Final Coaches Poll

[danefan]

Old news, but I didn't see it posted anywhere.

Coaches Poll

1. Richmond (24) 13-3 600 6
2. Montana 14-2 559 5
3. James Madison 12-2 540 1
4. Northern Iowa 12-3 538 4
5. Appalachian State 11-3 507 2
6. Villanova 10-3 465 7
7. New Hampshire 10-3 434 10
8. Cal Poly 8-3 419 3
9. Weber State 10-4 398 T12
10. Southern Illinois 9-3 389 8
11. Wofford 9-3 386 9
12. Central Arkansas 10-2 313 11
13. South Carolina State 10-3 298 T12
14. Harvard 9-1 237 14
15. Liberty 10-2 231 15
16. Maine 8-5 181 21
17. Colgate 9-3 176 16
18. Eastern Kentucky 8-4 160 22
19. Elon 8-4 154 19
20. William and Mary 7-4 147 18
21. McNeese State 7-4 138 17
22. Jacksonville State 8-3 112 20
23. Texas State 8-5 107 NR
24. Grambling State 11-2 92 25
25. Prairie View A&M 9-1 69 23

Other receiving votes (pts. in parentheses): UT Martin (40), Florida A&M (33), Massachusetts (24), Furman (17), South Dakota State (15), Albany (10), Tennessee State (8), Holy Cross (2), Northwestern State (1).


I don't think either Grambling or PV A&M should have been ranked, but that's just my opinion.

[DFW HOYA]

If you don't think PV A&M should be ranked, then Colgate shouldn't be, either. No non-conference wins against teams above .500:

Lost to Stony Brook (finished 5-6)
Defeated Coastal Carolina (6-6)
Lost to Furman (7-5)
Defeated Dartmouth (0-11)
Defeated Princeton (4-6)
Defeated Cornell (4-6)
Lost to Villanova (10-3)

[danefan]

If you don't think PV A&M should be ranked, then Colgate shouldn't be, either. No non-conference wins against teams above .500:

Lost to Stony Brook (finished 5-6)
Defeated Coastal Carolina (6-6)
Lost to Furman (7-5)
Defeated Dartmouth (0-11)
Defeated Princeton (4-6)
Defeated Cornell (4-6)
Lost to Villanova (10-3)

Colgate should be ranked because they won the Patriot League, which was a mid-level FCS conference this year. They shouldn't be as high as they are, but neither should Harvard. Colgate and Harvard should not be ranked in the top 20. They are both 21-25 teams.

The SWAC was the worst FCS conference this year. Just skimming the conference results its doesn't appear the SWAC had ANY Division I OOC wins this. I may have missed one, but I think I'm right.

Albany should be ranked above both Grambling and PV A&M.

[mikebigg]

Colgate should be ranked because they won the Patriot League, which was a mid-level FCS conference this year. They shouldn't be as high as they are, but neither should Harvard. Colgate and Harvard should not be ranked in the top 20. They are both 21-25 teams.

The SWAC was the worst FCS conference this year. Just skimming the conference results its doesn't appear the SWAC had ANY Division I OOC wins this. I may have missed one, but I think I'm right.

Albany should be ranked above both Grambling and PV A&M.

Did you see Grambling play this season?

[danefan]

Did you see Grambling play this season?

Yes on TV. 3 times actually. Alcorn State, Texas Southern (both ESPN games) and Southern.

[TheValleyRaider]

I'm just kinda curious as to why we lost a spot, while Maine jumped up 4, even though we both got hammered in the 1st Round? xconfusedx

[TexasTerror]

Just skimming the conference results its doesn't appear the SWAC had ANY Division I OOC wins this. I may have missed one, but I think I'm right.

SWAC had a win over Savannah State is I am not mistaken, if that counts for anything.


Did you see Grambling play this season?

Yes and there were no results that stood out. Perhaps if the SWAC would win some out of conference games against Division I opponents, they'd stick out. As those on TSPN have discussed, the SWAC was dead last in Sagarin. No question that the SWAC has fallen in recent years in terms of competitiveness on the field of play. This, despite having more money invested in coaches than any FCS conference in America.

[GrizFamily]

Cal Poly ahead of Weber when Weber put them out of the play-offs in the 1st round. That's wrong. Weber just didn't get any respect this year.

[Syntax Error]

... the SWAC was dead last in Sagarin...GPI Conference Ranking (before the playoffs):
Rank, League, Total Average
1. Colonial Athletic Association (22.16)
2. Southern Conference (29.16)
3. Big Sky Conference (32.32)
4. Southland Conference (35.74)
5. Great West Football Conference (36.13)
6. Missouri Valley Football Conference (40.02)
7. Patriot League (45.74)
8. Big South Conference (46.38)
9. Ivy League (46.47)
10. Ohio Valley Conference (52.71)
11. Mid-Eastern Athletic Conference (61.37)
12. Northeast Conference (65.60)
13. Southwestern Athletic Conference (70.20)
14. Pioneer Football League (72.38)
15. Independents (78.38)

http://www.championshipsubdivisionnews.com/index.php?blog=5&title=11-24-08-final-regular-season-gridiron-p-1&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1

[Ivytalk]

Colgate should be ranked because they won the Patriot League, which was a mid-level FCS conference this year. They shouldn't be as high as they are, but neither should Harvard. Colgate and Harvard should not be ranked in the top 20. They are both 21-25 teams.

The SWAC was the worst FCS conference this year. Just skimming the conference results its doesn't appear the SWAC had ANY Division I OOC wins this. I may have missed one, but I think I'm right.

Albany should be ranked above both Grambling and PV A&M.

danefan, you just can't help yourself! The old Harvard reflex action kicks in every time you see a poll.xrolleyesx

[danefan]

danefan, you just can't help yourself! The old Harvard reflex action kicks in every time you see a poll.xrolleyesx

I know, I know.....sorry, but you don't have to hear it again until the pre-season polls start coming out in August.xsmiley_wix

[Zeus69]

Liberty was ranked as the number 15 team in the country and they cant get in the playoffs? Obviously the coaches know something the committee didnt... I didnt know committee was spelled CAA....

[appfan2008]

I am fine with PVA&M being in there only bc i think it is a great story that they have been able to turn that program around after having about 10 straight 0 win seasons or whatever it was in the 90s

[danefan]

I am fine with PVA&M being in there only bc i think it is a great story that they have been able to turn that program around after having about 10 straight 0 win seasons or whatever it was in the 90s

What does that have to do with them being one of the best 25 teams in the country?

Sure its a great story and they had a good season, but there are better teams that are unranked in this poll.

[BobcatJH]

McNeese State did not deserve to finish ranked in the top 25.

[JohnStOnge]

McNeese State did not deserve to finish ranked in the top 25.

I suspect what's really got you isn't that McNeese, as is the case with the overwhelming majority of power rating systems, is rated ahead of Texas State. As I indicated in another thread on another poll, as of December 13, McNeese was rated ahead of Texas State by 35 of the 37 power rating systems at presented at http://www.mratings.com/cf/compare1aa.htm . Some games have been played since then but both Texas State and McNeese seasons were finished at that point so there's no way the basic picture (McNeese rated higher by overwhelming majority) has changed.

You can also click on some individual links at that site to see that, for instance, Massey ratings considering results of games through December 28 have McNeese rated 20 (Margin of Victory considered) and 21 (Margin of Victory not considered) as opposed to Texas State being rated 31 and 28.

Power rating systems such as Massey's do not, at this point of the season, give McNeese extra points for past reputation or "name." They simply "look" at the season's body of work and calculate how impressive the overall season's body of work was according to some pre-established criteria and they calculated that McNeese's overall season's body of work was more impressive than Texas State's was.

Apparently, a number of pollsters also think McNeese's overall body of work was more impressive.

As far as "belonging" in the top 25: 17 of the 37 power rating systems referenced have McNeese in the top 25 of FCS. Only 2 of the 37 have Texas State there. Again, when you're dealing with power rating systems, that's not due to any bias towards McNeese. It's just based on objective assessment of overall season results in recognition of the principle that the best team does not always win in a given head to head matchup.

[TexasTerror]

Liberty was ranked as the number 15 team in the country and they cant get in the playoffs? Obviously the coaches know something the committee didnt... I didnt know committee was spelled CAA....

You'll note there were some AQs outside the top 15 (i.e TXST). Just because you are top 16 does not mean you are deserving of a playoff spot...

Liberty would've been in if they took care of business...

[UNIFanSince1983]

I don't think there is any way Weber should be behind Cal Poly. This should be the real debate in this poll.

[mikebigg]

SWAC had a win over Savannah State is I am not mistaken, if that counts for anything.



Yes and there were no results that stood out. Perhaps if the SWAC would win some out of conference games against Division I opponents, they'd stick out. As those on TSPN have discussed, the SWAC was dead last in Sagarin. No question that the SWAC has fallen in recent years in terms of competitiveness on the field of play. This, despite having more money invested in coaches than any FCS conference in America.

Gram could have won those games by 50 pt margins and you still wouldn't be impressed...too much bias to overcome. You referenced the SWAC, but this conversation is about Grambling. Our competitiveness on the field hasn't faded one bit... even though this was a rebuilding year with basically 11 new offensive starters.

[GannonFan]

Liberty was ranked as the number 15 team in the country and they cant get in the playoffs? Obviously the coaches know something the committee didnt... I didnt know committee was spelled CAA....


Yawn...wouldn't have mattered anyway - Maine or Liberty or W&M all would have lost in the first round anyway and the rest of the playoffs would've still rolled out like they did. The CAA more than earned and proved they deserved at least 4 bids.

[Libertine]

Is there any way to see which coaches voted which way as in the final FBS coaches' poll?

[GrizFamily]

I don't think there is any way Weber should be behind Cal Poly. This should be the real debate in this poll.

See post #8. I guess nobody wants to debate it.


Cal Poly ahead of Weber when Weber put them out of the play-offs in the 1st round. That's wrong. Weber just didn't get any respect this year.

[JohnStOnge]

I don't think there is any way Weber should be behind Cal Poly. This should be the real debate in this poll.

That's a tough one. Can't use a power rating argument as most of the power rating systems at http://www.mratings.com/cf/compare1aa.htm have Weber State ranked higher as of December 13.

Only argument I can see is that Cal Poly only lost to quality teams (Montana, Wisconsin, Weber State) while Weber State did lose to an Eastern Washington team that had a mediocre year.

[uofmman1122]

That's a tough one. Can't use a power rating argument as most of the power rating systems at http://www.mratings.com/cf/compare1aa.htm have Weber State ranked higher as of December 13.

Only argument I can see is that Cal Poly only lost to quality teams (Montana, Wisconsin, Weber State) while Weber State did lose to an Eastern Washington team that had a mediocre year.Regardless, Cal Poly lost to Weber State at home. IMO, when that happens, you have to put the winner ahead of the loser.

[JohnStOnge]

Regardless, Cal Poly lost to Weber State at home. IMO, when that happens, you have to put the winner ahead of the loser.

If I were voting I'd vote Weber State higher than Cal Poly but there are obviously situations in which one team beats another yet the winner in that one game is ranked lower and nobody questions it. One example that immediately comes to mind is Ole Miss beating Florida at the Swamp this year. Nobody in their right mind would vote Ole Miss ahead of Florida in any poll. It's an obvious decision in that case but the point is that one team beating another at the other's home doesn't automatically mean the winner of that one game should be ranked higher.

[uofmman1122]

If I were voting I'd vote Weber State higher than Cal Poly but there are obviously situations in which one team beats another yet the winner in that one game is ranked lower and nobody questions it. One example that immediately comes to mind is Ole Miss beating Florida at the Swamp this year. Nobody in their right mind would vote Ole Miss ahead of Florida in any poll. It's an obvious decision in that case but the point is that one team beating another at the other's home doesn't automatically mean the winner of that one game should be ranked higher.Well, unlike Ole Miss and Florida, Cal Poly is not clearly better than Weber.