My Poll - 10/11/09

[dbackjon]

Actually - the computer rankings are far more UP to Date than the voters, who seem to be relying on last weeks results.


And yes, Idaho State would beat ODU or Dayton. YOU seem to think that only Montana is good in the Big Sky - the same Montana that should have lost to NAU, had it been officiated correctly.

[native]

GPI rankings as of 12 October:

17 Northern Arizona
21 Eastern Washington
26 Montana State
27 Colgate
37 Holy Cross
47 Prairie View

Uh, good for the GPI? I've never put much stock in that or most of the things that go into it. The GPI also has North Dakota 28th. Would anyone seriously put the Sioux that high? It additionally has dismal Idaho State above teams with winning records just because they played Oklahoma & Arizona State (does anyone think ISU is better than Dayton or Old Dominion?). Also odd is that a western football fan would use the GPI when it has 6 CAA teams in the top 12.

Half of the GPI is poll rankings. The rest is computer rankings. Computer rankings are good for college basketball where everyone plays 30 games, but college football doesn't have enough games or—in particular—enough games against comparable non-conference opponents to get any sort of accurate picture.

Points taken, but the GPI is relevant to the discussion because it is used by the NCAA.

The problem you identified, that there are not enough inter-conference matchups among 125 FCS teams, is all the more reason to use computer ratings to assist in making valid team comparisons.

With or without the GPI, I do believe that all three Big Sky teams listed are better than all three non-BSC teams listed.

[Mvemjsunpx]

Actually - the computer rankings are far more UP to Date than the voters, who seem to be relying on last weeks results.

What does that mean exactly? The GPI uses the poll rankings, too, and I agree that those have problems as well.

And yes, Idaho State would beat ODU or Dayton.

I doubt it, but you never know. This year's ISU team is the worst Big Sky team I can remember. I would be surprised if they played UNC within 10 points at home this week and I would be surprised if they got a single win this season.

YOU seem to think that only Montana is good in the Big Sky

Where did I say that? I had Weber @ #15 in case you missed it. I just don't think NAU & Montana State are as good as you do.

the same Montana that should have lost to NAU, had it been officiated correctly.

OK, now you've gone off the deep end. Wasn't this issue resolved 2 weeks ago? There are three glaring things wrong with that statement.

• 1. Henderson did step out of bounds.
  
  2. Even if Henderson hadn't stepped out of bounds, it would have only tied the game, not won it.
  
  3. NAU still had 1st. & goal at the 3 and Herrick blindly threw it up for grabs in the endzone.

[danefan]

Uh, good for the GPI? I've never put much stock in that or most of the things that go into it. The GPI also has North Dakota 28th. Would anyone seriously put the Sioux that high? It additionally has dismal Idaho State above teams with winning records just because they played Oklahoma & Arizona State (does anyone think ISU is better than Dayton or Old Dominion?). Also odd is that a western football fan would use the GPI when it has 6 CAA teams in the top 12.

Half of the GPI is poll rankings. The rest is computer rankings. Computer rankings are good for college basketball where everyone plays 30 games, but college football doesn't have enough games or—in particular—enough games against comparable non-conference opponents to get any sort of accurate picture.

Points taken, but the GPI is relevant to the discussion because it is used by the NCAA.

The problem you identified, that there are not enough inter-conference matchups among 125 FCS teams, is all the more reason to use computer ratings to assist in making valid team comparisons.

With or without the GPI, I do believe that all three Big Sky teams listed are better than all three non-BSC teams listed.

Actually its not relevant because despite what Ralph likes to tell people, the GPI is not used by the NCAA.

There is a modified GPI that is used by the NCAA, BUT only for the determination of the "Bridge AQ" granted to the NEC and Big South this year. The modified GPI is made up of only 4 computer polls and last year was pretty different in the 10-25 range than the regular GPI (when Ralph was normal he would PM me the modified GPI every week).

And for purposes of this year's playoffs, even the Modified GPI is irrelevant because there won't be an NEC or Big South team that can qualify for the Bridge AQ because neither of the league's conference champs will have 2 wins against AQ conference teams.

The Committee Chair has said in interviews that the Committee has its own ranking system which is updates on its weekly conference calls throughout the season.

[AZGrizFan]

Actually - the computer rankings are far more UP to Date than the voters, who seem to be relying on last weeks results.


And yes, Idaho State would beat ODU or Dayton. YOU seem to think that only Montana is good in the Big Sky - the same Montana that should have lost to NAU, had it been officiated correctly.

Careful, Jon. You sound like one of them bitter Donks who claim AlGore actually won the 2000 election.

Oh, wait. You ARE oneof those bitter donks.

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

Dback, it's really amazing to me to see a guy that I have always known to be level headed in all things like this be so emotional over the officiating as if it was a one sided affair for the Griz. I don't agree with mvem on the Dayton, or ODU stmt. and a few others he has put forth but he kicked your ass on the NAU vs. Montana thing. That is what I've said about the end of the game and haven't seen you or DukeJack have a reasonable answer for your team falling flat with a 1st and goal from the 4 to tie the game. You really need to pull back on that emotional shit a little bit man. NAU is a good team and I can't believe that you are putting so much stock into what some of the poll voters are thinking right now with the important 2nd half of the season still out there as a proving ground for you guys.

[dbackjon]

(closed circuit to Ursus and Z - he didn't kick my ass on anything, and that is not the play (or plays) I am refering to.)

Yes, NAU should have just punched it in with Henderson, instead of throwing it. Of course, had they properly called false start on Montana's touchdown in OT, or not called the BS roughing penalty in the first half, the score would have been different. But, I am not intending to rehash that game - Montana won.

What gets me is that there are MANY Griz fans (not just on here) that fail to give NAU, or for that matter, most other teams in the Big Sky any credit. They have fallen for the "Big Fluffy" argument, and the myth that the CAA is so superior that only one or two Big Sky teams are worthy, and the same record in another conference is superior to the Big Sky.

First the claim was - well, that was a fluke against Montana (as argued by Mvem) - lets see how you do in the cold and snow in Bozeman. NAU won that game by 13. So then it becomes - well, Montana State isn't a good team, they struggled against Dixie State (while ignoring the fact that New Hampshire struggled against a WORSE team in St. Francis).

[Gil Dobie]

1) UNI
2) Montana
3) New Hampshire
4) Richmond
5) Elon
6) SIU
7) Villanova
8) ASU
9) UCA
10) William & Mary
11) Weber State
12) SDSU
13) Delaware
14) Umass
15) Northern Arizona
16) Stephen F. Austin
17) Cal Poly
18) Montana State
19) McNeese State
20) Colgate
21) Youngstown State
22) Chattanooga
23) Albany
24) South Carolina State
25) Eastern Washington

Red teams new to my poll this week.

Not bad, but you may want to take a look at Jacksonville St

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

(closed circuit to Ursus and Z - he didn't kick my ass on anything, and that is not the play (or plays) I am refering to.)

Yes, NAU should have just punched it in with Henderson, instead of throwing it. Of course, had they properly called false start on Montana's touchdown in OT, or not called the BS roughing penalty in the first half, the score would have been different. But, I am not intending to rehash that game - Montana won.

What gets me is that there are MANY Griz fans (not just on here) that fail to give NAU, or for that matter, most other teams in the Big Sky any credit. They have fallen for the "Big Fluffy" argument, and the myth that the CAA is so superior that only one or two Big Sky teams are worthy, and the same record in another conference is superior to the Big Sky.

First the claim was - well, that was a fluke against Montana (as argued by Mvem) - lets see how you do in the cold and snow in Bozeman. NAU won that game by 13. So then it becomes - well, Montana State isn't a good team, they struggled against Dixie State (while ignoring the fact that New Hampshire struggled against a WORSE team in St. Francis).

I guess I don't see as much of what you're talking about because I ain't reading the shit that you are on other boards. I definitely don't think that there are only one or two good teams in the BSC. I think Weber, MSU, EWU, and NAU are all on the level of the Griz this year in particular but I always know that those teams are a tough out no matter what.

The thing is dback you are hanging your argument on a couple of calls in the game and you surely have watched enough games to know that is a real tenuous argument as it happens in every game to both sides.

I see the argument you are making there on eGriz after every game (including the NAU game) about the calls that didn't go our way to allow the other team to hang with us or win the game and is just emotional bullshit. Don't go down that road man it's pretty pathetic. There was a list of at least four or five calls that someone posted on eGriz that would match what you have come up with the false start and so forth. It's pretty dumb to hang on that.

[89Hen]

They have fallen for the "Big Fluffy" argument, and the myth that the CAA is so superior that only one or two Big Sky teams are worthy, and the same record in another conference is superior to the Big Sky.

Myth? Who besides Montana has made even the semifinals in the last 10 years?

Honestly, if you went back to the old AOL I-AA boards you would find us CAA (Yankee/A10 at the time) posters making this same arguement with SoCon and Gateway folks, so I know where you are coming from. It wasn't until 1998 > that the CAA really made a push in the playoffs. The Big Sky has certainly done better recently, but until it gets somebody besides Montana deep into the playoffs, the "myth" is still truth.

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

They have fallen for the "Big Fluffy" argument, and the myth that the CAA is so superior that only one or two Big Sky teams are worthy, and the same record in another conference is superior to the Big Sky.

Myth? Who besides Montana has made even the semifinals in the last 10 years?

Hey broken record, he ain't talking about that. He's talking about voters this year not living in the past. Thanks for playing.

[89Hen]

Hey broken record, he ain't talking about that. He's talking about voters this year not living in the past. Thanks for playing.

The past IS what he's talking about when he talks about a "myth". Why did we not have SCSt in the top 5 while they were still undefeated? Because we know 5-0 with a MEAC schedule = not a top 5 resume. I'm not saying Big Sky = MEAC, but you get the point.

[JMU DJ]

Yes, NAU should have just punched it in with Henderson, instead of throwing it. Of course, had they properly called false start on Montana's touchdown in OT, or not called the BS roughing penalty in the first half, the score would have been different. But, I am not intending to rehash that game - Montana won.

There's a lot of "if" statements being made here....

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

Hey broken record, he ain't talking about that. He's talking about voters this year not living in the past. Thanks for playing.

The past IS what he's talking about when he talks about a "myth". Why did we not have SCSt in the top 5 while they were still undefeated? Because we know 5-0 with a MEAC schedule = not a top 5 resume. I'm not saying Big Sky = MEAC, but you get the point.

They were not the only undefeated team out there, and I know you can't divorce yourself completely from what has happened traditionally.

I don't know why the ranking right now is mattering so much though because if the keep winning then they will be a highly ranked team in the next month anyway.

[putter]

They have fallen for the "Big Fluffy" argument, and the myth that the CAA is so superior that only one or two Big Sky teams are worthy, and the same record in another conference is superior to the Big Sky.

Myth? Who besides Montana has made even the semifinals in the last 10 years?

Honestly, if you went back to the old AOL I-AA boards you would find us CAA (Yankee/A10 at the time) posters making this same arguement with SoCon and Gateway folks, so I know where you are coming from. It wasn't until 1998 > that the CAA really made a push in the playoffs. The Big Sky has certainly done better recently, but until it gets somebody besides Montana deep into the playoffs, the "myth" is still truth.

I think it is more of a consistency thing. Montana, NAU, and EWU have all beaten the #1 playoff seed on the road in the playoffs, yet everyone keeps hanging thier hat on "deep into the playoffs". You do realize that there is only one more win to qualify for that distinction IYO. EWU lost to App in a tough game by 3 (yes, I have heard all the arguments about the game never being in doubt but it was with your special team struggles) and they beat SIU when everyone thought they would run the table and were nipped by SHSU at the buzzer in the next game. You are molding the argument to fit you point. Fact is the Big Sky reps, other than Montana, have played pretty well in the playoffs the past few yeas but people's perception keeps them from voting for other teams when comparing their resume' against eastern teams.

[89Hen]

I don't know why the ranking right now is mattering so much though because if the keep winning then they will be a highly ranked team in the next month anyway.

Teams that are better than expected will always be late in arriving to the polls. NAU should be in. What's weird is at least 20 people spoke up on AGS to say they were in their ballots. I'm not sure how they weren't ranked.

[89Hen]

I think it is more of a consistency thing. Montana, NAU, and EWU have all beaten the #1 playoff seed on the road in the playoffs, yet everyone keeps hanging thier hat on "deep into the playoffs".

Deep is important IMO. North Carolina A&T also beat a #1 seed on the road and lost the next week 41-3. The fact that NO other Big Sky team has gotten to the semis since maybe 1997 (?) is significant.

[AZGrizFan]

(closed circuit to Ursus and Z - he didn't kick my ass on anything, and that is not the play (or plays) I am refering to.)

Yes, NAU should have just punched it in with Henderson, instead of throwing it. Of course, had they properly called false start on Montana's touchdown in OT, or not called the BS roughing penalty in the first half, the score would have been different. But, I am not intending to rehash that game - Montana won.

What gets me is that there are MANY Griz fans (not just on here) that fail to give NAU, or for that matter, most other teams in the Big Sky any credit. They have fallen for the "Big Fluffy" argument, and the myth that the CAA is so superior that only one or two Big Sky teams are worthy, and the same record in another conference is superior to the Big Sky.

First the claim was - well, that was a fluke against Montana (as argued by Mvem) - lets see how you do in the cold and snow in Bozeman. NAU won that game by 13. So then it becomes - well, Montana State isn't a good team, they struggled against Dixie State (while ignoring the fact that New Hampshire struggled against a WORSE team in St. Francis).

I have 5 BSC teams ranked, and NAU is 16th. Granted, EWU will fall out of my poll when they lose to the Griz this weekend, but NAU should keep climbing...

[Cap'n Cat]

When it comes to the point where you are arguing about polls, college football is no longer fun.

- Cap'n Cat, 2009





AZGrizFan:


"....and, further, when Saturn is in its second phase and Mars is aligned with Neptune, that mathematically eliminates Georgia Southern, Illinois State and Maine."

[AZGrizFan]

"....and, further, when Saturn is in its second phase and Mars is aligned with Neptune, that mathematically eliminates Georgia Southern, Illinois State and Maine."

GSU, ISU and Maine were eliminated when they stepped off the bus.

[Cap'n Cat]

"....and, further, when Saturn is in its second phase and Mars is aligned with Neptune, that mathematically eliminates Georgia Southern, Illinois State and Maine."

GSU, ISU and Maine were eliminated when they stepped off the bus.

[AZGrizFan]

GSU, ISU and Maine were eliminated when they stepped off the bus.

JMU, UMass and Montana STATE are eliminated mathematically when Saturn is in it's second phase and Mars is aligned with Neptune. Anybody with a BRAINSTEM knows THAT, dumbass.

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

JMU, UMass and Montana STATE are eliminated mathematically when Saturn is in it's second phase and Mars is aligned with Neptune. Anybody with a BRAINSTEM knows THAT, dumbass.

Not to mention when a cock is in Uranus.



I know, pure hackery but I did it anyway.

[AZGrizFan]

JMU, UMass and Montana STATE are eliminated mathematically when Saturn is in it's second phase and Mars is aligned with Neptune. Anybody with a BRAINSTEM knows THAT, dumbass.

Not to mention when a cock is in Uranus.



I know, pure hackery but I did it anyway.

Well, since THAT will never happen, we'll just have to continue depending on Saturn and Mars to eliminate the sCats.

[JMU DJ]

JMU, UMass and Montana STATE are eliminated mathematically when Saturn is in it's second phase and Mars is aligned with Neptune. Anybody with a BRAINSTEM knows THAT, dumbass.

Not to mention when a cock is in Ursus.



I know, pure hackery but I did it anyway.