East Region Fan Poll

[dlippiel]

Kean didn't really beat Cortland, in other words.  Did Kean really beat Trenton St. TCNJ?

Kean did beat Cortland, but they beat Cortland without their best ****in player. That means something and should be accounted for regarding a teams actual strength vs their strength without their star player. Maybe dlip took it into consideration too much, point taken, but it deserved consideration none the less. And if one feels a team is at the same strength when they are playing without their star player than they are not dipping both ****in oars into the water when trying to paddle up stream. Hence if one were to say Rochester is clearly a better overall team than RPI without Herman, dlip would agree because that was taken care of on the field. Yet, if you came to dlip and said Rochester would have still won even if RPI had Herman, one could disagree, because they haven't beaten RPI when Herman (a 3 time LL rookie of the week) was playing. So dlip feels injuries and missing players must be accounted for, especially when those players are returning to the line-up that same year.

Not sure I agree with the arguement that head to head match ups only matters if you beat someone with all of the players.  A win is a win...everyone goes through injuries.  As bad as Wick's defense was last year in the Brockport game...Wick doesn't get a pass simply because Tomaino and the starting ILB and FS were all out by the second series of the first quarter.

If I came on here and argued that it didn't really matter because we put up 68 points...and that the 70 points shouldn't count as we had "guys out", I would get destroyed...and rightfully so.  I believe we would have won the game going away if everyone was healthy and playing all 4 quarters...and that we would have given up far fewer points as we obviously weren't that deep.  But the problem is they weren't in the game...and we gave up 70. Injuries are part of the game...and head to head match ups should count above and beyond everything else.

Again, it is not that the W does not ****in count, dlip does not recall KS, dlip, or anyone else saying that. When you are ranking teams you are reviewing SOS, W's and L's,  as well as any other factors that have to do with a teams performance, and/or lack there of. All dlip is saying (maybe KS too, dlip does not want to speak for him) is that if a key player, or players miss a game you MUST take that into account not only regarding that teams performance but also in weighing the W by the oppoisng team. dlip is baffled that this seems to be a hard ****ing concept for others to understand. If you simply rank teams by W's and L's and nothing else you are missing the bus. **** an NEFC team may be in the top five then of national polls.

[Jonny Utah]

Ithaca did not attempt to run the ball outside against Union.  Therefore, they were without their outside run game.  Therefore, Ithaca is better than Union.

[SJFF82]

I still have Cortland above Kean.  Yes Kean beat Cortland but that was the first week w/out Pitcher.  Cortland has also been a proven contender and is still pretty strong.  Kean has started out strong before and proven to be a tease.  Basically I gave Cortland the benefit of doubt so far.

You gave Cortland the benefit of what doubt, relative to 3-1 Kean?  Kean beat Cortland head-to-head.  There is no doubting that.  Kean's only loss is to 3-1 Del Val, whose only loss is to unbeaten Wesley. 

I don't understand poll voter psychology.

And Fisher's only losses are to God and a good Salisbury team on the road whose only losses are to Christopher Newport in 3 ot and a higher division team in Carolina......this 'he' beat him, and him beat her, so we beat them next logic doesnt work and you know that....

Having not read the poll comments I ranked Cortland ahead of Kean as well knowing the head to head result.  Isnt it possible for the better team to lose? 

[PBR...]

Kean didn't really beat Cortland, in other words.  Did Kean really beat Trenton St. TCNJ?

Kean did beat Cortland, but they beat Cortland without their best ****in player. That means something and should be accounted for regarding a teams actual strength vs their strength without their star player. Maybe dlip took it into consideration too much, point taken, but it deserved consideration none the less. And if one feels a team is at the same strength when they are playing without their star player than they are not dipping both ****in oars into the water when trying to paddle up stream. Hence if one were to say Rochester is clearly a better overall team than RPI without Herman, dlip would agree because that was taken care of on the field. Yet, if you came to dlip and said Rochester would have still won even if RPI had Herman, one could disagree, because they haven't beaten RPI when Herman (a 3 time LL rookie of the week) was playing. So dlip feels injuries and missing players must be accounted for, especially when those players are returning to the line-up that same year.

Not sure I agree with the arguement that head to head match ups only matters if you beat someone with all of the players.  A win is a win...everyone goes through injuries.  As bad as Wick's defense was last year in the Brockport game...Wick doesn't get a pass simply because Tomaino and the starting ILB and FS were all out by the second series of the first quarter.

If I came on here and argued that it didn't really matter because we put up 68 points...and that the 70 points shouldn't count as we had "guys out", I would get destroyed...and rightfully so.  I believe we would have won the game going away if everyone was healthy and playing all 4 quarters...and that we would have given up far fewer points as we obviously weren't that deep.  But the problem is they weren't in the game...and we gave up 70. Injuries are part of the game...and head to head match ups should count above and beyond everything else.

Again, it is not that the W does not ****in count, dlip does not recall KS, dlip, or anyone else saying that. When you are ranking teams you are reviewing SOS, W's and L's,  as well as any other factors that have to do with a teams performance, and/or lack there of. All dlip is saying (maybe KS too, dlip does not want to speak for him) is that if a key player, or players miss a game you MUST take that into account not only regarding that teams performance but also in weighing the W by the oppoisng team. dlip is baffled that this seems to be a hard ****ing concept for others to understand. If you simply rank teams by W's and L's and nothing else you are missing the bus. **** an NEFC team may be in the top five then of national polls.

this is good debate stuff.... just to play devils advocate here...what about settling it on the field rather than the polls? bottom line is kean beat them on the field and injuries are part of the game. what if cortlands qb rather than getting hurt had a bad game and throws 5 ints? what if weather was a factor? what would u do then? there are lots of ifs/ands/buts...to pbr if cortland is a good team they overcome injuries. i.e. see florida w/ tebow out they won last weekend and may have to play lsu this weekend w/o him.  
pbr is just sayin.... guess the question is yes cortland lost a good player but they still settled it on the field so how much weight does a pollster give to not having a good player? imho chances are you would see a lot of different weightings by different pollsters and what your seeing right here now

[Knightstalker]

Kean didn't really beat Cortland, in other words.  Did Kean really beat Trenton St. TCNJ?

Kean did beat Cortland, but they beat Cortland without their best ****in player. That means something and should be accounted for regarding a teams actual strength vs their strength without their star player. Maybe dlip took it into consideration too much, point taken, but it deserved consideration none the less. And if one feels a team is at the same strength when they are playing without their star player than they are not dipping both ****in oars into the water when trying to paddle up stream. Hence if one were to say Rochester is clearly a better overall team than RPI without Herman, dlip would agree because that was taken care of on the field. Yet, if you came to dlip and said Rochester would have still won even if RPI had Herman, one could disagree, because they haven't beaten RPI when Herman (a 3 time LL rookie of the week) was playing. So dlip feels injuries and missing players must be accounted for, especially when those players are returning to the line-up that same year.

Not sure I agree with the arguement that head to head match ups only matters if you beat someone with all of the players.  A win is a win...everyone goes through injuries.  As bad as Wick's defense was last year in the Brockport game...Wick doesn't get a pass simply because Tomaino and the starting ILB and FS were all out by the second series of the first quarter.

If I came on here and argued that it didn't really matter because we put up 68 points...and that the 70 points shouldn't count as we had "guys out", I would get destroyed...and rightfully so.  I believe we would have won the game going away if everyone was healthy and playing all 4 quarters...and that we would have given up far fewer points as we obviously weren't that deep.  But the problem is they weren't in the game...and we gave up 70. Injuries are part of the game...and head to head match ups should count above and beyond everything else.

Again, it is not that the W does not ****in count, dlip does not recall KS, dlip, or anyone else saying that. When you are ranking teams you are reviewing SOS, W's and L's,  as well as any other factors that have to do with a teams performance, and/or lack there of. All dlip is saying (maybe KS too, dlip does not want to speak for him) is that if a key player, or players miss a game you MUST take that into account not only regarding that teams performance but also in weighing the W by the oppoisng team. dlip is baffled that this seems to be a hard ****ing concept for others to understand. If you simply rank teams by W's and L's and nothing else you are missing the bus. **** an NEFC team may be in the top five then of national polls.

KS agrees with Dlipp regarding a key player missing a game.  Yes head to head matters but is not the only criteria, if it was the poll would change completely almost every week and we would basically be using the Poll that Pep linked to.  KS also did not hit Rowan as hard for their loss to Cortland because Rowans starting QB was out that game.  With him KS thinks Rowan may be the best team in the NJAC.  Also KS did not have Kean in his top ten last week and Cortland was still high in the rankings, I am not going to drop a team down far enough to put a previously unranked team ahead based on a head to head victory two or three weeks before.  Kean got in because of the way they shut down the TCNJ offense last week, they were KS number 13 team previously.  This is the same reason Albright did not leap way up in the rankings.

Finally, plenty of people criticizing, but how many are taking the time to do a poll weekly?  KS wl always come on and defend his rankings and say where KS ranked teams.  This weeks poll shows KS picks in the second column.

[SJFF82]

Ithaca did not attempt to run the ball outside against Union.  Therefore, they were without their outside run game.  Therefore, Ithaca is better than Union.

Fisher was without 'a prayer' against MUC, so because they had no prayer to beat them, they are better than them?   Is this correct JU?

[PBR...]

Kean didn't really beat Cortland, in other words.  Did Kean really beat Trenton St. TCNJ?

Kean did beat Cortland, but they beat Cortland without their best ****in player. That means something and should be accounted for regarding a teams actual strength vs their strength without their star player. Maybe dlip took it into consideration too much, point taken, but it deserved consideration none the less. And if one feels a team is at the same strength when they are playing without their star player than they are not dipping both ****in oars into the water when trying to paddle up stream. Hence if one were to say Rochester is clearly a better overall team than RPI without Herman, dlip would agree because that was taken care of on the field. Yet, if you came to dlip and said Rochester would have still won even if RPI had Herman, one could disagree, because they haven't beaten RPI when Herman (a 3 time LL rookie of the week) was playing. So dlip feels injuries and missing players must be accounted for, especially when those players are returning to the line-up that same year.

Not sure I agree with the arguement that head to head match ups only matters if you beat someone with all of the players.  A win is a win...everyone goes through injuries.  As bad as Wick's defense was last year in the Brockport game...Wick doesn't get a pass simply because Tomaino and the starting ILB and FS were all out by the second series of the first quarter.

If I came on here and argued that it didn't really matter because we put up 68 points...and that the 70 points shouldn't count as we had "guys out", I would get destroyed...and rightfully so.  I believe we would have won the game going away if everyone was healthy and playing all 4 quarters...and that we would have given up far fewer points as we obviously weren't that deep.  But the problem is they weren't in the game...and we gave up 70. Injuries are part of the game...and head to head match ups should count above and beyond everything else.

Again, it is not that the W does not ****in count, dlip does not recall KS, dlip, or anyone else saying that. When you are ranking teams you are reviewing SOS, W's and L's,  as well as any other factors that have to do with a teams performance, and/or lack there of. All dlip is saying (maybe KS too, dlip does not want to speak for him) is that if a key player, or players miss a game you MUST take that into account not only regarding that teams performance but also in weighing the W by the oppoisng team. dlip is baffled that this seems to be a hard ****ing concept for others to understand. If you simply rank teams by W's and L's and nothing else you are missing the bus. **** an NEFC team may be in the top five then of national polls.

KS agrees with Dlipp regarding a key player missing a game.  Yes head to head matters but is not the only criteria, if it was the poll would change completely almost every week and we would basically be using the Poll that Pep linked to.  KS also did not hit Rowan as hard for their loss to Cortland because Rowans starting QB was out that game.  With him KS thinks Rowan may be the best team in the NJAC.  Also KS did not have Kean in his top ten last week and Cortland was still high in the rankings, I am not going to drop a team down far enough to put a previously unranked team ahead based on a head to head victory two or three weeks before.  Kean got in because of the way they shut down the TCNJ offense last week, they were KS number 13 team previously.  This is the same reason Albright did not leap way up in the rankings.

Finally, plenty of people criticizing, but how many are taking the time to do a poll weekly?  KS wl always come on and defend his rankings and say where KS ranked teams.  This weeks poll shows KS picks in the second column.

pbr agrees w/ KS...it aint easy that is why everyone is seeing so much debate. stick to your guns you voted that was for a reason so stay w/ it. its actually good to see how everyone ranks teams and what weightings/reasons they give for a teams rankings. gives much more transparency.

[Knightstalker]

Kean didn't really beat Cortland, in other words.  Did Kean really beat Trenton St. TCNJ?

Kean did beat Cortland, but they beat Cortland without their best ****in player. That means something and should be accounted for regarding a teams actual strength vs their strength without their star player. Maybe dlip took it into consideration too much, point taken, but it deserved consideration none the less. And if one feels a team is at the same strength when they are playing without their star player than they are not dipping both ****in oars into the water when trying to paddle up stream. Hence if one were to say Rochester is clearly a better overall team than RPI without Herman, dlip would agree because that was taken care of on the field. Yet, if you came to dlip and said Rochester would have still won even if RPI had Herman, one could disagree, because they haven't beaten RPI when Herman (a 3 time LL rookie of the week) was playing. So dlip feels injuries and missing players must be accounted for, especially when those players are returning to the line-up that same year.

Not sure I agree with the arguement that head to head match ups only matters if you beat someone with all of the players.  A win is a win...everyone goes through injuries.  As bad as Wick's defense was last year in the Brockport game...Wick doesn't get a pass simply because Tomaino and the starting ILB and FS were all out by the second series of the first quarter.

If I came on here and argued that it didn't really matter because we put up 68 points...and that the 70 points shouldn't count as we had "guys out", I would get destroyed...and rightfully so.  I believe we would have won the game going away if everyone was healthy and playing all 4 quarters...and that we would have given up far fewer points as we obviously weren't that deep.  But the problem is they weren't in the game...and we gave up 70. Injuries are part of the game...and head to head match ups should count above and beyond everything else.

Again, it is not that the W does not ****in count, dlip does not recall KS, dlip, or anyone else saying that. When you are ranking teams you are reviewing SOS, W's and L's,  as well as any other factors that have to do with a teams performance, and/or lack there of. All dlip is saying (maybe KS too, dlip does not want to speak for him) is that if a key player, or players miss a game you MUST take that into account not only regarding that teams performance but also in weighing the W by the oppoisng team. dlip is baffled that this seems to be a hard ****ing concept for others to understand. If you simply rank teams by W's and L's and nothing else you are missing the bus. **** an NEFC team may be in the top five then of national polls.

KS agrees with Dlipp regarding a key player missing a game.  Yes head to head matters but is not the only criteria, if it was the poll would change completely almost every week and we would basically be using the Poll that Pep linked to.  KS also did not hit Rowan as hard for their loss to Cortland because Rowans starting QB was out that game.  With him KS thinks Rowan may be the best team in the NJAC.  Also KS did not have Kean in his top ten last week and Cortland was still high in the rankings, I am not going to drop a team down far enough to put a previously unranked team ahead based on a head to head victory two or three weeks before.  Kean got in because of the way they shut down the TCNJ offense last week, they were KS number 13 team previously.  This is the same reason Albright did not leap way up in the rankings.

Finally, plenty of people criticizing, but how many are taking the time to do a poll weekly?  KS wl always come on and defend his rankings and say where KS ranked teams.  This weeks poll shows KS picks in the second column.

pbr agrees w/ KS...it aint easy that is why everyone is seeing so much debate. stick to your guns you voted that was for a reason so stay w/ it. its actually good to see how everyone ranks teams and what weightings/reasons they give for a teams rankings. gives much more transparency.

KS will also state that some weeks he can devote more time and then he feels that he put out a better poll.

[Yanks 99]

Kean didn't really beat Cortland, in other words.  Did Kean really beat Trenton St. TCNJ?

Kean did beat Cortland, but they beat Cortland without their best ****in player. That means something and should be accounted for regarding a teams actual strength vs their strength without their star player. Maybe dlip took it into consideration too much, point taken, but it deserved consideration none the less. And if one feels a team is at the same strength when they are playing without their star player than they are not dipping both ****in oars into the water when trying to paddle up stream. Hence if one were to say Rochester is clearly a better overall team than RPI without Herman, dlip would agree because that was taken care of on the field. Yet, if you came to dlip and said Rochester would have still won even if RPI had Herman, one could disagree, because they haven't beaten RPI when Herman (a 3 time LL rookie of the week) was playing. So dlip feels injuries and missing players must be accounted for, especially when those players are returning to the line-up that same year.

Not sure I agree with the arguement that head to head match ups only matters if you beat someone with all of the players.  A win is a win...everyone goes through injuries.  As bad as Wick's defense was last year in the Brockport game...Wick doesn't get a pass simply because Tomaino and the starting ILB and FS were all out by the second series of the first quarter.

If I came on here and argued that it didn't really matter because we put up 68 points...and that the 70 points shouldn't count as we had "guys out", I would get destroyed...and rightfully so.  I believe we would have won the game going away if everyone was healthy and playing all 4 quarters...and that we would have given up far fewer points as we obviously weren't that deep.  But the problem is they weren't in the game...and we gave up 70. Injuries are part of the game...and head to head match ups should count above and beyond everything else.

Again, it is not that the W does not ****in count, dlip does not recall KS, dlip, or anyone else saying that. When you are ranking teams you are reviewing SOS, W's and L's,  as well as any other factors that have to do with a teams performance, and/or lack there of. All dlip is saying (maybe KS too, dlip does not want to speak for him) is that if a key player, or players miss a game you MUST take that into account not only regarding that teams performance but also in weighing the W by the oppoisng team. dlip is baffled that this seems to be a hard ****ing concept for others to understand. If you simply rank teams by W's and L's and nothing else you are missing the bus. **** an NEFC team may be in the top five then of national polls.

KS agrees with Dlipp regarding a key player missing a game.  Yes head to head matters but is not the only criteria, if it was the poll would change completely almost every week and we would basically be using the Poll that Pep linked to.  KS also did not hit Rowan as hard for their loss to Cortland because Rowans starting QB was out that game.  With him KS thinks Rowan may be the best team in the NJAC.  Also KS did not have Kean in his top ten last week and Cortland was still high in the rankings, I am not going to drop a team down far enough to put a previously unranked team ahead based on a head to head victory two or three weeks before.  Kean got in because of the way they shut down the TCNJ offense last week, they were KS number 13 team previously.  This is the same reason Albright did not leap way up in the rankings.

Finally, plenty of people criticizing, but how many are taking the time to do a poll weekly?  KS wl always come on and defend his rankings and say where KS ranked teams.  This weeks poll shows KS picks in the second column.

I think the key though is the teams records.  In this case...the Kean/Cortland State arguement...if both teams have the same record, I don't know how you could with the team that lost the H2H match up.  If Cortland was say...6-1, and Kean was 3-3, then of course you would go with CS.  But to simply say they had a player out doesn't make sense...especially when you argue that Kean wasn't ranked high in "previous" polls...who cares...we are only in Week #4.

[Knightstalker]

Kean didn't really beat Cortland, in other words.  Did Kean really beat Trenton St. TCNJ?

Kean did beat Cortland, but they beat Cortland without their best ****in player. That means something and should be accounted for regarding a teams actual strength vs their strength without their star player. Maybe dlip took it into consideration too much, point taken, but it deserved consideration none the less. And if one feels a team is at the same strength when they are playing without their star player than they are not dipping both ****in oars into the water when trying to paddle up stream. Hence if one were to say Rochester is clearly a better overall team than RPI without Herman, dlip would agree because that was taken care of on the field. Yet, if you came to dlip and said Rochester would have still won even if RPI had Herman, one could disagree, because they haven't beaten RPI when Herman (a 3 time LL rookie of the week) was playing. So dlip feels injuries and missing players must be accounted for, especially when those players are returning to the line-up that same year.

Not sure I agree with the arguement that head to head match ups only matters if you beat someone with all of the players.  A win is a win...everyone goes through injuries.  As bad as Wick's defense was last year in the Brockport game...Wick doesn't get a pass simply because Tomaino and the starting ILB and FS were all out by the second series of the first quarter.

If I came on here and argued that it didn't really matter because we put up 68 points...and that the 70 points shouldn't count as we had "guys out", I would get destroyed...and rightfully so.  I believe we would have won the game going away if everyone was healthy and playing all 4 quarters...and that we would have given up far fewer points as we obviously weren't that deep.  But the problem is they weren't in the game...and we gave up 70. Injuries are part of the game...and head to head match ups should count above and beyond everything else.

Again, it is not that the W does not ****in count, dlip does not recall KS, dlip, or anyone else saying that. When you are ranking teams you are reviewing SOS, W's and L's,  as well as any other factors that have to do with a teams performance, and/or lack there of. All dlip is saying (maybe KS too, dlip does not want to speak for him) is that if a key player, or players miss a game you MUST take that into account not only regarding that teams performance but also in weighing the W by the oppoisng team. dlip is baffled that this seems to be a hard ****ing concept for others to understand. If you simply rank teams by W's and L's and nothing else you are missing the bus. **** an NEFC team may be in the top five then of national polls.

KS agrees with Dlipp regarding a key player missing a game.  Yes head to head matters but is not the only criteria, if it was the poll would change completely almost every week and we would basically be using the Poll that Pep linked to.  KS also did not hit Rowan as hard for their loss to Cortland because Rowans starting QB was out that game.  With him KS thinks Rowan may be the best team in the NJAC.  Also KS did not have Kean in his top ten last week and Cortland was still high in the rankings, I am not going to drop a team down far enough to put a previously unranked team ahead based on a head to head victory two or three weeks before.  Kean got in because of the way they shut down the TCNJ offense last week, they were KS number 13 team previously.  This is the same reason Albright did not leap way up in the rankings.

Finally, plenty of people criticizing, but how many are taking the time to do a poll weekly?  KS wl always come on and defend his rankings and say where KS ranked teams.  This weeks poll shows KS picks in the second column.

I think the key though is the teams records.  In this case...the Kean/Cortland State arguement...if both teams have the same record, I don't know how you could with the team that lost the H2H match up.  If Cortland was say...6-1, and Kean was 3-3, then of course you would go with CS.  But to simply say they had a player out doesn't make sense...especially when you argue that Kean wasn't ranked high in "previous" polls...who cares...we are only in Week #4.

A: KS cares and it is week 5 plus a preseason so this is my sixth poll and previous rankings matter. 
B: If only records mattered I would have Framingham St and other NEFC teams at the top of my poll.
C: You don't throw out everything based on one game, this a cumulative process and Kean has to earn a higher spot.  My top 5 teams have been fairly consistant with their performances and that is why they are the top 5.  Kean is moving up, but has to prove more to KS. 
D: KS has previously stated that he is tougher when ranking the NJ teams to avoid any bias.  They are held to a higher standard because KS is more familiar with them and probably reads more about them than other teams.
E: As KS father used to say, Don't like it, too damn bad.

[Yanks 99]

Kean didn't really beat Cortland, in other words.  Did Kean really beat Trenton St. TCNJ?

Kean did beat Cortland, but they beat Cortland without their best ****in player. That means something and should be accounted for regarding a teams actual strength vs their strength without their star player. Maybe dlip took it into consideration too much, point taken, but it deserved consideration none the less. And if one feels a team is at the same strength when they are playing without their star player than they are not dipping both ****in oars into the water when trying to paddle up stream. Hence if one were to say Rochester is clearly a better overall team than RPI without Herman, dlip would agree because that was taken care of on the field. Yet, if you came to dlip and said Rochester would have still won even if RPI had Herman, one could disagree, because they haven't beaten RPI when Herman (a 3 time LL rookie of the week) was playing. So dlip feels injuries and missing players must be accounted for, especially when those players are returning to the line-up that same year.

Not sure I agree with the arguement that head to head match ups only matters if you beat someone with all of the players.  A win is a win...everyone goes through injuries.  As bad as Wick's defense was last year in the Brockport game...Wick doesn't get a pass simply because Tomaino and the starting ILB and FS were all out by the second series of the first quarter.

If I came on here and argued that it didn't really matter because we put up 68 points...and that the 70 points shouldn't count as we had "guys out", I would get destroyed...and rightfully so.  I believe we would have won the game going away if everyone was healthy and playing all 4 quarters...and that we would have given up far fewer points as we obviously weren't that deep.  But the problem is they weren't in the game...and we gave up 70. Injuries are part of the game...and head to head match ups should count above and beyond everything else.

Again, it is not that the W does not ****in count, dlip does not recall KS, dlip, or anyone else saying that. When you are ranking teams you are reviewing SOS, W's and L's,  as well as any other factors that have to do with a teams performance, and/or lack there of. All dlip is saying (maybe KS too, dlip does not want to speak for him) is that if a key player, or players miss a game you MUST take that into account not only regarding that teams performance but also in weighing the W by the oppoisng team. dlip is baffled that this seems to be a hard ****ing concept for others to understand. If you simply rank teams by W's and L's and nothing else you are missing the bus. **** an NEFC team may be in the top five then of national polls.

KS agrees with Dlipp regarding a key player missing a game.  Yes head to head matters but is not the only criteria, if it was the poll would change completely almost every week and we would basically be using the Poll that Pep linked to.  KS also did not hit Rowan as hard for their loss to Cortland because Rowans starting QB was out that game.  With him KS thinks Rowan may be the best team in the NJAC.  Also KS did not have Kean in his top ten last week and Cortland was still high in the rankings, I am not going to drop a team down far enough to put a previously unranked team ahead based on a head to head victory two or three weeks before.  Kean got in because of the way they shut down the TCNJ offense last week, they were KS number 13 team previously.  This is the same reason Albright did not leap way up in the rankings.

Finally, plenty of people criticizing, but how many are taking the time to do a poll weekly?  KS wl always come on and defend his rankings and say where KS ranked teams.  This weeks poll shows KS picks in the second column.

I think the key though is the teams records.  In this case...the Kean/Cortland State arguement...if both teams have the same record, I don't know how you could with the team that lost the H2H match up.  If Cortland was say...6-1, and Kean was 3-3, then of course you would go with CS.  But to simply say they had a player out doesn't make sense...especially when you argue that Kean wasn't ranked high in "previous" polls...who cares...we are only in Week #4.

A: KS cares and it is week 5 plus a preseason so this is my sixth poll and previous rankings matter. 
B: If only records mattered I would have Framingham St and other NEFC teams at the top of my poll.
C: You don't throw out everything based on one game, this a cumulative process and Kean has to earn a higher spot.  My top 5 teams have been fairly consistant with their performances and that is why they are the top 5.  Kean is moving up, but has to prove more to KS. 
D: KS has previously stated that he is tougher when ranking the NJ teams to avoid any bias.  They are held to a higher standard because KS is more familiar with them and probably reads more about them than other teams.
E: As KS father used to say, Don't like it, too damn bad.

Easy KS...this is why drinking isn't promoted before noon...I don't care who you pick...you could have Norwich ranked number one an I wouldn't care.  I was just arguing why Team-A who has the same record of Team-B and beat Team-B head to head (and at Team-B's home field) should be ranked higher.

I am not even a Kean fan...but if you are going to argue that they beat CS without their best player...you could argue that Kean beat CS without their best player in Jason Gwaltney.

[PBR...]

Kean didn't really beat Cortland, in other words.  Did Kean really beat Trenton St. TCNJ?

Kean did beat Cortland, but they beat Cortland without their best ****in player. That means something and should be accounted for regarding a teams actual strength vs their strength without their star player. Maybe dlip took it into consideration too much, point taken, but it deserved consideration none the less. And if one feels a team is at the same strength when they are playing without their star player than they are not dipping both ****in oars into the water when trying to paddle up stream. Hence if one were to say Rochester is clearly a better overall team than RPI without Herman, dlip would agree because that was taken care of on the field. Yet, if you came to dlip and said Rochester would have still won even if RPI had Herman, one could disagree, because they haven't beaten RPI when Herman (a 3 time LL rookie of the week) was playing. So dlip feels injuries and missing players must be accounted for, especially when those players are returning to the line-up that same year.

Not sure I agree with the arguement that head to head match ups only matters if you beat someone with all of the players.  A win is a win...everyone goes through injuries.  As bad as Wick's defense was last year in the Brockport game...Wick doesn't get a pass simply because Tomaino and the starting ILB and FS were all out by the second series of the first quarter.

If I came on here and argued that it didn't really matter because we put up 68 points...and that the 70 points shouldn't count as we had "guys out", I would get destroyed...and rightfully so.  I believe we would have won the game going away if everyone was healthy and playing all 4 quarters...and that we would have given up far fewer points as we obviously weren't that deep.  But the problem is they weren't in the game...and we gave up 70. Injuries are part of the game...and head to head match ups should count above and beyond everything else.

Again, it is not that the W does not ****in count, dlip does not recall KS, dlip, or anyone else saying that. When you are ranking teams you are reviewing SOS, W's and L's,  as well as any other factors that have to do with a teams performance, and/or lack there of. All dlip is saying (maybe KS too, dlip does not want to speak for him) is that if a key player, or players miss a game you MUST take that into account not only regarding that teams performance but also in weighing the W by the oppoisng team. dlip is baffled that this seems to be a hard ****ing concept for others to understand. If you simply rank teams by W's and L's and nothing else you are missing the bus. **** an NEFC team may be in the top five then of national polls.

KS agrees with Dlipp regarding a key player missing a game.  Yes head to head matters but is not the only criteria, if it was the poll would change completely almost every week and we would basically be using the Poll that Pep linked to.  KS also did not hit Rowan as hard for their loss to Cortland because Rowans starting QB was out that game.  With him KS thinks Rowan may be the best team in the NJAC.  Also KS did not have Kean in his top ten last week and Cortland was still high in the rankings, I am not going to drop a team down far enough to put a previously unranked team ahead based on a head to head victory two or three weeks before.  Kean got in because of the way they shut down the TCNJ offense last week, they were KS number 13 team previously.  This is the same reason Albright did not leap way up in the rankings.

Finally, plenty of people criticizing, but how many are taking the time to do a poll weekly?  KS wl always come on and defend his rankings and say where KS ranked teams.  This weeks poll shows KS picks in the second column.

I think the key though is the teams records.  In this case...the Kean/Cortland State arguement...if both teams have the same record, I don't know how you could with the team that lost the H2H match up.  If Cortland was say...6-1, and Kean was 3-3, then of course you would go with CS.  But to simply say they had a player out doesn't make sense...especially when you argue that Kean wasn't ranked high in "previous" polls...who cares...we are only in Week #4.

A: KS cares and it is week 5 plus a preseason so this is my sixth poll and previous rankings matter. 
B: If only records mattered I would have Framingham St and other NEFC teams at the top of my poll.
C: You don't throw out everything based on one game, this a cumulative process and Kean has to earn a higher spot.  My top 5 teams have been fairly consistant with their performances and that is why they are the top 5.  Kean is moving up, but has to prove more to KS. 
D: KS has previously stated that he is tougher when ranking the NJ teams to avoid any bias.  They are held to a higher standard because KS is more familiar with them and probably reads more about them than other teams.
E: As KS father used to say, Don't like it, too damn bad.

Easy KS...this is why drinking isn't promoted before noon...I don't care who you pick...you could have Norwich ranked number one an I wouldn't care.  I was just arguing why Team-A who has the same record of Team-B and beat Team-B head to head (and at Team-B's home field) should be ranked higher.

I am not even a Kean fan...but if you are going to argue that they beat CS without their best player...you could argue that Kean beat CS without their best player in Jason Gwaltney.

that is a very good point...

[union89]

Kean didn't really beat Cortland, in other words.  Did Kean really beat Trenton St. TCNJ?

Kean did beat Cortland, but they beat Cortland without their best ****in player. That means something and should be accounted for regarding a teams actual strength vs their strength without their star player. Maybe dlip took it into consideration too much, point taken, but it deserved consideration none the less. And if one feels a team is at the same strength when they are playing without their star player than they are not dipping both ****in oars into the water when trying to paddle up stream. Hence if one were to say Rochester is clearly a better overall team than RPI without Herman, dlip would agree because that was taken care of on the field. Yet, if you came to dlip and said Rochester would have still won even if RPI had Herman, one could disagree, because they haven't beaten RPI when Herman (a 3 time LL rookie of the week) was playing. So dlip feels injuries and missing players must be accounted for, especially when those players are returning to the line-up that same year.

Love 'ya Dlip, but couldn't disagree more....a loss is a loss regardless of injuries.  Throughout a season, if you discarded losses due to key player injuries, you would not actually have a season.  

Storms analogy rings very true....if injuries to key players discounted poor performances by the team itself, RPI should have actually risen in the polls.  Hermann was out and they still were competitive with Rochester....can you imagine how badly they would have won with arguably their best player healthy?

A few years back, Union lost their best receiver (Angiletta) for the better part of a season.  That Union team returned a ton from the previous years squad which made a nice NCAA run.  Should they be credited in the Polls for missing Angiletta to injury the following year?  Heck no!!!!

Football is a TEAM game....injuries are to individuals....the TEAM must compensate for the lost individuals....otherwise the TEAMS ranking should drop.

[union89]

Ithaca did not attempt to run the ball outside against Union.  Therefore, they were without their outside run game.  Therefore, Ithaca is better than Union.

Exactly.....Ithaca's outside running game was 'injured' during the Union game.

+1 to Utah.

[union89]

I still have Cortland above Kean.  Yes Kean beat Cortland but that was the first week w/out Pitcher.  Cortland has also been a proven contender and is still pretty strong.  Kean has started out strong before and proven to be a tease.  Basically I gave Cortland the benefit of doubt so far.

You gave Cortland the benefit of what doubt, relative to 3-1 Kean?  Kean beat Cortland head-to-head.  There is no doubting that.  Kean's only loss is to 3-1 Del Val, whose only loss is to unbeaten Wesley. 

I don't understand poll voter psychology.

And Fisher's only losses are to God and a good Salisbury team on the road whose only losses are to Christopher Newport in 3 ot and a higher division team in Carolina......this 'he' beat him, and him beat her, so we beat them next logic doesnt work and you know that....

Having not read the poll comments I ranked Cortland ahead of Kean as well knowing the head to head result.  Isnt it possible for the better team to lose? 

Not 3 times in one guys polls......once OK, 3 times, that guys not paying attention.