TOP 25

[Mr. Ypsi]

Now, now, did I ever say that a close loss (or OT loss) is better than a win?

I merely said it is less than compelling evidence IF there is other evidence.  Based on other evidence, I'd rate Wheaton over Bethel.  I'll await the Bethel/St. Thomas game before taking a stand on the other comparison you made.

Don't get me wrong - I think h-to-h is the single best measure.  But if you take it too far it is both self-defeating (A over B, B over C, C over A), and eliminates the one area where humans still beat computers: judgment!

[And, yes, in my judgment, Cap is better than Ott! ]

[redswarm81]

Now, now, did I ever say that a close loss (or OT loss) is better than a win?

I merely said it is less than compelling evidence IF there is other evidence.  Based on other evidence, I'd rate Wheaton over Bethel.  I'll await the Bethel/St. Thomas game before taking a stand on the other comparison you made.

Don't get me wrong - I think h-to-h is the single best measure.  But if you take it too far it is both self-defeating (A over B, B over C, C over A), and eliminates the one area where humans still beat computers: judgment!

[And, yes, in my judgment, Cap is better than Ott! ]

Well of course--they proved that much on the field.  Wait, . . . what?

[smedindy]

You know, you play the same game 10 times, it may be tied 5-5 after 10 games.

Some teams may have just a 3 to 5 percent chance of beating a team, but once in a while, that happens.

See Howard Payne vs. Mississippi College. Howard Payne beat Mississippi College. Howard Payne lost to McMurry 37-13. Mississippi College beat McMurry 61-14.

Explain THAT!

[Mr. Ypsi]

Now, now, did I ever say that a close loss (or OT loss) is better than a win?

I merely said it is less than compelling evidence IF there is other evidence.  Based on other evidence, I'd rate Wheaton over Bethel.  I'll await the Bethel/St. Thomas game before taking a stand on the other comparison you made.

Don't get me wrong - I think h-to-h is the single best measure.  But if you take it too far it is both self-defeating (A over B, B over C, C over A), and eliminates the one area where humans still beat computers: judgment!

[And, yes, in my judgment, Cap is better than Ott! ]

Well of course--they proved that much on the field.  Wait, . . . what?

Ever hear of the concept of an 'upset'?

H-to-h is obviously a key measure.  It is not the ONLY measure.  If they had a rematch, I'd pick Cap.  (That may pit me against 'reality'.  I'm betting it would also earn me money in the long run! )

[redswarm81]

You know, you play the same game 10 times, it may be tied 5-5 after 10 games.

Some teams may have just a 3 to 5 percent chance of beating a team, but once in a while, that happens.

See Howard Payne vs. Mississippi College. Howard Payne beat Mississippi College. Howard Payne lost to McMurry 37-13. Mississippi College beat McMurry 61-14.

Explain THAT!

Apples to oranges.  Howard Payne doesn't compare to Mississippi College the same way that Otterbein compares to Capital.

I haven't mentioned for quite some time that Capital--considered by many to be better than Otterbein--not only lost to Otterbein, but as of today has a worse overall record and a worse conference record than Otterbein.  Based on the available evidence, Otterbein is a better team than Capital right now.  I had to craft a (realistic) hypothetical where Otterbein loses another game to make the indirect comparison more in Capital's favor than it is right now.

Howard Payne doesn't compare well to Mississippi College.  Howard Payne's win over Mississippi College was clearly an upset.  Otterbein's win over Capital, not so much.

[redswarm81]

Now, now, did I ever say that a close loss (or OT loss) is better than a win?

I merely said it is less than compelling evidence IF there is other evidence.  Based on other evidence, I'd rate Wheaton over Bethel.  I'll await the Bethel/St. Thomas game before taking a stand on the other comparison you made.

Don't get me wrong - I think h-to-h is the single best measure.  But if you take it too far it is both self-defeating (A over B, B over C, C over A), and eliminates the one area where humans still beat computers: judgment!

[And, yes, in my judgment, Cap is better than Ott! ]

Well of course--they proved that much on the field.  Wait, . . . what?

Ever hear of the concept of an 'upset'?

H-to-h is obviously a key measure.  It is not the ONLY measure.  If they had a rematch, I'd pick Cap.  (That may pit me against 'reality'.  I'm betting it would also earn me money in the long run! )

Yeah, 7-1 teams "upset" 6-2 teams all the time. 

I don't get this "it's not the ONLY measure" refrain.  I keep pointing out that overall record and conference record are also "measures," and by those measures, Otterbein actually scores higher than Capital right now.

"If they had a rematch" is NO measure at all--it's fiction.  It's made up.  It's fantasy.

My inner cynic tells me that many poll voters cast their votes based not on what actually happens/happened, but rather on what they think might happen--in say, a rematch that likely won't happen.

[Mr. Ypsi]

rs81,

Once Ott has given MUC all they can handle, we'll resume this discussion.

Right now, it is a bit speculative.  If Ott is down 5 TDs in the first half, I suspect you will not want to resume the conversation.

[Pat Coleman]

My inner cynic tells me that many poll voters cast their votes based not on what actually happens/happened, but rather on what they think might happen--in say, a rematch that likely won't happen.

You don't need a human to tell you what happened.

[redswarm81]

rs81,

Once Ott has given MUC all they can handle, we'll resume this discussion.

Right now, it is a bit speculative.  If Ott is down 5 TDs in the first half, I suspect you will not want to resume the conversation.

Well, I suppose you're right.  Right now, it's a bit speculative that Otterbein is 7-1 while its conference mate Capital is 6-2.  Right now, it's a bit speculative that Otterbein beat Capital head to head.

But to paraphrase the Poohbah, you don't need a human to tell you all those bits of speculative, right now.

[Pat Coleman]

Nope, don't need you to tell us that over and over, that's true.

[TC]

My inner cynic tells me that many poll voters cast their votes based not on what actually happens/happened, but rather on what they think might happen--in say, a rematch that likely won't happen.

You don't need a human to tell you what happened.

A little off topic, but this has been bothering me for a while:  Can you clarify the purpose of the Top 25 poll?  Is it (A) a list of the best 25 teams in the country?  (B) A list of the 25 teams that have had the most impressive season so far?  (C) A list of the teams that will make it the furthest in the playoffs?  (D) Some combination thereof?

If it's...
(A)...I would put a bunch of OAC and WIAC teams in the Top 25, and teams like Bethel (and others that I'm not as familiar with) would be a lot higher.  In fact, I'm of the opinion that there are many seasons that one of the best 25 teams in the country is a WIAC team that ends up with a sub-.500 record.

(B)...then something similar to UW-Whitewater being ranked #4 in the West Region rankings prior to playing UW-Stevens Point might make sense.  Even when there are a lot of subjective reasons that they should be ranked higher, they really hadn't beaten anyone yet.  The three teams they were ranked behind had arguably more impressive resumes to that point (wins over Willamette, Coe, UW-Stevens Point, St. Thomas, etc.).

(C)...then, if teams are left in their geographic regions, one of the current top 8 teams in the poll is not making it out of the first round of the West Region.  (I sometimes see polls compared by how well they predict which teams go far in the playoffs, that's why I ask.)

I'd imagine it's (D), some combination of all those things.  Apologies if my question is way off topic or I'm not articulating it well.  It's just something that's been bothering me, and I don't think I've ever seen a poll state its purpose.

[Pat Coleman]

The goal is simple. It's just that with 25 voters, there could be 25 different interpretations and a bunch of different methodologies.

I want a Top 25 that would tell us who would beat whom today if a game were played on a neutral field. Maybe that doesn't always conform to every head-to-head win and loss that's already taken place, but sometimes teams change over the course of the season.

[union89]

My inner cynic tells me that many poll voters cast their votes based not on what actually happens/happened, but rather on what they think might happen--in say, a rematch that likely won't happen.

You don't need a human to tell you what happened.

A little off topic, but this has been bothering me for a while:  Can you clarify the purpose of the Top 25 poll?  Is it (A) a list of the best 25 teams in the country?  (B) A list of the 25 teams that have had the most impressive season so far?  (C) A list of the teams that will make it the furthest in the playoffs?  (D) Some combination thereof?

If it's...
(A)...I would put a bunch of OAC and WIAC teams in the Top 25, and teams like Bethel (and others that I'm not as familiar with) would be a lot higher.  In fact, I'm of the opinion that there are many seasons that one of the best 25 teams in the country is a WIAC team that ends up with a sub-.500 record.

(B)...then something similar to UW-Whitewater being ranked #4 in the West Region rankings prior to playing UW-Stevens Point might make sense.  Even when there are a lot of subjective reasons that they should be ranked higher, they really hadn't beaten anyone yet.  The three teams they were ranked behind had arguably more impressive resumes to that point (wins over Willamette, Coe, UW-Stevens Point, St. Thomas, etc.).

(C)...then, if teams are left in their geographic regions, one of the current top 8 teams in the poll is not making it out of the first round of the West Region.  (I sometimes see polls compared by how well they predict which teams go far in the playoffs, that's why I ask.)

I'd imagine it's (D), some combination of all those things.  Apologies if my question is way off topic or I'm not articulating it well.  It's just something that's been bothering me, and I don't think I've ever seen a poll state its purpose.

I've wondered the same......thanks for asking.

[Teamski]

A little off topic, but this has been bothering me for a while:  Can you clarify the purpose of the Top 25 poll?  Is it (A) a list of the best 25 teams in the country?  (B) A list of the 25 teams that have had the most impressive season so far?  (C) A list of the teams that will make it the furthest in the playoffs?  (D) Some combination thereof?

If it's...
(A)...I would put a bunch of OAC and WIAC teams in the Top 25, and teams like Bethel (and others that I'm not as familiar with) would be a lot higher.  In fact, I'm of the opinion that there are many seasons that one of the best 25 teams in the country is a WIAC team that ends up with a sub-.500 record.

Ooh, there goes that parity question again.  IMHO, the top 25 is a subjective listing of the best teams in the country when compared to their peers within their conference, not necessarily to those nationwide.  Of course, the OWP comes into play as well.  Try to quantify a 5-5 WIAC team with a 10-0 PAC team. You could try to, but you have to go with the best concrete information available, the record.  Obviously, some teams in any ranking system can lose more than 1 or 2 games and still be ranked, depending on who they played and their historical position, but those teams are a minority.

-Ski

[retagent]

I guess this is the same arguement you could have (and has been had) regarding Oregon and Boise State. BSU beats the Ducks head-to-head, but I would bet that of those two teams, Oregon would be much more likely to go to the BCS Championship game.