East Region Fan Poll

[dlippiel]

I'd like to say the Patriots were the best team in 2007-2008 going 18-1.  But they lost the Super Bowl to the Giants so unfortunately...

The Red Sox SHOULD have been better than every team in MLB this year.  But can you rank them higher than the 8 playoff teams?

2011 NCAA Basketball National Champion UConn.  I hate them.  I don't THINK they were the best team.  But can you NOT rank them 1 at the end?

yes...although it depends on what the criteria of the rankings are?  Are you looking for perception or reality?  Lets say a 34-2 Duke squad somehow got upset on a half-court buzzer beater in the Sweet Sixteen by a very good, upstart mid-major.  But prior, and without any doubt they were the hands-down best team in the land.  Now the field is wide-open and a 26-8 UCONN cuts down the nets, but more than likely, but for the upset by lets say, Gonzaga, circa 1999, Duke goes 38-2, then who is the true best team at the end?  34-3 Duke (who lost to UNC  and MD, conference rivals on the road plus Gonzaga as explained) or 26-8 UCONN which coulda been any other 26-8 team like Mich St or Fla or UCLA?

If the so called "BEST" team has to be the end champion, or the team with the best record, then what is the purpose of the poll?  Just leave the 'POLL' in your pocket and wait to whip it out after the champion is crowned.  The in-season poll has to be based on perception, which is any given voters opinion of the games' outcomes.  Certainly it does not appear to make sense that a 3-2 Cortland is ahead of a 5-0 Kean, that beat Cortland, but is it not possible, that Cortland, in the end, goes farther than Kean, such that the voter turns out to be correct using your theory of the last 'man' standing is the better team?  Perhaps the voter is convinced that Cortland is the better overall team, and is confident that his pole...poll will be vindicated at the end of the season

Now I get your point about the Eagles (i think it was your point) at 1-4, but 1-4 is much different than 3-2.  And 1 of those losses is to the 5-0 Kean team that is otherwise the top team.  So isnt it possible that Cortland is #1?

This is a good post 82, just thought dlip would say that  .

[Mr. Ypsi]

I agree with dlip's plaudits.  I have never agreed with the requirement in the d3 polls that the title winner be voted automatically #1 (though I can't think of any times where I would have definitely voted anyone else #1).  But in d1 basketball, does anyone honestly think Villanova or NCSt. was the BEST team the years they won?  (I would have elevated each into the top 25 , but not much more!  Of course, they still get to keep their national championship rings, so I'm sure they don't really care what I think! )

Actually, I can think of one exception, and it goes against my own team!  The final 2010 baseball poll.  IWU got red-hot and smoked the field throughout the playoffs, but with two weeks left in the regular season it did not look like they would even make the CCIW 4-team tourney!  (And the CCIW is an above average, but not great baseball conference.)  The Titans were undeniably the hottest team in d3 baseball when it counted; there is no way they were the BEST team for the 2010 season.

[JT]

Having been a top 25 football voter, it isn't a requirement.  You get a preseason spreadsheet of info on teams, in addition to what ever else one gathers on their own.  Often one is faced with a championship team/program that won it all the year before, and didn't lose a lot of starters, and/or won with a lot of non-seniors.  Then you factor in legacy systems/coaching and its hard to vote against Kehres in Alliance or Leipold at UW-Whitewater.

I was never told how to vote, but if asked (I was never asked), I wanted to be able to justify my choices and I wanted people to know that I took it very seriously.  It was an honor.

[Frank Rossi]

Agreed on the honor point, JT.  I know Pat hates when I discuss the poll or my basis for voting in certain ways, but I think it's always an interesting discourse since maybe I'm missing something -- it's not easy factoring in 239 teams (glad I'm not a hoops voter since there are even more teams, although more games to factor).  I would like to see the D3 polls enter into a more subjective Pool C index that would get away from the faulty SoS used in football (it only works with larger sample sets, like in baseball and basketball).  So, I would like to see voters make defendable stances in their ballots if we ever did get to that point.  Again, though, it's an honor to be a voter.

[Mr. Ypsi]

JT (and Frank?), I wasn't talking about the next preseason poll.  I was talking about the final poll of any current season.  Perhaps I have misremembered what Pat has said, but I thought he had made it clear he expected final polls to always be unanimous for the title winner.

As I said, I can't offhand recall any d3 football or basketball title winners where I would likely have dissented, but I certainly can recall d1 basketball examples, and gave the example of my own team in d3 baseball.

[Frank Rossi]

JT (and Frank?), I wasn't talking about the next preseason poll.  I was talking about the final poll of any current season.  Perhaps I have misremembered what Pat has said, but I thought he had made it clear he expected final polls to always be unanimous for the title winner.

As I said, I can't offhand recall any d3 football or basketball title winners where I would likely have dissented, but I certainly can recall d1 basketball examples, and gave the example of my own team in d3 baseball.

I was speaking more broadly and not focusing on the final poll.  That said, I haven't had a scenario yet as a voter where I had to pick beyond #1 and #2 heading into the postseason (the Mount Union/Whitewater winner would determine the #1 team since they were 1/2 the last few years -- including my first year as a voter last year).

I think football with a tournament structure is a rare breed.  I'm hard pressed to find a scenario in which the winner of the D3 tournament wouldn't be #1 based on the Stagg Bowl win.  Granted, this is why I harp on ensuring the teams in that 15-17 range get bids in the first place so that we can ensure some legitimacy in that "crowning of a champion" thing we do every year.  I mean, come up with a realistic scenario here by which the winner wouldn't be #1 in the minds of a voter.  5-5 teams aren't going to win the whole thing.  5 weeks of playoffs in football will ensure that.  I know I've been harping on two losses vs. undefeated teams in polls, but my point has been that 5-6 games into the season, 2 losses is damning.  If a team goes 13-2 with a national championship while the other teams sit at 14-1, 13-1, 12-1, etc., that's fine.  Even if a three-loss team found its way in, the two-loss differential spread over 15 games is a different story -- and THAT TEAM has played the best football down the stretch and at the point of our final ballot.  Again, the point here is to come up with a scenario in which someone would be JUSTIFIED not to vote the winner as #1 -- and I can't figure a realistic one out.

Before someone runs out and points to the Bridgewater/Rowan clock disaster from many years ago, let me remind you that the score was close enough to make the following statement:  the winner of that game would be a proxy for whether or not the loser could have competed in and potentially won the championship game.  Yet, even as a proxy, the team that wins in a controversial ending still has to PLAY in the championship and WIN the championship -- meaning, I'd still give my #1 vote to the Stagg Bowl winner regardless of that prior controversial result.  I'd consider putting the loser of that controversial game at #2, sure, but I still wouldn't have the ability or really a justification for putting the loser of that controversial ending at #1.

[Mr. Ypsi]

Thanks, Frank.  I had added you only with a question mark because I was fairly sure you understood I was talking about the final poll.  JT's post clearly showed he thought I meant the next preseason poll; I'm well aware the preseason polls are rarely (never?) unanimous.

My d3 baseball and d1 basketball examples were meant to indicate that in those sports a (clearly not THE best) team can get hot at the right time and win it all, despite a lengthy tournament trail.  Football tends to be a more predictable sport; upsets happen, but 4 or 5 consecutive upsets seems highly unlikely!  But hypothetically, if a team DID somehow manage to win the Stagg with 4 or 5 losses, while there were 3-4 teams with only one loss (and 8-10 with just two losses), would you still vote them #1?  (They still get the trophy, regardless, but should they win the poll?)

[Frank Rossi]

Thanks, Frank.  I had added you only with a question mark because I was fairly sure you understood I was talking about the final poll.  JT's post clearly showed he thought I meant the next preseason poll; I'm well aware the preseason polls are rarely (never?) unanimous.

My d3 baseball and d1 basketball examples were meant to indicate that in those sports a (clearly not THE best) team can get hot at the right time and win it all, despite a lengthy tournament trail.  Football tends to be a more predictable sport; upsets happen, but 4 or 5 consecutive upsets seems highly unlikely!  But hypothetically, if a team DID somehow manage to win the Stagg with 4 or 5 losses, while there were 3-4 teams with only one loss (and 8-10 with just two losses), would you still vote them #1?  (They still get the trophy, regardless, but should they win the poll?)

They beat three or four top teams to get there, so they played the best football down the stretch.  When the pool of teams was only 16, it was different -- I think some of the best in the country were left out.  I still think we're risking leaving out some as Pool A grows and Pools B and C shrink in terms of bids, but we're right on the threshold of that right now.  So, at 32 teams, that fifth playoff game just makes the playoff run necessary to win the championship that much more meaningful -- and makes our ability to say "the winner is at present the best team in the nation" a lot easier.  Conversely, it makes our ability to say "team X is better than the national champs" that much more impossible.

[Mr. Ypsi]

With Kean losing to previously 0-5 Brockport, I can't wait to see the discussion this week!

[Ralph Turner]

With the SeaGulls demolishing the Saxons in Mayberry, the poll really should be interesting.

[DanPadavona]

Wow, someone's down on Kean.

Agreed...Voter #1 has some explaining to do...not only with an undefeated Kean team being #6 and an undefeated Montclair State team being #5, but with a two-loss Cortland team being #4, with both of their losses to Kean and Montclair.

In retrospect, Voter #1 nailed it last week.  Salisbury is the best team in this field, and Kean is more or less an enigma.  No sour grapes from this Cortland fan.  I was at the game, and neither Cortland nor Kean particularly impressed me.  And I watched the Kean-Wesley game on video feed the week before, and I still don't know how Wesley didn't win that game by 2 touchdowns.  They dominated scrimmage but seemed to self destruct.

Whether you rank Cortland ahead of Kean or the other way around is rather meaningless. Neither team is close to being top 3 in region (as we define "region" in this poll) imo.

And for the people claiming Endicott should be ranked higher, I have one simple question for you. If Endicott played Brockport next week on a neutral field, and you had to bet a lot of money on the winner, would you really take Endicott?

[pg04]

Do you mean Kean or Brockport?  IMO opinion, the result would still be the same even at 1-5...

[Charles]

Wow, someone's down on Kean.

Agreed...Voter #1 has some explaining to do...not only with an undefeated Kean team being #6 and an undefeated Montclair State team being #5, but with a two-loss Cortland team being #4, with both of their losses to Kean and Montclair.

In retrospect, Voter #1 nailed it last week.  Salisbury is the best team in this field, and Kean is more or less an enigma.  No sour grapes from this Cortland fan.  I was at the game, and neither Cortland nor Kean particularly impressed me.  And I watched the Kean-Wesley game on video feed the week before, and I still don't know how Wesley didn't win that game by 2 touchdowns.  They dominated scrimmage but seemed to self destruct.

Whether you rank Cortland ahead of Kean or the other way around is rather meaningless. Neither team is close to being top 3 in region (as we define "region" in this poll) imo.

And for the people claiming Endicott should be ranked higher, I have one simple question for you. If Endicott played Brockport next week on a neutral field, and you had to bet a lot of money on the winner, would you really take Endicott?

Would that bet include the Cortland State gym teachers watching from the stands? Since the closest the will come to the NCAAs will be watching with you in your basement. Endicott would destroy The Cortland State gym teachers this year. Last year was a gift.

[Frank Rossi]

Would that bet include the Cortland State gym teachers watching from the stands? Since the closest the will come to the NCAAs will be watching with you in your basement. Endicott would destroy The Cortland State gym teachers this year. Last year was a gift.

Yeah, that will help your team gain national and regional respect...

[Upstate]

Would that bet include the Cortland State gym teachers watching from the stands? Since the closest the will come to the NCAAs will be watching with you in your basement. Endicott would destroy The Cortland State gym teachers this year. Last year was a gift.

Last year was a gift? Do you even remember last years game?

That game was no where near as close as the score indicated. It was 42-14 w/ 10 minutes left.

Endicott get's blasted if they go to the NCAAs.