Posters' Poll

[KnightSlappy]

I'm assuming it's safe to at least discuss our ballots. Who else didn't vote for St. Thomas #1?

I'm betting they will be unanimous. 2-5 may be the questionable area. I couldn't put Woo as #2 after their championship game play, and thought Midd deserved to be there based on their performance against the same team that whupped Woo. I had six new teams enter the poll, five of which I never gave thought to at all during the year, even when compiling my list of prospective candidates. I looked at every league before the first and then the fifth poll for candidates and 4 of the 5 newbies weren't even on my radar. My top 11 were the same at the D3 poll, with 2-3 and 7-8 switched.   

I know they won't be unanimous, because I had them at #3. And Wooster at #6.

[John Gleich]

If this keeps being pushed off, I might be able to get one in too

[Mr. Ypsi]

POSTERS' POLL - FINAL 2011

1.  St Thomas        248 (unanimous, except one 3)
2.  Wooster           229 (2,2,2,2,3,3,3,3,5,6)
3.  Middlebury        226 (2,2,2,2,3,3,3,5,6,6)
4.  Williams            224 (1.2.3.4,4,4,4,4,4,5)
5.  Whitworth        212 (3,4,4,4,5,5,5,6,6,6)
6.  UWSP               209 (2,4,5,5,5,5,6,6,6,7)
7.  Amherst           185 (6,7,7,7,7,7,8,8,9,9)
8.  Augustana       178 (7,7,8,8,8,8,8,8,9,11)
9.  St. Mary's         166 (7,8,9,9,9,9,10,10,10,13)
10 Va Wes             164 (7,8,9,9,10,10,10,10,10,13)
11 Randy Mac        138 (9,11,11,11,11,11,12,15,15,16)
12 Marietta            129 (10,11,11,11,12,12,12,13.15.24)
13 Rochester         118 (10,12,13,14,14,14,14,15,17,19)
14 Hope                  84 (12,13,13,17,18,18,19,20,23,23)
15 EMU                   78 (12,12,13,14,18,20,21,23,23,-)
16 RIC                     75 (13,14,15,15,17,18,20,21,-,-)
17 Manchester         70 (14,16,16,17,17,18,20,21,25,-)
18 Chapman            67 (12,15,18,19,19,20,20,22,23,25)
19 Cabrini                55 (13,13,16,18,21,23,24,25,-,-)
20 F&M                    42 (15,17,18,19,21,25,25,-,-,-)
21 Buff St                 41 (16,16,19,20,21,23,-,-,-,-)
22 St. Norbert          39 (12,17,18,22,22,-,-,-,-,-)
23 UMHB                  38 (16,16,19,20,21,-,-,-,-,-)
24 UWRF                  37 (15,16,18,21,24,25,-,-,-,-)
25 WPI                    32 (14,17,20,24,24,25,-,-,-,-)

26 IWU                    31 (17,19,21,22,22,24)
27 Oswego              20 (14,19,25)
28 Witt                    19 (11,23,25)
29 W. Conn            15 (15,22)
30 Carleton             13 (21,22,22)
31 Ferrum               12 (14)
t32 Alvernia              11 (19,22)
t32 Luther                11 (17,24)
34 Wabash              10 (16)
35 Centre                  8 (20,24)
36 Becker                  6 (22,24)
t37 Concordia           3 (23)
t37 Ramapo               3 (23)
39 LaRoche                2 (24)
40 SUNY-Purchase      1

[nescac1]

Wow, St. Thomas at number 3?  I don't see how you can justify that after winning a national title in dominant fashion in the title game, and beating some damn good teams on the road to Salem.  I put Midd at number two, considering how strong their entire body of work was (zero bad losses) and how close they came to beating St. Thomas, but I can't think of any team who deserves to be ranked above St. Thomas or Midd.  Not Stevens Point, who St. Thomas beat twice.  Not Wooster, Midd or Williams, due to Final Four results.  Certainly not Whitworth, who had very few impressive wins all year long (and no wins over any top-ten teams).  

Edit: Looking now it seems you put Williams at number 1, which I am happy to see of course, but ultimately, St. Thomas was the best team at the Final Four, and deserves a top ranking. 

[ScotsFan]

I'm assuming it's safe to at least discuss our ballots. Who else didn't vote for St. Thomas #1?

I'm betting they will be unanimous. 2-5 may be the questionable area. I couldn't put Woo as #2 after their championship game play, and thought Midd deserved to be there based on their performance against the same team that whupped Woo. I had six new teams enter the poll, five of which I never gave thought to at all during the year, even when compiling my list of prospective candidates. I looked at every league before the first and then the fifth poll for candidates and 4 of the 5 newbies weren't even on my radar. My top 11 were the same at the D3 poll, with 2-3 and 7-8 switched.   

I know they won't be unanimous, because I had them at #3. And Wooster at #6.

Could you please explain to me how you ranked the team that just won the NC in dominating fashion #3?  And they did so by beating the #2, #3 and #5 teams in the country on their path to winning said NC.  Who, may I ask, did you have ranked ahead of STU despite the fact that they didn't do what STU did and that is win the NCAA Tournament while beating some very good teams along the way in doing so?

And Woo at #6?  Wooster makes it all the way to the championship game and they DROP in the rankngs in your eyes?  Yes, Woo's performance in the NC game was disappointing, but I don't know how you could overlook their wins over the previously #1 and #4 ranked teams in the country on their way to making the championship game.  And I'd argue the energy that Wooster used (both physically and mentally) in their epic comeback victory over Williams may have had a little to do with their less than stellar performance vs. STU in the championship game. 

[KnightSlappy]

Unfortunately, losses to Hamline, St. Olaf, and Carleton still count in my book.

Williams, my #1, didn't have a loss outside of my Top 6.

Middlebury (my #2) only lost to my #1 Williams and my #3 St. Thomas, but they didn't have as difficult of a schedule as Williams did.

Wooster wasn't tested during the season as well as the teams above them were. They played tough games in the tournament, but so did everyone else. They also got an advantage by playing Whitworth at home.

Why people put so much stock into tournament results mystifies me.

[KnightSlappy]

And Woo at #6?  Wooster makes it all the way to the championship game and they DROP in the rankngs in your eyes? 

Nope, I had them at #7 going into the tournament. They moved up.

[John Gleich]

Why people put so much stock into tournament results mystifies me.

I know, it isn't like they issue a trophy at the end of it and declare a national champion or anything...   

[KnightSlappy]

Why people put so much stock into tournament results mystifies me.

I know, it isn't like they issue a trophy at the end of it and declare a national champion or anything...   

Are we running the poll to find out who just won the NC? If so I quit. 

Or are we trying to decide who the best team is? Sometimes the best team doesn't win, right? Like if you replayed the entire tournament over again starting this weekend, would St. Thomas win? Would they be more likely to win than Middlebury? Or Whitworth or Williams or even Wooster or Stevens Point?

What if we changed the locations to give all deserving teams the home court. RMC and Whitworth would get more home games. UWSP would have played some home games. Would that change the results?

Can you definitively tell me that UST is better than Middlebury because of a two point win?

[ziggy]

Why people put so much stock into tournament results mystifies me.

I know, it isn't like they issue a trophy at the end of it and declare a national champion or anything...   

Are we running the poll to find out who just won the NC? If so I quit. 

Or are we trying to decide who the best team is? Sometimes the best team doesn't win, right? Like if you replayed the entire tournament over again starting this weekend, would St. Thomas win? Would they be more likely to win than Middlebury? Or Whitworth or Williams or even Wooster or Stevens Point?

What if we changed the locations to give all deserving teams the home court. RMC and Whitworth would get more home games. UWSP would have played some home games. Would that change the results?

Can you definitively tell me that UST is better than Middlebury because of a two point win?

The Maui invitational is stacked next year. The NCAA should cancel the rest of the DI season because the presumed best teams will have already played a tournament.

[ScotsFan]

Why people put so much stock into tournament results mystifies me.

I know, it isn't like they issue a trophy at the end of it and declare a national champion or anything...   

Yeah.  I missed the part where Williams was awarded a trophy for not losing to a team outside of the top 6... 

And I'm sorry, but to say Wooster wasn't tested is a bit of an understatement if you ask me.  Their only regular season losses came at the hands of ranked teams which they also had wins over those teams as well, splitting with both Witt and Wabash.  And I guess not being tested sure hurt them in their run to the championship game...

Can you definitively tell me that UST is better than Middlebury because of a two point win?

Ummm. Is that not why they play the games?  Maybe we should just stop playing games and just use RPI's and SOS's and whatever other computer generated formulas out there? 

UST may not be 'definitvely' better than Midd, but unfortunately for Midd, the Tommies were better when it counted.  UST beat Midd head to head on a neutral floor, therefore I am going to presume in my mind that STU is the better team.  Period.  Likewise, Wooster beat Williams head to head on a nuetral floor.  Therefore I would have to presume that Wooster is a better team.  Period.  So on and so forth...  I'm not in the business of presuming who would beat who in a best of 7 series or under different home court circumstances or whatever other scenarios you come up with in trying to justify why you would rank 2 teams that lost in the national semis ahead of the team that acutally won the tournament and beat one of those teams head to head?! 

Personally, I think this year's Final 4 was a pretty darn good reflection of truly the 4 best teams in the country.  As I said above, STU knocked off previously #2 Midd, #3 UWSP and #5 Wooster on their path to a championship.  Wooster knocked of previously #1 Whitworth and #4 Williams on their path to the championship game.  And Midd and Williams were the #2 and #4 ranked teams coming into the tournament and they lived up to their rankings by making it to Salem.  Not too bad of a represnentation if you ask me no matter how you want to pick apart how they got there...

[Gregory Sager]

I understand where you're coming from, O Dean, but I think that there is a qualitative difference between tournament games and regular season games, just as within the regular season there are qualitative differences between conference games and non-conference games. How do I know this? Because generations of basketball players have told me how the higher stakes and the win-or-go-home setup in March amp everything and everyone up and make it harder to play under control, much less win, in a tournament game than a regular-season game, all other factors being equal.

How much of a qualitative difference there is is certainly subject to debate, but I think that the difference is there.

Not all basketball games are created equal.

[ziggy]

Yeah.  I missed the part where Williams was awarded a trophy for not losing to a team outside of the top 6... 

And I'm sorry, but to say Wooster wasn't tested is a bit of an understatement if you ask me.  Their only regular season losses came at the hands of ranked teams which they also had wins over those teams as well, splitting with both Witt and Wabash.  And I guess not being tested sure hurt them in their run to the championship game...

I missed the part where KS argued against St. Thomas as the national champion. Does a tournament prove who the best team is or does it provide a clean ending to the season and crown a generally acceptable champion? A top 25 is a ranking of the 25 best teams in the country as determined by the individual voter by his or her criteria of what "best" means. That #1 may or may not be the team that won the tournament.

Can you definitively tell me that UST is better than Middlebury because of a two point win?

Ummm. Is that not why they play the games?  Maybe we should just stop playing games and just use RPI's and SOS's and whatever other computer generated formulas out there? 

It wouldn't take a computer to spit out an RPI or SOS if there weren't any games... The games play a pretty important role in their computation. 


Sorry, I can't resist the urge to egg this debate on!

[Flying Dutch Fan]

poll

–noun
1. a sampling or collection of opinions on a subject, taken from either a selected or a random group of persons, as for the purpose of analysis.

[KnightSlappy]

I understand where you're coming from, O Dean, but I think that there is a qualitative difference between tournament games and regular season games, just as within the regular season there are qualitative differences between conference games and non-conference games. How do I know this? Because generations of basketball players have told me how the higher stakes and the win-or-go-home setup in March amp everything and everyone up and make it harder to play under control, much less win, in a tournament game than a regular-season game, all other factors being equal.

How much of a qualitative difference there is is certainly subject to debate, but I think that the difference is there.

Not all basketball games are created equal.

Wow, so it should have been easier for UST to play under control and win against St. Olaf, Hamline, and Carleton then. Should knocked them down more for not doing so.