D3 Top 25 Fan Poll

[02 Warhawk]

OOPS!

I didn't know we were still doing it into the playoffs 

[FCGrizzliesGrad]

I know I had Wheaton still on my ballot but they appear to not be in the poll anywhere...

[K-Mack]

We don't have a point of reference. If they added just ONE game, even with the ECFC or the NEFC, then we'd have some point of reference. That's my issue and why I can't seem to vote for a NESCAC team.

Then let's have the poll officially rule them ineligible. Don't have some people considering NESCAC teams and some people not and then just have the result not fit either methodology.

It's like that time -- brought up again this week in all the Verlander MVP stories -- where Pedro Martinez got the most first-place votes for AL MVP but didn't win it because two guys, presumably in favor of keeping Cy Young Awards for pitchers and MVPs for position players, didn't vote for him at all.

[K-Mack]

It's bizarre how an undefeated team from the academically elite NCAC, SCAC, Centennial, SCIAC, LL or UAA can crack the top 15 (8, 9, 12, 13, 16 in your latest) but Amherst gets one vote.

They have to be made up of similar athletes, no? I guess lack of top 25 love is going to be the NESCAC's pennance for starting late and not playing non-con forever.

We should really look into making them ineligible for the poll, that way no one has to bother (and clearly some don't).

We don't have a point of reference. If they added just ONE game, even with the ECFC or the NEFC, then we'd have some point of reference. That's my issue and why I can't seem to vote for a NESCAC team.

Also, I gave a point of reference. It's not a non-conference result, but it's a point of reference. (see bold)

[Mr. Ypsi]

It's bizarre how an undefeated team from the academically elite NCAC, SCAC, Centennial, SCIAC, LL or UAA can crack the top 15 (8, 9, 12, 13, 16 in your latest) but Amherst gets one vote.

They have to be made up of similar athletes, no? I guess lack of top 25 love is going to be the NESCAC's pennance for starting late and not playing non-con forever.

We should really look into making them ineligible for the poll, that way no one has to bother (and clearly some don't).

We don't have a point of reference. If they added just ONE game, even with the ECFC or the NEFC, then we'd have some point of reference. That's my issue and why I can't seem to vote for a NESCAC team.

Also, I gave a point of reference. It's not a non-conference result, but it's a point of reference. (see bold)

I disagree that that is a 'point of reference'.  Being 'academically elite' and 'made up of similar athletes' is a non sequitur.  Isn't it possible that the academically elite players who are serious about pursuing athletic excellence as well would choose a school where they could display athletic excellence?

IMO, NESCAC is not a d3 conference for football (much a I respect them in all other sports).  By their own choice, they are intramurals in football.  That is fine, I can respect that choice, but that IS their choice.

[smedindy]

It's bizarre how an undefeated team from the academically elite NCAC, SCAC, Centennial, SCIAC, LL or UAA can crack the top 15 (8, 9, 12, 13, 16 in your latest) but Amherst gets one vote.

They have to be made up of similar athletes, no? I guess lack of top 25 love is going to be the NESCAC's pennance for starting late and not playing non-con forever.

We should really look into making them ineligible for the poll, that way no one has to bother (and clearly some don't).

We don't have a point of reference. If they added just ONE game, even with the ECFC or the NEFC, then we'd have some point of reference. That's my issue and why I can't seem to vote for a NESCAC team.

Also, I gave a point of reference. It's not a non-conference result, but it's a point of reference. (see bold)

A point of reference as in how I can connect their results to the rest of the D-3 universe, Keith.

And it's nowhere near analogous to the "Pitcher / MVP" debate. You can compare (especially now with modern statistical measures) the results of pitchers vs. position players. I cannot tell how good Williams or Amherst are compared to the rest of D-3. Are they better than Salve Regina? Kean? Ithaca? You can't say for certain.

[bleedpurple]

I know I had Wheaton still on my ballot but they appear to not be in the poll anywhere...

Fixing...I think most of us did..will re-post. Thanks for letting me know!

[bleedpurple]

Here is the correct fan poll for this week. I apologize. I forgot my last double-check, which is number of teams receiving votes!

D3 TOP 25 FAN POLL

1. Wisconsin-Whitewater (8)            200          1(LW)
2. Mount Union                                191          2
3. St. Thomas                                  179          3
4. Mary Hardin-Baylor                      177          4
5. Linfield                                        171          5
6. North Central                               159          6
7. Wesley                                        152          7
8. Wabash                                       144          8
9. Delaware Valley                           129          10
10. Salisbury                                    115         11
11. McMurry                                     100         18
12. Kean                                            96         17
13. California Lutheran                        92          9
14. Franklin                                        83         20
15. Centre                                          74         unranked
16. Wheaton                                       71         15         
17. Bethel                                          66         21
18. St. John Fisher                              65        unranked
19. Monmouth                                    63        unranked
20. Johns Hopkins                               39        12
21. Trinity                                           37        16
22(t). Illinois Wesleyan                       33        14
22 (t) Redlands                                   33        13
24. Montclair State                              30        23
25. Cortland State                               19        unranked

Dropped Out of Top 25: Thomas More, Dubuque, Wisconsin-Oshkosh, Baldwin-Wallace

Also Receiving Votes:  Baldwin-Wallace (17), Hampden-Sydney (17), Dubuque (16), Thomas More (15), Wisconsin-Oshkosh (8), Louisiana College (3), Wittenberg (3), Amherst (1).

[bleedpurple]

Here are the Combined D3 Top 25 Voting Panel's Round 2 Predictions (of those who submitted them). Last week's record: 14-2.

Mount Union 41
Centre  14

Salisbury 31
Kean  21

Linfield 28
Wesley 27

St. John Fisher  21
Delaware Valley   30

UW-Whitewater  38
Franklin  10

St. Thomas  38
Monmouth   23

North Central  26
Wabash  17

UMHB  35
McMurry  23

[Mr. Ypsi]

If that holds, it would give me as 'perfect' a second round on my bracket as current conditions allow.  My hope would be that Alex Tanney and company can upset the Tommies, since my bracket had IWU doing that!  Since I assume most pickers had St. Thomas going a ways, for me to stay in contention requires Monmouth to do what they prevented IWU from attempting!

[I just checked my bracket and am not in contention anyway.   I could have sworn that I picked Linfield, but in fact picked Cal Lu.  I am toast.]

[bleedpurple]

I have received only 2 Top 25 ballots and predictions for next week so far. fyi....

[pumkinattack]

It's bizarre how an undefeated team from the academically elite NCAC, SCAC, Centennial, SCIAC, LL or UAA can crack the top 15 (8, 9, 12, 13, 16 in your latest) but Amherst gets one vote.

They have to be made up of similar athletes, no? I guess lack of top 25 love is going to be the NESCAC's pennance for starting late and not playing non-con forever.

We should really look into making them ineligible for the poll, that way no one has to bother (and clearly some don't).

We don't have a point of reference. If they added just ONE game, even with the ECFC or the NEFC, then we'd have some point of reference. That's my issue and why I can't seem to vote for a NESCAC team.

Also, I gave a point of reference. It's not a non-conference result, but it's a point of reference. (see bold)

I disagree that that is a 'point of reference'.  Being 'academically elite' and 'made up of similar athletes' is a non sequitur.  Isn't it possible that the academically elite players who are serious about pursuing athletic excellence as well would choose a school where they could display athletic excellence?

IMO, NESCAC is not a d3 conference for football (much a I respect them in all other sports).  By their own choice, they are intramurals in football.  That is fine, I can respect that choice, but that IS their choice.

Ypsi's correct.  In addition, from my eastern bubble world, I don't know if that's really all that true.  I look at the polls and see where Salisbury, Kean, Montclair/Cortland, SJF are and that Hobart's not on the map.  I'm not looking to debate the relative merits of placement per se, but if you believe KMack's statement, how is Hobart so far off the map as compared with all of these schools given the year's body of work?  Some people piss and moan about the 8 game schedule and that's fine, but if you line up all their seasons it's hard to see how many are 10-20 rankings in both polls and Hobart's not even garnering consideration.  Maybe it's just the LL, and not the UAA or others mentioned, since 2009 and 2010 were really down years for the conference, but I don't see evidence that the schools previously defined here (I also don't want anyone taking offense since I didn't make that claim) as "academically elite" really do get that much consideration vis-a-vis other conferences. 

Personally, I'm surprised how much love JHU and CWRU got this year.  JHU ran the table in the regular season, but the Centennial doesn't appear any better than the LL this year and CWRU took a loss to a below .500 UofR who they pounded in most of their recent matchups. 

[Ralph Turner]

I have received only 2 Top 25 ballots and predictions for next week so far. fyi....

I have been waiting until after the Stagg Bowl. 

[K-Mack]

It's bizarre how an undefeated team from the academically elite NCAC, SCAC, Centennial, SCIAC, LL or UAA can crack the top 15 (8, 9, 12, 13, 16 in your latest) but Amherst gets one vote.

They have to be made up of similar athletes, no? I guess lack of top 25 love is going to be the NESCAC's pennance for starting late and not playing non-con forever.

We should really look into making them ineligible for the poll, that way no one has to bother (and clearly some don't).

We don't have a point of reference. If they added just ONE game, even with the ECFC or the NEFC, then we'd have some point of reference. That's my issue and why I can't seem to vote for a NESCAC team.

Also, I gave a point of reference. It's not a non-conference result, but it's a point of reference. (see bold)

A point of reference as in how I can connect their results to the rest of the D-3 universe, Keith.

And it's nowhere near analogous to the "Pitcher / MVP" debate. You can compare (especially now with modern statistical measures) the results of pitchers vs. position players. I cannot tell how good Williams or Amherst are compared to the rest of D-3. Are they better than Salve Regina? Kean? Ithaca? You can't say for certain.

I disagree that that is a 'point of reference'.  Being 'academically elite' and 'made up of similar athletes' is a non sequitur. Isn't it possible that the academically elite players who are serious about pursuing athletic excellence as well would choose a school where they could display athletic excellence?

IMO, NESCAC is not a d3 conference for football (much a I respect them in all other sports).  By their own choice, they are intramurals in football.  That is fine, I can respect that choice, but that IS their choice.

Well suffice to say that I disagree, about your use of the phrases "point of reference" and "non sequitur," as well as the substance of the argument. I stand by my original statements, because pointing out that the NESCAC is not a D-III conference for football or that there's no direct comparison isn't breaking any new ground.

Of course it would be better to make comparisons with the benefit of non-conference results and playoff interplay. Been beating that drum for years. It's inconsistent with their policies in other D-III sports. But I'm not trying in this post to go down that road again.

There is a comparison. It's not one you can prove through use of compared data, clearly. It's an educated guess. What if I wanted to compare Grinnell and Carleton and Lewis & Clark and RPI? Well there are technically a bunch of data points I can use to do this, but that might not be any more accurate than a guess. Polling, as we'd all admit, is an inexact science.

All of that deflects from the point:

If some people are voting for NESCAC teams and some are avoiding them altogether, what's the point of having them in the poll? Nobody's interests are served, not theirs or the poll's. Both the fan poll and real poll should take a stand -- rank the NESCAC where you think it belongs strength-wise or eliminate it from top 25 consideration entirely. What we have now is some voters giving them an honest guess and some voter throwing their hands up and saying "well we have no links to the rest of D3 therefore I cannot consider them: and what results is a ranking that neither accurately reflects the honest guesses or the fact that some find them impossible to consider. It's inconsistent with the rest of the poll, which is neither right nor wrong, just inconsistent.

I could probably take this up with a superior but it's mostly just occurred to me how I feel about it over the course of this discussion.

[K-Mack]

And it's nowhere near analogous to the "Pitcher / MVP" debate. You can compare (especially now with modern statistical measures) the results of pitchers vs. position players.

No but it is analogous to the idea that voters using inconsistent methods skewed the results of the 1999 MVP race.