FB: Region 4 fan poll

[USee]

I took a peek at Elmhurst, but passed.  We're at the point in the season where I think if you want to be ranked with two losses, you ought to have some kind of meat on that bone.  Elmhurst does not.  Kind of the same reason I've put Heidelberg back out.  If you're going to be 4-2, you need to have done something with those 4 or made a good accounting for yourself with those 2 and you definitely can't be the only team that lost to Loras.

I'll be interested to see who meets your criteria. I ended up passing on Elmhurst as well. There isn't much meat on any bones down below #8.

ExTartan, I agree with your comments. The problem is usually you have a couple teams trending higher while a few others may be trending lower. Right now, this week, with #7-10 losing, most of these teams are all trending lower. It makes it a little harder and you have to dig deeper for data to separate the teams.

[ExTartanPlayer]

ExTartan, I agree with your comments. The problem is usually you have a couple teams trending higher while a few others may be trending lower. Right now, this week, with #7-10 losing, most of these teams are all trending lower. It makes it a little harder and you have to dig deeper for data to separate the teams.

Oh, sure.  There are a slew of teams with records in the 3-3, 4-2, 4-3 range right now that are nearly impossible to disentangle to comprise a set of rankings.  I just don't want to fall into the trap of talking about teams en route to winning seasons like they're not any good, or acting like the only teams that matter are the 9-1 and 10-0 teams.  It's tempting to look at the warts on anyone's resume and forget that a 7-3 season, even if it includes a weird loss or lacks many "quality wins" - is still a fine year for most teams.

[Li'l Giant]

There isn't much meat on any bones down below #8.

Agree. Any of those 4-2 teams can be argued for or against. Not sure it's worth the effort at this point, but it can be done.

[USee]

I took a peek at Elmhurst, but passed.  We're at the point in the season where I think if you want to be ranked with two losses, you ought to have some kind of meat on that bone.  Elmhurst does not.  Kind of the same reason I've put Heidelberg back out.  If you're going to be 4-2, you need to have done something with those 4 or made a good accounting for yourself with those 2 and you definitely can't be the only team that lost to Loras.

I would also point out that it's very difficult to weigh games in week 1 with much credibility either way as many teams are vastly different now than they were then. Losing at Loras is a really, really bad outcome though. Does anyone still think IWU beats Franklin if they played again today? Could any of us have contemplated IWU losing at home to Carthage and Augie while scoring a combined 12 pts? Teams have injuries and changes that affect them significantly.

[Gregory Sager]

I took a peek at Elmhurst, but passed.  We're at the point in the season where I think if you want to be ranked with two losses, you ought to have some kind of meat on that bone.  Elmhurst does not.  Kind of the same reason I've put Heidelberg back out.  If you're going to be 4-2, you need to have done something with those 4 or made a good accounting for yourself with those 2 and you definitely can't be the only team that lost to Loras.

... by three touchdowns, no less. Even though it was back in Week One, as USee said that's a really, really bad outcome.

I know that you guys are struggling to find worthy teams to slot at the bottom of the poll, but anyone who puts Elmhurst on his ballot is truly reaching. The Bluejays simply aren't very good. In a more typical CCIW season, this particular Elmhurst team would wind up the campaign 5-5 or 4-6, or maybe even 3-7. Even with their respective QB woes, both North Central and Wheaton should beat the Bluejays handily.

[wally_wabash]

I do get that teams evolve and change over the course of the season, but there just aren't enough games for me to dismiss a full 10% of a team's results.  Week 1 games have to count.   

Whether it's because it's week one or it's a rivalry game or some player was hurt or whatever else, we can always find a reason to shrug off a result we don't like, can't we? 

[USee]

I do get that teams evolve and change over the course of the season, but there just aren't enough games for me to dismiss a full 10% of a team's results.  Week 1 games have to count.   

Whether it's because it's week one or it's a rivalry game or some player was hurt or whatever else, we can always find a reason to shrug off a result we don't like, can't we?

Yes but the inverse is also true, which is we can easily find a way to ignore team we shouldn't. There are plenty of examples of teams who have bad losses and come back to make deep runs and/or beat teams no one gave them a chance to beat.

[smedindy]

I do get that teams evolve and change over the course of the season, but there just aren't enough games for me to dismiss a full 10% of a team's results.  Week 1 games have to count.   

Whether it's because it's week one or it's a rivalry game or some player was hurt or whatever else, we can always find a reason to shrug off a result we don't like, can't we?

It's not a result we don't like, dude. It's a result that has a different nuance than a run-of-the-mill thing. Rigid thinking gets one into traps.

I don't SHRUG anything off....there's nuances. It's not binary.

[wally_wabash]

I do get that teams evolve and change over the course of the season, but there just aren't enough games for me to dismiss a full 10% of a team's results.  Week 1 games have to count.   

Whether it's because it's week one or it's a rivalry game or some player was hurt or whatever else, we can always find a reason to shrug off a result we don't like, can't we?

Yes but the inverse is also true, which is we can easily find a way to ignore team we shouldn't. There are plenty of examples of teams who have bad losses and come back to make deep runs and/or beat teams no one gave them a chance to beat.

Very true, but in this case it should be noted that I didn't ignore Elmhurst- I did mention that I looked at Elmhurst and found that, for me at least, they haven't won any game or performed to a level that warrants overruling that awful result against Loras.  Elmhurst has those opportunities coming up (not this week, but in November).  I promise that if Elmhurst beats Wheaton and is 6-2 after that game, they'll be in my ten. 

I do get that teams evolve and change over the course of the season, but there just aren't enough games for me to dismiss a full 10% of a team's results.  Week 1 games have to count.   

Whether it's because it's week one or it's a rivalry game or some player was hurt or whatever else, we can always find a reason to shrug off a result we don't like, can't we?

It's not a result we don't like, dude. It's a result that has a different nuance than a run-of-the-mill thing. Rigid thinking gets one into traps.

I don't SHRUG anything off....there's nuances. It's not binary.

I wasn't taking shots- just laying out an amalgam of all of the different reasons (excuses?) I've read in many different corners of Post Patterns about why people rank teams they way they do in spite of clear h2h results. 

[USee]

Wally,

In the case of Elmhurst I agree with you and didn't put them in my ten either. I was just responding to the general comment and pointing out the inverse is a problem as well.

[smedindy]

But again, there's more than clear H2H results...as data collects.

[FCGrizzliesGrad]

Here's the poll. Gotta get in 'em in early if you want it early. Just the nature of my schedule. Sorry gang. If I don't have them by Tuesday, it won't get up until late Thurs/early Fri.

I know 4 of the people who vote in this poll also participate in the Top 25 poll and always are in by Tuesday. So of you other four... who's the straggler that forces us to wait another couple days? Maybe we need some suspensions... no tardiness or steroids allowed

[USee]

My poll has beenin by Sunday afternoon every week.

[smedindy]

Here's the poll. Gotta get in 'em in early if you want it early. Just the nature of my schedule. Sorry gang. If I don't have them by Tuesday, it won't get up until late Thurs/early Fri.

I know 4 of the people who vote in this poll also participate in the Top 25 poll and always are in by Tuesday. So of you other four... who's the straggler that forces us to wait another couple days? Maybe we need some suspensions... no tardiness or steroids allowed

People got stuff goin' on...

[FCGrizzliesGrad]

Hopefully we get a poll this week. I had a team at 11 last week that I didn't see any talk about and they're going to make it on my ballot this week... but of course I fully expect them to lose Only once this season have the teams I've ranked 9th and 10th both managed to avoid losing in the same week.