Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

This is not a diss to the current poll or the people who make/run it.


3.Instead of listing the nickname after the school name, (ex. Thunderbirds) list the Conf initials (ex. BSC)...

Spoiler: show

This gives us a better aspect of which conf's are stronger/ which conf's are more deserving of an at large bid ect..

2.There is no point for the poll to exceed 16 teams...

Spoiler: show

This is not FBS where you have 6-6 teams getting bowl games ect... In FCS football a 16 team playoff system determines the best team, so whats the point of listing the #23 team?

1.Start the poll at 5pm pacific time & close the poll at midnight Saturday...

Spoiler: show

The key word here is bias; It is my belief that SOME PEOPLE, look at other polls before they vote. Now maybe it doesnt matter bc people are gonna vote the same way anyway, BUT, wouldnt you rather have a truly unbais poll? Another added bonus is we get the results of the poll on Monday...not Wednesday.

3. I think people generally know what conference each team is in.

2. I like this idea, would make the poll unique... but we also know that the top 16 aren't necessarily the ones who make it into the playoffs.

1. Think you'd received less votes. People aren't going to always be home on a Saturday night or near a computer to vote. Extra time allows for better evaluation. I usually get this done on a Sunday after I've had a chance to process all the games: who played who... who they've played before... how they've fared this season... strength of schedule... etc. Plus some people like old man Bandl are in bed by 5 PM Pacific time.

The 16 team idea is the one that I really wanted and lobbied for when the discussion of a poll for the site came about and the feeling was about 50/50 with people on the thread. It don't matter too much to me that there are 25 in it but the logic for doing it that way is pretty weak as well. Just because everyone else does it that way we need to do it that way. I went for the unique angle but it does make comparisons with other polls pretty easy and the fact that there are some people that really feel like they need to know the ORV category is somewhat proof that everybody would be asking for the names of those just outside the 16 which would end up being 20-25 anyway.

3. Conference affiliation would be nice, but it would get cluttered. Plus, Big South and Big Sky have the same abbreviation...

2. Like DJ said, say this year Jax. St, UCA, Harvard, Grambling State, and Chatty were in the top 16. You really only have 11 playoff eligible teams in the top 16, and makes you wish you could see the rest of the top 25 to see those next in line.

1. The timing will be worked out as things go on, I think. We can judge based on how quickly people get their polls in, and what kind of poll is put out, and see where we can go from there. I think the sooner, the better, but you need to be able to get a large sample size, as well.

I think adding ORV's is the main thing the poll could use. That and first place votes in parenthesis after the teams. Neither is a big deal, but just adds more info to be considered by those looking at the poll.

What if an deserving Ivy League or SWAC team deservedly deserves to be included in the top 16? But they won't participate in the playoffs, so then you are leaving out a number of teams that will.

On the poll closing idea...no way on that one BF. We want to do a good job and look at the stuff that went on the previous day so using Sunday to do the research is the way to go. There ain't no way in hell I would have a vote in by midnight on Saturday. I'm usually at the game and then partying until then and I ain't gonna change that to vote in the poll. Saturdays are for the game, not working on something like this.

bandl wrote:What if an deserving Ivy League or SWAC team deservedly deserves to be included in the top 16? But they won't participate in the playoffs, so then you are leaving out a number of teams that will.

My idea was that our poll could be more of a "playoff poll". Any teams not eligible for the playoffs wouldn't be in the list.

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote:

bandl wrote:What if an deserving Ivy League or SWAC team deservedly deserves to be included in the top 16? But they won't participate in the playoffs, so then you are leaving out a number of teams that will.

My idea was that our poll could be more of a "playoff poll". Any teams not eligible for the playoffs wouldn't be in the list.

That would have really pissed off a mass of NDSU folks back in the day...

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote:

bandl wrote:What if an deserving Ivy League or SWAC team deservedly deserves to be included in the top 16? But they won't participate in the playoffs, so then you are leaving out a number of teams that will.

My idea was that our poll could be more of a "playoff poll". Any teams not eligible for the playoffs wouldn't be in the list.

Ah. Got it.

So why do they even play football?

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote:

bandl wrote:What if an deserving Ivy League or SWAC team deservedly deserves to be included in the top 16? But they won't participate in the playoffs, so then you are leaving out a number of teams that will.

My idea was that our poll could be more of a "playoff poll". Any teams not eligible for the playoffs wouldn't be in the list.

Could work, but then I still think the "Top 16" wouldn't work... would definitely have to put in an ORV part of that poll. It just doesn't work that way when the NCAA selection committee picks the teams. There are some shoe ins, but in the end I feel like it gets murky towards the lower ranked teams. Someone walks away feeling snubbed in the end.

JMU DJ wrote:

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote: My idea was that our poll could be more of a "playoff poll". Any teams not eligible for the playoffs wouldn't be in the list.

Could work, but then I still think the "Top 16" wouldn't work... would definitely have to put in an ORV part of that poll. It just doesn't work that way when the NCAA selection committee picks the teams. There are some shoe ins, but in the end I feel like it gets murky towards the lower ranked teams. Someone walks away feeling snubbed in the end.

Someone always ends up getting 'Woffed'
Or is it 'Woofed'?

I think having a supplementary top 16 "Playoff Resume Power Ranking" would be nice. But if you want to do a poll, make it top 25, just like everyone else.

In fact, the idea of a Playoff Resume Power Ranking sounds pretty sweet, and I think it should happen. Not saying cs.com needs to run it, since ya'll have plenty on your plates, but if someone wants to help me run it, or just run it themselves... either giving it a trial run now, or starting it next year, let me know... I think it would be a nice added element.

ToTheLeft wrote:I think having a supplementary top 16 "Playoff Resume Power Ranking" would be nice. But if you want to do a poll, make it top 25, just like everyone else.

In fact, the idea of a Playoff Resume Power Ranking sounds pretty sweet, and I think it should happen. Not saying cs.com needs to run it, since ya'll have plenty on your plates, but if someone wants to help me run it, or just run it themselves... either giving it a trial run now, or starting it next year, let me know... I think it would be a nice added element.

That's another that we were discussing on the Poll thread but we were gonna wait until after getting the poll running as it stands now. Guys like Bench, Rob, and a few others are actually doing that now in a sense with the discussions they are rolling out every week.

bandl wrote:

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote: My idea was that our poll could be more of a "playoff poll". Any teams not eligible for the playoffs wouldn't be in the list.

Ah. Got it.

So why do they even play football?

Your guess is as good as mine.

Having more than 6 people vote

Franks Tanks wrote:Having more than 6 people vote

Do you actually know how many people vote?

Franks Tanks wrote:Having more than 6 people vote

Taking some sort of a shot here Tanks? Got a problem with the poll?

Franks Tanks wrote:Having more than 6 people vote

Of course Frank has a problem with it. Holy Cross isn't ranked 13th.

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote:

Franks Tanks wrote:Having more than 6 people vote

Taking some sort of a shot here Tanks? Got a problem with the poll?

Does anyone know how many people actually vote-- has that been divulged?

Such a small number of voters with inherient bias (fans of an individual team) personal bias has a greater chance to seep into the results.

Also who cares?? We have a playoff, for the most part every team with a shot at the championship is going to make the playoffs.

Willie wrote:

Franks Tanks wrote:Having more than 6 people vote

Well how many people vote then Willie?

danefan wrote:Of course Frank has a problem with it. Holy Cross isn't ranked 13th.

I dont care where Holy Cross or Lafayette is ranked.. I really dont.

I know they would both beat Albany however

Franks Tanks wrote:

danefan wrote:Of course Frank has a problem with it. Holy Cross isn't ranked 13th.

I dont care where Holy Cross or Lafayette is ranked.. I really dont.

I know they would both beat Albany however

Sure you don't care.

danefan wrote:

Franks Tanks wrote:
I dont care where Holy Cross or Lafayette is ranked.. I really dont.

I know they would both beat Albany however

Sure you don't care.

I dont --cause Holy Cross and or Lafayette will make the playoffs and get a chance to prove how good (or bad) they are. WHy does it matter if they are number 24 or not ranked in some poll nobody outside of those that vote in it look at?

Anyone want to note how many people voted in the cs.com poll this week?