FCS Poll 11/2

[BDKJMU]

I don't click on/look at polls till Nov. Well I just did and I see they're still all worthless as titties on a bull. Case in point CSU (7-1) just beat CCU (7-1) by a couple of TDs. CSU only lost to a I-A, CCU dnp a I-A & has barely beaten a bunch of mediocre to subpar teams. So of course CSU is ranked ahead of CCU right? No, these clueless retards have CCU ahead, and not just by a couple of spots. There is ZERO logical explanation for that. NONE...

[bucs90]

BTW, let's see your list of 6 replacements.

Its like I said on the other forum, hen - its real easy

you drop down the teams that cant finish and are therefore .500 in November and you move up the ones under them

adjusting slightly for SOS (yes that should count for something) but not going entirely on it - which is the only reason ISU, UNI, and YSU are ranked, and holy cow Montana

I agree. Citadel is 6-2 with no bad losses. Montana is 4-4 and lost by 10 to unranked Liberty. How the ranking shakes out with Montana still ranked above both is hard to figure. And 8-0 Dayton remains unranked. 6-2 Kennesaw is also unranked.

[dbackjon]

Its like I said on the other forum, hen - its real easy

you drop down the teams that cant finish and are therefore .500 in November and you move up the ones under them

adjusting slightly for SOS (yes that should count for something) but not going entirely on it - which is the only reason ISU, UNI, and YSU are ranked, and holy cow Montana

I agree. Citadel is 6-2 with no bad losses. Montana is 4-4 and lost by 10 to unranked Liberty. How the ranking shakes out with Montana still ranked above both is hard to figure. And 8-0 Dayton remains unranked. 6-2 Kennesaw is also unranked.

8-0 Dayton should not be ranked - the competition in the Pioneer League is very, very low. Most of the Big Sky, MVFC, etc would be 8-0 with Dayton's schedule.

4 of Kennesaw State's wins are over D2, NAIA or a first year ETSU. Plus they lost to Dayton.

[bucs90]

I agree. Citadel is 6-2 with no bad losses. Montana is 4-4 and lost by 10 to unranked Liberty. How the ranking shakes out with Montana still ranked above both is hard to figure. And 8-0 Dayton remains unranked. 6-2 Kennesaw is also unranked.

8-0 Dayton should not be ranked - the competition in the Pioneer League is very, very low. Most of the Big Sky, MVFC, etc would be 8-0 with Dayton's schedule.

4 of Kennesaw State's wins are over D2, NAIA or a first year ETSU. Plus they lost to Dayton.

I'm neutral on Dayton. Yes...their league isn't strong. But eventually 8-0 has to count. Their league includes Jacksonville U....who beat Delaware. So the teams aren't horrible.

Yeah...same with Kennesaw. Neutral. But they're hanging with and even beaten some fully funded Big South teams...and Dayton beat them...so Dayton looks solid.

[93henfan]

Montana also has wins over NDSU, UND and NAU.

Liberty's signature wins are Montana and...Georgia State? Along with bad losses to SIU, Gardner-Webb and Monmouth.

Try again.

Agreed.

But, then, I just don't like Liberty because of the Jesus bullshit.

Amen!

[bucs90]

Agreed.

But, then, I just don't like Liberty because of the Jesus bullshit.

Amen!

Then yall are gonna love CSU!!! We're Christian like Liberty....but without all the morals.

[kalm]

Montana also has wins over NDSU, UND and NAU.

Liberty's signature wins are Montana and...Georgia State? Along with bad losses to SIU, Gardner-Webb and Monmouth.

Try again.

This year...Liberty is better than Montana. Beat em head to head on the field and both are 4-4. How LU is ranked (well...unranked) below them doesn't make sense. Wouldn't a 10 point loss to Liberty be a "bad loss" for Montana?? It really is just name brand recognition. But I get it....same thing happens in FBS and D2 so I'm not that surprised or upset about it.

Dayton is 8-0 and unranked. Just my opinion...but winning matters and head to head matters.

You guys are placing WAY too much importance in one game (especially from September and one where Montana lost their starting QB.) Polls are more than simply head to head and records.

I had Montana out of the top 25 for a week and then they drilled UND with a new QB who threw 6 touchdowns. Their defense has been solid and if they find some offense to go with it they're a top 25 team at 4-3...was the thinking.

Then they lose to PSU and I'm going to move them back out. Except, (as 89 points out) who do you move in? There are a bunch of flawed teams in the 3-5 to 5-3 range, I'm not ranking a MEAC or a Pioneer, Montana has one really nice win, and a couple of decent ones, and the only reason I'm moving them out is that they lost on the road to the #3 ranked team in the country.

Regarding Coastal, I dropped them 5 spots to 8 but they have a couple of nice wins against WIU and Furman. Again, I can forgive one road loss to a quality team to a certain degree, and this is Coastal's.

I agree that CSU and Citadel are getting screwed a bit due to where they started in the polls, but that's the nature of the beast, and being a victim of late-season FBS matchups. FTR, I have them at 15 and 16 and I've had The Citadel in the top 25 for three weeks.

CSU might deserve to be higher, but the 15 teams I have ahead are all from better conferences, with tougher schedules, and better resume's.

[bucs90]

This year...Liberty is better than Montana. Beat em head to head on the field and both are 4-4. How LU is ranked (well...unranked) below them doesn't make sense. Wouldn't a 10 point loss to Liberty be a "bad loss" for Montana?? It really is just name brand recognition. But I get it....same thing happens in FBS and D2 so I'm not that surprised or upset about it.

Dayton is 8-0 and unranked. Just my opinion...but winning matters and head to head matters.

You guys are placing WAY too much importance in one game (especially from September and one where Montana lost their starting QB.) Polls are more than simply head to head and records.

I had Montana out of the top 25 for a week and then they drilled UND with a new QB who threw 6 touchdowns. Their defense has been solid and if they find some offense to go with it they're a top 25 team at 4-3...was the thinking.

Then they lose to PSU and I'm going to move them back out. Except, (as 89 points out) who do you move in? There are a bunch of flawed teams in the 3-5 to 5-3 range, I'm not ranking a MEAC or a Pioneer, Montana has one really nice win, and a couple of decent ones, and the only reason I'm moving them out is that they lost on the road to the #3 ranked team in the country.

Regarding Coastal, I dropped them 5 spots to 8 but they have a couple of nice wins against WIU and Furman. Again, I can forgive one road loss to a quality team to a certain degree, and this is Coastal's.

I agree that CSU and Citadel are getting screwed a bit due to where they started in the polls, but that's the nature of the beast, and being a victim of late-season FBS matchups. FTR, I have them at 15 and 16 and I've had The Citadel in the top 25 for three weeks.

CSU might deserve to be higher, but the 15 teams I have ahead are all from better conferences, with tougher schedules, and better resume's.

CSUs problem is the Big South is a better league than its reputation. It's true. Image and perception plays a big role. I like that you have Citadel higher. I'd have them around 17-18.

[Ibanez]

I don't click on/look at polls till Nov. Well I just did and I see they're still all worthless as titties on a bull. Case in point CSU (7-1) just beat CCU (7-1) by a couple of TDs. CSU only lost to a I-A, CCU dnp a I-A & has barely beaten a bunch of mediocre to subpar teams. So of course CSU is ranked ahead of CCU right? No, these clueless retards have CCU ahead, and not just by a couple of spots. There is ZERO logical explanation for that. NONE...

Are you surprised? There are some teams that are always in the Top 25 and it's mostly due to history ( cough cough Montana).

[89Hen]

BTW, let's see your list of 6 replacements.

Its like I said on the other forum, hen - its real easy

you drop down the teams that cant finish and are therefore .500 in November and you move up the ones under them

adjusting slightly for SOS (yes that should count for something) but not going entirely on it - which is the only reason ISU, UNI, and YSU are ranked, and holy cow Montana

It's easy, but you haven't given me 6 teams to replace them yet.

[89Hen]

Their league includes Jacksonville U....who beat Delaware. So the teams aren't horrible.

Now who's relying on historical strength? In case you haven't heard, the Hens suck.

[89Hen]

the Big South is a better league than its reputation.

How's that? CCU has been the top team and they are 2-5 in the playoffs against teams not named Bethune-Cookman. They seem to be a solid program. Liberty is not a bad team, but by my count they are 1-6 vs the CAA in the past several years. Make a case for the Big South to be thought of in a better light, I will certainly listen.

[kalm]

the Big South is a better league than its reputation.

How's that? CCU has been the top team and they are 2-5 in the playoffs against teams not named Bethune-Cookman. They seem to be a solid program. Liberty is not a bad team, but by my count they are 1-6 vs the CAA in the past several years. Make a case for the Big South to be thought of in a better light, I will certainly listen.

That's some some cold-blooded analysis right there folks. Boom!

[bandl]

Now who's relying on historical strength?

CCU has been the top team and they are 2-5 in the playoffs against teams
Liberty is not a bad team, but by my count they are 1-6 vs the CAA in the past several years.

Guess we're relying on historical weakness here?

[89Hen]

Now who's relying on historical strength?

CCU has been the top team and they are 2-5 in the playoffs against teams
Liberty is not a bad team, but by my count they are 1-6 vs the CAA in the past several years.

Guess we're relying on historical weakness here?

Absolutely. I believe you MUST rely on historical data when trying to rank a bunch of teams from different conferences who rarely play each other. Those that say history is history are burying their heads in the sand IMO. We know that an 8-0 Dayton team probably really isn't that great. Note "probably". I've been around I-AA boards and discussions on polls long enough to remember case after case after case of leopards from historically weak conferences showing their spots. It's no coincidence that the SWAC was 0-19 in the playoffs. That the MEAC and OVC went years and years without winning a playoff game. You can't ignore history.

[bandl]

Guess we're relying on historical weakness here?

Absolutely.

Guess you didn't get the sarcasm....I was roundaboutlike agreeing with you

[89Hen]

Absolutely.

Guess you didn't get the sarcasm....I was roundaboutlike agreeing with you

I'm slow today.

[Ibanez]

Guess we're relying on historical weakness here?

Absolutely. I believe you MUST rely on historical data when trying to rank a bunch of teams from different conferences who rarely play each other. Those that say history is history are burying their heads in the sand IMO. We know that an 8-0 Dayton team probably really isn't that great. Note "probably". I've been around I-AA boards and discussions on polls long enough to remember case after case after case of leopards from historically weak conferences showing their spots. It's no coincidence that the SWAC was 0-19 in the playoffs. That the MEAC and OVC went years and years without winning a playoff game. You can't ignore history.

You can't ignore history...HOWEVER...the history shouldn't be an important part of the ranking. Different teams, different seasons, different players, etc.... It appears that certain schools are ranked simply because they are in a strong conference.

[Ibanez]

Absolutely.

Guess you didn't get the sarcasm....I was roundaboutlike agreeing with you

Damnit, Bandle! Use emoticons!

[bandl]

Guess you didn't get the sarcasm....I was roundaboutlike agreeing with you

Damnit, Bandle! Use emoticons!

[CID1990]

Its like I said on the other forum, hen - its real easy

you drop down the teams that cant finish and are therefore .500 in November and you move up the ones under them

adjusting slightly for SOS (yes that should count for something) but not going entirely on it - which is the only reason ISU, UNI, and YSU are ranked, and holy cow Montana

It's easy, but you haven't given me 6 teams to replace them yet.

Take any six teams currently ranked right below them! It doesnt matter. UNI maybe has the only somewhat credible argument for being ranked so highly but personally I would drop them 4-5 spots. If theyre deserving then they'll prove it in the playoffs.

[89Hen]

Absolutely. I believe you MUST rely on historical data when trying to rank a bunch of teams from different conferences who rarely play each other. Those that say history is history are burying their heads in the sand IMO. We know that an 8-0 Dayton team probably really isn't that great. Note "probably". I've been around I-AA boards and discussions on polls long enough to remember case after case after case of leopards from historically weak conferences showing their spots. It's no coincidence that the SWAC was 0-19 in the playoffs. That the MEAC and OVC went years and years without winning a playoff game. You can't ignore history.

You can't ignore history...HOWEVER...the history shouldn't be an important part of the ranking. Different teams, different seasons, different players, etc.... It appears that certain schools are ranked simply because they are in a strong conference.

We will have to agree to disagree. It's a HUGE part of the ranking. Knowing the Pioneer, SWAC, MEAC, etc.. are historically weak conferences means teams that are 7-0 aren't going to be in the top 10.

I don't however disagree that teams sometimes do get falsely propped up by historical strength, but often it actually works out to be correct. I recall a 4-3 Richmond team winning the NC. A 4-3 UNI making the chipper. A 4-3-1 GSU making the semis. Etc...

[89Hen]

It's easy, but you haven't given me 6 teams to replace them yet.

Take any six teams currently ranked right below them! It doesnt matter.

Holy white flag Batman.

[Ibanez]

You can't ignore history...HOWEVER...the history shouldn't be an important part of the ranking. Different teams, different seasons, different players, etc.... It appears that certain schools are ranked simply because they are in a strong conference.

We will have to agree to disagree. It's a HUGE part of the ranking. Knowing the Pioneer, SWAC, MEAC, etc.. are historically weak conferences means teams that are 7-0 aren't going to be in the top 10.

I don't however disagree that teams sometimes do get falsely propped up by historical strength, but often it actually works out to be correct. I recall a 4-3 Richmond team winning the NC. A 4-3 UNI making the chipper. A 4-3-1 GSU making the semis. Etc...

I have not disagreed with you. I see your point of view and it's valid.


But so is my point.

[89Hen]

BTW, it's also no coincidence that the folks bitching about history are the ones which don't have one on which to rely.