FB: Region 4 fan poll

[USee]

Good comments. A few replies/additional notes:

Ypsi,
Re:
-UMU and 30 years....be careful here. You are coming dangerously close to ringing Wally's bell. I was making a different point with my analogy.
-Olivet: You and the coaches in the MIAA apparently overrated Adrian. They were the pick to win the MIAA. I would say on a relative scale that's a quality win. More so than Depauw to date.
-Check you math on UWSP Mr. Stats professor. Their opponents, sans Albion, are 3-9 so I have my doubts about UWSP.  I am not sure that Albion's victory over UWSP is such a quality win. But sith 17 returning starters (for UWSP) from the team that beat NCC and finished 7-3 I gave Albion the benefit of the doubt for that win. I may be adjusting it later. For now, Albion is in my top 10
-RHIT's last year record with 18 returning starters doesn't mean anything other than they should be better than last year, which is good enough for spot #10 for now. ONU's on my radar but the Bluffton thing and general performance of the OAC below UMU gives me pause. I don't have a strong axe to grind here.

ExTartan, You described Depauw better than I could, I agree.

As for your "nobody's perfect" comment, I disagree. Wally and me are perfect except when we disagree, then it's just me.

[wally_wabash]

You can't just say "they played Earlham, Wooster, Hiram and Kenyon" and "there are 100 teams that could beat those guys". As Wally would say that's lazy voting. Part of the responsibility of voting (ok this is pretend voting) is to look beyond just a simple set of data like who they played. Voting and ranking teams is like a jigsaw puzzle. We have imperfect pieces of the puzzle in the form of data and we have to try and make decisions based on limited information and imperfect comparison's.

No, I think there's a difference between taking a wait-and-see approach with DePauw (or Denison) and slotting teams in a ballot based on what league they play in.  If somebody were to say that they vote by slotting Mount Union #1, the best CCIW team #2, the second best OAC team #3, second best CCIW #4 and then cite some nonsense about league performance in past tournaments (nevermind that entire leagues never play in the tournament) being the end-all guidance for where to rank teams, then my eye twitches and I might say that that somebody were lazy about evaluating and ranking teams.  We all go about ranking teams differently...looking at the data through different lenses with different focuses.  That's all well and good and, in fact, I think it gives us a really balanced, informed poll.  But the methodology that I can't get behind is the one that says a team belongs ranked at a certain place because of their league affiliation.  That's garbage. 

[USee]

Yes but he isn't just taking a "wait and see approach" he is saying "100 other teams can beat those teams so I won't rank them", which is lazy. The same way you are saying slotting a conference into a ranking is lazy. Do the work, check the facts. If you look deeper you can see Depauw is good. It would shock me if they get blown out by Witt. It wouldn't be a surprise to me to see them win this weekend or keep it very close. CCIW winner is #7 nationally, that means this year, which means Wheaton currently. If Wheaton loses and IWU is the leader/winner, maybe CCIW winner/leader is #14?

[Mr. Ypsi]

Yes but he isn't just taking a "wait and see approach" he is saying "100 other teams can beat those teams so I won't rank them", which is lazy. The same way you are saying slotting a conference into a ranking is lazy. Do the work, check the facts. If you look deeper you can see Depauw is good. It would shock me if they get blown out by Witt. It wouldn't be a surprise to me to see them win this weekend or keep it very close. CCIW winner is #7 nationally, that means this year, which means Wheaton currently. If Wheaton loses and IWU is the leader/winner, maybe CCIW winner/leader is #14?

If they didn't have a chance to prove themselves in the very next game, I might have dug deeper.  But with a program that had a losing record as recently as 2013 (and therefore doesn't get the benefit of the doubt that some teams who have also so far played no one do), why not just wait one week for much clearer evidence than I could probably find by digging?

[wally_wabash]

Yes but he isn't just taking a "wait and see approach" he is saying "100 other teams can beat those teams so I won't rank them", which is lazy. The same way you are saying slotting a conference into a ranking is lazy. Do the work, check the facts. If you look deeper you can see Depauw is good. It would shock me if they get blown out by Witt. It wouldn't be a surprise to me to see them win this weekend or keep it very close. CCIW winner is #7 nationally, that means this year, which means Wheaton currently. If Wheaton loses and IWU is the leader/winner, maybe CCIW winner/leader is #14?

The way I interpreted the "100 other teams can beat those teams" is that you can't really buy a whole lot into their stats at this point.  There's definitely an element of faith that you have to have in DePauw through the first month of the season.  I'm with you, USee- I think DePauw is probably pretty good this year (finally) and I think they have a shot to win on Saturday.  But I wouldn't be at all surprised if they lose by 30 either.  I don't really know what they are because their September schedule was so awful.  I have DePauw in my top 10, but I can understand anybody who wants to see them play a real game and validate their performance before putting them in. 

This definitely isn't as egregious as John Carroll being ranked ahead of ONU in any place at the moment, which is a thing that is happening (not in our poll, thank goodness). 

[Gregory Sager]

**I also think we should take a moment just to admire the turnaround job at Olivet, who went 2-48 from 2008-2012 (three winless seasons in five years).  Their current seniors went 0-10 as freshmen.  This year they sit 4-0 with a chance (not a lock, but a chance...given the way the MIAA has shaken out the last few years, someone may pick them off) to run the table.  Impressive stuff, regardless of where they end up in the RR's.

I saw the Comets play in 2012 and 2013 (the freshman and sophomore seasons of the current seniors), as Olivet had a home-and-home with North Park for those two seasons. NPU won in Olivet the first year, Olivet returned the favor in Chicago the second year. I could tell both times that I saw the Comets that that class of 2015 that Dan Pifer had recruited was really special. It was all a matter of retention, and he kept almost all of the really good players from that class (and has added some more since), so it's paying dividends for him now.

[Mr. Ypsi]

Yes but he isn't just taking a "wait and see approach" he is saying "100 other teams can beat those teams so I won't rank them", which is lazy. The same way you are saying slotting a conference into a ranking is lazy. Do the work, check the facts. If you look deeper you can see Depauw is good. It would shock me if they get blown out by Witt. It wouldn't be a surprise to me to see them win this weekend or keep it very close. CCIW winner is #7 nationally, that means this year, which means Wheaton currently. If Wheaton loses and IWU is the leader/winner, maybe CCIW winner/leader is #14?

The way I interpreted the "100 other teams can beat those teams" is that you can't really buy a whole lot into their stats at this point.  There's definitely an element of faith that you have to have in DePauw through the first month of the season.  I'm with you, USee- I think DePauw is probably pretty good this year (finally) and I think they have a shot to win on Saturday.  But I wouldn't be at all surprised if they lose by 30 either.  I don't really know what they are because their September schedule was so awful.  I have DePauw in my top 10, but I can understand anybody who wants to see them play a real game and validate their performance before putting them in. 

This definitely isn't as egregious as John Carroll being ranked ahead of ONU in any place at the moment, which is a thing that is happening (not in our poll, thank goodness).

Thanks, wally.  Yeah, I too suspect DePauw is pretty good this year, but with a losing record as recently as 2013, that would be a leap of faith unjustified by anything in the record this season.  (With the tomato cans they have played so far, what evidence am I supposed to be looking for by 'digging deeper'?)  Since it is only a week (now 3 days) until the first REAL evidence of the year comes in, and since I had ten teams I was satisfied with already (and even had to drop Franklin to hold it to ten), I felt good about holding off 'til next poll.

I was not as harsh as most with JCU - I'm their 7 vote.  (Fear not, ONU was my 6 vote, thus dropping my own Titans to #8. )  I'll be predisposed to knocking them further down (like most all of the rest of you), but they may not be tested again 'til November.

[USee]

Thanks, wally.  Yeah, I too suspect DePauw is pretty good this year, but with a losing record as recently as 2013, that would be a leap of faith unjustified by anything in the record this season.  (With the tomato cans they have played so far, what evidence am I supposed to be looking for by 'digging deeper'?)  Since it is only a week (now 3 days) until the first REAL evidence of the year comes in, and since I had ten teams I was satisfied with already (and even had to drop Franklin to hold it to ten), I felt good about holding off 'til next poll.

I was not as harsh as most with JCU - I'm their 7 vote.  (Fear not, ONU was my 6 vote, thus dropping my own Titans to #8. )  I'll be predisposed to knocking them further down (like most all of the rest of you), but they may not be tested again 'til November.

You are ignoring facts.  It's not a leap of faith to uncover 2013 was Bill Lynchs first year (he inherited a bad team), he went 4-6, then 7-3.  He has 19 starters back from a team that went 7-3 last year and was ranked in the North region top ten.  Why is it a leap of faith to think that same team might be better this year, particularly when they have done what they are supposed to do so far this season? Dig deeper means look at the team as it is constituted.  It takes no work to rank Depauw after they beat Witt.  Heck why don't you just wait til December and submit your final poll then.  That would be genius.

[ExTartanPlayer]

Why is a losing record in 2013 relevant to rankings five full weeks into the 2015 season?  I can live with a little carryover from last year, maybe, while we are still shaking things out with limited data, but there's no reason that two seasons ago has any real relevance to this year's rankings.

[Pat Coleman]

Their opponents, sans Albion, are 3-9 so I have my doubts about UWSP.

Their opponents, sans Finlandia, are 6-6. Depends on how you nitpick their schedule, I suppose.

[Mr. Ypsi]

The point is that they have NO relevant data for this year.  (It would not surprise me if their SOS for games played so far is among the bottom 5 in all of D3.)  A losing record in 2013 is relevant only in that they don't get the 'benefit of the doubt' that some programs receive.  As I said, I 'suspect' that they are top ten, but you guys protest when I go on 'suspicions' rather than data.  So far there is NO data.  Jeez, can't you wait TWO MORE days?!

USee, I found your final sentences to be highly offensive.  I'm waiting ONE f'kin' week, not December.  And you probably recall what happened to IWU last year when most expected 7-3 or 8-2.  Injuries (or mono) can change things pretty damned fast.  (And yes, I vote on what is, not what might be, but so far we have NO clue what is for DePauw.  I repeat that there are AT LEAST 100 teams that would be 4-0 against their schedule.)

Their opponents, sans Albion, are 3-9 so I have my doubts about UWSP.

Their opponents, sans Finlandia, are 6-6. Depends on how you nitpick their schedule, I suppose.

Thanks, Pat.  I was going to chastise USee for arbitrarily dropping 25% of their schedule (Albion), but arbitrarily dropping Finlandia works just as well!

Either way, their schedule is about as 'average' as you can get!

[USee]

Their opponents, sans Albion, are 3-9 so I have my doubts about UWSP.

Their opponents, sans Finlandia, are 6-6. Depends on how you nitpick their schedule, I suppose.

No. It matters very specifically since the Albion win at home over UWSP is the one in question. I wonder if that's a quality win since outside of that game UWSP has beaten 2-2 Coe at home by 3, 1-3 Finlandia on the road by 71, and 0-4 Eu Claire by 10 at home.  If UWSP had wins over winning teams then Albions victory could be considered higher quality. That may yet happen it just hasnt so far.

[FCGrizzliesGrad]

Their opponents, sans Albion, are 3-9 so I have my doubts about UWSP.

Their opponents, sans Finlandia, are 6-6. Depends on how you nitpick their schedule, I suppose.

No. It matters very specifically since the Albion win at home over UWSP is the one in question. I wonder if that's a quality win since outside of that game UWSP has beaten 2-2 Coe at home by 3, 1-3 Finlandia on the road by 71, and 0-4 Eu Claire by 10 at home.  If UWSP had wins over winning teams then Albions victory could be considered higher quality. That may yet happen it just hasnt so far.

So if UWSP had wins over 3-1 Ripon, 3-2 Westminster (MO), and 3-2 Minnesota-Morris then it'd be better than wins over 1-3 St John Fisher, 1-2 Redlands, and 1-3 Montclair St or their current schedule?

I just like playing devils advocate... I'm not actually taking a side

[USee]

Mr Ypsi,

I am sorry for my comments that you clearly took personally. I meant it as a general "you" concerning frustration with the methodology of ranking (which is not specific to just you). I could have written those words better.

[USee]

Their opponents, sans Albion, are 3-9 so I have my doubts about UWSP.

Their opponents, sans Finlandia, are 6-6. Depends on how you nitpick their schedule, I suppose.

No. It matters very specifically since the Albion win at home over UWSP is the one in question. I wonder if that's a quality win since outside of that game UWSP has beaten 2-2 Coe at home by 3, 1-3 Finlandia on the road by 71, and 0-4 Eu Claire by 10 at home.  If UWSP had wins over winning teams then Albions victory could be considered higher quality. That may yet happen it just hasnt so far.

So if UWSP had wins over 3-1 Ripon, 3-2 Westminster (MO), and 3-2 Minnesota-Morris then it'd be better than wins over 1-3 St John Fisher, 1-2 Redlands, and 1-3 Montclair St or their current schedule?

I just like playing devils advocate... I'm not actually taking a side

Fair example and good point. But this is semantics. My point is we don't yet know if UWSP was a quality win for Albion and your example highlights the same thing, we could have opponents opponents who have good records but aren't very good. UWSP hasn't beaten anyone eye popping so we don't know about them and thus I question Albion. This last weekend's game against Hope did nothing to give me anymore confidence in Albion. As I said weeks ago, I am pretty sure Olivet is better. In the same vein, Wally asked the question a couple weeks ago "Do we really know Albion wouldn't beat North Central" and while, back then, many would assume (due to history) the answer is "no" we actually didn't have much data to inform us one way or another. North Central had lost to UWP in OT and we didn't know if UWP was any good. Now we have much more information (UWP v UWW, NCC v Wesley, UWSP questionable, Augie v Loras, Albion v Hope, etc). North Central is 2 plays away from being 4-0 against one of the top schedules in the country and Albion was a failed 2pt conversion away from losing to a middle of the pack Hope team. This doesn't answer Wally's question but it certainly informs us. I would be willing to wager there are very few outside of Sprankle-Sprandel Stadium that would make a big bet on Albion over North Central if they played this weekend.

Similarly, how do we know Wabash is any good? They beat up on helpless NCAC teams by 50 and have what we think is a quality win against a top 25 Witt team. What if Witt ends up as the IWU of 2015? What if Depauw beats Witt by 30 this weekend? Does that raise Depauw and/or lower Wabash as a result? How do we know know how good this years Mt Union is good? 2014 UMU beat Wesley by 70 and then got handled by UWW in the 'ship. With the OAC struggling we don't know if we have 2012 UMU or 2014 UMU on our hands. Fortunately for us we have "30 years of history" that suggests we won't have to worry about this until the semi's or later.

None of this is exact science as we saw last year. There are no shortage of examples from 2014: Wheaton was winning by 14 and 12 over bad Coe and Kalamzoo teams many rightfully questioned how good they were. They evolved into a top 10 team. IWU was top 15 quality early and then fell off a cliff. Finally, when UWW needed a TD in the last 28 seconds to beat a 3-7 River Falls team in the last week of the regular season some of their own questioned their chances in the post season. Who knew?