My Poll - week 7

[danefan]

My Week 7 ballot (previous week in parentheses)…

• 1. Richmond (1)
  2. Montana (3)
  3. Elon (4)
  4. Villanova (6)
  5. Southern Illinois (10)
  6. Northern Iowa (2)
  7. New Hampshire (5)
  8. William & Mary (7)
  9. Stephen F. Austin (16)
  10. Jacksonville St. (11)
  11. Central Arkansas (8)
  12. Appalachian St. (9)
  13. South Dakota St. (12)
  14. South Carolina St. (14)
  15. Weber St. (15)
  16. Delaware (17)
  17. Colgate (19)
  18. Massachusetts (25)
  19. Furman (22)
  20. Prairie View A&M (21)
  21. Florida A&M (13)
  22. McNeese St. (23)
  23. Northern Arizona (NR)
  24. Cal Poly (20)
  25. Eastern Washington (NR)
  
  Most Significant W - Southern Illinois
  Most Significant L - James Madison

Next 5 (in order): Liberty, Holy Cross (24), Lafayette, Grambling, Georgia Southern

Others Considered (NOT in order): Missouri St., Tennessee-Chattanooga

Dropped from Consideration: James Madison (18), Samford, Harvard

Do you just not consider NEC teams because you still think they are "Mid Majors"?

I don't understand how you can consider Liberty, Holy Cross (24), Lafayette, Grambling, Georgia Southern, Missouri St. and UTC without considering Albany and Central. It doesn't seem consistent to me.

[dbackjon]

I'm really impressed with the voters in this poll and their ability to look at things without "homer" glasses. Pretty damn impressed with the integrity shown.

9: Northern Arizona Lumberjacks

Computers agree with me


NAU has as strong a case as any other team for the #9 spot.

[Skjellyfetti]

Computers agree with me


NAU has as strong a case as any other team for the #9 spot.

I think Elon (who you have at 10), New Hampshire (who you have at 14) have a MUCH better case for the #9 spot.

[dbackjon]

Computers agree with me


NAU has as strong a case as any other team for the #9 spot.

I think Elon (who you have at 10), New Hampshire (who you have at 14) have a MUCH better case for the #9 spot.

Elon: Wins over Davidson, Presby, Furman, The Citadel and Ga Southern - close, debatable, one spot. Davidson, Presby and The Citadel - worse teams than any NAU played.

UNH: Struggled against the worst team in FCS, St. Francis, beat an FBS rated lower than most of the Big Sky, beat Dartmouth, second worse team. Nova was a good win, then laid an egg next week. NAU has been consistent, and improving.

[SeattleGriz]

Computers agree with me


NAU has as strong a case as any other team for the #9 spot.

pfft. on computers. I got them at 12.

Just as a point of what I have been saying, lets say NAU started off the year with a win over a Temple or Ball State instead of a 34 - 17 loss to a BCS level opponent like Arizona. Their only other loss was Montana in overtime. Would they be ranked higher?

I'll keep saying it over an over. West coast teams that start with an FBS loss to start out the season, will always start lower in the polls than an East coast team that can schedule teams that are more inline with their abilities and get a win to start the season.

Now with that being said, the top CAA teams really outdid themselves, by all winning their FBS games, but why was UMASS relegated so low in the rankings to start off? They lost to Kansas State 21-17.

[wideright82]

Computers agree with me


NAU has as strong a case as any other team for the #9 spot.

pfft. on computers. I got them at 12.

Just as a point of what I have been saying, lets say NAU started off the year with a win over a Temple or Ball State instead of a 34 - 17 loss to a BCS level opponent like Arizona. Their only other loss was Montana in overtime. Would they be ranked higher?

I'll keep saying it over an over. West coast teams that start with an FBS loss to start out the season, will always start lower in the polls than an East coast team that can schedule teams that are more inline with their abilities and get a win to start the season.

Now with that being said, the top CAA teams really outdid themselves, by all winning their FBS games, but why was UMASS relegated so low in the rankings to start off? They lost to Kansas State 21-17.

Losses don't mean shit.

[89Hen]

Computers agree with me

Jon, I like you too much to allow yourself to be degraded like that. Computers?

[89Hen]

I'll keep saying it over an over. West coast teams that start with an FBS loss to start out the season, will always start lower in the polls than an East coast team that can schedule teams that are more inline with their abilities and get a win to start the season.

That's a pretty lame excuse there SG. New Hampshire > Indiana isn't exactly next door. Next you'll be telling me that lower I-A teams are scared to schedule Big Sky opponents.

[SeattleGriz]

I'll keep saying it over an over. West coast teams that start with an FBS loss to start out the season, will always start lower in the polls than an East coast team that can schedule teams that are more inline with their abilities and get a win to start the season.

That's a pretty lame excuse there SG. New Hampshire > Indiana isn't exactly next door. Next you'll be telling me that lower I-A teams are scared to schedule Big Sky opponents.

It's lame to suggest at 1-0 team will poll higher than an 0-1 team?

As far as travel, money talks. If Ball State can pay UNH enough to make them happy, great. I just see a good amount of West schools trying to offset expenses, and thus end up playing the UCals, Oklahoma's, Arizona's.

Those are for sure losses and thus, starting lower in the poll. On the flip side, Weber had two winnable games that they did not. You can bet if they would have won one of those, they would have started much higher in the polls.

[Mvemjsunpx]

Do you just not consider NEC teams because you still think they are "Mid Majors"?

I had Albany in my preseason top-25 and I had them in my top 30 until they got waxed by UMass. I think Albany & CCSU (I would put Albany ahead of CCSU right now) are close to consideration, but their lackluster wins this past week prevented me from considering them.

Like previous years, Albany had a chance to prove themselves in non-conference play, but they failed again. I barely considered Georgia Southern, & Albany lost to them. It's also difficult to consider the Danes when they got humiliated by a team ranked in the teens. Albany did beat Maine, but the Black Bears are nowhere near last year. I was going to re-add them into consideration this week, but the fact they only beat Bryant by 3 caused to hold back on that.

CCSU is 5-1, but they got handled by W&M and their 5 wins are over teams that wouldn't even qualify as mediocre. It would be one thing if CCSU had won convincingly in those five games, but only the Robert Morris (1-6) win was by more than 12 points. They also beat Duquesne by just 7; Duquesne lost to Albany the week before by 45. Right now, I see them as similar to Eastern Illinois (a team I also did not consider): even an average team would have similar results with that schedule.

I don't understand how you can consider Liberty, Holy Cross (24), Lafayette, Grambling, Georgia Southern, Missouri St. and UTC without considering Albany and Central. It doesn't seem consistent to me.

It doesn't seem consistent to you because you think the NEC is better than it is.

I don't know if you think the NEC is equal to the Patriot League or not, but here's a stat for you:

• FCS Non-Conference Record
  
  Patriot: 18-14
  NEC: 6-17

That record for the NEC is lower than any other conference. I won't go so far as to say they are worse than the Pioneer League, but I think it's reasonable to say the NEC is below every other conference.


The NEC isn't a mid-major conference anymore, but they are playing like it.

[89Hen]

That's a pretty lame excuse there SG. New Hampshire > Indiana isn't exactly next door. Next you'll be telling me that lower I-A teams are scared to schedule Big Sky opponents.

It's lame to suggest at 1-0 team will poll higher than an 0-1 team?

As far as travel, money talks. If Ball State can pay UNH enough to make them happy, great. I just see a good amount of West schools trying to offset expenses, and thus end up playing the UCals, Oklahoma's, Arizona's.

No, it's lame to suggest that West coast teams can't find weaker I-A's to play. UNH has won at Ball State, Northwestern and Marshall. None of those are driving distance for UNH. If the Big Sky teams desire to make more money and therefore only play better schools, that's their choice, but they CAN "schedule teams that are more inline with their abilities" just the same as anyone.

[danefan]

Do you just not consider NEC teams because you still think they are "Mid Majors"?

I had Albany in my preseason top-25 and I had them in my top 30 until they got waxed by UMass. I think Albany & CCSU (I would put Albany ahead of CCSU right now) are close to consideration, but their lackluster wins this past week prevented me from considering them.

Like previous years, Albany had a chance to prove themselves in non-conference play, but they failed again. I barely considered Georgia Southern, & Albany lost to them. It's also difficult to consider the Danes when they got humiliated by a team ranked in the teens. Albany did beat Maine, but the Black Bears are nowhere near last year. I was going to re-add them into consideration this week, but the fact they only beat Bryant by 3 caused to hold back on that.

CCSU is 5-1, but they got handled by W&M and their 5 wins are over teams that wouldn't even qualify as mediocre. It would be one thing if CCSU had won convincingly in those five games, but only the Robert Morris (1-6) win was by more than 12 points. They also beat Duquesne by just 7; Duquesne lost to Albany the week before by 45. Right now, I see them as similar to Eastern Illinois (a team I also did not consider): even an average team would have similar results with that schedule.

I don't really disagree with your analysis here. Your emphasis on the Bryant loss is a cop-out. You didn't punish Colgate for the OT win over Princeton. I don't see a way for you to say that Princeton is any better than Bryant.

But anyway, below is where I really disagree with you.

I don't understand how you can consider Liberty, Holy Cross (24), Lafayette, Grambling, Georgia Southern, Missouri St. and UTC without considering Albany and Central. It doesn't seem consistent to me.

It doesn't seem consistent to you because you think the NEC is better than it is.

I don't know if you think the NEC is equal to the Patriot League or not, but here's a stat for you:

• FCS Non-Conference Record
  
  Patriot: 18-14
  NEC: 6-17

That record for the NEC is lower than any other conference. I won't go so far as to say they are worse than the Pioneer League, but I think it's reasonable to say the NEC is below every other conference.

Your reliance on win-loss record is evidence that your analysis is only skin-deep. You haven't even really looked at the wins and losses. Take a look at the MEAC, SWAC and Patriot OOC.

It is VERY likely the NEC would have the same exact record as the PL OOC if the NEC played the Ivy and PL only. You can add additional wins for Central, Albany and Monmouth. But that, IMO, has nothing to do with whether Albany or Central should be considered equal with Colgate and Holy Cross.

When ranking teams the quality of the bottom of the conference they play in should not be a deciding factor. You put way too much emphasis on conference affiliation in your analysis. You'll never see me argue that St Francis, Robert Morris or Wagner do anything for the NEC. But Albany hasn't gotten close to losing to then when I've argued for Albany to be in the Top 25.

Compare these resume and do not think about conference affiliations:

Albany
Sep 5 - L at Ga Southern, 26-29
Sep 12 - L at Massachusetts, 7-44
Sep 19 - W vs. Maine, 20-16
Sep 26 - W vs. Sacred Heart, 22-9
Oct 3 - W at St Francis-PA, 27-6
Oct 10 - W vs. Duquesne, 55-10
Oct 17 - W vs. Bryant, 20-17

Central Conn.
Sep 5 - W at Lehigh, 28-21
Sep 12 - L at William & Mary, 14-33
Sep 26 - W at Columbia, 22-13
Oct 3 - W vs. Sacred Heart, 24-12
Oct 10 - W vs. Robert Morris, 42-21
Oct 17 - W at Duquesne, 31-24

Holy Cross
Sep 5 - W vs. Georgetown, 20-7
Sep 12 - W vs. Sacred Heart, 52-21
Sep 19 - W vs. Harvard, 27-20
Oct 3 - W at Northeastern, 42-21
Oct 10 - L at Brown, 31-34
Oct 17 - W vs. Dartmouth, 34-14

Colgate
Sep 5 - W vs. Monmouth, 35-23
Sep 12 - W vs. Stony Brook, 23-13
Sep 19 - W at Dartmouth, 34-15
Sep 26 - W vs. Fordham, 20-12
Oct 3 - W vs. Cornell, 45-23
Oct 8 - W at Princeton, 21-14 2OT
Oct 17 - W at Georgetown, 31-14

Liberty
Sep 5 - L at West Virginia, 20-33
Sep 12 - W vs. NC Central, 35-10
Sep 19 - W at Lafayette, 19-13
Sep 26 - L vs. James Madison, 10-24
Oct 3 - W vs. WV Wesleyan, 45-7
Oct 17 - W vs. Coastal Carolina, 58-13

Florida A&M
Sep 5 - W vs. Delaware State, 21-12
Sep 10 - W at Winston-Salem St, 34-10
Sep 17 - W vs. Howard, 48-10
Sep 26 - W vs. Tennessee St, 31-12
Oct 3 - Open
Oct 10 - L at Miami-Florida, 16-48
Oct 17 - L at SC State, 20-35

There is exactly ONE GAME that stands out as superior in that resume: Liberty's loss to WVU.
There is actually only one good win in that entire bunch. Albany's win over Maine. And that's not even a great win. In fact, I'd say Albany's last second loss to GSU and Liberty's win over Lafayette could be the up there for the 3rd best performance. Yet, somehow you have Colgate and FAMU ranked and Holy Cross and Liberty right on the outside, but Albany and Central are nowhere to be found. There is no other explanation than your reliance on win-loss records of the conference as a whole?

The NEC isn't a mid-major conference anymore, but they are playing like it.

And you are way off base with this comment when discussing rankings. Its not even arguable that Albany and Central aren't playing like the teams were when they were nonscholarship.

Ask anyone who has seen these teams play in the last 3 years. There has been a large jump up. I, and many other non-homers, would put Albany up against any Patriot, Ivy, MEAC, OVC, or SWAC team any day of the week. You don't see that for some reason. Perhaps its because you just fail to get over the fact that a team in a lower league can actually be better than the league itself?



And my god, Praire View ranked and Grambling in consideration?

Prairie View
Sep 5 - W vs. Texas Southern, 17-7
Sep 12 - L at New Mexico St, 18-21
Oct 3 - W vs. Grambling St, 35-32
Oct 10 - W at Alabama State, 24-10
Oct 17 - W vs. Miss Valley St, 38-0

What in the world leads you to believe that PVA&M is any better than Albany? They certainly haven't shown it on the field.

Grambling
Sep 6 - L at SC State, 31-34
Sep 12 - W vs. Northwestern St, 38-17
Sep 19 - W at Jackson State, 27-17
Sep 26 - L at Oklahoma State, 6-56
Oct 3 - L at Prairie View, 32-35
Oct 10 - W vs. Alabama A&M, 41-20
Oct 17 - W at Alabama State, 23-12

They are "in consideration"? Really?

[SeattleGriz]

No, it's lame to suggest that West coast teams can't find weaker I-A's to play. UNH has won at Ball State, Northeastern and Marshal. None of those are driving distance for UNH. If the Big Sky teams desire to make more money and therefore only play better schools, that's their choice, but they CAN "schedule teams that are more inline with their abilities" just the same as anyone.

I agree with what you are saying, for each school does make their own schedule. With that being said, I have no idea why West teams seem to schedule a for sure loss FBS game, and East teams are smart enough to schedule a winnable FBS game, but it appears that is what happened this year. The only winnable games were the ones scheduled by Weber (Colorado State and Wyoming).

Pure speculation, but all of the teams that won FBS matches are playoff contenders and might have realized they stand to make more money if they get another home game added to the season, instead of playing a bodybagger and taking the cash.

[Mvemjsunpx]

Your reliance on win-loss record is evidence that your analysis is only skin-deep. You haven't even really looked at the wins and losses. Take a look at the MEAC, SWAC and Patriot OOC.

I haven't looked at the wins & losses? What the hell are you talking about? I look at everyone's wins & losses EVERY DAMN WEEK for my breakdown threads and while doing my poll rankings. I'm quite confident I look at everyone's schedules more often than most anybody else that follows FCS football.

It is VERY likely the NEC would have the same exact record as the PL OOC if the NEC played the Ivy and PL only.

You base that on what exactly? It's not like the Patriot League only plays Ivy teams. They play the CAA & the NEC & the Big South, too. I will agree the NEC as a whole has played a tougher non-conf. schedule than the Patriot League, but nothing to justify that gigantic difference in the record (& that record doesn't include Wagner's non-DI loss).

You can add additional wins for Central, Albany and Monmouth. But that, IMO, has nothing to do with whether Albany or Central should be considered equal with Colgate and Holy Cross.

When ranking teams the quality of the bottom of the conference they play in should not be a deciding factor. You put way too much emphasis on conference affiliation in your analysis. You'll never see me argue that St Francis, Robert Morris or Wagner do anything for the NEC. But Albany hasn't gotten close to losing to then when I've argued for Albany to be in the Top 25.

Conference affiliation doesn't directly determine where I put teams in my rankings. If it did, I wouldn't have Montana at #2, nor would I have Jacksonville State in my top 10. Conference does matter to me as far as who's beating who by how much because your conference determines the majority of of your games (& about half of games to this point).

I wasn't saying Albany & CCSU don't deserve to be considered because they're in the NEC, I was challenging your NEC homerism. I was pointing out the NEC's flaws because I believe you think Albany & CCSU should be considered higher because you think the NEC is better than it is.

Compare these resume and do not think about conference affiliations:

Don't you think I do that constantly? I also base my rankings on my analysis of how good the players are & on how good I thought the teams were to begin with & how they've changed since then. I'm not a computer, and I don't vote like one. There aren't enough games in college football to get good computer rankings and I believe one should look deeper than simply the schedule page.

My opinions of each of your profiled teams:


Albany

Good: David McCarty, decent defense
Bad: Spanked by UMass (a borderline playoff-caliber team), anemic passing game despite veteran QB

CCSU

Good: Dangerous option game
Bad: Majority of wins are close ones over bad to terrible teams (Lehigh, Sacred Heart, Duquesne)

Holy Cross

Good: One of the best QBs in FCS (Randolph)
Possibly Good: Win over Harvard (best team in the Ivy, though the Ivy is down this year)
Bad: Loss to Brown, suspect pass defense

Colgate

Good: Looked to be a playoff caliber team on paper & nothing has refuted that yet, very dangerous offensive threats (Sullivan, Eachus, Simonds)
Possibly Good: Undefeated, albeit with a weak schedule; improved defense
Possibly Bad: Barely beat Princeton (though that was on a short week, which tends to cause sloppy football)

Liberty

Good: Beat Lafayette, played WVU reasonably close
Possibly Good: Played JMU reasonably close before the Dukes lost Dudzik, destroyed Coastal
Bad: Nothing specific (Liberty has looked noticeably better than I thought they would at the beginning)

Florida A&M

Good: Returned virtually every player from last year's 8-3 team
Possibly Bad: No wins over decent opponents, & they unfortunately won't have an opportunity to get one unless you count Morgan State
Bad: No running game other than the QB Pulley

PVAMU

Good: Beat Grambling
Possibly Good: Nearly came back to beat FBS New Mexico St.
Bad: Nothing really

Grambling

Good: Ridiculously opportunistic defense
Possibly Good: Nearly beat SCSU
Possibly Bad: No statement wins & 2 FCS losses



Now, I do think most of the those other teams are just slightly higher than Albany & CCSU, but I had those teams barely in consideration & I had the 2 NEC teams barely not in consideration. I would probably put those two in the mid-30s at this point.

[Mvemjsunpx]

oops, double post. Hit quote instead of edit.

[89Hen]

I agree with what you are saying, for each school does make their own schedule. With that being said, I have no idea why West teams seem to schedule a for sure loss FBS game, and East teams are smart enough to schedule a winnable FBS game, but it appears that is what happened this year. The only winnable games were the ones scheduled by Weber (Colorado State and Wyoming).

Pure speculation, but all of the teams that won FBS matches are playoff contenders and might have realized they stand to make more money if they get another home game added to the season, instead of playing a bodybagger and taking the cash.

I'm sure it's no easy decision for an AD and coach. If you have a Big XII school offering you $500,000 and a MAC school is offering $200,000 which do you take? Each school's needs are different and are even different from year to year for themselves. The ultimate goal for any of our schools should be to make the playoffs, but all that cash is hard to turn down when your women's swimming team is bleeding you dry.

[danefan]

Your reliance on win-loss record is evidence that your analysis is only skin-deep. You haven't even really looked at the wins and losses. Take a look at the MEAC, SWAC and Patriot OOC.

I haven't looked at the wins & losses? What the hell are you talking about? I look at everyone's wins & losses EVERY DAMN WEEK for my breakdown threads and while doing my poll rankings. I'm quite confident I look at everyone's schedules more often than most anybody else that follows FCS football.

It is VERY likely the NEC would have the same exact record as the PL OOC if the NEC played the Ivy and PL only.

You base that on what exactly? It's not like the Patriot League only plays Ivy teams. They play the CAA & the NEC & the Big South, too. I will agree the NEC as a whole has played a tougher non-conf. schedule than the Patriot League, but nothing to justify that gigantic difference in the record (& that record doesn't include Wagner's non-DI loss).

You can add additional wins for Central, Albany and Monmouth. But that, IMO, has nothing to do with whether Albany or Central should be considered equal with Colgate and Holy Cross.

When ranking teams the quality of the bottom of the conference they play in should not be a deciding factor. You put way too much emphasis on conference affiliation in your analysis. You'll never see me argue that St Francis, Robert Morris or Wagner do anything for the NEC. But Albany hasn't gotten close to losing to then when I've argued for Albany to be in the Top 25.

Conference affiliation doesn't directly determine where I put teams in my rankings. If it did, I wouldn't have Montana at #2, nor would I have Jacksonville State in my top 10. Conference does matter to me as far as who's beating who by how much because your conference determines the majority of of your games (& about half of games to this point).

I wasn't saying Albany & CCSU don't deserve to be considered because they're in the NEC, I was challenging your NEC homerism. I was pointing out the NEC's flaws because I believe you think Albany & CCSU should be considered higher because you think the NEC is better than it is.

Compare these resume and do not think about conference affiliations:

Don't you think I do that constantly? I also base my rankings on my analysis of how good the players are & on how good I thought the teams were to begin with & how they've changed since then. I'm not a computer, and I don't vote like one. There aren't enough games in college football to get good computer rankings and I believe one should look deeper than simply the schedule page.

My opinions of each of your profiled teams:


Albany

Good: David McCarty, decent defense
Bad: Spanked by UMass (a borderline playoff-caliber team), anemic passing game despite veteran QB

CCSU

Good: Dangerous option game
Bad: Majority of wins are close ones over bad to terrible teams (Lehigh, Sacred Heart, Duquesne)

Holy Cross

Good: One of the best QBs in FCS (Randolph)
Possibly Good: Win over Harvard (best team in the Ivy, though the Ivy is down this year)
Bad: Loss to Brown, suspect pass defense

Colgate

Good: Looked to be a playoff caliber team on paper & nothing has refuted that yet, very dangerous offensive threats (Sullivan, Eachus, Simonds)
Possibly Good: Undefeated, albeit with a weak schedule; improved defense
Possibly Bad: Barely beat Princeton (though that was on a short week, which tends to cause sloppy football)

Liberty

Good: Beat Lafayette, played WVU reasonably close
Possibly Good: Played JMU reasonably close before the Dukes lost Dudzik, destroyed Coastal
Bad: Nothing specific (Liberty has looked noticeably better than I thought they would at the beginning)

Florida A&M

Good: Returned virtually every player from last year's 8-3 team
Possibly Bad: No wins over decent opponents, & they unfortunately won't have an opportunity to get one unless you count Morgan State
Bad: No running game other than the QB Pulley

PVAMU

Good: Beat Grambling
Possibly Good: Nearly came back to beat FBS New Mexico St.
Bad: Nothing really

Grambling

Good: Ridiculously opportunistic defense
Possibly Good: Nearly beat SCSU
Possibly Bad: No statement wins & 2 FCS losses



Now, I do think most of the those other teams are just slightly higher than Albany & CCSU, but I had those teams barely in consideration & I had the 2 NEC teams barely not in consideration. I would probably put those two in the mid-30s at this point.

Your analysis above does not equate to your rankings. Using your analysis above I would not include any of those teams in the top 25. You've been unable to differentiate between any of the teams I asked about and yet you have Colgate at 17, PVA&M at 20 and FAMU at 21? That's not logical to me. Especially when you rank them over teams like UMass, which just beat the a top 5 team.

You also say that Colgate looked like a playoff caliber team on paper. I don't get this logic. Colgate is only a playoff caliber team becasue of their AQ. They wouldn't have made the playoffs last year without the AQ. And they wouldn't make the playoffs this year without one either. So you must be in the camp that says if the team comes from an AQ conference they automatically deserve a bump in the rankings?

I really think you need reevaluate the Patriot League OOC schedule. There is one team in the entire PL OOC schedule worth anything (Villanova). Lafayette has a decent game against Liberty. Saying you play games against the CAA is one thing. Playing Rhode Island and Northeastern from the CAA is another.

And btw, your attempt to prove me a homer is pretty clear. Your analysis of Albany isn't even close to the truth. Take out the UMass game where the offense put the defense in horrendous situations all night long (5 turnovers by our QB alone) and Albany has let up 8 TD's all season, and only 3 in the last 18 quarters. That's a little bit better than "decent".

[Mvemjsunpx]

Your analysis above does not equate to your rankings. Using your analysis above I would not include any of those teams in the top 25. You've been unable to differentiate between any of the teams I asked about and yet you have Colgate at 17, PVA&M at 20 and FAMU at 21? That's not logical to me. Especially when you rank them over teams like UMass, which just beat the a top 5 team.

I think my above analysis of Colgate & PVAMU put them clearly ahead of teams like Albany, CCSU, Grambling, etc. UMass beat UNH, but they also got owned by a Delaware team that definitely isn't top-5. I had FAMU @ #13 last week & they lost to my #14, so why would I drop them a huge amount? It appears I overrated them a tad in my preseason analysis (I had them @ #11 in May), but there's not enough evidence to plummet them yet.

You also say that Colgate looked like a playoff caliber team on paper. I don't get this logic. Colgate is only a playoff caliber team becasue of their AQ. They wouldn't have made the playoffs last year without the AQ. And they wouldn't make the playoffs this year without one either.

Because I think they're good enough to make the playoffs or at least good enough to be on the bubble, regardless of auto-bid. You say they wouldn't have made it last year as an at-large, but you don't know that; Maine was a pretty weak at-large. I think the Raiders would have been firmly on the bubble along w/ Maine, FAMU, Jacksonville St., Liberty, and W&M.

As for this year, I don't think anyone I have ranked below 22nd. would even be on the bubble at this point. Albany & CCSU are bit away from the bubble & it doesn't seem likely they'll reach it given their remaining schedules. You also say Colgate wouldn't make it this year? If they go 10-1 and don't get the Patriot auto-bid, I figure it's better than 50/50 they'll make it as an at-large.

So you must be in the camp that says if the team comes from an AQ conference they automatically deserve a bump in the rankings?

Oh, yes, that must be it.

I'm part of some "FCS Establishment Conspiracy" that is plotting against the NEC because their new auto-bid status next year will result in the death of democracy as we know it. Just ignore that fact I considered Liberty ahead of many playoff conference teams even though the Big South is in nearly the same boat as the NEC. Also ignore that most actual "FCS Establishment" types (i.e. power-conference supremacists) also tend to slight weaker playoff conferences like the Patriot & OVC, which I didn't.

Your analysis of Albany isn't even close to the truth. Take out the UMass game where the offense put the defense in horrendous situations all night long (5 turnovers by our QB alone) and Albany has let up 8 TD's all season, and only 3 in the last 18 quarters. That's a little bit better than "decent".

How did I unfairly attack the Dane defense? I said their defense was a "good". And why would I discount the UMass game? The offense hurt the defense, but the D also gave up 473 yards all on their own. The Albany defense is pretty good, but it's not elite:

• 38th. - Total Defense
  21st. - Run Defense
  73rd. - Pass (yardage) Defense
  43rd. - Pass (efficiency) Defense
  28th. - Scoring Defense
  24th. - Sacks
  T-30th. - Turnovers Forced (total, not per game)

Face it, if Albany is as good as you seem to think, there's no way they should have lost to UMass by 37. The Danes don't have a signature win that overrides that, either (& don't give me Maine; the Black Bears never deserved to even sniff the top-25 this year).

And btw, your attempt to prove me a homer is pretty clear.

I should hope so. I came right out and said it.


The insulting thing about your posts is that you believe the burden should be on me to prove my rankings beyond any doubt (which is impossible for anyone to do on a topic like this), yet you cannot provide compelling evidence to support your own position. I think some teams should be ranked a certain way, you obviously disagree. That's fine—and I have no problem explaining my ballot—but how about you stop accusing voters of having sinister biases just because they don't rank teams the way you like?

[danefan]

Your analysis above does not equate to your rankings. Using your analysis above I would not include any of those teams in the top 25. You've been unable to differentiate between any of the teams I asked about and yet you have Colgate at 17, PVA&M at 20 and FAMU at 21? That's not logical to me. Especially when you rank them over teams like UMass, which just beat the a top 5 team.

I think my above analysis of Colgate & PVAMU put them clearly ahead of teams like Albany, CCSU, Grambling, etc. UMass beat UNH, but they also got owned by a Delaware team that definitely isn't top-5. I had FAMU @ #13 last week & they lost to my #14, so why would I drop them a huge amount? It appears I overrated them a tad in my preseason analysis (I had them @ #11 in May), but there's not enough evidence to plummet them yet.

You also say that Colgate looked like a playoff caliber team on paper. I don't get this logic. Colgate is only a playoff caliber team becasue of their AQ. They wouldn't have made the playoffs last year without the AQ. And they wouldn't make the playoffs this year without one either.

Because I think they're good enough to make the playoffs or at least good enough to be on the bubble, regardless of auto-bid. You say they wouldn't have made it last year as an at-large, but you don't know that; Maine was a pretty weak at-large. I think the Raiders would have been firmly on the bubble along w/ Maine, FAMU, Jacksonville St., Liberty, and W&M.

As for this year, I don't think anyone I have ranked below 22nd. would even be on the bubble at this point. Albany & CCSU are bit away from the bubble & it doesn't seem likely they'll reach it given their remaining schedules. You also say Colgate wouldn't make it this year? If they go 10-1 and don't get the Patriot auto-bid, I figure it's better than 50/50 they'll make it as an at-large.

So you must be in the camp that says if the team comes from an AQ conference they automatically deserve a bump in the rankings?

Oh, yes, that must be it.

I'm part of some "FCS Establishment Conspiracy" that is plotting against the NEC because their new auto-bid status next year will result in the death of democracy as we know it. Just ignore that fact I considered Liberty ahead of many playoff conference teams even though the Big South is in nearly the same boat as the NEC. Also ignore that most actual "FCS Establishment" types (i.e. power-conference supremacists) also tend to slight weaker playoff conferences like the Patriot & OVC, which I didn't.

Your analysis of Albany isn't even close to the truth. Take out the UMass game where the offense put the defense in horrendous situations all night long (5 turnovers by our QB alone) and Albany has let up 8 TD's all season, and only 3 in the last 18 quarters. That's a little bit better than "decent".

How did I unfairly attack the Dane defense? I said their defense was a "good". And why would I discount the UMass game? The offense hurt the defense, but the D also gave up 473 yards all on their own. The Albany defense is pretty good, but it's not elite:

• 38th. - Total Defense
  21st. - Run Defense
  73rd. - Pass (yardage) Defense
  43rd. - Pass (efficiency) Defense
  28th. - Scoring Defense
  24th. - Sacks
  T-30th. - Turnovers Forced (total, not per game)

Face it, if Albany is as good as you seem to think, there's no way they should have lost to UMass by 37. The Danes don't have a signature win that overrides that, either (& don't give me Maine; the Black Bears never deserved to even sniff the top-25 this year).

And btw, your attempt to prove me a homer is pretty clear.

I should hope so. I came right out and said it.


The insulting thing about your posts is that you believe the burden should be on me to prove my rankings beyond any doubt (which is impossible for anyone to do on a topic like this), yet you cannot provide compelling evidence to support your own position. I think some teams should be ranked a certain way, you obviously disagree. That's fine—and I have no problem explaining my ballot—but how about you stop accusing voters of having sinister biases just because they don't rank teams the way you like?

I don't accuse anyone of having sinister biases. I just accuse you of having illogical voting patterns, which cannot be explained by any of your reasoning.

I have not once called people out for not putting Albany in this year. Never. What I call people out on is when they vote illogically. There are many people who don't vote any of the above mentioned teams in the poll. That to me is consistent and logical. However, I don't agree with your analysis. I don't think it justifies putting teams like Colgate at 17th in the country and PVA&M in the top 20 and I'll gladly call you out on it everytime you post your ballot.

And my problem with your ballot was never about the exclusion of Albany. I used Albany and Central to make a point. It was more about the inclusion of teams that make no sense at this point (Colgate at 17, PVA&M at 20, FAMU at 21). My point was that those teams have done nothing to distinguish themselves from the teams which aren't "in consideration" as you point out. You still haven't shown they have.

If you don't like your ballot being questioned, don't post your ballot. Simple as that.