PDA

View Full Version : FCS teams in this week's Sagarin index



HiHiYikas
November 12th, 2007, 01:41 PM
Here's the obligatory weekly Sagarin index thread, soon to be followed by the obligatory "I don't put much stock in Sagarin" reply...

Still, it's interesting food for discussion.

1. 35 Northern Iowa
2. 45 North Dakota State
3. 60 Southern Illinois
4. 62 Appalachian State
5. 70 Richmond
6. 79 McNeese State
7. 80 Delaware
8. 81 Massachusetts
9. 85 James Madison
10. 88 Wofford
11. 91 Youngstown State
12. 96 Western Illinois
13. 97 Montana
14. 100 Yale
15. 101 Villanova
16. 104 Hofstra
17. 105 South Dakota State
18. 106 Georgia Southern (Colorado State is at #116, btw)
19. 108 Elon
20. 111 New Hampshire
21. 118 Citadel
22. 122 Furman
23. 131 Eastern Kentucky
24. 132 Eastern Washington
25. 133 Grambling

135 Liberty, 136 Holy Cross, 137 Dayton, 138 Missouri State, 139 Cal Poly, 140 Fordham, 141 Northeastern, 142 Sam Houston State, 143 Delaware State, 145 Nicholls State

I just noticed...if you compare Sagarin to AP, UNI rates ahead of three of the "others receiving votes" (BYU, Mississippi State, and Air Force). UNI is only 2 spots below Arkansas, another of the "others receiving." It would be nice to see the Panthers benefit from the "Appalachian State" rule. Now that we have almost an entire season's perspective, it looks like UNI is at least as deserving now as ASU was after September 1.

Ronbo
November 12th, 2007, 01:56 PM
And as long as the GPI keeps using those hilarious computer rankings that have Montana ranked #13 to #22 it's a complete joke too.

WUTNDITWAA
November 12th, 2007, 01:59 PM
I don't put much stock in Sagarin.



Actually I have nothing against it...I just wanted to be the first to say it.

Cleets
November 12th, 2007, 02:00 PM
Any poll that has Southern Illinois higher than:

App
Umass
Montana
Richmond
and
McNeese

is

seriously flawed

Southern Illinois higher than any one of them would be a mistake, but higher than all of them.!!!!!! xlolx

Black and Gold Express
November 12th, 2007, 02:02 PM
And as long as the GPI keeps using those hilarious computer rankings that have Montana ranked #13 to #22 it's a complete joke too.

The playoffs will prove out who's right. Your SOS stinks and should be counted against you accordingly, like it or not. Once you finally start facing real teams on a weekly basis starting 2 weeks from now, either you'll prove that you are a good team or get exposed for playing a cupcake schedule (shoild we call that being "MEAC'ed"?).

JMUSaxMRD
November 12th, 2007, 02:05 PM
I'm a fan, JMU is #9!

LehighFan11
November 12th, 2007, 02:10 PM
#13 Montana sounds alot better than #3 or #4 Montana. Who have they beat? Eastern Washington by 1 point?

WMTribe90
November 12th, 2007, 02:13 PM
Playoff field, if Sagarin was doing the picking (assuming all bubble teams win this week, including GSU and excluding teams not participating or no longer eligible for consideration):

1. 35 Northern Iowa
2. 60 Southern Illinois
3. 62 Appalachian State
4. 70 Richmond
5. 79 McNeese State
6. 80 Delaware
7. 81 Massachusetts
8. 85 James Madison
9. 88 Wofford
10. 97 Montana
11. 104 Hofstra (assumes win over UMass)
12. 106 Georgia Southern (assumes win over CSU)
13. 131 Eastern Kentucky
14. 132 Eastern Washington
15. 140 Fordham (AQ)
16. 143 DSU (AQ)

That's the 16 I would pick if I were on the committee (though not the order I would rank them). GSU is probably still a near lock with a loss to CSU, but a win by Hofstra could make it interesting considering GSU played a DII and Hofstra didn't (assuming that was choice facing the commitee).

Loss by Hofstra puts Alabama A&M (170), EIU (168), and Colgate (158) into play. I'd take Colgate, higher GPI and the PL has a more respectable playoff resume than the SWAC or OVC (at least in recent times).

HiHiYikas
November 12th, 2007, 02:13 PM
Any poll that has...
That's just it, Cleets - it's not a poll. It's a computer rating index. It's the expression of lots and lots of data.

I don't think Sagarin is trying to say "the 40th-rated team is definitely better than the 50th-rated team." He's just compiling and reporting data. If there's a problem, it's from relying too heavily on one tyoe of data, not considering another type of data, having too little data, or no data at all.

If #40 consistently beats #50, the formula appears to be working. But when it comes to college football, you can't hold a formula to a high standard of accuracy.

Ronbo
November 12th, 2007, 02:19 PM
#13 Montana sounds alot better than #3 or #4 Montana. Who have they beat? Eastern Washington by 1 point?

You guys just keep overlooking us.xsmiley_wix I'm pretty sure McNeese did last year and was shocked 36-7 and SIU and was shocked 20-3. UMass took us on and got out with a 2 point victory. We have basically the same team that is 22-1 in the last 23 games and we are #13? Someone close to a Montana offensive starter said that Hauck has only opened 40% of the playbook so far and is saving the rest for MSU and the playoffs.

LehighFan11
November 12th, 2007, 02:21 PM
You guys just keep overlooking us.xsmiley_wix I'm pretty sure McNeese did last year and was shocked 36-7 and SIU and was shocked 20-3. UMass took us on and got out with a 2 point victory. We have basically the same team that is 22-1 in the last 23 games and we are #13? Someone close to a Montana offensive starter said that Hauck has only opened 40% of the playbook so far and is saving the rest for MSU and the playoffs.

This year's poll is based on THIS year. If it included previous seasons, App St would be #1, but they have lost 2 games this year so they are 5-6. Until Montana beats someone, they shouldn't be top 5.

Ronbo
November 12th, 2007, 02:23 PM
Blah, Blah, blah! An 11-0 Montana gets a seed. Bet your house on it and STFU.

danefan
November 12th, 2007, 02:27 PM
And as long as the GPI keeps using those hilarious computer rankings that have Montana ranked #13 to #22 it's a complete joke too.

Talk about some hilarious computer rankings, check this out:
http://www.mratings.com/cf/compare1aa.htm

I especially like the Mason rankings :D :

1 North Dakota State
2 Northern Iowa
3 McNeese State
4 Montana
5 Delaware State
6 Yale
7 Eastern Kentucky
8 Grambling State
9 Southern Illinois
10 Albany
11 Fordham
12 Eastern Illinois
13 Liberty
14 Dayton
15 Harvard
16 Eastern Washington
17 Richmond
18 South Carolina State
19 San Diego
20 Sam Houston State
21 South Dakota State
22 Missouri State
23 Youngstown State
24 Alabama A&M
25 Jacksonville State

http://www.top100football.com/


xbowx xbowx xbowx xbowx xbowx xlolx xlolx xlolx xrotatehx xrotatehx xrotatehx xrotatehx

please note the sarcasm.

Hansel
November 12th, 2007, 02:56 PM
the Big Sky has 0 quality non-conf wins

that is why they are low in all in the computers

walliver
November 12th, 2007, 03:01 PM
Talk about some hilarious computer rankings, check this out:
http://www.mratings.com/cf/compare1aa.htm

I especially like the Mason rankings :D :

1 North Dakota State
2 Northern Iowa
3 McNeese State
4 Montana
5 Delaware State
6 Yale
7 Eastern Kentucky
8 Grambling State
9 Southern Illinois
10 Albany
11 Fordham
12 Eastern Illinois
13 Liberty
14 Dayton
15 Harvard
16 Eastern Washington
17 Richmond
18 South Carolina State
19 San Diego
20 Sam Houston State
21 South Dakota State
22 Missouri State
23 Youngstown State
24 Alabama A&M
25 Jacksonville State

http://www.top100football.com/


xbowx xbowx xbowx xbowx xbowx xlolx xlolx xlolx xrotatehx xrotatehx xrotatehx xrotatehx

please note the sarcasm.

I guess the SoCon really is over-rated.xconfusedx

lizrdgizrd
November 12th, 2007, 03:04 PM
Talk about some hilarious computer rankings, check this out:
http://www.mratings.com/cf/compare1aa.htm

I especially like the Mason rankings :D :

1 North Dakota State
2 Northern Iowa
3 McNeese State
4 Montana
5 Delaware State
6 Yale
7 Eastern Kentucky
8 Grambling State
9 Southern Illinois
10 Albany
11 Fordham
12 Eastern Illinois
13 Liberty
14 Dayton
15 Harvard
16 Eastern Washington
17 Richmond
18 South Carolina State
19 San Diego
20 Sam Houston State
21 South Dakota State
22 Missouri State
23 Youngstown State
24 Alabama A&M
25 Jacksonville State

http://www.top100football.com/


xbowx xbowx xbowx xbowx xbowx xlolx xlolx xlolx xrotatehx xrotatehx xrotatehx xrotatehx

please note the sarcasm.
That is funny! xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx

HensRock
November 12th, 2007, 03:11 PM
I guess the SoCon really is over-rated.xconfusedx

As is the CAA with 1 team in. It's obvious this ranking puts a premium on wins, regardless of the level of competition.

danefan
November 12th, 2007, 03:13 PM
As is the CAA with 1 team in. It's obvious this ranking puts a premium on wins, regardless of the level of competition.

I cannot for the life of me figure out how this guy gets Albany in at 10. Can't be wins, because there are a lot of 7-3 teams right now.

The funny thing is, this guy doesn't even believe in his own rankings. Check out his playoff predictions (http://www.top100football.com/default.asp?file=newsarticle&pgid=2007PLAYOFFS&id=69):





#1 Seed: Northern Iowa, Gateway AB vs. Eastern Washington, Big Sky

Georgia Southern, Southern AB at home vs. Jacksonville State, Ohio Valley




#4 Seed Delaware, CAA AB vs. Delaware State, MEAC, AB

James Madison, CAA at home vs. Fordham, Patriot League AB



#2 Seed McNeese State, Southland AB vs. Wofford, Southern


Appalachian State, Southern at home vs. Richmond, CAA




#3 Seed Montana, Big Sky AB vs. Eastern Kentucky, Ohio Valley AB


Massachusetts, CAA at home vs. Southern Illinois, Gateway

McNeese_beat
November 12th, 2007, 03:14 PM
You guys just keep overlooking us.xsmiley_wix I'm pretty sure McNeese did last year and was shocked 36-7 and SIU and was shocked 20-3. UMass took us on and got out with a 2 point victory. We have basically the same team that is 22-1 in the last 23 games and we are #13? Someone close to a Montana offensive starter said that Hauck has only opened 40% of the playbook so far and is saving the rest for MSU and the playoffs.

I don't think McNeese was shocked at all last year. McNeese wasn't good enough last year to be shocked by anybodyxsmiley_wix

Last year, McNeee was the best team in a bad league. This year, McNeese is a very good team playing in a bad league. The question is if they'll remain healthy enough to prove it.

Retro
November 12th, 2007, 03:18 PM
You guys just keep overlooking us.xsmiley_wix I'm pretty sure McNeese did last year and was shocked 36-7 and SIU and was shocked 20-3. UMass took us on and got out with a 2 point victory. We have basically the same team that is 22-1 in the last 23 games and we are #13? Someone close to a Montana offensive starter said that Hauck has only opened 40% of the playbook so far and is saving the rest for MSU and the playoffs.

I don't think Mcneese overlooked Montana whatsoever last year and this year's Mcneese team is far better than last season's in many ways.. Mcneese was 7-4 last season...

You just sound upset because your realizing that if Mcneese wins out, they and and UNI will be the top 2 seeds and and eventually Montana would have to prove themselves on the road againest a quality opponent if things play out as expected. xnonox

SuperJon
November 12th, 2007, 03:24 PM
I love how in every poll, we're the closest to get in, and yet our name hasn't been mentioned once. Everyone's arguing over everyone else, and we haven't even been whispered yet. It's nice to be under the radar.

lizrdgizrd
November 12th, 2007, 03:26 PM
I love how in every poll, we're the closest to get in, and yet our name hasn't been mentioned once. Everyone's arguing over everyone else, and we haven't even been whispered yet. It's nice to be under the radar.
You're not under the radar, you're out of the picture. ;)

BigApp
November 12th, 2007, 03:36 PM
I guess the SoCon really is over-rated.xconfusedx

what do you mean? Here are the SoCon rankings (out of 100):


28. Appalachian State
43. Wofford (between Monmouth and Ark-PineBluff)
51. Furman
61. The Citadel
72. Georgia Southern
77. Chattanooga
88. Western Carolina
100. Elon


I mean, what's the rub? Looks sane to me!
http://www.abestweb.com/smilies/rotflol.gifhttp://www.abestweb.com/smilies/rotflol.gifhttp://www.abestweb.com/smilies/rotflol.gifhttp://www.abestweb.com/smilies/rotflol.gifhttp://www.abestweb.com/smilies/rotflol.gifhttp://www.abestweb.com/smilies/rotflol.gifhttp://www.abestweb.com/smilies/rotflol.gifhttp://www.abestweb.com/smilies/rotflol.gif

walliver
November 12th, 2007, 03:39 PM
what do you mean? Here are the SoCon rankings (out of 100):


28. Appalachian State
43. Wofford (between Monmouth and Ark-PineBluff)
51. Furman
61. The Citadel
72. Georgia Southern
77. Chattanooga
88. Western Carolina
100. Elon


I mean, what's the rub? Looks sane to me!
http://www.abestweb.com/smilies/rotflol.gifhttp://www.abestweb.com/smilies/rotflol.gifhttp://www.abestweb.com/smilies/rotflol.gifhttp://www.abestweb.com/smilies/rotflol.gifhttp://www.abestweb.com/smilies/rotflol.gifhttp://www.abestweb.com/smilies/rotflol.gifhttp://www.abestweb.com/smilies/rotflol.gifhttp://www.abestweb.com/smilies/rotflol.gif


That should make Catamount fans happy.:)

URMite
November 12th, 2007, 03:42 PM
You guys just keep overlooking us.xsmiley_wix I'm pretty sure McNeese did last year and was shocked 36-7 and SIU and was shocked 20-3. UMass took us on and got out with a 2 point victory. We have basically the same team that is 22-1 in the last 23 games and we are #13? Someone close to a Montana offensive starter said that Hauck has only opened 40% of the playbook so far and is saving the rest for MSU and the playoffs.

That's the problem with computer rankings even when they are well designed (many are not) they only use data from what you have done, not from what you can do.

Human polls OTOH sometimes put an emphasis on what you can do, and can almost ignore what you have done.

The computers won't recognize that the other 60% of the playbook exists, and the humans will assume it is going to be brilliant (or not).

Computers ignore potential and human rationalize...

lizrdgizrd
November 12th, 2007, 03:50 PM
That's the problem with computer rankings even when they are well designed (many are not) they only use data from what you have done, not from what you can do.

Human polls OTOH sometimes put an emphasis on what you can do, and can almost ignore what you have done.

The computers won't recognize that the other 60% of the playbook exists, and the humans will assume it is going to be brilliant (or not).

Computers ignore potential and human rationalize...
So if only there were some way to combine the two....xchinscratchx

blur2005
November 12th, 2007, 04:19 PM
Someone close to a Montana offensive starter said that Hauck has only opened 40% of the playbook so far and is saving the rest for MSU and the playoffs.

I seriously can't stand complete hearsay like this. All fans of teams do it, too, which makes it even more annoying.

I-AA Fan
November 12th, 2007, 04:22 PM
Playoff field, if Sagarin was doing the picking (assuming all bubble teams win this week, including GSU and excluding teams not participating or no longer eligible for consideration):

1. 35 Northern Iowa
2. 60 Southern Illinois
3. 62 Appalachian State
4. 70 Richmond
5. 79 McNeese State
6. 80 Delaware
7. 81 Massachusetts
8. 85 James Madison
9. 88 Wofford
10. 97 Montana
11. 104 Hofstra (assumes win over UMass)
12. 106 Georgia Southern (assumes win over CSU)
13. 131 Eastern Kentucky
14. 132 Eastern Washington
15. 140 Fordham (AQ)
16. 143 DSU (AQ)

That's the 16 I would pick if I were on the committee (though not the order I would rank them). GSU is probably still a near lock with a loss to CSU, but a win by Hofstra could make it interesting considering GSU played a DII and Hofstra didn't (assuming that was choice facing the commitee).

Loss by Hofstra puts Alabama A&M (170), EIU (168), and Colgate (158) into play. I'd take Colgate, higher GPI and the PL has a more respectable playoff resume than the SWAC or OVC (at least in recent times).

Nice choices. A couple of things:

1. To my knowledge, there has never been an 8-win OVC team not make the post-season. In either case consider EIU all but a lock. You cannot go 4-deep in a conference at the expense of such a long-standing quality conference. Look at the snub of YSU in favor of Lafayette a couple years ago.

2. 4-teams was a mistake before & it would be again if the committee is short-sided enough to do so.

3. They will do everything they can to get 4 teams from the west. (right now it is Montana, EWU, and McNeese) Cal-Poly was for certain with a win over NDSU. Now?? CPU has a DII & a non-scholly (DIII). Nicholls St. & SHSU have DII's. CAU will have 7 DI wins & I will bet you a play-off spot if they knock off McNeese. I thought they were still provisional, but according to everything I find, they are eligible. Anyone have anything different?

4. The MEAC is a quality conference as well. Had Hampton been in the #2 spot, they would have gone 2-deep for certain ... now I am not so certain. However, the game was settled in OT, so it would not be a shock to see 2.

McNeese75
November 12th, 2007, 04:41 PM
You guys just keep overlooking us.xsmiley_wix I'm pretty sure McNeese did last year and was shocked 36-7

xrolleyesx Dont be silly. McNeese was 7-4 last year and you think they were overlooking Montana? Just another one of your goofy Rodney Dangerfield posts. xrotatehx

placidlakegriz
November 12th, 2007, 04:50 PM
#13 Montana sounds alot better than #3 or #4 Montana. Who have they beat? Eastern Washington by 1 point?


Every team they have played!

placidlakegriz
November 12th, 2007, 04:54 PM
You just sound upset because your realizing that if Mcneese wins out, they and and UNI will be the top 2 seeds and and eventually Montana would have to prove themselves on the road againest a quality opponent [/QUOTE]

Where is that written?

WMTribe90
November 12th, 2007, 05:12 PM
Nice choices. A couple of things:

1. To my knowledge, there has never been an 8-win OVC team not make the post-season. In either case consider EIU all but a lock. You cannot go 4-deep in a conference at the expense of such a long-standing quality conference. Look at the snub of YSU in favor of Lafayette a couple years ago.

Same can be said for the A10/CAA. Villanova was snubbed at 8-3 in 2001, but they had a DII LOSS. In the last 12 years (extent fo my personal knowledge), no 8-3 CAA squad has been denied when they played an all DI schedule.


2. 4-teams was a mistake before & it would be again if the committee is short-sided enough to do so.

Four teams has happened twice and both times all four teams advanced to the second round, so I'm sure how you can call it a mistake?


3. They will do everything they can to get 4 teams from the west. (right now it is Montana, EWU, and McNeese) Cal-Poly was for certain with a win over NDSU. Now?? CPU has a DII & a non-scholly (DIII). Nicholls St. & SHSU have DII's. CAU will have 7 DI wins & I will bet you a play-off spot if they knock off McNeese. I thought they were still provisional, but according to everything I find, they are eligible. Anyone have anything different?

I don't think any of the teams you list are eligible for consideration at this point. Regardless, none of them are in line for consideration.


4. The MEAC is a quality conference as well. Had Hampton been in the #2 spot, they would have gone 2-deep for certain ... now I am not so certain. However, the game was settled in OT, so it would not be a shock to see 2.

Had NSU beaten DSU, the MEAC likely would have gotten DSU in as an at-large. Virtually zero chance of that happening now.

Assume for now that GSU is a lock with a win against CSU, and that Hofstra beats UMass. Hofstra would have wins against UMass and Furman among their 8 total DI wins and a Sagarin rating in the 80s.

I think that resume compares very favorably to any of the other contenders in consideration, Colgate, EIU, and Alabama A&M. Now, if I were betting my house I wouldn't bet on Hofstra as the 5th CAA team in the field, but its not because they aren't deserving.

GrizFoo
November 12th, 2007, 06:23 PM
You just sound upset because your realizing that if Mcneese wins out, they and and UNI will be the top 2 seeds and and eventually Montana would have to prove themselves on the road againest a quality opponent

Where is that written?

No doubt, and the assumption that the teams above the Griz will automatically win just because they are ranked high is also out there. NAU ring a bell. If you ask me, this year's playoff teams are all going to be pretty darn even, and all real good. The teams 1, 2, 3, and 4 play will end up playing could very easily win. So it isn't a given that even if the Griz come in 4 (or any other team for that matter) that team could very easily have homes all of the way. And if 1 - 4 lose out, it is about $$$/attendance mostly, even though they consider venue, etc.

APPSTER
November 12th, 2007, 06:40 PM
And as long as the GPI keeps using those hilarious computer rankings that have Montana ranked #13 to #22 it's a complete joke too.

Gridiron Power Index. As long as you keep playing a lame OOC schedule, coupled with a weak BSC, you're going to suffer in the GPI.

james_lawfirm
November 12th, 2007, 06:48 PM
The playoffs will prove out who's right. Your SOS stinks and should be counted against you accordingly, like it or not. Once you finally start facing real teams on a weekly basis starting 2 weeks from now, either you'll prove that you are a good team or get exposed for playing a cupcake schedule (shoild we call that being "MEAC'ed"?).


Now that was a diplomatic post. Tell us how you really feel. "Real teams"??? xeekx xeekx xeekx

Actually, I agree. Reading all the Montana posters dissing SOS is certainly interesting, and loyalty is great, but reality is something else.

All I can add is, "Remember Hampton!"

01pantherfan
November 12th, 2007, 06:56 PM
You guys just keep overlooking us.xsmiley_wix I'm pretty sure McNeese did last year and was shocked 36-7 and SIU and was shocked 20-3. UMass took us on and got out with a 2 point victory. We have basically the same team that is 22-1 in the last 23 games and we are #13? Someone close to a Montana offensive starter said that Hauck has only opened 40% of the playbook so far and is saving the rest for MSU and the playoffs.


Is that the Griz defense to everything ? well last year we did this and we did that ????? News for you what happened last year dont mean jack squat this year !! I dont give a damn if you did beat SIU last year it sure dont mean you would or will this year !

And as far as the 40 % of the play book if true maybe he should have opened it up sooner so that you didnt just squeek by teams that if your so great you should of crushed, then there would be any question on how good the Griz are.xthumbsupx

skinny_uncle
November 12th, 2007, 07:58 PM
Any poll that has Southern Illinois higher than:

App
Umass
Montana
Richmond
and
McNeese

is

seriously flawed

Southern Illinois higher than any one of them would be a mistake, but higher than all of them.!!!!!! xlolx
SIU only has one loss and it came in a road game against #1 UNI in a game that came down to the last play. I would rate :
#1 UNI
#1.1 SIU
xnodx

Gil Dobie
November 12th, 2007, 08:08 PM
SIU only has one loss and it came in a road game against #1 UNI in a game that came down to the last play. I would rate :
#1 UNI
#1.1 SIU
xnodx

I have SIU behind UNI, Montana, NDSU, McNeese St.

Good luck in the playoffs to all xthumbsupx

JohnStOnge
November 12th, 2007, 08:11 PM
Any poll that has Southern Illinois higher than:

App
Umass
Montana
Richmond
and
McNeese

is

seriously flawed

Southern Illinois higher than any one of them would be a mistake, but higher than all of them.!!!!!! xlolx

Why? Southern Illinois' only loss is by 6 points on the road to UNI in a game during which they reached the UNI 3 yard line on the final play. McNeese beat Southern Utah by 21 on the road. Montana beat Southern Utah by 20 at home. Southern Illinois beat Southern Utah by 34 on the road.

Ask yourself: Would McNeese or Montana be undefeated if they'd played at UNI? We don't know, but I think we both know that the answer is, "probably not."

skinny_uncle
November 12th, 2007, 08:11 PM
I have SIU behind UNI, Montana, NDSU, McNeese St.

Good luck in the playoffs to all xthumbsupx
You sure squeeze a lot of teams into six yards.
:D

igo4uni
November 12th, 2007, 08:18 PM
You sure squeeze a lot of teams into six yards.
:D

I still have nightmares about that final play in the fabulous UNI-Dome!!!xeekx xeekx xeekx xeekx xeekx xeekx

skinny_uncle
November 12th, 2007, 08:21 PM
I still have nightmares about that final play in the fabulous UNI-Dome!!!xeekx xeekx xeekx xeekx xeekx xeekx

As I've said before,"fabulous" is a matter of perspective.
xeyebrowx

Cincy App
November 12th, 2007, 09:00 PM
Why? Southern Illinois' only loss is by 6 points on the road to UNI in a game during which they reached the UNI 3 yard line on the final play. McNeese beat Southern Utah by 21 on the road. Montana beat Southern Utah by 20 at home. Southern Illinois beat Southern Utah by 34 on the road.

Ask yourself: Would McNeese or Montana be undefeated if they'd played at UNI? We don't know, but I think we both know that the answer is, "probably not."

I prefer to turn that scenario around. Would McNeese, Montana, or SIU be better than 9-2 against ASU's schedule - or the schedule of UMass or Delaware for that matter? I doubt it.

Gil Dobie
November 12th, 2007, 09:06 PM
I prefer to turn that scenario around. Would McNeese, Montana, or SIU be better than 9-2 against ASU's schedule - or the schedule of UMass or Delaware for that matter? I doubt it.

IMO, App St could have run the table with a healthy QB. Any of those three could have been 10-1 or 9-2 with ASU's Sked. We'll never know though.

Cincy App
November 12th, 2007, 09:13 PM
IMO, App St could have run the table with a healthy QB. Any of those three could have been 10-1 or 9-2 with ASU's Sked. We'll never know though.

I think the "we'll never know" part is exactly why the seeds and at-large selections are usually spread out amongst the different regions and conferences. We really don't know until we see Gateway teams playing CAA teams or Big Sky teams playing SoCon teams, etc. like we do in the playoffs. I think past playoff performances by conferences tells us alot about conference teams' capabilities although I realize it is not supposed to be a determining factor in at-large or seed selections.

Grizaholic17
November 12th, 2007, 09:14 PM
That poll is a hoax, and friggin' ridiculous.

BDKJMU
November 12th, 2007, 09:20 PM
Playoff field, if Sagarin was doing the picking (assuming all bubble teams win this week, including GSU and excluding teams not participating or no longer eligible for consideration):

1. 35 Northern Iowa
2. 60 Southern Illinois
3. 62 Appalachian State
4. 70 Richmond
5. 79 McNeese State
6. 80 Delaware
7. 81 Massachusetts
8. 85 James Madison
9. 88 Wofford
10. 97 Montana
11. 104 Hofstra (assumes win over UMass)
12. 106 Georgia Southern (assumes win over CSU)
13. 131 Eastern Kentucky
14. 132 Eastern Washington
15. 140 Fordham (AQ)
16. 143 DSU (AQ)

That's the 16 I would pick if I were on the committee (though not the order I would rank them). GSU is probably still a near lock with a loss to CSU, but a win by Hofstra could make it interesting considering GSU played a DII and Hofstra didn't (assuming that was choice facing the commitee).

Loss by Hofstra puts Alabama A&M (170), EIU (168), and Colgate (158) into play. I'd take Colgate, higher GPI and the PL has a more respectable playoff resume than the SWAC or OVC (at least in recent times).

*If Alabama A&M wins @ 6-4 Prarie View and Alcorn State beats Jackson State, that would put Alabama A&M in the SWAC title game.

DSUHornet
November 13th, 2007, 10:59 AM
The playoffs will prove out who's right. Your SOS stinks and should be counted against you accordingly, like it or not. Once you finally start facing real teams on a weekly basis starting 2 weeks from now, either you'll prove that you are a good team or get exposed for playing a cupcake schedule (shoild we call that being "MEAC'ed"?).

no offense taken, but i'll take this time to let everyone know that we are not to be slept on...

Purple Knight
November 13th, 2007, 11:15 AM
That's the problem with computer rankings even when they are well designed (many are not) they only use data from what you have done, not from what you can do.

Human polls OTOH sometimes put an emphasis on what you can do, and can almost ignore what you have done.

The computers won't recognize that the other 60% of the playbook exists, and the humans will assume it is going to be brilliant (or not).

Computers ignore potential and human rationalize...


If anyone was any good at predicting what a team was going to do, they would make a ton of money and not be wasting time running a poll or posting on this board. Analysing past performance is about the only way we can judge a teams quality and future performance. If predicting was more reliable, the bookmakers could just pick winners and losers and not have to use point spreads.