FB: Region 6 fan poll

[Ice Bear]

@Baldini, make the case for why Martin Luther passes "the eye test" ... cuz they certainly don't pass the "field test" aka, see GAC result.

(Sorry, Hazz - I just grabbed your quote for an example - I know you "get it")

Thanx guys, for noticing I went waaaaaay against the grain in my last ballot. I'll state for the third time, I threw out all the TWO LOSS teams before selecting my picks. It trumps all head to head, regional rankings and comes closer to a true "coaches poll", in that it is simply looking at wins and losses. Once I had those teams, I tried ranking them in order of who I thought could beat whom in a head to head competition. There was no intention on my part to guess how I would do against the regional rankings - I got lucky there.

However, after a little navel gazing, one has to start to wonder if I caught onto something concerning the Regional Ranking Committee. Perhaps, they too, put more emphasis on records versus the secondary and tertiary tools at their disposal at this time of year. As Hazz has mentioned a few times here, Gustavus should be "Regionally Ranked" with the win over Martin Luther, if head to head competition was the primary tool at their disposal, and other "better games" thus far. But it kind of looks to me like the Committee has turned a blind eye to these types of results.

This might be a question Pat could forward to the NCAA for clarification, at this time of the year, when SOS is still so fluid.

Ice believes that the committees do place a large amount of stock in W's vs. L's. On the LLPP we've had a plethora of conversations about scheduling strong opponents vs. cupcakes and the benefits and pitfalls of both.

IB also understands the frustration hazzben has in regards to the possible dismissal of a head-to-head win/wins. Ice says jest using an example from the ERRR, "so you're ****ing telling me Wilkes would defeat Hobart and that Hobart's win vs. Brockport (currently #7 and the E8 champ) and only having losses to #4 Union and #6 Ithaca justify having Wilkes ahead of them? What **** are you drinking committee?" It can certainly be frustrating.

Ice asks this knowledgeable group what is the best way to determine the RR? ****, if it was ****ing up to Ice he'd have the voters come from the fan polls...Ice makes jokes, makes jokes...or maybe not.

[Pat Coleman]

I am not sure what is really shown by beating the tar out of Willamette, Lewis & Clark, Puget Sound and Pacific -- the latter two of which showed exactly how little defense they play when they combined for 115 points and 1,416 yards of total offense last week -- but to each his own. This week will be far more telling, next week perhaps so, to a lesser extent.

[hazzben]

I'm not the first to say it, but an improved SOS formula would be a great start.

[WW]

PS. And another thing I did in my last ballot was put Linfield ahead of Redlands, because it is my opinion that if they played this Saturday, the results would be different, because Linfield has "grown" more that the Bulldogs have through the season. I know, it's such a travesty what I have done...

It's cool. I'm gonna vote for Beloit next week because they are 1-0 (undefeated) in games vs Major D3s from south of de Pere and north of Ripon. My mind is open, and it's a groovy world

[George Thompson]

I am not sure what is really shown by beating the tar out of Willamette, Lewis & Clark, Puget Sound and Pacific -- the latter two of which showed exactly how little defense they play when they combined for 115 points and 1,416 yards of total offense last week -- but to each his own. This week will be far more telling, next week perhaps so, to a lesser extent.

I agree with you.    I do not like ANY 60+ point wins.   Yet, look at the Top 20 teams that equally hammer their weaker opponents.     So, to point out only Linfield is rather selective.     The Cats will not score 60+ against Whitworth.

GT

[MonroviaCat]

I am not sure what is really shown by beating the tar out of Willamette, Lewis & Clark, Puget Sound and Pacific -- the latter two of which showed exactly how little defense they play when they combined for 115 points and 1,416 yards of total offense last week -- but to each his own. This week will be far more telling, next week perhaps so, to a lesser extent.

I agree with you.    I do not like ANY 60+ point wins.   Yet, look at the Top 20 teams that equally hammer their weaker opponents.     So, to point out only Linfield is rather selective.     The Cats will not score 60+ against Whitworth.

GT

pat made his comment in regards to another poster ranking the Cats over Redlands because they have grown more as the season has progressed.  He wasn't singling out the Cats for running up the score

[Pat Coleman]

Agreed. I just wasn't sure what we learned from those games.

[USee]

https://www.ncaa.com/rankings/football/d3/regional-rankings


Martin Luther is #10 in the first regional ranking, good job art76 for thinking outside the box.

Just because the Regional Rankigs list Martin Luther 10 doesn't mean it's correct or a good use of the criteria. Especially when there's a H2H result that screams, they aren't as good as GAC. The point of SOS and RRO is to give some data against pure W-L record slotting.

It's not a huge deal right now. But if GAC beats UST Saturday and ML is still above them, that's egregious. And I'm not saying they have to rank GAC, just that if they are ranking ML and not GAC they have missed something significant (I. e. An actual H2H result that was very lopsided)

Listening to the podcast and the National Chair, he indicated GAC was not ranked because they weren't the next best team from their own conference let alone the next best on the board in the region. The implication is that UST would have been next. He also reiterated that RRO was not a consideration this round but will be next week.

Another interesting response to a question on GAC vs Martin Luther was to highlight Monmouth. To paraphrase: "Monmouth is #1 ranked SOS in the country with losses to Wartburg and Wheaton, both undefeated teams ranked #2 in their regions. If we just looked at limited criteria we would have had Monmouth in there" 

[olddog]

I am not sure what is really shown by beating the tar out of Willamette, Lewis & Clark, Puget Sound and Pacific -- the latter two of which showed exactly how little defense they play when they combined for 115 points and 1,416 yards of total offense last week -- but to each his own. This week will be far more telling, next week perhaps so, to a lesser extent.

One of your best comments ever PC..

[Baldini]

The reshuffling of the west should be very interesting this week. The first 9 should remain the first 9 and in what order is the only question. That shuffling will probably be effected by who ends up in the 10th spot. I believe Martin Luther, Monmouth, St. Thomas, UW-Lacrosse and UW-Platteville are all options to be placed there.

If St. Thomas should claim it, it should help St. John's move up and combined with the Wartburg lose St. John's may inch back up to the 3rd spot in the west. Which should mean a home game and also keep them out of a quad with UW-W. But does St. Thomas really have any chance to claim that spot? If the common opponent theory is a thing and carries the weight that many here have claimed, then the GAC win for St. Thomas this weekend puts them ahead of Martin Luther. That is solved, move St. John's up, end of story.

Oh but the tangled web we weave. If Martin Luther is out because of a common opponent, well St. Thomas can no longer be an option because of a common opponent. St. Thomas lost to UW-EC and they are a common opponent with UW-O, UW-LC and UW-Platteville, so I guess St. Thomas can't be ranked ahead of any of those and St. John's move up the ladder is put on hold.

I'm thinking this week might look something like this,

1.) UW-Whitewater
2.) Chapman
3.) Redlands
4.) St. Johns
5.) Central
6.) Linfield
7.) Bethel
8.) Wartburg
9.) UW-Oshkosh
10.) UW-Platteville
   

[hazzben]

As long as Bethel is above Wartburg you can slot them however you or the committee desire 

[Baldini]

As long as Bethel is above Wartburg you can slot them however you or the committee desire 

That may well be the difference between being in and being out. Trying few days for fans on both sides of the fence here.

[USee]

West Region   
1 UW-Whitewater 9-0 + .559 (28) 0-0
2 Wartburg 8-1 .576 (19) 0-1
3 Chapman 8-0 .532 (56) 1-0
4 Redlands 8-1 .596 (9) 1-1
5 St. John's 8-1 .527 (68) 1-0
6 Bethel 8-1 .494 (140) 0-1
7 Linfield 7-1 .511 (107) 0-1
8 Central 8-1 .515 (98) 1-0
9 UW-Oshkosh 7-2  .570 (21) 0-0
10 Martin Luther 8-1 .439  (204) 0-0
11. St Thomas 7-2 .497 (62) 0-1
12. Monmouth 6-2 .611 (3) 0-2

Here is the updated SOS and RRO's added for the west. There are 3 things that changed from last week. First is the W/L % of Central and Wartburg (all others won). Two is the SOS of the various teams, and 3rd the RRO will be counted toward this weeks rankings. Forget the idea that St Thomas is 100 TD's better than ML, for the committee, that doesn't matter. The reason to rank ST Thomas, based on the criteria, would be their RRO record or their stronger SOS. The SOS vs ML didn't matter last week so I am not sure why, all of a sudden it would matter this week to the committee. Martin Luther has a stronger win %. I think it would be tough to get St Thomas into these rankings. Monmouth, based on criteria, is actually much stronger in every way than STT and they didn't rank them last week either.

I am assuming the same 10 teams will be ranked this week. The question then becomes what to do with Wartburg. They are now a 1 loss team and will be compared to StJ, Bethel, Redlands, Etc. I don't see a case to drop Wartburg below Bethel. Compared to St Johns, they may rank StJ higher based on RRO. Central could get bumped up to 4. I think West could look like this:

1. UWW
2. Chapman
3. Redlands
4. Central
5 St Johns
6. Wartburg
7. Bethel
8. Linfield
9. UWO
10 Martin Luther

I don't think you can really make an argument for St Thomas over Martin Luther without making the same argument (again based on criteria) for Monmouth, who is stronger than STT on paper (and would lose by a lot the Tommies on the field). The SOS criteria are broken. Monmouth is getting a SOS boost by not playing Grinnell (who forfeited) and thereby getting their 0-3 record counted in their SOS. That affects Wartburg and Wheaton as well, the former likely staying above Bethel as a result of that.

I could be reading this stuff all wrong, but the data is here, everyone can take a look for themselves.

[RFB]

PS. And another thing I did in my last ballot was put Linfield ahead of Redlands, because it is my opinion that if they played this Saturday, the results would be different, because Linfield has "grown" more that the Bulldogs have through the season. I know, it's such a travesty what I have done...

Lol. Redlands punched Linfield in the mouth and thoroughly dominated them. Linfield had negative 14 yards rushing on the night. The score indicates a closer game, but it was not. Redlands and Chapman without a doubt have owned the top NWC teams this season.

[hazzben]

USee. Don't disagree with you on any of this. The only thing that can help UST v ML (besides common sense) is the common opponent in GAC. Not sure that it will, but it seems like a data point to at least discuss. But wouldn't be shocked to see ML still there and UST unranked.

@Pat

Could you ask the chair if they ever consider common opponents? Also, if they are viewing Monmouths SOS with an asterisk because of Grinnell or not? The latter seems particularly relevant.