Chris Lang TSN Ballot

[89Hen]

I often find myself scrapping the last week's ballot and starting over, which is pretty much what I did last week.

Too bad no one else does that.

I don't think that's necessarily a good idea. That would basically be saying, "I have no idea what I was thinking last week.". The previous week has to enter into your process, it just can't dominate it. Too reactionary.

[danefan]

Too bad no one else does that.

I don't think that's necessarily a good idea. That would basically be saying, "I have no idea what I was thinking last week.". The previous week has to enter into your process, it just can't dominate it. Too reactionary.

I disagree. Not relying on last week's poll is the only real way to do a poll that is supposed to be a snapshot of the ranking of the teams as of the current week.

Now that may result in you having to admit that your poll last week was worthless, but building off a bad poll just to avoid that "embarassment" is what causes the polls to be a mess, IMO.

[89Hen]

I disagree. Not relying on last week's poll is the only real way to do a poll that is supposed to be a snapshot of the ranking of the teams as of the current week.

Now that may result in you having to admit that your poll last week was worthless, but building off a bad poll just to avoid that "embarassment" is what causes the polls to be a mess, IMO.

We will have to agree to disagree on this one because I don't see it that way. Take 2003 for example. Delaware lost it's only game to unranked Northeastern in the middle of the season. Would you drop them 15 spots only to have them finally regain the spots one by one over the rest of the season? No way. Too reactionary just starting fresh each week.

One more example... if you don't use the previous week, how do you give credit for a #10 beating a #5? The #5 isn't really a #5 because this week you've dropped them probably below the #10.

[danefan]

I disagree. Not relying on last week's poll is the only real way to do a poll that is supposed to be a snapshot of the ranking of the teams as of the current week.

Now that may result in you having to admit that your poll last week was worthless, but building off a bad poll just to avoid that "embarassment" is what causes the polls to be a mess, IMO.

We will have to agree to disagree on this one because I don't see it that way. Take 2003 for example. Delaware lost it's only game to unranked Northeastern in the middle of the season. Would you drop them 15 spots only to have them finally regain the spots one by one over the rest of the season? No way. Too reactionary just starting fresh each week.

One more example... if you don't use the previous week, how do you give credit for a #10 beating a #5? The #5 isn't really a #5 because this week you've dropped them probably below the #10.

Who's to say a voter would drop Delaware 15 spots for that fluke loss?

Maybe that #10 shouldn't get all that much credit for beating a #5 if that #5 shouldn't have been at #5 in the first place?

That's exactly why when I vote I don't drop teams that lose to better teams. So if I think you're a #10 and you lose to a #5, then that loss alone should not drop you. If other teams perform better than that #10 may no longer be a #10.

[89Hen]

Who's to say a voter would drop Delaware 15 spots for that fluke loss?

Maybe that #10 shouldn't get all that much credit for beating a #5 if that #5 shouldn't have been at #5 in the first place?

That's exactly why when I vote I don't drop teams that lose to better teams. So if I think you're a #10 and you lose to a #5, then that loss alone should not drop you. If other teams perform better than that #10 may no longer be a #10.

You should drop them 15 spots if you're starting from scratch.

Your second sentence actually proves my point.

I too don't always drop teams that lose to better teams, so that point is moot.

[AZGrizFan]

I don't think that's necessarily a good idea. That would basically be saying, "I have no idea what I was thinking last week.". The previous week has to enter into your process, it just can't dominate it. Too reactionary.

I disagree. Not relying on last week's poll is the only real way to do a poll that is supposed to be a snapshot of the ranking of the teams as of the current week.

Now that may result in you having to admit that your poll last week was worthless, but building off a bad poll just to avoid that "embarassment" is what causes the polls to be a mess, IMO.

Starting from scratch must mean something different to you and I, Hen. I simply take the entire body of work each week and reconsider rankings. It means that just because I started with a team @ #5, doesn't mean it drops to #9, then #14 if it loses two weeks in a row. It's possible...just POSSIBLE that you might have misunderestimated a team (see JMU last year) and have a team ranked that shouldn't be ranked. It took WEEKS forJMU to finally fall out of the rankings when they really shouldn't have been ranked to begin with.

[danefan]

Who's to say a voter would drop Delaware 15 spots for that fluke loss?

Maybe that #10 shouldn't get all that much credit for beating a #5 if that #5 shouldn't have been at #5 in the first place?

That's exactly why when I vote I don't drop teams that lose to better teams. So if I think you're a #10 and you lose to a #5, then that loss alone should not drop you. If other teams perform better than that #10 may no longer be a #10.

You should drop them 15 spots if you're starting from scratch.

Your second sentence actually proves my point.

I too don't always drop teams that lose to better teams, so that point is moot.

Why should you drop them 15 spots if you're starting from scratch? If they were the #5 team in the country and lost but I still thought they were the 5th best team, then I wouldn't drop them at all.