| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66920
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
|
bullsky
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
Posts: 20310
Back to top |
 Posted: 11/03/14 6:37 pm ::: |
Reply  |
|
| I know we always say pre-season/early-season polls don't matter but I just get the feeling that this year they really won't matter. Lots of unproven rosters in the Top 25. Could be fun to see who moves in and who moves out.
_________________
"Don't do something until you get it right, do it until you can't do it wrong."
- Geno Auriemma
|
|
Howee
Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15739
Location: OREGON (in my heart)
Back to top |
|
beknighted
Joined: 11 Nov 2004
Posts: 11050
Location: Lost in D.C.
Back to top |
| Posted: 11/03/14 11:33 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| bullsky wrote: |
| I know we always say pre-season/early-season polls don't matter but I just get the feeling that this year they really won't matter. Lots of unproven rosters in the Top 25. Could be fun to see who moves in and who moves out. |
I was interested in how consistent the two polls are, especially considering the point you make (and I agree with it).
|
|
myrtle
Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32335
Back to top |
| Posted: 11/03/14 11:36 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| beknighted wrote: |
| bullsky wrote: |
| I know we always say pre-season/early-season polls don't matter but I just get the feeling that this year they really won't matter. Lots of unproven rosters in the Top 25. Could be fun to see who moves in and who moves out. |
I was interested in how consistent the two polls are, especially considering the point you make (and I agree with it). |
one suspects they looked at the other poll before voting...
_________________
For there is always light,
if only we’re brave enough to see it.
If only we’re brave enough to be it.
- Amanda Gorman
|
|
Oldfandepot2
Joined: 05 Jul 2013
Posts: 996
Location: Northeast
Back to top |
| Posted: 11/04/14 8:19 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| bullsky wrote: |
| I know we always say pre-season/early-season polls don't matter but I just get the feeling that this year they really won't matter. Lots of unproven rosters in the Top 25. Could be fun to see who moves in and who moves out. |
Agree this is transitional year for many of the traditional powers. Could see lots of movement. Think that U of SC will take their lumps while they cut their teeth. I believe that ND will move to two early on. Think that Gary Blair and company could raise havoc in the SEC.
_________________
Cave Canem!
We must listen to each other no matter how much it hurts. Bishop Desmond Tutu.
|
|
Phil
Joined: 22 Oct 2011
Posts: 1273
Back to top |
| Posted: 11/04/14 9:23 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| myrtle wrote: |
| beknighted wrote: |
| bullsky wrote: |
| I know we always say pre-season/early-season polls don't matter but I just get the feeling that this year they really won't matter. Lots of unproven rosters in the Top 25. Could be fun to see who moves in and who moves out. |
I was interested in how consistent the two polls are, especially considering the point you make (and I agree with it). |
one suspects they looked at the other poll before voting... |
Yeah, my guess is they understand it doesn't mean a lot, so look at the other poll, make a couple changes to show you aren't simply copying, and maybe even have a couple real instances where you disagree, and mail it in.
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66920
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 11/04/14 9:42 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| Oldfandepot2 wrote: |
| Think that U of SC will take their lumps while they cut their teeth. |
They've got everybody back from last year's E8 team. Not sure how you figure they are a team in transition.
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
Davis4632
Joined: 14 Jul 2014
Posts: 861
Back to top |
| Posted: 11/04/14 10:14 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| pilight wrote: |
| Oldfandepot2 wrote: |
| Think that U of SC will take their lumps while they cut their teeth. |
They've got everybody back from last year's E8 team. Not sure how you figure they are a team in transition. |
South Carolina lost in S16 to UNC.
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 11/04/14 11:03 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| Phil wrote: |
| myrtle wrote: |
| beknighted wrote: |
| bullsky wrote: |
| I know we always say pre-season/early-season polls don't matter but I just get the feeling that this year they really won't matter. Lots of unproven rosters in the Top 25. Could be fun to see who moves in and who moves out. |
I was interested in how consistent the two polls are, especially considering the point you make (and I agree with it). |
one suspects they looked at the other poll before voting... |
Yeah, my guess is they understand it doesn't mean a lot, so look at the other poll, make a couple changes to show you aren't simply copying, and maybe even have a couple real instances where you disagree, and mail it in. |
I don't think it's about what they think it means or doesn't mean. It's been well documented for years that a large share of the coaches voting in these polls are having staff do it for them, and most of the rest spend about 5 minutes. They aren't sitting there investing hours studying rosters and the like, and during the season they aren't watching games other than their own and next week's opponents. So the easiest quickest thing is just to follow the "conventional wisdom", modified by voting for your own conference and your own opponents (which of course helps boost the perception of your own team).
It's ridiculous that "coaches polls" even exist.
|
|
Oldfandepot2
Joined: 05 Jul 2013
Posts: 996
Location: Northeast
Back to top |
| Posted: 11/04/14 11:25 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| pilight wrote: |
| Oldfandepot2 wrote: |
| Think that U of SC will take their lumps while they cut their teeth. |
They've got everybody back from last year's E8 team. Not sure how you figure they are a team in transition. |
They have two freshman who are going to be integral to their success this year as far as taking the next step, plus they have prove nothing yet as obtaining their ultimate goal. They are still a work in progress and even Dawn said that when she said they are going to take their lumps early.
_________________
Cave Canem!
We must listen to each other no matter how much it hurts. Bishop Desmond Tutu.
|
|
beknighted
Joined: 11 Nov 2004
Posts: 11050
Location: Lost in D.C.
Back to top |
| Posted: 11/04/14 2:18 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| Phil wrote: |
| myrtle wrote: |
| beknighted wrote: |
| bullsky wrote: |
| I know we always say pre-season/early-season polls don't matter but I just get the feeling that this year they really won't matter. Lots of unproven rosters in the Top 25. Could be fun to see who moves in and who moves out. |
I was interested in how consistent the two polls are, especially considering the point you make (and I agree with it). |
one suspects they looked at the other poll before voting... |
Yeah, my guess is they understand it doesn't mean a lot, so look at the other poll, make a couple changes to show you aren't simply copying, and maybe even have a couple real instances where you disagree, and mail it in. |
I don't think it's about what they think it means or doesn't mean. It's been well documented for years that a large share of the coaches voting in these polls are having staff do it for them, and most of the rest spend about 5 minutes. They aren't sitting there investing hours studying rosters and the like, and during the season they aren't watching games other than their own and next week's opponents. So the easiest quickest thing is just to follow the "conventional wisdom", modified by voting for your own conference and your own opponents (which of course helps boost the perception of your own team).
It's ridiculous that "coaches polls" even exist. |
All things being equal, I'd give more weight to the AP poll, for the reasons you mention. It also isn't as susceptible to back-scratching (remember, every conference gets a voter in the coaches poll, which sometimes leads to things like mid-majors getting votes from other mid-majors just because), although there is a certain amount of homerism even among the writers.
That said, I don't think the coaches poll is useless, just limited in its particular way. And since the committee has started considering polls at least a little in its deliberations, it's become more important than it used to be.
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 11/04/14 2:32 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| beknighted wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| Phil wrote: |
| myrtle wrote: |
| beknighted wrote: |
| bullsky wrote: |
| I know we always say pre-season/early-season polls don't matter but I just get the feeling that this year they really won't matter. Lots of unproven rosters in the Top 25. Could be fun to see who moves in and who moves out. |
I was interested in how consistent the two polls are, especially considering the point you make (and I agree with it). |
one suspects they looked at the other poll before voting... |
Yeah, my guess is they understand it doesn't mean a lot, so look at the other poll, make a couple changes to show you aren't simply copying, and maybe even have a couple real instances where you disagree, and mail it in. |
I don't think it's about what they think it means or doesn't mean. It's been well documented for years that a large share of the coaches voting in these polls are having staff do it for them, and most of the rest spend about 5 minutes. They aren't sitting there investing hours studying rosters and the like, and during the season they aren't watching games other than their own and next week's opponents. So the easiest quickest thing is just to follow the "conventional wisdom", modified by voting for your own conference and your own opponents (which of course helps boost the perception of your own team).
It's ridiculous that "coaches polls" even exist. |
All things being equal, I'd give more weight to the AP poll, for the reasons you mention. It also isn't as susceptible to back-scratching (remember, every conference gets a voter in the coaches poll, which sometimes leads to things like mid-majors getting votes from other mid-majors just because), although there is a certain amount of homerism even among the writers.
That said, I don't think the coaches poll is useless, just limited in its particular way. And since the committee has started considering polls at least a little in its deliberations, it's become more important than it used to be. |
Oh, I didn't say it wasn't important. Only that it's ridiculous that there is such a poll, both because of the inherent conflicts of interest, and the reality that coaches are not studying any teams other than their own and their opponents. Do you think any SEC coach is paying the slightest attention to how good Dayton might be, or is any PAC coach studying whether MSU, NU or MD might be the best Big 10 team or how those teams compare to any Big 12 teams? Of course they aren't. They have better things to do with their limited time during the season.
Which makes it even more scandalous that anyone would use a coaches poll for tournament decisions. Heck, in the old football BCS system, it was a specific factor in the formula for picking the participants in the national title game. So if you vote for your own conference school, you actually stand to make more money for your own program. Yeah, that's honest and objective.
Of course, that's less ridiculous and corrupt than the new football playoff system where half the voters are current ADs who have a direct financial stake in the choices they make and it's all done in secret behind closed doors.
|
|
patsweetpat
Joined: 14 Jul 2010
Posts: 2313
Location: Culver City, CA
Back to top |
| Posted: 11/04/14 8:24 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| beknighted wrote: |
| That said, I don't think the coaches poll is useless, just limited in its particular way. And since the committee has started considering polls at least a little in its deliberations, it's become more important than it used to be. |
When did that begin? Is that true? 'Cause if it's true, it sucks.
|
|
Howee
Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15739
Location: OREGON (in my heart)
Back to top |
|
beknighted
Joined: 11 Nov 2004
Posts: 11050
Location: Lost in D.C.
Back to top |
| Posted: 11/04/14 10:03 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| patsweetpat wrote: |
| beknighted wrote: |
| That said, I don't think the coaches poll is useless, just limited in its particular way. And since the committee has started considering polls at least a little in its deliberations, it's become more important than it used to be. |
When did that begin? Is that true? 'Cause if it's true, it sucks. |
A couple of years ago.
This is from last year's selection principles:
"Among the resources available to the committee are complete box scores, game summaries and notes, various computer rankings, head‐to‐head results, chronological results, Division I results, non‐conference results, home and away results, results in the last twelve games, rankings, polls and the coaches’ regional advisory committee rankings."
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 11/05/14 12:04 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| beknighted wrote: |
| patsweetpat wrote: |
| beknighted wrote: |
| That said, I don't think the coaches poll is useless, just limited in its particular way. And since the committee has started considering polls at least a little in its deliberations, it's become more important than it used to be. |
When did that begin? Is that true? 'Cause if it's true, it sucks. |
A couple of years ago.
This is from last year's selection principles:
"Among the resources available to the committee are complete box scores, game summaries and notes, various computer rankings, head‐to‐head results, chronological results, Division I results, non‐conference results, home and away results, results in the last twelve games, rankings, polls and the coaches’ regional advisory committee rankings." |
What are "the coaches regional advisory committee rankings"? Are those publicly available? Who creates those?
|
|
patsweetpat
Joined: 14 Jul 2010
Posts: 2313
Location: Culver City, CA
Back to top |
| Posted: 11/05/14 7:21 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| beknighted wrote: |
| patsweetpat wrote: |
| beknighted wrote: |
| That said, I don't think the coaches poll is useless, just limited in its particular way. And since the committee has started considering polls at least a little in its deliberations, it's become more important than it used to be. |
When did that begin? Is that true? 'Cause if it's true, it sucks. |
A couple of years ago.
This is from last year's selection principles:
"Among the resources available to the committee are complete box scores, game summaries and notes, various computer rankings, head‐to‐head results, chronological results, Division I results, non‐conference results, home and away results, results in the last twelve games, rankings, polls and the coaches’ regional advisory committee rankings." |
That's terrible. I didn't know about that. I hate that.
|
|
beknighted
Joined: 11 Nov 2004
Posts: 11050
Location: Lost in D.C.
Back to top |
| Posted: 11/05/14 7:40 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| beknighted wrote: |
| patsweetpat wrote: |
| beknighted wrote: |
| That said, I don't think the coaches poll is useless, just limited in its particular way. And since the committee has started considering polls at least a little in its deliberations, it's become more important than it used to be. |
When did that begin? Is that true? 'Cause if it's true, it sucks. |
A couple of years ago.
This is from last year's selection principles:
"Among the resources available to the committee are complete box scores, game summaries and notes, various computer rankings, head‐to‐head results, chronological results, Division I results, non‐conference results, home and away results, results in the last twelve games, rankings, polls and the coaches’ regional advisory committee rankings." |
What are "the coaches regional advisory committee rankings"? Are those publicly available? Who creates those? |
I don't know much about them, but they seem to be used in a lot of sports. It sounds like they appoint coaches, who then rank the top teams (15 in one report I read) in their regions on a monthly basis and then report that to the committee. That said, I'm not sure those rankings are given much weight at all.
On the topic of the polls, I recall people (mostly fans of mid-majors) complaining that the committee *didn't* look at the polls and instead relied too heavily on things like RPI (which the committee always says is not determinative), which is why the polls were added. I also don't think the polls are given that much weight.
|
|
purduefanatic
Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana
Back to top |
| Posted: 11/05/14 9:22 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| beknighted wrote: |
This is from last year's selection principles:
"Among the resources available to the committee are complete box scores, game summaries and notes, various computer rankings, head‐to‐head results, chronological results, Division I results, non‐conference results, home and away results, results in the last twelve games, rankings, polls and the coaches’ regional advisory committee rankings." |
The key part is those first few words that I highlighted...they are resources that are available. It is my understanding that they see the rankings but they pay no attention to them as they are fully aware of the subjective nature of them.
|
|
|
|
