so. I don't typically blow up the whole thing at this time of year, but I probably will be today, just because things have been so unpredictable.  As always, I'll use any many sources of information as possible to gauge which teams I think are the best.

All anyone can ask. It happens. I've been there in high school rankings when I used to have votes in that.

I hope all the voters do the same thing.

One example among several: for me John Carroll and Baldwin Wallace should be ranked ahead of Marietta until further evidence reveals itself. Better records, strong schedules, and won on the road.

When basically everyone has losses, the quality of wins becomes even more important. Pretty much everyone has shown they can have a bad night and lose.

[Titan Q]

Regarding the CCIW, I believe IWU should be the 2nd team voters are looking at (behind Augustana).  North Central (9-4, 3-2) was the only other CCIW team to get votes in the Week #5 poll, but IWU (11-3, 4-1) won at North Central.  With IWU's win vs Augustana this week, it seems IWU should clearly be the CCIW team with the second most poll points.

Good Wins
at Wheaton
at North Central
vs #2-Augustana
vs Elmhurst

Losses
vs Carthage
vs #10-Wash U
at Emory

[WUPHF]

It seems to me that the IWU loss to Emory will end up being a loss to a ranked Emory after tomorrow.

[me]

I like where this is going. Hopefully more people chime in with teams they think are being overlooked.

I'll give another I referenced earlier: Augsburg. I reserve the right to regret this in 26 or so hours.

[FCGrizzliesGrad]

We're reviving the Posters Poll so if you think certain polls are wrong, why not show it by providing your own ballot? We're hoping for at least 10 and we're well on our way to that.
AndOne? me? smed?

[Smitty Oom]

I like where this is going. Hopefully more people chime in with teams they think are being overlooked.

I'll give another I referenced earlier: Augsburg. I reserve the right to regret this in 26 or so hours.

I mentioned it on the MIAC page but they have quite the week... 3 games. Bethel, St. Johns and St. Thomas.

I agree with you, they are tough and physical on D and have multiple above average scorers on offense. Good wins against Wart, Loras and Bethel.

Carleton, who lost their last MIAC game in 360 days (The followers of The Belt^TM should remember their run quite fondly from last year) is also a solid MIAC team that should be gaining votes instead of Bethel IMO.

Me, you should join the Posters Poll that Grizz referenced!

[me]

We're reviving the Posters Poll so if you think certain polls are wrong, why not show it by providing your own ballot? We're hoping for at least 10 and we're well on our way to that.
AndOne? me? smed?

Where do we submit? And when? I might give it a shot. Can I just copy and paste the Massey top 25?

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

I like where this is going. Hopefully more people chime in with teams they think are being overlooked.

I'll give another I referenced earlier: Augsburg. I reserve the right to regret this in 26 or so hours.

I got you on that one; they're getting a few points from me.

With so many of the highly ranked teams taking a recent loss, or losses, the next poll should be highly interesting!   

Should blow it up and start over, with a bigger emphasis on quality wins and not getting so hung up about who took a random loss to another good team by a couple of points.

I'll be starting to work on my ballot in about twenty minutes or so. I don't typically blow up the whole thing at this time of year, but I probably will be today, just because things have been so unpredictable.  As always, I'll use any many sources of information as possible to gauge which teams I think are the best.

All anyone can ask. It happens. I've been there in high school rankings when I used to have votes in that.

I hope all the voters do the same thing.

One example among several: for me John Carroll and Baldwin Wallace should be ranked ahead of Marietta until further evidence reveals itself. Better records, strong schedules, and won on the road.

When basically everyone has losses, the quality of wins becomes even more important. Pretty much everyone has shown they can have a bad night and lose.

Here we'll have to agree to disagree.  I've seen Marietta in person.  I watched most of both the JCU loss and the B-W loss.  At no point did I think the team that won was the better team.  It just didn't look that way.  Marietta has some losses I don't like, but none of them are bad - not a single one.  The other two both have bad losses, excusable maybe, but that factors in.  I've got Marietta very near the bottom of my Top 25 and Baldwin Wallace just outside it.  I'm going to need to see a larger body of work from them.  I do think, though, that the OAC has four teams capable of winning games in the national tournament, which is pretty impressive.

[Smitty Oom]

We're reviving the Posters Poll so if you think certain polls are wrong, why not show it by providing your own ballot? We're hoping for at least 10 and we're well on our way to that.
AndOne? me? smed?

Where do we submit? And when? I might give it a shot. Can I just copy and paste the Massey top 25?

You can post any top 25 you want! We would post the ranks in the "Poster Poll" thread on the Multi-Regional topic. Grizz posted the link in that message. We would post a new set of rankings  each week, preferably on Monday!

[FCGrizzliesGrad]

We're reviving the Posters Poll so if you think certain polls are wrong, why not show it by providing your own ballot? We're hoping for at least 10 and we're well on our way to that.
AndOne? me? smed?

Where do we submit? And when? I might give it a shot. Can I just copy and paste the Massey top 25?

You can post any top 25 you want! We would post the ranks in the "Poster Poll" thread on the Multi-Regional topic. Grizz posted the link in that message. We would post a new set of rankings  each week, preferably on Monday!

You would PM your ballot to me and then I'd compile and post the results. Here's how the final football poll looked for reference. I don't reveal who voted for who but voters are free to reveal their ballot if they wish.

[me]

I like where this is going. Hopefully more people chime in with teams they think are being overlooked.

I'll give another I referenced earlier: Augsburg. I reserve the right to regret this in 26 or so hours.

I mentioned it on the MIAC page but they have quite the week... 3 games. Bethel, St. Johns and St. Thomas.

I agree with you, they are tough and physical on D and have multiple above average scorers on offense. Good wins against Wart, Loras and Bethel.

Carleton, who lost their last MIAC game in 360 days (The followers of The Belt^TM should remember their run quite fondly from last year) is also a solid MIAC team that should be gaining votes instead of Bethel IMO.

Me, you should join the Posters Poll that Grizz referenced!

I know the kid made a decision to try to further his basketball career, but I can't help but think what might have been for Carleton. They would be such a handful. As they stand, I'm not sure where they slot in. 2-6 is basically up in the air for me, but they're all good.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

me - your attacks (and I see them as such) on the Top 25 voters for not voting how you see fit not withstanding, I post by ballot nearly every week. You are welcome to read it. You might find some info in there a bit ... surprising. You assertion that voters aren't doing certain things would be proven wrong in many cases.

My opinion about Massey and Bennett (the other ranking system in DIII) is that I find them helpful in reminding me of teams I am either overlooking or overbuying, but I don't find they have enough data to rely on at this time. I but into them not for a few more weeks - kind of like why we don't get earlier regional rankings because the SOS can vary wildly from game to game, week to week. They are helpful for me in making me look (or re-look) at teams, but I am not going to suddenly change how I vote because I have a team 20th and Massey has them 5th (a made-up example, not intended to be a real scenario). Or rather, Massey has them in the Top 10 and I don't even have them on my ballot.

You would actually be amazed at how many teams are ranked high in the overall Top 25 that aren't getting any votes from me. I am amazed myself. I am either way off this year or everyone else is.

But that last part isn't it, actually.

Someone said something like the following a few pages back - we have a wide open season currently and 25 voters are trying to make head and tails about it. We have teams who were either slowly building to better and better seasons or others who have come out of nowhere in the conversation with ridiculously gaudy records that now have to be evaluated, or re-evaluated, against another group of teams we all know are good and have been for some time.

I understand that people don't want "history" to play a role, but when I look at Ohio Wesleyan, I understand the talents of Nate Axelrod and others because they have been in this conversation in the past. I know how Mike DeWitt is as a coach and I can make some fair evaluations on how good, or off, the team is at any given moment during the season. In comparison, I have struggled for a few weeks now with Emory & Henry. They have some darn good results to teams whose resumes are improving themselves. (I dismissed their loss to Wooster, but the Scots are now 10-3 and making me re-evaluate E&H and others including Wooster themselves.) I don't E&H's team as well. They aren't that far removed from 4 and 5-win seasons. Their coach, a former DIII player, seems to have them tracking in the right direction, but I don't really know them well. They were under the radar, though third in the ODAC last season... but that doesn't mean voters know what they bring to the table. It is hard to buy in with so much unknown - and very hard to learn in 24-36 hours (the window to vote each week).

As a result, voters have a lot in front of them and saying they should just trust in Massey (or Bennett) and move on isn't fair to the process. Those two systems can't account for players being ill for a loss that voters know would have been different otherwise. Just as those two systems can weed through some of the stuff that voters may glaze over. As Ryan stated earlier, voters should have the ability to use as much information as they want to make logical choices and if they don't vote the same way a computer system spits out rankings they shouldn't be criticized for it.

Saying you figured out the system that losses are taken too seriously over quality wins is an interesting point (and again, read my blog), but your "attack" towards voters for doing so isn't helpful. I have stated for years (again... read my blog) that voters seem to ding teams for losses more than maybe the collective should. I have used ranked teams playing as a great example. The lower ranked team is expected to lose and suddenly drop three spots after a loss to a higher ranked team as if it was a surprise.

However, I will also say that for a long time in Division III, losses were a significant indicator. Only in the last two, maybe three, years including this season have we seen so many losses throughout the Top 25 and beyond. It was a surprising move when I did NOT remove Augustana from #1 after they lost a few seasons ago. The normal reaction was to do that because the top team(s) in the country tended to go into the NCAA tournament undefeated or with a single loss. Now-a-days with parity as thick as it is, losses are starting to become common-place and I think the voting panel is adjusting. It takes time to adjust how one votes because it takes time to understand the landscape has changed.

I remember when I barely used to move teams in my Top 10 and moved a lot in 15-25. I have to physically get out of my habits these days and be willing to make drastic changes each week. It is against my norm, because the norm has changed. It isn't easy to do when you worked in a system that worked for you. We can thank the fact Division III has gotten so much better and now each night brings terrific basketball.

Feel free to make suggestions, ask questions, and debate the Top 25 and teams in, out, or misplaced... but let's not make comments like voters are mailing it in. It simply isn't the case. And to have it from someone who clearly has never put a Top 25 ballot together (at least in Division III)... it just seems like an attack.

[me]

I like where this is going. Hopefully more people chime in with teams they think are being overlooked.

I'll give another I referenced earlier: Augsburg. I reserve the right to regret this in 26 or so hours.

I got you on that one; they're getting a few points from me.

With so many of the highly ranked teams taking a recent loss, or losses, the next poll should be highly interesting!   

Should blow it up and start over, with a bigger emphasis on quality wins and not getting so hung up about who took a random loss to another good team by a couple of points.

I'll be starting to work on my ballot in about twenty minutes or so. I don't typically blow up the whole thing at this time of year, but I probably will be today, just because things have been so unpredictable.  As always, I'll use any many sources of information as possible to gauge which teams I think are the best.

All anyone can ask. It happens. I've been there in high school rankings when I used to have votes in that.

I hope all the voters do the same thing.

One example among several: for me John Carroll and Baldwin Wallace should be ranked ahead of Marietta until further evidence reveals itself. Better records, strong schedules, and won on the road.

When basically everyone has losses, the quality of wins becomes even more important. Pretty much everyone has shown they can have a bad night and lose.

Here we'll have to agree to disagree.  I've seen Marietta in person.  I watched most of both the JCU loss and the B-W loss.  At no point did I think the team that won was the better team.  It just didn't look that way.  Marietta has some losses I don't like, but none of them are bad - not a single one.  The other two both have bad losses, excusable maybe, but that factors in.  I've got Marietta very near the bottom of my Top 25 and Baldwin Wallace just outside it.  I'm going to need to see a larger body of work from them.  I do think, though, that the OAC has four teams capable of winning games in the national tournament, which is pretty impressive.

For me they've gotta prove it on the court. Marietta might have some bigtime talent, but you can't drop games like that at home. The BW game I can see basically counting as a null, but they just got beat by John Carroll. They all 4 have similar schedule strength. I don't see much difference there.

And the more we see of St. Thomas, the more that looks like not as great a win as it seemed. Less like 'wow maybe St. Thomas is pretty good' to 'hrm maybe Marietta's not so great'.

So I dunno. I feel like if I was BW or JCU, I would feel pretty hard done to be ranked below Marietta, but I don't imagine they're too concerned since they control their own destiny in the league. I also don't think John Carroll's losses are bad. Mount Union and Hope have both played very strong schedules. Mount had a couple of rough ones early but not many are going to win at ONU, Hope or BW. That's what I mean about focusing too much on losses. Most of Hope's losses are similarly crazy -- I don't know how smart scheduling two different WIAC road games back to back was, but they did it. And they'd probably 4-2 in the OAC too if they played a couple more of them

I don't mean to just pick on Marietta and the OAC, just one of a few things that stands out to me as odd.

[me]

me - your attacks (and I see them as such)

No one else seems to have reacted to them as an attack. On the contrary it seems like I've started a conversation and lit a fire a bit.

That's all I'm really going to say about that.

I can understand the hesitancy on Emory & Henry. The number of gimmes on their early schedule makes it tough to figure what they are.