Big Sky coaches/media poll

[CrazyCat]

2014 Preseason
Football Polls

1. Eastern Washington (12) ................... 144
2. Montana (1) .................................... 130
3. Montana State ..................................111
4. Cal Poly .......................................... 108
5. Northern Arizona ................................100
6. Southern Utah ....................................89
7. Sacramento State ...............................79
8. Portland State ................................... 71
9. UC Davis ............................................66
10. North Dakota .....................................34
11. Weber State ..................................... 30
12. Idaho State .......................................28
13. Northern Colorado .............................. 23
Media Poll
1. Eastern Washington (34) .................464
2. Montana (1) ................................. 416
3. Montana State (1) ........................ 364
4. Cal Poly ....................................... 329
5. Northern Arizona ........................... 328
6. Southern Utah .............................. 299
7. UC Davis ...................................... 228
8. Portland State ...............................227
9. Sacramento State ..........................222
10. Idaho State ................................ 124
11. North Dakota ................................121
12. Weber State ............................... 103
13. Northern Colorado ...........................61
http://bigskyconf.com/news/2014/7/13/FB_0713140616.aspx (http://bigskyconf.com/news/2014/7/13/FB_0713140616.aspx)

[darell1976]

No shock for UND except i would have them higher than Idaho State.xeyebrowx

[SUPharmacist]

Anyone else notice the article claimed EWU got all 12 possible votes in the coaches poll. Made me chuckle.

[JSUBison]

Idaho State has lost 45 consecutive road games.

[clenz]

Anyone else notice the article claimed EWU got all 12 possible votes in the coaches poll. Made me chuckle.
Why?

[CrazyCat]

Anyone else notice the article claimed EWU got all 12 possible votes in the coaches poll. Made me chuckle.

Why? You can't vote for your own team.

[tomq04]

I'm starting to get the feeling NAU is going to be gunning for #2 as soon as games start being played.

[ncbears]

I would be surprised if UNC didn't finish above the Sue and Weber State, especially Weber. They lost something like 19 players to transfers and missions. They have a QB problem. Their supposed starting QB is a transfer coming in from BYU who has yet to take a snap for them. How will he learn the offense in time? Also, the Sue lost some real talent in the receiver spot with one guy transferring to an FBS school and one that graduated. Also, both teams will need to adjust to new schemes and new coaches.

I think UNC will finish above both teams and possibly ISU. That being said I think we were projected to finish 5th or 6th in last season's polls and we finished dead last. Pre-season polls don't mean a thing.

[Red & Black]

Anyone else notice the article claimed EWU got all 12 possible votes in the coaches poll. Made me chuckle.

They did get all 12 possible. Baldwin most likely gave Montana their lone vote. Not sure what's funny about it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Red & Black]

I would be surprised if UNC didn't finish above the Sue and Weber State, especially Weber. They lost something like 19 players to transfers and missions. They have a QB problem. Their supposed starting QB is a transfer coming in from BYU who has yet to take a snap for them. How will he learn the offense in time? Also, the Sue lost some real talent in the receiver spot with one guy transferring to an FBS school and one that graduated. Also, both teams will need to adjust to new schemes and new coaches.

I think UNC will finish above both teams and possibly ISU. That being said I think we were projected to finish 5th or 6th in last season's polls and we finished dead last. Pre-season polls don't mean a thing.

They do when you're consistently at the bottom of them. That's called a trend. Anyway, I think ISU showed improvement this past season and I expect them to build upon that this year. I'd be extremely surprised to see UNC finish above them. Weber may be another story; I don't expect they'll be very good at all. Horrible, quite possibly.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[clenz]

UNC has 4 D1 (non Idaho State) wins since the start of the 2010 season and lost to a D2 last season

I don't follow UNC closely...but...what makes anyone think they will be anything other than 11th, 12th or 13th with Idaho State and Weber St?

[mvemjsunpx]

I'm starting to get the feeling NAU is going to be gunning for #2 as soon as games start being played.

After losing Bauman?

[clenz]

After losing Bauman?

He actually didn't account for as many yards per game as I thought he did. 150 betwen rushing and receiving.

Then again...

He was their leading receiver (in catches), top 5 in yards, and the second leading rusher had 224 less carries than him with half of the YPC. But...NAU does have 2 whole guys coming back who averaged OVER .9 ypc - their QB (2.7 ypc and 15 ypg) and Jahn (56 for 212 or 3.8 and17.7)...so they have that going for them.

[darell1976]

I would be surprised if UNC didn't finish above the Sue and Weber State, especially Weber. They lost something like 19 players to transfers and missions. They have a QB problem. Their supposed starting QB is a transfer coming in from BYU who has yet to take a snap for them. How will he learn the offense in time? Also, the Sue lost some real talent in the receiver spot with one guy transferring to an FBS school and one that graduated. Also, both teams will need to adjust to new schemes and new coaches.

I think UNC will finish above both teams and possibly ISU. That being said I think we were projected to finish 5th or 6th in last season's polls and we finished dead last. Pre-season polls don't mean a thing.

As bad as UND was last season they did beat ISU and UNC, with some new life now they will improve and should be ahead of the Bears and Bengals and hopefully a lot more teams.

[BisonFan02]

UNC, Weber, ISU, and UND will be the biggest pillow fight ever.

[clenz]

UNC, Weber, ISU, and UND will be the biggest pillow fight ever.

BUT...

Those 4 teams create this strange "depth" to the conference that will allow them at least 4 teams in the playoffs....The Big Sky figured it out for the expanded field and getting teams in

Have 1 great team, 1 pretty good team, 3-4 just a scosche above average, 3-4 below average but not too far below average that they can't look semi respectable against a weak OOC, and then 3-4 complete dog crap teams that the top 4-5 teams can play 2 of each season to boost the win total.

It's a genius strategy from their stand point. They will always have 4 teams with at least 8 wins because of it...and it's sure to fool 98% of voters and selection committee members going forward.


I very much so prefer a true round robin schedule sized conference, however, at some point the MVFC HAS to follow that path to keep the top 4ish teams from beating the crap out of each other every year. Replace 2 of those games with games against some magic combination of Murray State, SEMO, Drake, TTU, Austin Peay, Drake, etc... and the MVFC will be much better off in terms of playoff births.

I don't think the conference will actually be stronger (I actually think the opposite) but rather than NDSU/SDSU/UNI/SIU playing all 3 every year if they can work the rotation of getting those 4 to only have to play 2 in any given season it will be better off

[ncbears]

UNC has 4 D1 (non Idaho State) wins since the start of the 2010 season and lost to a D2 last season

I don't follow UNC closely...but...what makes anyone think they will be anything other than 11th, 12th or 13th with Idaho State and Weber St?

I think our skills positions are a bit better. Think about it - Weber's coach isn't happy about the QB play after spring practice. Moreover, the supposed starting QB transferred out (as did about 19 players) and now they have a QB transferring in from BYU who hasn't even taken a snap for them. Their head coach is 39 years and hasn't been a head coach in his career.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Oh good the whining can start again...

I hope we get the chance to hear about Massey or whatever ratings again, that would be really cool.

[clenz]

So... 12th with 1 win over WSU.

Again, give me any reason that i should actually believe UNC isn't the same dog crap they have been their entire d1 existence.

[clenz]

Oh good the whining can start again...

I hope we get the chance to hear about Massey or whatever ratings again, that would be really cool.
I'm not whining at this point.

I freely admit the BSC and CAA have it right when it comes to getting 3, 4, or 5 teams into this expanded field.

Have 1 class of the league with a couple others that pass they eye test and a lot of fluff at the bottom of a large league to prop the top. It's a brilliant strategy.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

I'm not whining at this point.

I freely admit the BSC and CAA have it right when it comes to getting 3, 4, or 5 teams into this expanded field.

Have 1 class of the league with a couple others that pass they eye test and a lot of fluff at the bottom of a large league to prop the top. It's a brilliant strategy.

Sure thing, from the tenor of the post and all that came before it this statement seems clean to me. Doesn't matter anyway, we can tell what's what from the h2h matchups and that story is a fairly clear "pretty damn even" most of the time. If you take away the anomaly from one year that is normally how the selections shake out....excepting the CAA from that one of course.

[ncbears]

So... 12th with 1 win over WSU.

Again, give me any reason that i should actually believe UNC isn't the same dog crap they have been their entire d1 existence.

Here's what I posted on our fan website about why I think they will or will not be a .500 team.
http://www.bigskyfans.com/uncbears/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1688

[clenz]

No o line play and no running game? No way UNC sniffs anything past three d1 wins (if that) if those are accurate statements.

If you had talent on par with Montana, EWU, etc.. I might be willing to buy that.... But you don't and i don't

[BisonFan02]

Here's what I posted on our fan website about why I think they will or will not be a .500 team.
http://www.bigskyfans.com/uncbears/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1688

Potential wins in bold....best case I see is 4 wins, but who knows.


Sep. 6
UNLV









Sep. 13
Houston Baptist









Sep. 20
Northern Iowa









Sep. 27
Montana









Oct. 4
Northern Arizona









Oct. 11
Sacramento State









Oct. 18
Eastern Washington









Oct. 25
Idaho State









Nov. 1
UC Davis









Nov. 15
Weber State









Nov. 22
North Dakota

[darell1976]

So... 12th with 1 win over WSU.

Again, give me any reason that i should actually believe UNC isn't the same dog crap they have been their entire d1 existence.

When was the last time UNC had a winning record??

[clenz]

Sure thing, from the tenor of the post and all that came before it this statement seems clean to me. Doesn't matter anyway, we can tell what's what from the h2h matchups and that story is a fairly clear "pretty damn even" most of the time. If you take away the anomaly from one year that is normally how the selections shake out....excepting the CAA from that one of course.
You know I've done the math on the past births and found I wasn't completely accurate in my assessment of the Big Sky's playoff births in the past. I've admitted that. I created a sheet to prove how wrong I was.

We've disagreed, some, going forward how bids will work. You think that last year was an anomaly with the MVFC only getting 2 and the BSC getting 4. I don't know that that will be the "norm" but I think going forward you'll see the BSC average closer to 4 and the MVFC average closer to 2 and it's all because the Big Sky has it absolutely right - strength in numbers. That doesn't mean top to bottom the conference is strong. It means if you can find the right balance top heavy and complete bottom feeders with the right amount of meh in the middle you are in a much better position to get 4, 5, 6, or 7 teams to 7, 8, 9+ wins. Top to bottom I don't think the Big Sky is better. Tops 2 or 3 are likely going to be pretty even ever year. I think 4-6 will be a toss up with one conference being slightly better. I think that's where it stops until the worst of the worst. I think the MVFCs 6-9 are better. Indiana State is as bad as anyone in the nation (I'm well on record thinking they are the worst D1 scholarship non-HBCU. However, the typical fluff of 9/10-13/14 (in the future) is worse if for no other reason that quantity.

Like I said, it works perfectly for the Big Sky. The top 4/5 will almost never player all 3 of the other top 4/5. They'll probably catch 1 or 2 of them but 3 will be rare and all of them will be like Haley's Comet. It creates a nice balance of 1 or 2 top flight teams, 1 or 2 average teams, and 1 or 2 trash teams on the schedule. Take care of the bottom 4 on the schedule and split the top 2 teams on the schedule while creating a lot of parody in positions 3-6 in record. That creates a nice looking pyramid of separation for poll voters and selection committee members to look at. A smoke screen to hide if the 3-6 teams are "legit" all of the time. There will be times they are and there will be times they aren't. By the time anyone can find out it will be in the playoffs and too late to really matter.

On the flip side, the MVFC is quite strict on keeping a tighter footprint, and keeping as close to 9 teams as possible. That means, especially with the way it's split with E/W and the eastern teams complaining about having to travel more than a bus ride (they do it in the all sports conference too...it makes those of us in the west sick to our stomach and why we got stuck with Loyola (IL) rather than Belmont, NMSU, ORU, etc...) that UNI/SDSU/SIU/NDSU will pretty much never miss each other (the way the rotation is set and the way it will likely happen is UNI/SDSU/NDSU never not being on each others schedule because the Illinois schools were promised they'd not have to travel west more than once or twice. That can put a teams that might go through a rough patch with injuries/bad breaks in a REAL tough spot real quick. Had UNI had SDSU/NDSU replaced on their schedule with Indiana State (who they missed the last two years) it would have put UNI at 4-4 in conference and 8-4 overall. That's not how it's going to work ever though.

The MVFC also doesn't want to believe in adding fluff to the conference. I say that with USD being the most recent addition. That seems to have been more a knee jerk reaction to YSU's constant threats to leave for FBS/CAA/east coast and them being the only option available at that point. Going forward I don't think the MVFC will add anyone that doesn't have a proven history being a playoff contender.

I love that that is the way the MVFC does things, but it really puts the second through fourth place teams in a tough spot to make sure there are zero slips anywhere, even against each other, because they simply can't afford it.

I also thinking the CAA and Big Sky getting 3-4 teams every year will "prove" they deserve that many every year, no matter what because they are bound to have multiple teams advance to the quarters/semis or even title game just because of sheer numbers and the fact that for some reason the MEAC and OVC apparently have to have at least 2 bids every year. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. We are watching it happen with the SEC over the last 10-15 years. They've always had great football, but they weren't nearly as far a head as they are now at that point. However, the media started only talking about their wins over B10/ACC/B12 schools and ignoring the losses. All of a sudden the SEC looked REALLY REALLY good nationally. Kids want to play for winners. Michigan, Notre Dame, USC, etc.. stopped being talked about and were replaced with Bama, Auburn LSU, etc... and kids started going there more than they had in the past and after a couple of recruiting classes the SEC had become a complete power head and shoulders above every one.


Maybe I'll be proven wrong over the next 4 or 5 years. I'll happily be wrong on this. I really will. It's just how I see things working.

[clenz]

When was the last time UNC had a winning record??
As a D2 in 03.

Since moving D1 they have gone




2004
Kay Dalton






2

9

0

0.18182

186

294

-108



2005
Kay Dalton






4

7

0

0.36364

255

285

-30



2006
Scott Downing






1

10

0

0.09091

129

373

-244



2007
Scott Downing






1

11

0

0.08333

136

415

-279



2008
Scott Downing






1

10

0

0.09091

225

326

-101



2009
Scott Downing






3

8

0

0.27273

202

288

-86



2010
Scott Downing






3

8

0

0.27273

275

345

-70



2011
Earnest Collins, Jr.






0

11

0

0.00000

207

382

-175



2012
Earnest Collins, Jr.






5

6

0

0.45455

282

324

-42



2013
Earnest Collins, Jr.






1

11

0

0.08333

237

375

-138




21-91 in a decade of D1 football...I can double check the exact number but I think about 14-16 of those wins are non D1/Idaho State

Nearly all of their wins have been sub D1 or Idaho State.

[darell1976]

As a D2 in 03.

Since moving D1 they have gone




2004

Kay Dalton




2


9


0


0.18182


186


294


-108




2005

Kay Dalton




4


7


0


0.36364


255


285


-30




2006

Scott Downing




1


10


0


0.09091


129


373


-244




2007

Scott Downing




1


11


0


0.08333


136


415


-279




2008

Scott Downing




1


10


0


0.09091


225


326


-101




2009

Scott Downing




3


8


0


0.27273


202


288


-86




2010

Scott Downing




3


8


0


0.27273


275


345


-70




2011

Earnest Collins, Jr.




0


11


0


0.00000


207


382


-175




2012

Earnest Collins, Jr.




5


6


0


0.45455


282


324


-42




2013

Earnest Collins, Jr.




1


11


0


0.08333


237


375


-138





21-91 in a decade of D1 football...I can double check the exact number but I think about 14-16 of those wins are non D1/Idaho State

Nearly all of their wins have been sub D1 or Idaho State.

Even UND has had a winning record since moving up to DI (the last one was 8-3 in 2011 GWFC Co-Champs). UNC sure has gone downhill since their dominance in DII.

[clenz]

04: D2 win and Southern Utah
05: 2 D2 wins, SELA and SHSU
06: Texas State
07: Montana State
08: Idaho State
09: San Diego (non-scholly), Idaho State, D2
10: D2, Idaho State, Portland State
11: NO WINS
12: D2, Idaho State, Portland State, Weber State, UND,
13: NAIA

I was a touch off...10 of their 21 wins have been against sub D1s, Idaho State or non scholly teams.

I'm not sure what it says about Portland State that they show up multiple times as well...xsmhx

[dewey]

04: D2 win and Southern Utah
05: 2 D2 wins, SELA and SHSU
06: Texas State
07: Montana State
08: Idaho State
09: San Diego (non-scholly), Idaho State, D2
10: D2, Idaho State, Portland State
11: NO WINS
12: D2, Idaho State, Portland State, Weber State, UND,
13: NAIA

I was a touch off...10 of their 21 wins have been against sub D1s, Idaho State or non scholly teams.

I'm not sure what it says about Portland State that they show up multiple times as well...xsmhx

Hard to believe that they were really good in the 90's and the old D2 NCC (North Central Conference) came down to NDSU, UND and UNC almost every year. Heck they even won two D2 National Titles in 1996 and 1997.

Good work on the research Clenz!

Dewey

[ncbears]

I'm certainly aware of UNC's futility since the D1 era, I've been a fan since the a kid and witnessed the good and bad. That's in the past now, cheers to the future!

[ursus arctos horribilis]

You know I've done the math on the past births and found I wasn't completely accurate in my assessment of the Big Sky's playoff births in the past. I've admitted that. I created a sheet to prove how wrong I was.

We've disagreed, some, going forward how bids will work. You think that last year was an anomaly with the MVFC only getting 2 and the BSC getting 4. I don't know that that will be the "norm" but I think going forward you'll see the BSC average closer to 4 and the MVFC average closer to 2 and it's all because the Big Sky has it absolutely right - strength in numbers. That doesn't mean top to bottom the conference is strong. It means if you can find the right balance top heavy and complete bottom feeders with the right amount of meh in the middle you are in a much better position to get 4, 5, 6, or 7 teams to 7, 8, 9+ wins. Top to bottom I don't think the Big Sky is better. Tops 2 or 3 are likely going to be pretty even ever year. I think 4-6 will be a toss up with one conference being slightly better. I think that's where it stops until the worst of the worst. I think the MVFCs 6-9 are better. Indiana State is as bad as anyone in the nation (I'm well on record thinking they are the worst D1 scholarship non-HBCU. However, the typical fluff of 9/10-13/14 (in the future) is worse if for no other reason that quantity.

Like I said, it works perfectly for the Big Sky. The top 4/5 will almost never player all 3 of the other top 4/5. They'll probably catch 1 or 2 of them but 3 will be rare and all of them will be like Haley's Comet. It creates a nice balance of 1 or 2 top flight teams, 1 or 2 average teams, and 1 or 2 trash teams on the schedule. Take care of the bottom 4 on the schedule and split the top 2 teams on the schedule while creating a lot of parody in positions 3-6 in record. That creates a nice looking pyramid of separation for poll voters and selection committee members to look at. A smoke screen to hide if the 3-6 teams are "legit" all of the time. There will be times they are and there will be times they aren't. By the time anyone can find out it will be in the playoffs and too late to really matter.

On the flip side, the MVFC is quite strict on keeping a tighter footprint, and keeping as close to 9 teams as possible. That means, especially with the way it's split with E/W and the eastern teams complaining about having to travel more than a bus ride (they do it in the all sports conference too...it makes those of us in the west sick to our stomach and why we got stuck with Loyola (IL) rather than Belmont, NMSU, ORU, etc...) that UNI/SDSU/SIU/NDSU will pretty much never miss each other (the way the rotation is set and the way it will likely happen is UNI/SDSU/NDSU never not being on each others schedule because the Illinois schools were promised they'd not have to travel west more than once or twice. That can put a teams that might go through a rough patch with injuries/bad breaks in a REAL tough spot real quick. Had UNI had SDSU/NDSU replaced on their schedule with Indiana State (who they missed the last two years) it would have put UNI at 4-4 in conference and 8-4 overall. That's not how it's going to work ever though.

The MVFC also doesn't want to believe in adding fluff to the conference. I say that with USD being the most recent addition. That seems to have been more a knee jerk reaction to YSU's constant threats to leave for FBS/CAA/east coast and them being the only option available at that point. Going forward I don't think the MVFC will add anyone that doesn't have a proven history being a playoff contender.

I love that that is the way the MVFC does things, but it really puts the second through fourth place teams in a tough spot to make sure there are zero slips anywhere, even against each other, because they simply can't afford it.

I also thinking the CAA and Big Sky getting 3-4 teams every year will "prove" they deserve that many every year, no matter what because they are bound to have multiple teams advance to the quarters/semis or even title game just because of sheer numbers and the fact that for some reason the MEAC and OVC apparently have to have at least 2 bids every year. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. We are watching it happen with the SEC over the last 10-15 years. They've always had great football, but they weren't nearly as far a head as they are now at that point. However, the media started only talking about their wins over B10/ACC/B12 schools and ignoring the losses. All of a sudden the SEC looked REALLY REALLY good nationally. Kids want to play for winners. Michigan, Notre Dame, USC, etc.. stopped being talked about and were replaced with Bama, Auburn LSU, etc... and kids started going there more than they had in the past and after a couple of recruiting classes the SEC had become a complete power head and shoulders above every one.


Maybe I'll be proven wrong over the next 4 or 5 years. I'll happily be wrong on this. I really will. It's just how I see things working.

Well to be honest clenz I've never really seen you admit you were wrong on it and thus this just appeared to be more of the same ol'.

Percentage of teams from each will probably fairly equal. The actual number may be different and trend up for the BSC with the additional teams.

[MplsBison]

They did get all 12 possible. Baldwin most likely gave Montana their lone vote. Not sure what's funny about it.


I'm guessing he thought it was funny because there are 13 coaches in the Big Sky, each of whom vote and I assume each of whom could choose to vote their own team first if desired.

I get the point, but it was worded poorly.

[SUPharmacist]

I definitely did not connect the dots that a coach cannot vote for their own team (no matter how obvious this should have been if I paused a second or read the entire article). Skimming left me thinking how can they say all votes when the totals clearly showed otherwise. Oh well, that's what I get for being snarky. I had wondered how someone could have not voted for EWU after their season last year, and the players they retained.

[MplsBison]

I definitely did not connect the dots that a coach cannot vote for their own team (no matter how obvious this should have been if I paused a second or read the entire article). Skimming left me thinking how can they say all votes when the totals clearly showed otherwise. Oh well, that's what I get for being snarky. I had wondered how someone could have not voted for EWU after their season last year, and the players they retained.

I doubt the EWU coach was barred from voting for his own team.

Many coaches have famously done so in their own media polls at big schools over the years. I suppose it's considered the polite thing to do or something like karma, in not boasting too much.

[dudeitsaid]

I suppose it's considered the polite thing to do or something like karma, in not boasting too much.

I don't know if Baldwin would've voted for EWU or not if he could, but according to what I've read, the Big Sky coaches cannot vote for their own team in the poll.

[MplsBison]

I don't know if Baldwin would've voted for EWU or not if he could, but according to what I've read, the Big Sky coaches cannot vote for their own team in the poll.

Do you have a link to that? I'm not trying to be a douche about it, I'm just curious as to how they run their poll.

I would think it makes sense for each coach to rank all 13 teams in the conference from best to worst. But then looking at the numbers, EWU got 144 points which is exactly 12 times 12 points. So maybe they ask each coach to rank every team other than their own team from best to worst? If true, that is a really odd, hokey way to do it ...

[ursus arctos horribilis]

I doubt the EWU coach was barred from voting for his own team.

Many coaches have famously done so in their own media polls at big schools over the years. I suppose it's considered the polite thing to do or something like karma, in not boasting too much.

He was barred, it's been that way forever in the BSC. He did not vote for his own team. End.

[mvemjsunpx]

As a D2 in 03.

Since moving D1 they have gone




2004

Kay Dalton


2


9


0


0.18182


186


294


-108




2005

Kay Dalton


4


7


0


0.36364


255


285


-30




2006

Scott Downing


1


10


0


0.09091


129


373


-244




2007

Scott Downing


1


11


0


0.08333


136


415


-279




2008

Scott Downing


1


10


0


0.09091


225


326


-101




2009

Scott Downing


3


8


0


0.27273


202


288


-86




2010

Scott Downing


3


8


0


0.27273


275


345


-70




2011

Earnest Collins, Jr.


0


11


0


0.00000


207


382


-175




2012

Earnest Collins, Jr.


5


6


0


0.45455


282


324


-42




2013

Earnest Collins, Jr.


1


11


0


0.08333


237


375


-138





21-91 in a decade of D1 football...I can double check the exact number but I think about 14-16 of those wins are non D1/Idaho State

Nearly all of their wins have been sub D1 or Idaho State.

2003 was actually their first transition year. They went 9-2 with wins over Suutah and Montana State. They also played 8-4 Idaho State and eventual semifinalist FAU close. That promising start obviously did not springboard them to anywhere. xlolx:(

11 of NoCo's 21 post-2003 wins were over teams other than non-DI/ISU/Pioneer: 2004 - NDSU & SUU; 2005 - SELU & Sam Houston; 2006 - Texas St.; 2007 - Montana St.; 2009 - SoDak; 2010 - PSU; 2012 - PSU, Weber, & NoDak.

[MplsBison]

He was barred, it's been that way forever in the BSC. He did not vote for his own team. End.

If true, that's a hokey way to run the poll. Will you provide the link to the rules (to satisfy my curiosity)?

[McNeese75]

If true, that's a hokey way to run the poll. Will you provide the link to the rules (to satisfy my curiosity)?

I would guess that is the standard and not the exception. I am pretty sure the SLC coaches cannot vote for their own team.

[darell1976]

http://www.sanluisobispo.com/2014/07/15/3155020/calpoly-picked-fourth-in-big-sky.html

In the coaches poll, Eastern Washington (8-0 Big Sky) received 12 first-place votes and 140 points to one first-place vote and 130 points for Montana, 111 points for Montana State and 108 points for Cal  Poly.
Head coaches were not allowed to vote for their own team.

[clenz]

I would guess that is the standard and not the exception. I am pretty sure the SLC coaches cannot vote for their own team.
The MVFC and MVC (all sports) are run the same way.

[MplsBison]

So you're saying in a league with X head coaches, every coach has to rank X-1 teams (every team in the league excluding his own) from top to bottom?

That's stupid. And I don't believe that is the standard way.


The standard way would be for every coach to rank every team in the league from top to bottom.


What possible advantage could the former have??

[McNeese75]

So you're saying in a league with X head coaches, every coach has to rank X-1 teams (every team in the league excluding his own) from top to bottom?

That's stupid. And I don't believe that is the standard way.


The standard way would be for every coach to rank every team in the league from top to bottom.


What possible advantage could the former have??

xrolleyesx I am pretty sure you are wrong

[MplsBison]

xrolleyesx I am pretty sure you are wrong

If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. But I don't think I am. I clearly remember reading how some big time coaches famously voted for their own schools in polls.

[msupokes1]

That is not in conference polls that is in national polls. Most conferences do not let a coach vote for their own team.

[clenz]

If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. But I don't think I am. I clearly remember reading how some big time coaches famously voted for their own schools in polls.
National top 25 polls a very different than conference polls.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

If true, that's a hokey way to run the poll. Will you provide the link to the rules (to satisfy my curiosity)?

I won't be link hunting for ya, no offense but I've watched the process for many, many years and have heard it talked about on local radio and TV many, many times as well and just know that to be the case. It's not important to me that you trust it so if you do good enough, if you don't good enough as well.

I will get in touch with the BSC though and let them know that you have an issue with it.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

So you're saying in a league with X head coaches, every coach has to rank X-1 teams (every team in the league excluding his own) from top to bottom?

That's stupid. And I don't believe that is the standard way.


The standard way would be for every coach to rank every team in the league from top to bottom.


What possible advantage could the former have??
It's odd that a guy that presumes to know so much would not know this rather well known fact isn't it?

Thanks to darrel for the link as I hadn't hit this page on last post...I sure wasn't gonna look for one. xlolx

[dudeitsaid]

If true, that's a hokey way to run the poll. Will you provide the link to the rules (to satisfy my curiosity)?

In the article, there are these statements:


Coaches were not allowed to vote for their own team.

Eastern Washington received all 12 of the possible first-place votes and 144 total points in the coaches' poll.

As you have already done the math and can see that, as stated, EWU had 12 coaches give them 12 points, I would take the articles statements at face value, hokey or not.

If there are rules that are presented to the coaches about how to vote that can be furnished, you will likely be as effective at researching that as anyone else. But since all of the evidence supports the process as indicated in the article, seems like that would be a waste of time to me.

If Baldwin was aloud to vote EWU as number one, would he? Who knows. In a sense, shouldn't every coach vote their team as number one? Who really goes in and tells their players their goal is to be 8th in the league? We can add all types of conjecture, but the results and process are what they are.

[dudeitsaid]

If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. But I don't think I am. I clearly remember reading how some big time coaches famously voted for their own schools in polls.

Looks like you need to be the one providing some links. Maybe things are the way they are as the result of those famous incidents of the past.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Looks like you need to be the one providing some links. Maybe things are the way they are as the result of those famous incidents of the past.

I remember back to at least the 80's I'm thinking that this is the way the coaches poll has done for the BSC so it's a long standing tradition and nothing new by any means.

Well, I guess it's new to some but you get my meaning.

[MplsBison]

National top 25 polls a very different than conference polls.

Fair enough. But why?

Is it not the simplest, most straightforward to have every coach rank every team? Especially for such a meaningless poll as a pre-season coaches' poll.

[MplsBison]

In the article, there are these statements:



As you have already done the math and can see that, as stated, EWU had 12 coaches give them 12 points, I would take the articles statements at face value, hokey or not.

If there are rules that are presented to the coaches about how to vote that can be furnished, you will likely be as effective at researching that as anyone else. But since all of the evidence supports the process as indicated in the article, seems like that would be a waste of time to me.

If Baldwin was aloud to vote EWU as number one, would he? Who knows. In a sense, shouldn't every coach vote their team as number one? Who really goes in and tells their players their goal is to be 8th in the league? We can add all types of conjecture, but the results and process are what they are.

I'm no longer questioning that's how the Big Sky coaches poll works. I'm saying the way they do it is wrong. Why add unnecessary complication to a meaningless poll?

You just have each coach rank every team top to bottom. How is it not more simpler than that? If it's a meaningless poll whose outcome has no bearing on anything, you go for the simplest, tally it up, report it and then wash your hands of it. End

[clenz]

How is it a complication?

You simply can't put your team on the poll. It's not a hard concept.

With such a small number of votes it allows for a "better" picture of where coaches think the league is. With only 8-13 voters all it would take is 1 coach thinking his team was #1 when everyone else had them at 5 to make the poll completely worthless.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

How is it a complication?

You simply can't put your team on the poll. It's not a hard concept.

With such a small number of votes it allows for a "better" picture of where coaches think the league is. With only 8-13 voters all it would take is 1 coach thinking his team was #1 when everyone else had them at 5 to make the poll completely worthless.

He's trying to be the minutia moron again clenzy. Don't buy into it brother. Your post did nail it thorugh, can't vote for own team gives better rep with such a small number of votes.

[clenz]

He's trying to be the minutia moron again clenzy. Don't buy into it brother. Your post did nail it thorugh, can't vote for own team gives better rep with such a small number of votes.I know...I just struggle with stupid some times.

I did a quick example to show what kind of influence a single vote could have in a 13 person poll that isn't weighted



8
8


9
9


10
10


8
8


10
10


7
7


8
8


8
8


9
9


8
8


7
7


8
8



13


100
113





I didn't mean for it to come out to 100 with only 12 voters but it just happened. 13 is first place and 1 is last. This team is clearly picked to finish between 4th and 7th by everyone. But their coach decides "We need to be higher" so he throws a first place vote to his own team. That's 13 extra points and would likely move them from 5th or 6th preseason to likely 3rd

[MplsBison]

I know...I just struggle with stupid some times.

I did a quick example to show what kind of influence a single vote could have in a 13 person poll that isn't weighted



8
8


9
9


10
10


8
8


10
10


7
7


8
8


8
8


9
9


8
8


7
7


8
8



13


100
113




I didn't mean for it to come out to 100 with only 12 voters but it just happened. 13 is first place and 1 is last. This team is clearly picked to finish between 4th and 7th by everyone. But their coach decides "We need to be higher" so he throws a first place vote to his own team. That's 13 extra points and would likely move them from 5th or 6th preseason to likely 3rd

Figures. You call me stupid but show lack of understanding elementary school level math.

In your 12 team scenario the average was 8.33. In your 13 team scenario (with one "rogue" vote) the average jumped up to .... 8.69. If 13.0 is a perfect first place, then the team was ranked between 6th and 5th in both scenarios.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

I know...I just struggle with stupid some times.

I did a quick example to show what kind of influence a single vote could have in a 13 person poll that isn't weighted



8
8


9
9


10
10


8
8


10
10


7
7


8
8


8
8


9
9


8
8


7
7


8
8



13


100
113





I didn't mean for it to come out to 100 with only 12 voters but it just happened. 13 is first place and 1 is last. This team is clearly picked to finish between 4th and 7th by everyone. But their coach decides "We need to be higher" so he throws a first place vote to his own team. That's 13 extra points and would likely move them from 5th or 6th preseason to likely 3rd

It's a good example and a great showing of how the simpleton thinking may not be the best answer even when MPLS is sure it is the correct answer. I'm sure he isn't nearly as vested or as smart on this as the people running this one so I'll just laugh at the exclamations for a while.

"This is wrong!"
"This is hokey!"
"End!"

xrotatehx

[MplsBison]

How is it a complication?

You simply can't put your team on the poll. It's not a hard concept.

With such a small number of votes it allows for a "better" picture of where coaches think the league is. With only 8-13 voters all it would take is 1 coach thinking his team was #1 when everyone else had them at 5 to make the poll completely worthless.

How is it not a complication? Anything except the simplest method is by definition a complication.

[clenz]

Figures. You call me stupid but show lack of understanding elementary school level math.

In your 12 team scenario the average was 8.33. In your 13 team scenario (with one "rogue" vote) the average jumped up to .... 8.69. If 13.0 is a perfect first place, then the team was ranked between 6th and 5th in both scenarios.
They aren't taking an average and saying "This person had the highest average"

They are taking total points.

13 points is a HUGE swing

- - - Updated - - -


How is it not a complication? Anything except the simplest method is by definition a complication.
How is adding up 12 numbers not the simplest solution?

[mvemjsunpx]

Not allowing a coach to vote for his own team also removes the incentive for the AD/President to pressure the coach into voting their own team #1 regardless of accuracy (look at us, we got a first-place vote!!! :D xsmiley_wix).

[darell1976]

Everyone voted for EWU, and since you can't vote for yourself the EWU people voted for Montana. Case closed!

[Red & Black]

Fair enough. But why?

Well, because of the sample size. One vote out of 13 carries a lot more weight than one vote out of however many people vote in the national coaches and/or media polls.

Not being to vote for your own team at all gives a much more objective picture on how the coaches generally feel each team is going to finish.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mvemjsunpx]

Well, because of the sample size. One vote out of 13 carries a lot more weight than one vote out of however many people vote in the national coaches and/or media polls.

Also… not every team votes in the coaches poll, so preventing own-team votes would handicap teams with coaches voting.

[Red & Black]

Also… not every team votes in the coaches poll, so preventing own-team votes would handicap teams with coaches voting.

Not sure what you mean by this. If not every team votes in the coaches poll, where did the 12 votes for EWU come from? The 12 votes for EWU + Baldwin's vote for UM=13.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NoCoDanny]

We're ranked too high... :(

[slostang]

Not sure what you mean by this. If not every team votes in the coaches poll, where did the 12 votes for EWU come from? The 12 votes for EWU + Baldwin's vote for UM=13.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkI think he is talking about the national polls.

[mvemjsunpx]

I think he is talking about the national polls.

Right.

[McNeese75]

Well, because of the sample size. One vote out of 13 carries a lot more weight than one vote out of however many people vote in the national coaches and/or media polls.

Not being to vote for your own team at all gives a much more objective picture on how the coaches generally feel each team is going to finish.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Pretty much point A to point B here xthumbsupx

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Pretty much point A to point B here xthumbsupx

On top of that the rule came around when the sample size was even smaller so even more prevalent.

[Hellgate60]

Figures. You call me stupid but show lack of understanding elementary school level math.

In your 12 team scenario the average was 8.33. In your 13 team scenario (with one "rogue" vote) the average jumped up to .... 8.69. If 13.0 is a perfect first place, then the team was ranked between 6th and 5th in both scenarios.

Wow! These preseason polls are a tough concept for you...

[MplsBison]

They aren't taking an average and saying "This person had the highest average"

They are taking total points.

13 points is a HUGE swing

- - - Updated - - -


How is adding up 12 numbers not the simplest solution?

I just showed you why 13 points wasn't a huge swing - not in the example you gave. You know ... math? Not meth.


Ranking every team is patently simpler than ranking every team except one team that might be right in the middle of the rankings. No argument there.


Whatever, I'm right and it doesn't matter because they're not going to change the way it's run.


Coaches' polls are utterly stupid in the first place. Pre-season polls are utterly stupid in the first place. Combine them and you get: horse dung that was regurgitated by a fly.

End

[slostang]

When it comes to utterly stupid no one would know better than you.

[clenz]

How much do one of that ban hammers cost?


I'll take 52 of them

[Red & Black]

Right.

Gotcha.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ursus arctos horribilis]

How much do one of that ban hammers cost?


I'll take 52 of them

xlolx

I think he's already taken 3 or 4 of them out of people's hands this year. He is a hell of a fund raiser for Jay...unwittingly of course.

[MplsBison]

OK then ... so was this just Ash misspeaking, or what?

http://www.inforum.com/content/outside-top-two-big-sky-tough-pin-down


If you’re looking for a silver lining in the University of North Dakota football team’s selection near the bottom of the Big Sky Conference preseason polls, Montana State head coach Rob Ash has it for you.

“Eastern Washington and Montana are the two favorites going into the season; that’s who was at the top of my ballot,” Ash said last week at the Big Sky football kickoff event in Park City, Utah.

“From my ballot three through 13, I struggled for a long time. I had to ask my coaches, and we talked a lot,” Ash said. There’s not much difference there. Anyone could beat anyone in that group. Those teams will also give good games to Eastern and Montana. For us to be selected third, we take that as quite the compliment.”

Umm....

[dudeitsaid]

OK then ... so was this just Ash misspeaking, or what?

http://www.inforum.com/content/outside-top-two-big-sky-tough-pin-down



Umm....

Wow, the energy expended to try to win an argument. Maybe you should call Rob Ash, and get some clarification.

Honestly, for me, I don't care how they do the poll. There are probably downsides to any approach. But considering they have no bearing on how things actually play out, but are there mostly for entertainment purposes, and to feed us football hungry fans, giving us something to talk about, I'd say the polls are doing their job. That being said, I do find it funny that the majority of discussion the poll has generated is not about where the coaches view the teams, but on the philosophy behind how the coaches votes are administered.

[MplsBison]

Wow, the energy expended to try to win an argument. Maybe you should call Rob Ash, and get some clarification.

Honestly, for me, I don't care how they do the poll. There are probably downsides to any approach. But considering they have no bearing on how things actually play out, but are there mostly for entertainment purposes, and to feed us football hungry fans, giving us something to talk about, I'd say the polls are doing their job. That being said, I do find it funny that the majority of discussion the poll has generated is not about where the coaches view the teams, but on the philosophy behind how the coaches votes are administered.

And yet you just spent your time to comment on that part of the discussion, though without adding anything of substance to it.

[CrazyCat]

How did Ash "misspeak?" Every coach still fills out a ballot from 1-13, but they can't have their own team #1. It really isn't that hard to figure out.

[Bisonoline]

And yet you just spent your time to comment on that part of the discussion, though without adding anything of substance to it.

You just cant help yourself can you. Please ----seek professional help.

[dudeitsaid]

And yet you just spent your time to comment on that part of the discussion, though without adding anything of substance to it.

LOL, there is nothing to add. It's settled for pretty much everyone except you. The substance you seek does not exist. There is no conspiracy. It is what it is. But I honestly don't mind the fruitless discussion. It is providing what it is intended for, entertainment. I just find it funny that you are actually debating this meaningless issue, and feel there is something to prove here. By all means, please continue.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Wow, the energy expended to try to win an argument. Maybe you should call Rob Ash, and get some clarification.

Honestly, for me, I don't care how they do the poll. There are probably downsides to any approach. But considering they have no bearing on how things actually play out, but are there mostly for entertainment purposes, and to feed us football hungry fans, giving us something to talk about, I'd say the polls are doing their job. That being said, I do find it funny that the majority of discussion the poll has generated is not about where the coaches view the teams, but on the philosophy behind how the coaches votes are administered.

It's his normal tact. He says something completely stupid to try and get some unfriendly feedback and then twists, spins, and tells you that you are wrong and he is correct even though everybody can see he is a moron.

Don't worry, he get's on a runner and does too much of it I'll make life difficult for him as payback for his crap. Best policy is let him twist in the wind and maybe give him a little slapping once in a while.

[Bisonator]

OK then ... so was this just Ash misspeaking, or what?

http://www.inforum.com/content/outside-top-two-big-sky-tough-pin-down



Umm....

This was the funniest part of that article to me:

“The Big Sky, to me, is the FCS equivalent of the SEC,” Northern Colorado coach Earnest Collins Jr. said. “We had four teams in the playoffs last year, and that doesn’t happen. That’s the quality brand of football our conference has. We’re blessed to be part of this conference.”

xlolx

[JSUBison]

This was the funniest part of that article to me:


xlolx

Poor Ernie, bless that fools heart.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

This was the funniest part of that article to me:


xlolx

You always see a few liberties taken at these things.:D

[mvemjsunpx]

How did Ash "misspeak?" Every coach still fills out a ballot from 1-13, but they can't have their own team #1. It really isn't that hard to figure out.

That's not how it works. Each coach just ranks the 12 teams other than their own. I'm guessing Ash did misspeak; either that or he ranked all 13 & the conference just ignored the MSU placement.

[Red & Black]

I'm not sure there is an "SEC" of the FCS.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CrazyCat]

That's not how it works. Each coach just ranks the 12 teams other than their own. I'm guessing Ash did misspeak; either that or he ranked all 13 & the conference just ignored the MSU placement.


It was a complete guess xcoolx

[MplsBison]

How did Ash "misspeak?" Every coach still fills out a ballot from 1-13, but they can't have their own team #1. It really isn't that hard to figure out.

No, that was not what everyone was trying to ram down my throat, as if it has been commonplace the last 100 years and I was a jerk for even questioning it.

Everyone was saying that each coach in the poll only ranks the other 12 teams, leaving his own team off the poll.

- - - Updated - - -


That's not how it works. Each coach just ranks the 12 teams other than their own. I'm guessing Ash did misspeak; either that or he ranked all 13 & the conference just ignored the MSU placement.

See?

[MplsBison]

Either way, it just proves I was correct all along.

If a Big Sky coach can't even figure it out, obviously it's unnecessarily complicated.

I just don't see what's so wrong with just having all 13 coaches rank all 13 teams and making the results public. If Northern Colorado's coach ranked his team first when every other coach ranked them last, everyone would know it was BS.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Of course! It proves you were right all along because a coach flubbed something!

As you've shown in this thread several times, you ain't real sharp and feel a bit alarmed when caught with yo pants down not knowing something that is fairly standard. Just let it go and the embarrassment will fade in time.

[MplsBison]

Of course! It proves you were right all along because a coach flubbed something!

As you've shown in this thread several times, you ain't real sharp and feel a bit alarmed when caught with yo pants down not knowing something that is fairly standard. Just let it go and the embarrassment will fade in time.

"Yo pants down"?

Is that what you tell AG1 to do when you guys get together? xnodx

[McNeese75]

"Yo pants down"?

Is that what you tell AG1 to do when you guys get together? xnodx

xrolleyesx Anyone need to borrow a Banhammer???

[MplsBison]

xrolleyesx Anyone need to borrow a Banhammer???

Oh please. You should see those guys on the political board. Believe it or not, I actually was joking with my last post! :)

[McNeese75]

Oh please. You should see those guys on the political board. Believe it or not, I actually was joking with my last post! :) :D so was I