Selection Committee Rankings (11/9)

[Professor Chaos]

Georgia Southern and App St are just going to halftime now on ESPNU so the new rankings should be out soon. I'll update this post with them when they show them.

Here they are:

1. JMU
2. JSU
3. UCA
4. NDSU
5. SHSU
6. Elon
7. SDSU
8. Wofford
9. South Dakota
10. North Carolina A&T

[mamberso]

I'm old enough to remember when a game between App and Southern mattered.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TheKingpin28]

Georgia Southern and App St are just going to halftime now on ESPNU so the new rankings should be out soon. I'll update this post with them when they show them.

I completely forgot about it. If NDSU drops below 4, then that will be an eye opener.

[Professor Chaos]

Borderline amazed that they actually talked about the FCS a bit this week. Showed highlights from the SDSU/NDSU and UNI/USD games along with giving some details on upcoming big games amongst top 10 teams (they mentioned NDSU/USD and Elon/JMU).

[Southern Bison]

Borderline amazed that they actually talked about the FCS a bit this week. Showed highlights from the SDSU/NDSU and UNI/USD games along with giving some details on upcoming big games amongst top 10 teams (they mentioned NDSU/USD and Elon/JMU).JSU & UCA pass the Bison? Their SoS is weak compared to any MVFC team.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[JSUSoutherner]

Not sure which team is about to get hated on more in this thread, JSU or NCAT.

[TheKingpin28]

Georgia Southern and App St are just going to halftime now on ESPNU so the new rankings should be out soon. I'll update this post with them when they show them.

Here they are:

1. JMU
2. JSU
3. UCA
4. NDSU
5. SHSU
6. Elon
7. SDSU
8. Wofford
9. South Dakota
10. North Carolina A&T

NCAT and Wofford? After Wofford needed 2OTs to beat Chatty at home and NCAT, who has done nothing to warrant a T15 vote, what are they smoking? SUU and WIU/SBU deserve to be in there over these two teams, but that is just me.

[WCU-Cats!]

Too bad we won't know what team is right below NC A&T since they might not be participating.

Overall good list, looks like this week is a must win for NDSU to remain in the top 8 seeds, assuming the other top 9 teams win this week.

[TheKingpin28]

Not sure which team is about to get hated on more in this thread, JSU or NCAT.

I am the resident "anti-NCAT" member, so I will take this noble cause so your Southern Cocks aren't as abused.

[Professor Chaos]

JSU & UCA pass the Bison? Their SoS is weak compared to any MVFC team.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
I'd say the Bison still can move back to #2. It's obvious that the committee still likes USD at #9 so with a win there I think they can impress. The committee chair called out the quality of the MVFC as well in his blurb (or "interview" as they called it) this week so I'd have to imagine an outright MVFC championship would mean something to them.

[dustinthorn93]

My only complaint is ranking North Carolina A&T since they more than likely won't play in the playoffs. Other than that, it looks ok based off of this past week. It's going to be interesting these next couple of weeks though, that's for sure!

[Professor Chaos]

The committee didn't quite do as good of a job this week. They were a little further away from the AGS poll xlolx

1. JMU (-)
2. JSU (-)
3. UCA (-)
4. NDSU (-)
5. SHSU (+1)
6. Elon (+1)
7. SDSU (-2)
8. Wofford (-)
9. South Dakota (+1)
10. North Carolina A&T (+4)

Missed: Southern Utah (#9 in AGS)

[WCU-Cats!]

Someone please explain to me why they are not releasing a top 10 poll next week as well?

Seems like a bit of a cop-out

[mmiller_34]

Someone please explain to me why they are not releasing a top 10 poll next week as well?

Seems like a bit of a cop-out

They want a look at the AGS final top 25 before they make their final selections.

[JSUSoutherner]

In case anyone wants to play too.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171110/add8992555ee2b5b7bbf28c19238c9e7.jpg

[PantherRob82]

JSU & UCA pass the Bison? Their SoS is weak compared to any MVFC team.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Really? I haven’t heard anything about SoS. Explain more. :D

[PantherRob82]

Why bother including NCAT? Kudos for what they have done? If they win out they won’t be involved, if they lose they won’t be a seed.

[mmiller_34]

In case anyone wants to play too.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171110/add8992555ee2b5b7bbf28c19238c9e7.jpg

I GOT A BINGO!

[Evolution Prime]

In case anyone wants to play too.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171110/add8992555ee2b5b7bbf28c19238c9e7.jpg

Casey's Breakfast Pizza should be there free space. No one can argue against that.

[TheKingpin28]

I'd say the Bison still can move back to #2. It's obvious that the committee still likes USD at #9 so with a win there I think they can impress. The committee chair called out the quality of the MVFC as well in his blurb (or "interview" as they called it) this week so I'd have to imagine an outright MVFC championship would mean something to them.

I was not able to watch, but from this, what you are saying is if #4 NDSU beats #9 USeD and then a T15/20, the odds are that they will seed NDSU opposite of JMU, and then if SDSU wins out, at 7 to ensure a bottleneck of Valley teams on one side and a rematch of the best game in FCS football if both teams win out? (I had to, the Marker Game is just something as big as Casey's Breakfast Pizza with Extra Bacon. :D) I could see WIU "sneaking" into the 8 spot, to satisfy the MVFC rule, and to ensure USeD, NDSU, SDSU, and UNI on one side for "bus trip" purposes and then send both schools to rematches.

NDSU-USeD: 303 Miles
NDSU-UNI: 455 Miles (NGTH)
NDSU-SDSU: 190 Miles

SDSU-USeD: 116 Miles
SDSU-UNI: 353 Miles

So I could see a OVC team (EIU if they beat APU next week to end the season) vs UNI game and the winner goes to SDSU since UNI is "too far" from NDSU which creates another bus trip if UNI wins and then the USeD vs BS/San Diego winner gets sent to Fargo with the hopes that USeD wins to recreate a matchup, but another cost saving bus trip, with all of those teams within bus range for the following week (except NDSU-UNI)

EIU vs UNI = Winner VS SDSU

USeD vs BS/SD = Winner vs NDSU

Winner of Game 2 vs Winner of Game 4

So looking at 4 out of 5 potential bus trips is too hard for the committee to pass up and make it work like this.

[WestCoastAggie]

In case anyone wants to play too.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171110/add8992555ee2b5b7bbf28c19238c9e7.jpg

Classic.

[JSUSoutherner]

I was not able to watch, but from this, what you are saying is if #4 NDSU beats #9 USeD and then a T15/20, the odds are that they will seed NDSU opposite of JMU, and then if SDSU wins out, at 7 to ensure a bottleneck of Valley teams on one side and a rematch of the best game in FCS football if both teams win out? I could see WIU "sneaking" into the 8 spot just to ensure USeD, NDSU, SDSU, and UNI on one side for "bus trip" purposes and then send both schools to rematches.

NDSU-USeD: 303 Miles
NDSU-UNI: 455 Miles (NGTH)
NDSU-SDSU: 190 Miles

SDSU-USeD: 116 Miles
SDSU-UNI: 353 Miles

So I could see a OVC team (EIU if they beat APU next week to end the season) vs UNI game and the winner goes to SDSU since UNI is "too far" from NDSU which creates another bus trip if UNI wins and then the USeD vs BS/San Diego winner gets sent to Fargo with the hopes that USeD wins to recreate a matchup, but another cost saving bus trip, with all of those teams within bus range for the following week (except NDSU-UNI)

EIU vs UNI = Winner VS SDSU

USeD vs BS/SD = Winner vs NDSU

Winner of Game 2 vs Winner of Game 4

So looking at 4 out of 5 potential bus trips is too hard for the committee to pass up and make it work like this.

EIU is out. The only possible OVC At Large is APSU.

[DRDukes01]

At the end of the regular season the committee is going to find some way to seed it so that JMU and NDSU are on opposite sides of the bracket so there is the potential for them to meet in Frisco. As long as JMU wins out, the Dukes will be #1. If NDSU wins out they should be #2, but could see the committee slating them #3, but they won't stay at #4.

[TheKingpin28]

EIU is out. The only possible OVC At Large is APSU.

We are talking about the NCAA committee who claims they are unbiased about bids, but if they can get a potential UNI-EIU match-up and get a bus trip, you and I both know someone will ensure their name is at least thrown into the conversation about the distance between the two schools. Not saying they should be in at all, but I have seen stranger things, looking at you UNH in 2015.

[WestCoastAggie]

My only complaint is ranking North Carolina A&T since they more than likely won't play in the playoffs. Other than that, it looks ok based off of this past week. It's going to be interesting these next couple of weeks though, that's for sure!

We will be participating in the playoffs in the event we don't make the Celebration Bowl.

[Schism55]

Looks pretty much as expected...other than Southern Utah getting no love

[TheKingpin28]

At the end of the regular season the committee is going to find some way to seed it so that JMU and NDSU are on opposite sides of the bracket so there is the potential for them to meet in Frisco. As long as JMU wins out, the Dukes will be #1. If NDSU wins out they should be #2, but could see the committee slating them #3, but they won't stay at #4.

I remember the last time NDSU was seeded #3... :D

[WestCoastAggie]

https://twitter.com/ncaa_fcs/status/928807993705205760

#2 in scoring defense and #7 in scoring offense. We're taking an at-large bid if we don't make the Celebration Bowl.

[Evolution Prime]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v53/EvolutionPrime/Mobile%20Uploads/add8992555ee2b5b7bbf28c19238c9e7_zpswjgpsgq1.jpg

[JSUSoutherner]

https://twitter.com/ncaa_fcs/status/928807993705205760

#2 in scoring defense and #7 in scoring offense. We're taking an at-large bid if we don't make the Celebration Bowl.

Ya hear that?

They think we're an "outstanding" football program. We should get stickers. :D

[katss07]

Send us anywhere but Fargo! Please!

I don't expect these rankings to hold, but if they do, I hope SDSU climbs to 5 ahead of us so we get sent to uca or JACKSONVILLE STATE. But I really don't see how the Bison get a seed lower than 4, and I think it is crazy to think they will stay there. And also, I hope we play JACKSONVILLE STATE.

I'm kind of glad to not see SUU here. Good chance this committee sends the Thunderbirds to Huntsville in round two. We will get a chance to defend our Big Sky title if that were the scenario.

[JSUSoutherner]

Send us anywhere but Fargo! Please!

I don't expect these rankings to hold, but if they do, I hope SDSU climbs to 5 ahead of us so we get sent to uca or JACKSONVILLE STATE. But I really don't see how the Bison get a seed lower than 4, and I think it is crazy to think they will stay there. And also, I hope we play JACKSONVILLE STATE.

I'm kind of glad to not see SUU here. Good chance this committee sends the Thunderbirds to Huntsville in round two. We will get a chance to defend our Big Sky title if that were the scenario.

Careful what you wish for.

[dustinthorn93]

We will be participating in the playoffs in the event we don't make the Celebration Bowl.

Oh I know, I just don't think you guys lose this year and play in the Celebration Bowl is all. I just don't see the point in them ranking you guys if they aren't even sure you will be playing in the playoffs ya know?

Also, I think you guys are a pretty dang good team, but the MEAC as a whole hasn't helped you at all, so it's hard to see just how good they are!

[katss07]

Careful what you wish for.
JSU is SHSU last year. A fraud.

[JSUSoutherner]

JSU is SHSU last year. A fraud.

Didn't you guys almost get knocked off by Northwestern State?

[WestCoastAggie]

Oh I know, I just don't think you guys lose this year and play in the Celebration Bowl is all. I just don't see the point in them ranking you guys if they aren't even sure you will be playing in the playoffs ya know?

Also, I think you guys are a pretty dang good team, but the MEAC as a whole hasn't helped you at all, so it's hard to see just how good they are!

It just shows how the committee views teams in terms of seeding. If anything, our ranking is an indictment to the Big Sky who is grinding themselves out of a seed. They could have a champion at 6-2 in conference play.

Ironically, the MVFC could have the same thing, however, their record against the Big Sky is a major influence.

[TheKingpin28]

Didn't you guys almost get knocked off by Northwestern State?

You might be labeled a Bison fan if you keep talking like that.

[JSUSoutherner]

You might be labeled a Bison fan if you keep talking like that.

Nah, I'm apparently already a fan of the Jacksonville State Fighting Frauds.

[TheKingpin28]

Nah, I'm apparently already a fan of the Jacksonville State Fighting Frauds.

In their eyes, you might be getting cocky...

https://i.imgur.com/0PfMfYb.gif

[JSUSoutherner]

In their eyes, you might be getting cocky...

https://i.imgur.com/0PfMfYb.gif


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l60MnDJklnM&app=desktop

[jsualumnus]

I think most of JSU's fan base would say that #2 is stretching it as the offense has sputtered this year with inconsistent QB play, but this is probably the reason so many of you think we're a joke being #2. The run game has kept us in it offensively, but the D is why we're 8-1 and ranked high. We completely controlled the GT game until Horn threw 2 picks and fumbled which GT scored 20 pts of off... The two ranked teams we beat went to **** after we beat them. The reason why other teams scored more than 7-10 pts on us is because 2nd and 3rd string needing playing time. We might suspect this to increase more as the last couple games come up and the 1st-2nd string will need to be as healthy as possible.

[BEAR]

I like the national respect for UCA in all 3 polls. Since coach Campbell arrived he has not only improved the overall record but has recruited players that give the team a feel of playing above the conference. I think UCA will go far in the playoffs but I'm not sure they will go to the title game. If coach keeps up his efforts maybe the SLC will get more respect. Hope it will happen with more than one team though.

[Thumper 76]

It just shows how the committee views teams in terms of seeding. If anything, our ranking is an indictment to the Big Sky who is grinding themselves out of a seed. They could have a champion at 6-2 in conference play.

Ironically, the MVFC could have the same thing, however, their record against the Big Sky is a major influence.

I don’t have a problem with it I guess. The issue is that if you’re hanging around the ten spot no way you get a seed by dropping a game and not ending up in the Celebration Bowl. I would love to see an SDSU/NCA&T matchup.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ElCid]

In case anyone wants to play too.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171110/add8992555ee2b5b7bbf28c19238c9e7.jpg

Well this is just the funniest thing I've seen in a while. Nice!

[RootinFerDukes]

Send us anywhere but Fargo! Please!

I don't expect these rankings to hold, but if they do, I hope SDSU climbs to 5 ahead of us so we get sent to uca or JACKSONVILLE STATE. But I really don't see how the Bison get a seed lower than 4, and I think it is crazy to think they will stay there. And also, I hope we play JACKSONVILLE STATE.

I'm kind of glad to not see SUU here. Good chance this committee sends the Thunderbirds to Huntsville in round two. We will get a chance to defend our Big Sky title if that were the scenario.

If you want to be the best, you have to beat the best. Dodging ndsu isn’t going to win you a championship.

[JSUSoutherner]

If you want to be the best, you have to beat the best. Dodging ndsu isn’t going to win you a championship.
He's not trying to dodge the best. Didn't you hear him? He wants to play Jacksonville State. :Dxdrunkyx

[Bison56]

He's not trying to dodge the best. Didn't you hear him? He wants to play Jacksonville State. :Dxdrunkyx

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSTiG34HR9NZNQuoOuRijk1UqnMaIo7F XnMrEGNUXIfYFbjdLWy (https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiLmcKChLTXAhULiFQKHfpHAa4QjRwIBw&url=https%3A%2F%2Fgiphy.com%2Fgifs%2Faustin-powers-mike-myers-dr-evil-pSWRouTGi6eKQ&psig=AOvVaw0ZmUvGNmYvrtDMH3tXC0c4&ust=1510404098690047)

[OhioHen]

JSU & UCA pass the Bison? Their SoS is weak compared to any MVFC team.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

They could put NDSU at 2 and keep SDSU at 7 to guarantee a quarterfinal matchup. Would you prefer that scenario to the Bison seeded to play SHSU and the Jacks to play JSU?

[Southern Bison]

They could put NDSU at 2 and keep SDSU at 7 to guarantee a quarterfinal matchup. Would you prefer that scenario to the Bison seeded to play SHSU and the Jacks to play JSU?The scenario is whatever it ends up being. Seeding the top 8 by the committee into geographical quarterfinals instead of the true order of the best 8 teams is what most of us are tired of seeing.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[Redbird 4th & short]

JSU & UCA pass the Bison? Their SoS is weak compared to any MVFC team.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

already posted how idiotic this is .. NDSU's SOS is clearly tougher than JSU, UCA, and SHSU .. clearly much tougher .. and they are winning by much bigger margins. Sheer idiocy !!!!

Elon is beating bad teams by 3 to 8 points at most .. no wins over 8 point margin. Aren't top 8 seeds supposed to put away bad teams .. at some point ??

NC A&T .. play someone good. Beat someone good ... PLEASE !!!

Last observation .. with 2 more weeks of top MVFC playing each other, we could end up with no one in top 4 and be down to 1 in top 8 after we're all said and done .. sheer idiocy.

Clue .. when 2 very good MVFC teams play each other .. you don't have to drop either team, after one beats the other .. someone has to lose that game ... that doesn't mean one is worse than you thought a week ago .... right ??

[POD Knows]

At the end of the regular season the committee is going to find some way to seed it so that JMU and NDSU are on opposite sides of the bracket so there is the potential for them to meet in Frisco. As long as JMU wins out, the Dukes will be #1. If NDSU wins out they should be #2, but could see the committee slating them #3, but they won't stay at #4.If the Bison are lower than a #2 with a 10-1 record, that would be a joke. If NDSU wins out, they are #1 in my poll.

[kalm]

It just shows how the committee views teams in terms of seeding. If anything, our ranking is an indictment to the Big Sky who is grinding themselves out of a seed. They could have a champion at 6-2 in conference play.

Ironically, the MVFC could have the same thing, however, their record against the Big Sky is a major influence.

No, it shows the committee has not been thorough in their research and/or is not following their own guidelines very well. And no, the MVFC's record against the BSC (5-3 this year) is not a metric to be used either. At this point, you should be comparing resumes from one team to another, to another.

SUU has the same amount of FCS losses as Wofford, SHSU, USD with better wins than all three. Their SoS is better than all three as well at #7 versus #9 for USD, 45 for Wofford, and 57 for SHSU. Hell, you could make a similar case for Weber State.

Other observations regarding the ranking and this thread...

No way in hell APU or EIU should be close to an at-large unless the bubble absolutely ruptures. And if IIRC, bus trips and bids are not looked at until after the 24 team field is set so an EIU getting in based on proximity would be quite the conspiracy theory.

Team statistical rankings are also not used in the selection and seeding process.

NCAT being ranked in this poll might send a message to the MEAC that quality teams from their conference would be respected by the committee and could get future home games. I would be surprised if most FCS AD's are real happy about abandoning the subdivision's championship tourney.

If you value what the committee claims to value the poll should look like this...

1. JMU
2. NDSU
3. UCA
4. JSU
5. SDSU
6. Elon
7. SUU
8. Wofford
9. South Dakota
10. SHSU

[Terrier19]

I have no issue with where Wofford is currently. I like our spot. Working on locking up the SoCon AutoBid and no worse than a share of the Title. Then get to watch the other teams in the top 10-15 battle it out the next 2 weekends with some results that may very well enhance our seed. Regardless of what anyone says, Wofford has handled our business, and lost 1 FCS game by a Field Goal........Ready for another opportunity to make a deep playoff run.

[JSUSoutherner]

No, it shows the committee has not been thorough in their research and/or is not following their own guidelines very well. And no, the MVFC's record against the BSC (5-3 this year) is not a metric to be used either. At this point, you should be comparing resumes from one team to another, to another.

SUU has the same amount of FCS losses as Wofford, SHSU, USD with better wins than all three. Their SoS is better than all three as well at #7 versus #9 for USD, 45 for Wofford, and 57 for SHSU. Hell, you could make a similar case for Weber State.

Other observations regarding the ranking and this thread...

No way in hell APU or EIU should be close to an at-large unless the bubble absolutely ruptures. And if IIRC, bus trips and bids are not looked at until after the 24 team field is set so an EIU getting in based on proximity would be quite the conspiracy theory.

Team statistical rankings are also not used in the selection and seeding process.

NCAT being ranked in this poll might send a message to the MEAC that quality teams from their conference would be respected by the committee and could get future home games. I would be surprised if most FCS AD's are real happy about abandoning the subdivision's championship tourney.

If you value what the committee claims to value the poll should look like this...

1. JMU
2. NDSU
3. UCA
4. JSU
5. SDSU
6. Elon
7. SUU
8. Wofford
9. South Dakota
10. SHSU
So the AGS poll has UNH, Kennesaw, and McNeese in bubble range. What have those teams done that APSU hasn't? None of them have any good wins either.

The Valley likes to stroke each other about their SOS but APSU played 3 FBS games and JSU and gets less than no respect for winning every game they've played outside of those four. Somehow the Valley fans get away with four losses being somewhat excuseable because they lost to other good teams. None of the bubble teams would have won 9 games with APSU's schedule.

This, of course, is assuming the Govs win out and finish 8-4. Since the Committee apparently doesn't look at FBS losses, APSU will be viewed as an 8-1 team with their sole loss to the #2 team in their rankings.

[McNeese75]

So the AGS poll has UNH, Kennesaw, and McNeese in bubble range. What have those teams done that APSU hasn't? None of them have any good wins either.

The Valley likes to stroke each other about their SOS but APSU played 3 FBS games and JSU and gets less than no respect for winning every game they've played outside of those four. Somehow the Valley fans get away with four losses being somewhat excuseable because they lost to other good teams. None of the bubble teams would have won 9 games with APSU's schedule.

This, of course, is assuming the Govs win out and finish 8-4. Since the Committee apparently doesn't look at FBS losses, APSU will be viewed as an 8-1 team with their sole loss to the #2 team in their rankings.

And you know this for a fact HOW?????

[JSUSoutherner]

And you know this for a fact HOW?????

You guys lost to Nicholls and got taken to the wire by Alcorn State. The MAC/ AAC may not be great but they're better than that.

[McNeese75]

You guys lost to Nicholls and got taken to the wire by Alcorn State. The MAC/ AAC may not be great but they're better than that.Oh, so they won those games against the MAC/ACC? Yeah right smh

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[JSUSoutherner]

Oh, so they won those games against the MAC/ACC? Yeah right smh

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

No they didn't. I'm curious why you think McNeese would.

[UNIFanSince1983]

No they didn't. I'm curious why you think McNeese would.

I am curious why you think it is impossible any bubble team would beat Miami(OH) or Cincinnati? These are both bad FBS teams. Now UCF is probably a loss for most FCS teams period bubble or not. But it isn't guaranteed that every bubble team wouldn't win more than 8 games with that schedule.

[kalm]

So the AGS poll has UNH, Kennesaw, and McNeese in bubble range. What have those teams done that APSU hasn't? None of them have any good wins either.

The Valley likes to stroke each other about their SOS but APSU played 3 FBS games and JSU and gets less than no respect for winning every game they've played outside of those four. Somehow the Valley fans get away with four losses being somewhat excuseable because they lost to other good teams. None of the bubble teams would have won 9 games with APSU's schedule.

This, of course, is assuming the Govs win out and finish 8-4. Since the Committee apparently doesn't look at FBS losses, APSU will be viewed as an 8-1 team with their sole loss to the #2 team in their rankings.

Good comparison and I think they're all in trouble. KSU has slightly better wins than APU but the SOS, like McNeese is not good. UNH needs to beat Elon or I think they're out as well.

[McNeese75]

I am not saying they would but I took your insinuation that the "bubble" teams were worse than APSU. We can pontify all day about "what ifs" regarding schedules, certain games, etc to try and manipulate the way others see our conferences or teams. It takes skill and a lot of luck to win 9 games in any conference. Teams are the victim of their AD's (and or Coaches) scheduling and have to play whoever lines up across from them on Saturday. When it comes selection time they pay the price. Will The SLC get 3 or more teams in post season play? Who knows, if both Nicholls and McNeese win out then I think one of them gets in and it will probably be Nicholls. Do I think Nicholls is better than McNeese? Absolutely not but it is what it is.

[Serpentor]

I am not saying they would but I took your insinuation that the "bubble" teams were worse than APSU. We can pontify all day about "what ifs" regarding schedules, certain games, etc to try and manipulate the way others see our conferences or teams. It takes skill and a lot of luck to win 9 games in any conference. Teams are the victim of their AD's (and or Coaches) scheduling and have to play whoever lines up across from them on Saturday. When it comes selection time they pay the price. Will The SLC get 3 or more teams in post season play? Who knows, if both Nicholls and McNeese win out then I think one of them gets in and it will probably be Nicholls. Do I think Nicholls is better than McNeese? Absolutely not but it is what it is.

Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown...

[JSUSoutherner]

I am curious why you think it is impossible any bubble team would beat Miami(OH) or Cincinnati? These are both bad FBS teams. Now UCF is probably a loss for most FCS teams period bubble or not. But it isn't guaranteed that every bubble team wouldn't win more than 8 games with that schedule.

I'd bet money they wouldn't. Either way we won't find out anyway. But, in my opinion, writing them out of playoff contention is completely asinine.


I am not saying they would but I took your insinuation that the "bubble" teams were worse than APSU. We can pontify all day about "what ifs" regarding schedules, certain games, etc to try and manipulate the way others see our conferences or teams. It takes skill and a lot of luck to win 9 games in any conference. Teams are the victim of their AD's (and or Coaches) scheduling and have to play whoever lines up across from them on Saturday. When it comes selection time they pay the price. Will The SLC get 3 or more teams in post season play? Who knows, if both Nicholls and McNeese win out then I think one of them gets in and it will probably be Nicholls. Do I think Nicholls is better than McNeese? Absolutely not but it is what it is.

I didn't say whether they were better or worse. I said I don't think any of them would have beaten the FBS teams and ended up with the same record as Peay and using those losses against APSU is crap.

[Professor Chaos]

So the AGS poll has UNH, Kennesaw, and McNeese in bubble range. What have those teams done that APSU hasn't? None of them have any good wins either.

The Valley likes to stroke each other about their SOS but APSU played 3 FBS games and JSU and gets less than no respect for winning every game they've played outside of those four. Somehow the Valley fans get away with four losses being somewhat excuseable because they lost to other good teams. None of the bubble teams would have won 9 games with APSU's schedule.

This, of course, is assuming the Govs win out and finish 8-4. Since the Committee apparently doesn't look at FBS losses, APSU will be viewed as an 8-1 team with their sole loss to the #2 team in their rankings.
It's pretty simple. Don't ****ing schedule 3 FBS games if they're not winnable for you because that leave's you with zero margin for error in the rest of your schedule. That goes for MVFC teams too but especially for OVC teams where even 7 wins leaves you on the bubble. I don't give teams grace points for whoring themselves out for multiple FBS paychecks and I wouldn't expect the selection committee to either.

[JSUSoutherner]

It's pretty simple. Don't ****ing schedule 3 FBS games if they're not winnable for you because that leave's you with zero margin for error in the rest of your schedule. That goes for MVFC teams too but especially for OVC teams where even 7 wins leaves you on the bubble. I don't give teams grace points for whoring themselves out for multiple FBS paychecks and I wouldn't expect the selection committee to either.

So why don't the perennial 6 win MVFC teams just switch conferences so they aren't at the mercy of their tough schedule and have more room for error? Sounds like stupid logic, right?

FBS or no FBS APSU has potential to go 8-1 in FCS play with their lone loss to the #2 team. That at least deserves consideration.

[Professor Chaos]

So why don't the perennial 6 win MVFC teams just switch conferences so they aren't at the mercy of their tough schedule and have more room for error? Sounds like stupid logic, right?

FBS or no FBS APSU has potential to go 8-1 in FCS play with their lone loss to the #2 team. That at least deserves consideration.
That's an incredibly apples to oranges comparison. Not scheduling 3 FBS games per year is a hell of a lot easier than moving conferences. Besides that, being in a conference as tough as the MVFC affords extra margin for error rather than taking it away like scheduling multiple FBS games does (unless of course you can win those FBS games).

Yes, at 8-4 APSU deserves consideration but they'll be scrutinized, and rightly so, for a lack of quality wins just like KSU and McNeese and Nicholls.

[wcugrad95]

I wouldn't schedule 3, but some schools have to get the payouts from at least 1 and often 2 such games. I understand you trade your margin of error to make the playoffs, but for the financial viability of not only football but other programs a $500k or more payout goes a long way, and 2 of them go twice as far :D

APSU then leans on their only FCS loss being to a consensus top-3 to 5 program, and has to let the chips fall however they do. I doubt they really wanted 3, but the financials and the opportunity probably dictated it or were just grabbed because of the timing.

[JSUSoutherner]

That's an incredibly apples to oranges comparison. Not scheduling 3 FBS games per year is a hell of a lot easier than moving conferences. Besides that, being in a conference as tough as the MVFC afford extra margin for error rather than taking it away like scheduling multiple FBS games does.

Yes, at 8-4 APSU deserves consideration but they'll be scrutinized, and rightly so, for a lack of quality wins just like KSU and McNeese and Nicholls.

I agree. Their lack of quality wins is a shortfall. But it's not a shortfall that's exclusive to Austin Peay which is why when people say crap like


No way in hell APSU should be close to an at-large unless the bubble absolutely ruptures.

it's surprising to me. They act like APSU is the only team on the bubble that doesn't have a quality win. I'm willing to bet the people saying that have either Monmouth, KSU, McNeese, or UNH ranked.

They may not have quality wins but they sure don't have any bad losses.

[Professor Chaos]

I agree. Their lack of quality wins is a shortfall. But it's not a shortfall that's exclusive to Austin Peay which is why when people say crap like



it's surprising to me. They act like APSU is the only team on the bubble that doesn't have a quality win. I'm willing to bet the people saying that have either Monmouth, KSU, McNeese, or UNH ranked.

They may not have quality wins but they sure don't have any bad losses.
That's where the job of the selection committee gets tough. They basically have to pick apart and compare teams like SELA and EIU to figure who whose wins are less crappy between bubble teams like APSU or McNeese. You could make arguments for either of them but it'll be pretty subjective no matter what argument is made.

[beerkat]

strap in for another game of circular logic ladies and gentlemen....

argument against SHSU: they haven't proven anything because they have a weak schedule and haven't beaten anybody good
argument for UCA: they should be ranked #2 or #3 because they beat SHSU

[JSUSoutherner]

strap in for another game of circular logic ladies and gentlemen....

argument against SHSU: they haven't proven anything because they have a weak schedule and haven't beaten anybody good
argument for UCA: they should be ranked #2 or #3 because they beat SHSU

Not sure how that's circular.

SHSU's schedule is basically as weak as JSU's and they blew pretty much their only chance to prove themselves as a top seed and have struggled to put away a couple mediocre teams whereas UCA has gone through and waffle stomped pretty much everyone.

Basically the the way I look at it is that UCA and SHSU have pretty much swapped places from last year (though I think UCA last year is better than SHSU this year) and UCA last year wasn't even seeded.

[katss07]

Richmond and Nicholls are better than anything JSU has seen IMO. The Chatty win looked good for a minute, but that went downhill fast.

[JSUSoutherner]

Richmond and Nicholls are better than anything JSU has seen IMO. The Chatty win looked good for a minute, but that went downhill fast.
Debateable.

Either way SHSU's SOS vs. JSU's SOS is irrelevant. The difference maker is one has an FCS loss.

[Daytripper]

Debateable.

Either way SHSU's SOS vs. JSU's SOS is irrelevant. The difference maker is one has an FCS loss.

Only one has played a very good FCS team, also.

[dewey]

Only one has played a very good FCS team, also.

Agreed.

Dewey

[JSUSoutherner]

Only one has played a very good FCS team, also.
And lost. Congrats you have the same season highlight as Murray State.

Anyone can lose a game.


We lost to GT and you don't see me parading it as our crowning achievement.

[beerkat]

And lost. Congrats you have the same season highlight as Murray State.

Anyone can lose a game.


We lost to GT and you don't see me parading it as our crowning achievement.

what exactly is your crowning achievement this year?

[JSUSoutherner]

what exactly is your crowning achievement this year?
Not losing. If you paid any attention at all here you would know I think the committee has us overranked.

Now riddle me this. Why does JSU have ANYTHING to do with Sam Houston's State's ranking? Every time you guys get called out by anyone the first response is "but JSU".

[beerkat]

Not losing. If you paid any attention at all here you would know I think the committee has us overranked.

Now riddle me this. Why does JSU have ANYTHING to do with Sam Houston's State's ranking? Every time you guys get called out by anyone the first response is "but JSU".

Because we get marks against us due to "strength of schedule, haven't beaten anybody, weak conference, barely beat ___", and if those things are true for us then they are true for JSU as well, yet you are ranked higher than us and higher than UCA and NDSU. Which then leads to the hilarious "quality losses" discussion

[JSUSoutherner]

Because we get marks against us due to "strength of schedule, haven't beaten anybody, weak conference, barely beat ___", and if those things are true for us then they are true for JSU as well, yet you are ranked higher than us and higher than UCA and NDSU. Which then leads to the hilarious "quality losses" discussion
Yeah they are true. Nobody is disagreeing with you. I have NDSU ranked at 2 still in my poll.

However JSU being overranked shouldn't affect SHSU's placement.

I have SHSU ranked according to how I've seen them play in the games I've watched.

[kalm]

I agree. Their lack of quality wins is a shortfall. But it's not a shortfall that's exclusive to Austin Peay which is why when people say crap like



it's surprising to me. They act like APSU is the only team on the bubble that doesn't have a quality win. I'm willing to bet the people saying that have either Monmouth, KSU, McNeese, or UNH ranked.

They may not have quality wins but they sure don't have any bad losses.

"Crap? " "Crap"? I'll give you crap....

Sagarin rating of for each opponents in APSU's wins:

301
272
256
226
293
512


UNH:

237
211
311
231
239
168

Monmouth:

321
209
205
247
314
288
273
331

McNeese is about the same. None of them are that great, and as I said before they are all in trouble. Compare those wins against a number of other potential 7-4 or even 6-5 teams from the BSC, MVFC, and Socon and the lack of quality wins is even weaker. For example:

Delaware

168
138
237
115
265
439

NAU:

157
141
285
102
244
230

Now is Sagarin reliable? Not completely. Is it only about quality wins? Of course not. Should any 7-4 team even with a healthy SoS and a couple of quality wins be nervous? Yes. I just think there are too many 7-4's who will have better a resume than an 8-4 APSU this year.

But I will be kinder and my wording next time and admit that APSU should at least be in the discussion. :D

[JSUSoutherner]

"Crap? " "Crap"? I'll give you crap....

Sagarin rating of for each opponents in APSU's wins:

301
272
256
226
293
512


UNH:

237
211
311
231
239
168

Monmouth:

321
209
205
247
314
288
273
331

McNeese is about the same. None of them are that great, and as I said before they are all in trouble. Compare those wins against a number of other potential 7-4 or even 6-5 teams from the BSC, MVFC, and Socon and the lack of quality wins is even weaker. For example:

Delaware

168
138
237
115
265
439

NAU:

157
141
285
102
244
230

Now is Sagarin reliable? Not completely. Is it only about quality wins? Of course not. Should any 7-4 team even with a healthy SoS and a couple of quality wins be nervous? Yes. I just think there are too many 7-4's who will have better a resume than an 8-4 APSU this year.

But I will be kinder and my wording next time and admit that APSU should at least be in the discussion. :D

Keep in mind, I was arguing that an 8-4 APSU deserves consideration (especially if teams such as the ones I mentioned are considered, I didn't mention Delaware or NAU because I think in no circumstance APSU should be in over either of them), not that they deserve at bid. What happens with the at large bubble teams is yet to be seen and for all I know APSU could get blown TF out today and this discussion will become irrelevant.

[Redbird 4th & short]

"Crap? " "Crap"? I'll give you crap....

Sagarin rating of for each opponents in APSU's wins:

301
272
256
226
293
512


UNH:

237
211
311
231
239
168

Monmouth:

321
209
205
247
314
288
273
331

McNeese is about the same. None of them are that great, and as I said before they are all in trouble. Compare those wins against a number of other potential 7-4 or even 6-5 teams from the BSC, MVFC, and Socon and the lack of quality wins is even weaker. For example:

Delaware

168
138
237
115
265
439

NAU:

157
141
285
102
244
230

Now is Sagarin reliable? Not completely. Is it only about quality wins? Of course not. Should any 7-4 team even with a healthy SoS and a couple of quality wins be nervous? Yes. I just think there are too many 7-4's who will have better a resume than an 8-4 APSU this year.

But I will be kinder and my wording next time and admit that APSU should at least be in the discussion. :D

and for anyone who believes there is statistical bias and imperfections in Massey SOS .. add 5 to any conference team rankings you believe is getting their conf teams ranked to high (i.e. MVFC) .. then subtract 25 or 50 from any conference you think are being ranked to low (OVC, Southland) ... and you still are forced to reach exact same conclusions .. just a little less blatantly obvious.

The most recent case with NDSU dropping below JSU, UCA, SHSU is blatant example .. all with 8-1 records ... NDSU is beating a much tougher schedule by 27 ppg, while the other 3 are playing much weaker schedule and winning by just 15 to 18 ppg. .. just sheer idiocy that NDSU got dropped so much after losing to another top 10 team on road. And if the committee is pouncing on them now because the lost they stud RB Dunn .. then thats quite a precedence they just set .. current season and 7 year body of work no longer matters just one game into a key injury ??

[JSUSoutherner]

and for anyone who believes there is statistical bias and imperfections in Massey SOS .. add 5 to any conference team rankings you believe is getting their conf teams ranked to high (i.e. MVFC) .. then subtract 25 or 50 from any conference you think are being ranked to low (OVC, Southland) ... and you still are forced to reach exact same conclusions .. just a little less blatantly obvious.

The NDSU dropping below JSU, UCA, SHSU is blatant example .. all with 8-1 records ... NDSU is beating a much tougher schedule by 27 ppg, while the other 3 are playing much weaker schedule and winning but just 15 to 18 ppg. .. just sheer idiocy that NDSU got dropped so much after losing to another top 8 team on road. And if the committee is pouncing on them because the lost they stud RB Dunn .. then thats quite a precedence they just set.

Are we still on about this NDSU falling business? Sheesh. xrolleyesx

[kalm]

Keep in mind, I was arguing that an 8-4 APSU deserves consideration (especially if teams such as the ones I mentioned are considered, I didn't mention Delaware or NAU because I think in no circumstance APSU should be in over either of them), not that they deserve at bid. What happens with the at large bubble teams is yet to be seen and for all I know APSU could get blown TF out today and this discussion will become irrelevant.

Gotcha and agreed. xthumbsupx

The more I look at remaining schedules and resume's the more of a **** show this all becomes.

The MVFC should be a lock for 3 at larges but might get at least 1 more. (I see either ISUr or USD losing two. Perhaps both do.) I would say any 7-4 MVFC is in at this point except USD.
CAA is a lock for 2 but I think gets at least one more between UD, UNH, or Richmond if they pull off the upset. Any 7-4 CAA is nervous with the exception of UR.
SLC is a lock for 1. McNeese and Nichols need some help but could both get in.
Big Sky is a lock for 1. If NAU wins out than it's a lock for 2 and probably 3 teams with the Griz getting a bump for the NAU win.
SoCon is a likely a lock for at least 1. Barring an upset this week, the winner Samford-Furman is in for sure with the loser on the bubble along with WCU.

So there are 8 locks and a whole grip of teams ranging from 7-4's with compelling SoS and quality wins to 9-2 SLC's and Big Souths vying for the remaining 6 spots.

[Redbird 4th & short]

NC A&T playing at home against #105th ranked team .. wins by just 16 points . Top 10 teams are supposed to win those games by 40 or more.

SHSU beat #85 Abilene (2-8) by just 9 points .. see above for what is expected of alleged top 5 teams, especially those ranked ahead of NDSU.

JSU beat #59 Tenn Martin (5-5) by just 7 points .. this should have been a 25+ point win for any serious top 5 team, particularly an alleged #2.

Congrats to UCA for beating #102 Incarnate Word by 46 .. they've played an easy SOS, but at least they're winning their easy games by decent margins. Definitely the #3 team behind JMU and NDSU.


Elon .. lost to UNH, good team, but not top 20; proving Elon is simply a competitive team, but clearly not a top 8 seed. Elon has no convincing wins against anyone at bottom of their schedule. Top 10 teams should not only beat other ranked teams, but they should put away teams at bottom of schedule.

FCS selection committee better be taking note of these weak wins against bad teams. Why the committee is not putting a top 10 list out this week is hard to understand. After dropping NDSU to #5 below SHSU, JSU, and UCA, and putting NC A&T into their top 10 ... it would sure be nice to see if they got some sense this week after last weeks big fail.

[WestCoastAggie]

NC A&T playing at home against #105th ranked team .. wins by just 16 points . Top 10 teams are supposed to win those games by 40 or more.

SHSU beat #85 Abilene (2-8) by just 9 points .. see above for what is expected of alleged top 5 teams, especially those ranked ahead of NDSU.

JSU beat #59 Tenn Martin (5-5) by just 7 points .. this should have been a 25+ point win for any serious top 5 team, particularly an alleged #2.

Congrats to UCA for beating #102 Incarnate Word by 46 .. they've played an easy SOS, but at least they're winning their easy games by decent margins. Definitely the #3 team behind JMU and NDSU.


Elon .. lost to UNH, good team, but not top 20; proving Elon is simply a competitive team, but clearly not a top 8 seed. Elon has no convincing wins against anyone at bottom of their schedule. Top 10 teams should not only beat other ranked teams, but they should put away teams at bottom of schedule.

FCS selection committee better be taking note of these weak wins against bad teams. Why the committee is not putting a top 10 list out this week is hard to understand. After dropping NDSU to #5 below SHSU, JSU, and UCA, and putting NC A&T into their top 10 ... it would sure be nice to see if they got some sense this week after last weeks big fail.

It's clear as day that the FCS Selection Committee are not using the Massey or Sagarin SOS for their seed considerations. NDSU will jump to the top 4 and will likely have a top 3 seed next Sunday.

BTW: I believe the Massey and Sagarin SOS have a strong bias embedded in them.

[Professor Chaos]

After dropping NDSU to #5 below SHSU, JSU, and UCA, and putting NC A&T into their top 10 ... it would sure be nice to see if they got some sense this week after last weeks big fail.
NDSU dropped to #4 in last week's selection committee rankings. They're still ahead of SHSU but behind JSU and UCA.

[JSUSoutherner]

NC A&T playing at home against #105th ranked team .. wins by just 16 points . Top 10 teams are supposed to win those games by 40 or more.

SHSU beat #85 Abilene (2-8) by just 9 points .. see above for what is expected of alleged top 5 teams, especially those ranked ahead of NDSU.

JSU beat #59 Tenn Martin (5-5) by just 7 points .. this should have been a 25+ point win for any serious top 5 team, particularly an alleged #2.

Congrats to UCA for beating #102 Incarnate Word by 46 .. they've played an easy SOS, but at least they're winning their easy games by decent margins. Definitely the #3 team behind JMU and NDSU.


Elon .. lost to UNH, good team, but not top 20; proving Elon is simply a competitive team, but clearly not a top 8 seed. Elon has no convincing wins against anyone at bottom of their schedule. Top 10 teams should not only beat other ranked teams, but they should put away teams at bottom of schedule.

FCS selection committee better be taking note of these weak wins against bad teams. Why the committee is not putting a top 10 list out this week is hard to understand. After dropping NDSU to #5 below SHSU, JSU, and UCA, and putting NC A&T into their top 10 ... it would sure be nice to see if they got some sense this week after last weeks big fail.

**** happens when your major offensive players get injured.

Defense is still playing well. We only have up 48 yards rushing on 30 attempts and would have held them to negative yards for the second week in a row but we ended up giving up a 51 yard run late.

That said, I'm dropping JSU in my poll this week. I had them at three last week.

[WestCoastAggie]

NDSU dropped to #4 in last week's selection committee rankings. They're still ahead of SHSU but behind JSU and UCA.

You're right and they should move to 2 or 3 in the rankings.

It should be, IMHO:

1. JMU
2. NDSU
3. SDSU

[WestCoastAggie]

**** happens when your major offensive players get injured.

Defense is still playing well. We only have up 48 yards rushing on 30 attempts and would have held them to negative yards for the second week in a row but we ended up giving up a 51 yard run late.

That said, I'm dropping JSU in my poll this week. I had them at three last week.

It seems that the Computer Hawks don't realize that injuries are considered by the selection committee.

[JSUSoutherner]

It seems that the Computer Hawks don't realize that injuries are considered by the selection committee.
Haven't had official word on it yet but it's my guess that Roc could play this week. I hope we hold him out though for the sake of keeping him healthy. The other couple of injuries I haven't heard much on.

[Professor Chaos]

You're right and they should move to 2 or 3 in the rankings.

It should be, IMHO:

1. JMU
2. NDSU
3. SDSU
That's plausible. I think SDSU's two FCS losses will hurt them though. Right now I'd have it as:

1. JMU
2. NDSU
3. UCA
4. JSU
5. SDSU

[JSUSoutherner]

That's plausible. I think SDSU's two FCS losses will hurt them though. Right now I'd have it as:

1. JMU
2. NDSU
3. UCA
4. JSU
5. SDSU

That's how it should be.

[TheKingpin28]

That's plausible. I think SDSU's two FCS losses will hurt them though. Right now I'd have it as:

1. JMU
2. NDSU
3. UCA
4. JSU
5. SDSU


That's how it should be.

I flipped 4 and 5 due to SDSUs win over NDSU, but that is just me.

[JSUSoutherner]

I flipped 4 and 5 due to SDSUs win over NDSU, but that is just me.
I think the two FCS losses hurts them more than the win helps them. Youngstown State is floating slightly above dumpster fire status at the moment.

[TheKingpin28]

I think the two FCS losses hurts them more than the win helps them. Youngstown State is floating slightly above dumpster fire status at the moment.

Think about when they played them though. Kind of like UTM vs JSU yesterday. Hard to fault a team for losing to a team that when at full depth, was a T5/T10 team. Hopefully the committee remembers that when considering where to place them, instead of just looking at the score and saying, oh yeah they suck. The loss to UNI is looking better by the moment since if they beat ISUb next week (0-10), they will finish #2 and SDSU will finish #3. Then again, if UNI loses next week, well, IDK what to say to that.

SDSU beat: NDSU, WIU, ISUr
JSU beat: I'll wait...

[JSUSoutherner]

Think about when they played them though. Kind of like UTM vs JSU yesterday. Hard to fault a team for losing to a team that when at full depth, was a T5/T10 team. Hopefully the committee remembers that when considering where to place them, instead of just looking at the score and saying, oh yeah they suck. The loss to UNI is looking better by the moment since if they beat ISUb next week (0-10), they will finish #2 and SDSU will finish #3. Then again, if UNI loses next week, well, IDK what to say to that.

SDSU beat: NDSU, WIU, ISUr
JSU beat: I'll wait...

I'm not disagreeing that you could make an argument for SDSU over JSU. I'm saying I don't think the committee will do it.

SDSU had two FCS losses last year and beat NDSU last year and still ended up as the 7 seed.

[TheKingpin28]

I'm not disagreeing that you could make an argument for SDSU over JSU. I'm saying I don't think the committee will do it.

SDSU had two FCS losses last year and beat NDSU last year and still ended up as the 7 seed.

Bus trip to Fargo or charter a plane. I wonder which one they would choose? xnodx

[Redbird 4th & short]

I think the two FCS losses hurts them more than the win helps them. Youngstown State is floating slightly above dumpster fire status at the moment.
And YSU will finish 6-5 this year having played a top 5 SOS .. and they will have the best 4 of 5 losses ever .. only ISUr gave them a bad loss. Every other loss was against a highly ranked FCS team or FBS Pitt.

Now will the committee notice that ?? I hope so .. they seem to acknowledge they look at quality wins and losses. I don't think there are a handful of teams in FCS history with as many high quality losses as YSU .. not making a case for YSU getting in playoffs, but making case for the winner of those games against YSU should be viewed as a high quality win.

[JSUSoutherner]

And YSU will finish 6-5 this year having played a top 5 SOS .. and they will have the best 4 of 5 losses ever .. only ISUr gave them a bad loss. Every other loss was against a highly ranked FCS team or FBS Pitt.

Now will the committee notice that ?? I hope so .. they seem to acknowledge they look at quality wins and losses. I don't think there are a handful of teams in FCS history with as many high quality losses as YSU .. not making a case for YSU getting in playoffs, but making case for the winner of those games against YSU should be viewed as a high quality win.

5 of their 6 wins against RMU, CCU, SIU, ISUb, and possibly MSU.

Those teams are garbage. They've done NOTHING outside of beat SDSU that merits them being taken seriously by the committee.

YSU being viewed as a high quality loss is a joke.

[th0m]

5 of their 6 wins against RMU, CCU, SIU, ISUb, and possibly MSU.

Those teams are garbage. They've done NOTHING outside of beat SDSU that merits them being taken seriously by the committee.

YSU being viewed as a high quality loss is a joke.

Don't you understand? With all them high quality losses, there is no more room for high quality wins! Geez

[WestCoastAggie]

And YSU will finish 6-5 this year having played a top 5 SOS .. and they will have the best 4 of 5 losses ever .. only ISUr gave them a bad loss. Every other loss was against a highly ranked FCS team or FBS Pitt.

Now will the committee notice that ?? I hope so .. they seem to acknowledge they look at quality wins and losses. I don't think there are a handful of teams in FCS history with as many high quality losses as YSU .. not making a case for YSU getting in playoffs, but making case for the winner of those games against YSU should be viewed as a high quality win.

Let this obsession with the computer rankings go, please. The committee isn't using your criteria.

[FargoBison]

5 of their 6 wins against RMU, CCU, SIU, ISUb, and possibly MSU.

Those teams are garbage. They've done NOTHING outside of beat SDSU that merits them being taken seriously by the committee.

YSU being viewed as a high quality loss is a joke.

YSU has no business being in the playoffs but I think somebody here said losing to them is a bad loss which is also just wrong.

[JSUSoutherner]

YSU has no business being in the playoffs but I think somebody here said losing to them is a bad loss which is also just wrong.
It's not "bad".

But some people here are trying to act like losing to YSU is like losing to NDSU and shouldn't be punished as harshly which is TOTAL crap.

[Reign of Terrier]

It's not "bad".

But some people here are trying to act like losing to YSU is like losing to NDSU and shouldn't be punished as harshly which is TOTAL crap.

I can't rep you any more for this comment, but yeah. No one is denying that the MVFC is a good conference, but you guys are getting so much more "inside baseball" than the committee will because you over-weigh the computer rankings.

The committee is not going to puts a a 7-4 MVFC team in that isn't named UNI (because of their conference standing and the strength of the bubble this year). As for weighing SOS, I'm skeptical that anyone is going to weight a 6-5 YSU team over another non-MVFC team's conference's win over a team with a similar record.

[thebootfitter]

BTW: I believe the Massey and Sagarin SOS have a strong bias embedded in them.

I'm curious what evidence you have to support the idea of Massey and Sagarin being strongly biased? Is it just anecdotal observations? (Which by their nature are themselves quite biased?) Or do you have some statistical evidence to support the idea of bias?

While neither shares their formulas publicly, I would be extremely surprised if their formulas contain any bias against any individual teams or categories of teams. The formula works the same for every team. Exceed the predictions and have the teams you played (W or L) exceed their expectations, and you move up. Not a whole lot of room for bias when using objective scores as the only input.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[TheKingpin28]

I can't rep you any more for this comment, but yeah. No one is denying that the MVFC is a good conference, but you guys are getting so much more "inside baseball" than the committee will because you over-weigh the computer rankings.

The committee is not going to puts a a 7-4 MVFC team in that isn't named UNI (because of their conference standing and the strength of the bubble this year). As for weighing SOS, I'm skeptical that anyone is going to weight a 6-5 YSU team over another non-MVFC team's conference's win over a team with a similar record.

If USeD wins, they are in. If ISUr wins, they are in. These are the facts

NDSU: lock
SDSU: lock
WIU: almost lock
UNI: almost lock

USeD: WIU, YSU (before the injuries), SDSU (they play them this week)
ISUr: USeD, NDSU (they play them this week)

It would be damn near impossible to leave either of these two teams out if they both win.

[WestCoastAggie]

I'm curious what evidence you have to support the idea of Massey and Sagarin being strongly biased? Is it just anecdotal observations? (Which by their nature are themselves quite biased?) Or do you have some statistical evidence to support the idea of bias?

While neither shares their formulas publicly, I would be extremely surprised if their formulas contain any bias against any individual teams or categories of teams. The formula works the same for every team. Exceed the predictions and have the teams you played (W or L) exceed their expectations, and you move up. Not a whole lot of room for bias when using objective scores as the only input.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

I got two things:

1. Their current top 10 poll released this year and;
2. The evidence they've used SRS in the past.

With both, the committee has demonstrated to look beyond these two metrics, which showcase that At-Large teams from the MEAC, OVC & PL ranked way below BSC, CAA and MVFC teams left at home.

Look at the at-large berths in 2015 or Tennessee State's last playoff appearance for recent examples of this.

[thebootfitter]

I got two things:

1. Their current top 10 poll released this year and;
2. The evidence they've used SRS in the past.

With both, the committee has demonstrated to look beyond these two metrics, which showcase that At-Large teams from the MEAC, OVC & PL ranked way below BSC, CAA and MVFC teams left at home.

Look at the at-large berths in 2015 or Tennessee State's last playoff appearance for recent examples of this.I'm not sure I follow. Are you saying Massey and Sagarin are biased because the selection committee doesn't make their selections by the same metrics?

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[Thumper 76]

5 of their 6 wins against RMU, CCU, SIU, ISUb, and possibly MSU.

Those teams are garbage. They've done NOTHING outside of beat SDSU that merits them being taken seriously by the committee.

YSU being viewed as a high quality loss is a joke.

Can we take a moment to realize that Ol’ 4th and Short is the most fanatical of the pro MVFC posters and pro computers poster by a long shot? Please? Maybe don’t put us all in his little section?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Reign of Terrier]

I'm curious what evidence you have to support the idea of Massey and Sagarin being strongly biased? Is it just anecdotal observations? (Which by their nature are themselves quite biased?) Or do you have some statistical evidence to support the idea of bias?

While neither shares their formulas publicly, I would be extremely surprised if their formulas contain any bias against any individual teams or categories of teams. The formula works the same for every team. Exceed the predictions and have the teams you played (W or L) exceed their expectations, and you move up. Not a whole lot of room for bias when using objective scores as the only input.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

It's biased in the sense that the logic it uses is circular and the margin of error is pretty high for FCS because there's a lot less perfect information.

We have good data right now in comparing the MVFC and Big Sky (because those conferences played each other), but for inter-conference comparison we can't say much about most conferences outside of that.

To demonstrate the "bias" of the computer rankings let's look at Youngstown (and to be clear, I don't think bias is necessarily the right word). They lost five games and had a losing record and were still listed as a top 10 team in one of those rankings. It makes perfect sense if you weigh SOS and have a bunch of close losses like Youngstown did to rank them high in terms of computers, but computers don't make the judgment of whether or not a team with a losing record in week 8 has something wrong with it.

Put another way, the computer rankings don't really have a measure for having the ability to close close games, because most teams that can't have a lot of L's and the teams that can have a lot of W's and coding for that would be overfitting or superfluous in most cases.

So, when we say it's biased, there's evidence of many MVFC teams doing wrong (YSU being chief among them) and the computer rankings saying "ah yes, this is fine."


If USeD wins, they are in. If ISUr wins, they are in. These are the facts

NDSU: lock
SDSU: lock
WIU: almost lock
UNI: almost lock

USeD: WIU, YSU (before the injuries), SDSU (they play them this week)
ISUr: USeD, NDSU (they play them this week)

It would be damn near impossible to leave either of these two teams out if they both win.

I agree that USD is in if they win as they have 8 wins. If they lose I don't think a win against YSU is impressive enough; though the WIU win would be impressive there are a number of teams with an impressive win over a 7 or 8 win team that will probably be left at home (Western Carolina to name one).

I don't see an 8-win team from the MVFC, Big Sky, Socon, CAA and maybe the Southland getting left out in favor of an MVFC win with 7 wins not named UNI. My point in the above comment was that I don't think a 7 win team from the MVFC, not named UNI gets in this year because of the strength of the bubble,

Look, the number of teams that get selected into the playoffs has just as much to do with what the rest of the field looks like than it does one's individual strength of schedule. Samford got in last year at 7-4 (with 6 D1 wins) because they had 2 quality wins and the field was weak. The national field is not weak this year.

All these NDSU fans think those of us who are skeptical of the MVFC getting more than 4 or 5 teams or are drawing scrutiny about certain teams think we're either denying that 1) the MVFC is tough or 2) a lot of bubble MVFC teams don't have quality wins. No one is making this argument. It's just that with the strength of the current field, you'd have to be a blind MVFC homer to think they are 1) the only teams with quality wins or 2) the only conference that may have 1-2 teams sitting at home who have a legitimate case for a bid or a quality win. There are at least 1-2 teams in every conference that fits that criteria.

[leatherneck177]

It's biased in the sense that the logic it uses is circular and the margin of error is pretty high for FCS because there's a lot less perfect information.

We have good data right now in comparing the MVFC and Big Sky (because those conferences played each other), but for inter-conference comparison we can't say much about most conferences outside of that.

To demonstrate the "bias" of the computer rankings let's look at Youngstown (and to be clear, I don't think bias is necessarily the right word). They lost five games and had a losing record and were still listed as a top 10 team in one of those rankings. It makes perfect sense if you weigh SOS and have a bunch of close losses like Youngstown did to rank them high in terms of computers, but computers don't make the judgment of whether or not a team with a losing record in week 8 has something wrong with it.

Put another way, the computer rankings don't really have a measure for having the ability to close close games, because most teams that can't have a lot of L's and the teams that can have a lot of W's and coding for that would be overfitting or superfluous in most cases.

So, when we say it's biased, there's evidence of many MVFC teams doing wrong (YSU being chief among them) and the computer rankings saying "ah yes, this is fine."



I agree that USD is in if they win as they have 8 wins. If they lose I don't think a win against YSU is impressive enough; though the WIU win would be impressive there are a number of teams with an impressive win over a 7 or 8 win team that will probably be left at home (Western Carolina to name one).

I don't see an 8-win team from the MVFC, Big Sky, Socon, CAA and maybe the Southland getting left out in favor of an MVFC win with 7 wins not named UNI. My point in the above comment was that I don't think a 7 win team from the MVFC, not named UNI gets in this year because of the strength of the bubble,

Look, the number of teams that get selected into the playoffs has just as much to do with what the rest of the field looks like than it does one's individual strength of schedule. Samford got in last year at 7-4 (with 6 D1 wins) because they had 2 quality wins and the field was weak. The national field is not weak this year.

All these NDSU fans think those of us who are skeptical of the MVFC getting more than 4 or 5 teams or are drawing scrutiny about certain teams think we're either denying that 1) the MVFC is tough or 2) a lot of bubble MVFC teams don't have quality wins. No one is making this argument. It's just that with the strength of the current field, you'd have to be a blind MVFC homer to think they are 1) the only teams with quality wins or 2) the only conference that may have 1-2 teams sitting at home who have a legitimate case for a bid or a quality win. There are at least 1-2 teams in every conference that fits that criteria.

A 7-4 Western Illinois and/or ISUr would most likely make it.

6 road wins including FBS win and wins against UNI, ISUr, NAU for Western.

ISUr has the USD win and would have beat NDSU to get to 7-4.

A lot would have to happen for them to be left out. In my opinion the bubble is not that deep either when you really break it down. There are a lot of weak 7-4 teams out there.

[Reign of Terrier]

A 7-4 Western Illinois and/or ISUr would most likely make it.

6 road wins including FBS win and wins against UNI, ISUr, NAU for Western.

ISUr has the USD win and would have beat NDSU to get to 7-4.

A lot would have to happen for them to be left out. In my opinion the bubble is not that deep either when you really break it down. There are a lot of weak 7-4 teams out there.

The Southland could have 4 teams with 9+ wins (that's never happened before)
The Big South will have 2 teams with 9+ wins
The Big Sky could have 4 team with 8+ wins
The CAA could have 5 teams with 8+ wins
The Socon will have (at least) 2 teams with 8+ wins
the OVC could have 2 teams with 8+ wins

Even if you take out the historically weak conferences (Big South, OVC, fourth place Southland team), with autobids, you're looking at possibly 21 slots filled with 8+ wins "before" (in scare quotes not because those teams will get in before but because I'm just trying to illustrate how narrow the field gets) 3-4 MVFC at-large teams to fill.

As I've said multiple times, I think the MVFC gets at least 4, possibly 5 in. Western Illinois and South Dakota can't gamble with a loss this weekend. ISUr would have a good chance with a win against NDSU (but I don't think they will so it's moot).

I just don't see the politics of the committee saying "yes we will let a last 7-4 team from the MVFC" in over a team like Nichols state who would be 9-2. I just don't see the MVFC getting 5 with 2 of them at 7-4 when you have conference who have more wins than usual being limited to 1-2.

And this is all speculation. I could be wrong (ask Furman fans, I'm wrong all the time!). I'm just skeptical that the MVFC is going to be treated so well with as a strong a field we have now.

[Hammerhead]

Why do a ranking and then stop for two weeks?

[Herder]

Georgia Southern and App St are just going to halftime now on ESPNU so the new rankings should be out soon. I'll update this post with them when they show them.

Here they are:

1. JMU
2. JSU
3. UCA
4. NDSU
5. SHSU
6. Elon
7. SDSU
8. Wofford
9. South Dakota
10. North Carolina A&T

The FCS selection committee would have UCF ahead of Georgia and Clemson. They just would. Crazy stupid ranking. Which gap is wider? Sec/American or MVFC/Southland. Unbelievable how deeply heads buried in sand.

[Reign of Terrier]

Looking at the bracket, I think if JMU beats Elon, and all else goes on schedule, your seeding brackets will look like this

JMU v undisclosed 8 seed (Furman/UCA/SUU possibly?

2/7 JSU and Wofford

3/6 UCA Sam Houston

4/5 NDSU/SDSU

This isn't a value judgment of the skill of the teams, if they deserve it, etc. I just think those are the likely matchups because geography and how the seeds look now.

[thebootfitter]

It's biased in the sense that the logic it uses is circular and the margin of error is pretty high for FCS because there's a lot less perfect information.

We have good data right now in comparing the MVFC and Big Sky (because those conferences played each other), but for inter-conference comparison we can't say much about most conferences outside of that.

To demonstrate the "bias" of the computer rankings let's look at Youngstown (and to be clear, I don't think bias is necessarily the right word). They lost five games and had a losing record and were still listed as a top 10 team in one of those rankings. It makes perfect sense if you weigh SOS and have a bunch of close losses like Youngstown did to rank them high in terms of computers, but computers don't make the judgment of whether or not a team with a losing record in week 8 has something wrong with it.

Put another way, the computer rankings don't really have a measure for having the ability to close close games, because most teams that can't have a lot of L's and the teams that can have a lot of W's and coding for that would be overfitting or superfluous in most cases.

So, when we say it's biased, there's evidence of many MVFC teams doing wrong (YSU being chief among them) and the computer rankings saying "ah yes, this is fine."



I agree that USD is in if they win as they have 8 wins. If they lose I don't think a win against YSU is impressive enough; though the WIU win would be impressive there are a number of teams with an impressive win over a 7 or 8 win team that will probably be left at home (Western Carolina to name one).

I don't see an 8-win team from the MVFC, Big Sky, Socon, CAA and maybe the Southland getting left out in favor of an MVFC win with 7 wins not named UNI. My point in the above comment was that I don't think a 7 win team from the MVFC, not named UNI gets in this year because of the strength of the bubble,

Look, the number of teams that get selected into the playoffs has just as much to do with what the rest of the field looks like than it does one's individual strength of schedule. Samford got in last year at 7-4 (with 6 D1 wins) because they had 2 quality wins and the field was weak. The national field is not weak this year.

All these NDSU fans think those of us who are skeptical of the MVFC getting more than 4 or 5 teams or are drawing scrutiny about certain teams think we're either denying that 1) the MVFC is tough or 2) a lot of bubble MVFC teams don't have quality wins. No one is making this argument. It's just that with the strength of the current field, you'd have to be a blind MVFC homer to think they are 1) the only teams with quality wins or 2) the only conference that may have 1-2 teams sitting at home who have a legitimate case for a bid or a quality win. There are at least 1-2 teams in every conference that fits that criteria.

I challenge you to demonstrate that the "margin of error" is "high" for the FCS using Sagarin or Massey. Both generally predict the winner of games for FCS with about 75-80% accuracy.

I also am not aware of any "circular logic" used in the calculations. You may perceive there to be circular logic if you believe that strength of schedule is an input to the models. It is simply a by-product of the scores that are input. It can be a useful metric to determine the relative strength of schedules (obviously with a measure of uncertainty), but it does not feed the model itself.

Based on Youngstown's results on the field, they likely were a top 10 team at the time. You are right that the computers don't directly take into account injuries and other variables, but usually by the end of the year, all that stuff sorts itself out. It's both a benefit and a drawback to using the computer models. And also why they should never be used in a vacuum.

If you constantly play teams that are just better enough to score a point or two more than you, but they are really good teams, then chances are you have a really good team as well even if you're not winning games. Chances are that you'll be able to beat a team rated lower than you. Granted, the emotional and intangible aspects of being a "winner" aren't counted, but again... That's where a human can apply judgment.

Another way to look at this is that the computers are not biased, but humans are. And sometimes the bias that humans add to the mix is a good thing. That doesn't mean that the computers are worthless for relative ratings.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[melloware13]

If all goes on schedule, the 8 will likely either be the Big Sky champion or possibly Stony Brook (9-2 at that point)

[Professor Chaos]

If all goes on schedule, the 8 will likely either be the Big Sky champion or possibly Stony Brook (9-2 at that point)
8-3 WIU would be more deserving of the #8 seed than 9-2 Stony Brook would IMO. Although I agree that it's SUU's to lose as of now.

[JSUSoutherner]

Why do a ranking and then stop for two weeks?
I mean we're getting the selection show on Sunday. It's only a three day difference from when we would have gotten this week's ranking.

I doubt it has anything to do with it but JSU is also playing Thursday night. Would be kind of awkward to release last week's ranking in the middle of a game.

[Herder]

Looking at the bracket, I think if JMU beats Elon, and all else goes on schedule, your seeding brackets will look like this

JMU v undisclosed 8 seed (Furman/UCA/SUU possibly?

2/7 JSU and Wofford

3/6 UCA Sam Houston

4/5 NDSU/SDSU

This isn't a value judgment of the skill of the teams, if they deserve it, etc. I just think those are the likely matchups because geography and how the seeds look now.

UCF and Wisconsin at 2 & 3. Laughable.

[RootinFerDukes]

Don't you understand? With all them high quality losses, there is no more room for high quality wins! Geez

Look when the mvfc is ranked all in the top 10, you’re either getting quality wins or quality losses. There’s no way you can lose in that scenario!

[Reign of Terrier]

I challenge you to demonstrate that the "margin of error" is "high" for the FCS using Sagarin or Massey. Both generally predict the winner of games for FCS with about 75-80% accuracy.

I also am not aware of any "circular logic" used in the calculations. You may perceive there to be circular logic if you believe that strength of schedule is an input to the models. It is simply a by-product of the scores that are input. It can be a useful metric to determine the relative strength of schedules (obviously with a measure of uncertainty), but it does not feed the model itself.

Based on Youngstown's results on the field, they likely were a top 10 team at the time. You are right that the computers don't directly take into account injuries and other variables, but usually by the end of the year, all that stuff sorts itself out. It's both a benefit and a drawback to using the computer models. And also why they should never be used in a vacuum.

If you constantly play teams that are just better enough to score a point or two more than you, but they are really good teams, then chances are you have a really good team as well even if you're not winning games. Chances are that you'll be able to beat a team rated lower than you. Granted, the emotional and intangible aspects of being a "winner" aren't counted, but again... That's where a human can apply judgment.

Another way to look at this is that the computers are not biased, but humans are. And sometimes the bias that humans add to the mix is a good thing. That doesn't mean that the computers are worthless for relative ratings.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

As the guy in the comment above pointed out more briefly than I did:

If all of a conference is ranked in the top 25, every win you have is a quality win and every loss you have is a quality loss. You can't "lose" in that scenario, and that's why it's circular.

It may be true that Massey and Sagarin pick the right winner 80% of the time, but it's not hard to pick most games. Now if they can pick the winner of playoff games with that sort of accuracy, I'm all ears, but the vast majority of FCS games aren't that hard to pick if you have a decent model (heck, I have one for picking the Socon that's pretty helpful this year).

To put things in perspective of how not-impressive it is to pick 80% of games correctly. That's like picking your typical conference matchup on a weekly basis 4 of 5 games right (how good is Sagarin at picking the MVFC?).

[thebootfitter]

As the guy in the comment above pointed out more briefly than I did:

If all of a conference is ranked in the top 25, every win you have is a quality win and every loss you have is a quality loss. You can't "lose" in that scenario, and that's why it's circular.

It may be true that Massey and Sagarin pick the right winner 80% of the time, but it's not hard to pick most games. Now if they can pick the winner of playoff games with that sort of accuracy, I'm all ears, but the vast majority of FCS games aren't that hard to pick if you have a decent model (heck, I have one for picking the Socon that's pretty helpful this year).

To put things in perspective of how not-impressive it is to pick 80% of games correctly. That's like picking your typical conference matchup on a weekly basis 4 of 5 games right (how good is Sagarin at picking the MVFC?).

Your example of the circular logic is irrelevant though. That's not how Sagarin or Massey work. They don't care about "good wins" or "good losses." They just care about the difference between the prediction of the ratings and the actual score differential.

If every team in a conference is in the top 25, then there is a reason for that. They have each played 3 OOC games and have a collective measure of their strength against other conferences based on the outcomes of 30 games. It would be ideal to have more, I agree. But 30 games is enough to show trends.

It doesn't matter whether other systems can predict with 80% accuracy or not. We're not comparing other systems here. We're trying to establish whether Sagarin and Massey have value in determining the relative strength of teams. 80% accuracy is much better than "throwing darts."

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[Reign of Terrier]

Your example of the circular logic is irrelevant though. That's not how Sagarin or Massey work. They don't care about "good wins" or "good losses." They just care about the difference between the prediction of the ratings and the actual score differential.

If every team in a conference is in the top 25, then there is a reason for that. They have each played 3 OOC games and have a collective measure of their strength against other conferences based on the outcomes of 30 games. It would be ideal to have more, I agree. But 30 games is enough to show trends.

It doesn't matter whether other systems can predict with 80% accuracy or not. We're not comparing other systems here. We're trying to establish whether Sagarin and Massey have value in determining the relative strength of teams. 80% accuracy is much better than "throwing darts."

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

Well obviously that's the case. But the point I and other posters in this thread (and other threads FWIW) is that you guys are putting way too much weight behind these particular rankings. It makes sense because it makes the MVFC looks really really good even when certain teams probably don't deserve it.

[TheKingpin28]

Well obviously that's the case. But the point I and other posters in this thread (and other threads FWIW) is that you guys are putting way too much weight behind these particular rankings. It makes sense because it makes the MVFC looks really really good even when they probably don't deserve it.

This right here might be one of the dumbest things I have read on AGS, and I have read Chatty's "This is our year" threads.

[Reign of Terrier]

This right here might be one of the dumbest things I have read on AGS, and I have read Chatty's "This is our year" threads.

Does Youngstown State deserve a top 10 rating?

If yes then you prove my point, if no then you agree with me.

The MVFC is the best conference and worthy of 4 or 5 playoff teams this year. But it's not because a computer said so.

Stop selective reading.

[thebootfitter]

Does Youngstown State deserve a top 10 rating?

If yes then you prove my point, if no then you agree with me.

The MVFC is the best conference and worthy of 4 or 5 playoff teams this year. But it's not because a computer said so.

Stop selective reading.

Here's a thought... It's not BECAUSE a computer said so, but the fact that a computer said so, and the eye test says so, etc. Means that several measures all point to the same conclusion. Meaning that the conclusion is probably valid. And if a biased human observer says something to the contrary, then perhaps the bias is with the human. Not the computer? Hmm...

I think that Youngstown was legitimately a top ten team at one point earlier this season. I think injuries and the intangibles of losing too much have taken their toll, and I wouldn't put them in a poll of the top ten anymore. But based on what they did earlier in the season, they were absolutely top ten.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[thebootfitter]

Well obviously that's the case. But the point I and other posters in this thread (and other threads FWIW) is that you guys are putting way too much weight behind these particular rankings. It makes sense because it makes the MVFC looks really really good even when certain teams probably don't deserve it.I don't think you're that far off... I think you just are expecting the computer ratings to be something they are not. They don't have human bias, therefore they cannot make adjustments later in a season to something like injuries or off the field issues, etc. The computers have to wait a few weeks until the scores start to show up what's going on behind the scenes. There's no conspiracy at all. No hidden biases. Just a function of the scores on the field.

I doubt anyone disagrees with the idea that Youngstown from earlier in the year is a very different team than the current team. I doubt there's anyone out there that still believes that Youngstown is top ten today. But most people (I think) understand that the computers have limitations and use them as a tool. A very good tool. But not perfect. Biased human judgment can help temper the unbiased computer ratings that fail to take so many variables into account.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[Reign of Terrier]

Here's a thought... It's not BECAUSE a computer said so, but the fact that a computer said so, and the eye test says so, etc. Means that several measures all point to the same conclusion. Meaning that the conclusion is probably valid. And if a biased human observer says something to the contrary, then perhaps the bias is with the human. Not the computer? Hmm...

I think that Youngstown was legitimately a top ten team at one point earlier this season. I think injuries and the intangibles of losing too much have taken their toll, and I wouldn't put them in a poll of the top ten anymore. But based on what they did earlier in the season, they were absolutely top ten.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

I don't disagree with that, but the thing is the computer couldn't see that either. It can only calculate numbers and averages, etc etc.

[KPSUL]

It doesn't matter whether other systems can predict with 80% accuracy or not. We're not comparing other systems here. We're trying to establish whether Sagarin and Massey have value in determining the relative strength of teams. 80% accuracy is much better than "throwing darts."

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

About half of the AGS members picking in the CAA Pick-em Thread are achieving accuracy picking winners equal to or better than Massey. It's obvious that many poster consider Massey and Sagarin as a definitive source of empirical information about FCS football, not the shallow and flawed measurement it actually is.

[thebootfitter]

About half of the AGS members picking in the CAA Pick-em Thread are achieving accuracy picking winners equal to or better than Massey. It's obvious that many poster consider Massey and Sagarin as a definitive source of empirical information about FCS football, not the shallow and flawed measurement it actually is.I'm not sure I agree. I think many posters consider Massey and Sagarin as a legitimate source of empirical evidence that shouldn't be completely ignored because human bias suggests something must be flawed. I think there are many other posters who DO completely (or nearly completely) disregard the computers because of one or two things that don't make intuitive sense, so then EVERYTHING must be wrong.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[Reign of Terrier]

I'm not sure I agree. I think many posters consider Massey and Sagarin as a legitimate source of empirical evidence that shouldn't be completely ignored because human bias suggests something must be flawed. I think there are many other posters who DO completely (or nearly completely) disregard the computers because of one or two things that don't make intuitive sense, so then EVERYTHING must be wrong.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

for the record, I am not the latter, and I think a lot of people think I am

[thebootfitter]

for the record, I am not the latter, and I think a lot of people think I amI get that. I would suggest you lean toward the latter, but your comments certainly suggest you are not completely one sided on the issue.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[Reign of Terrier]

I think computer rankings are a lot better for FBS than FCS just because there's a lot more parity on this level than people think

[thebootfitter]

I think computer rankings are a lot better for FBS than FCS just because there's a lot more parity on this level than people think

Why would parity preclude a computer rating system from being a valid tool to determine the relative strength of teams? And if it were true, wouldn't we see that play out in the results?

I haven't been tracking weekly like I used to a few years ago, but I don't recall seeing a significant difference in the skill of predictions between FBS and FCS. If you have any data to suggest otherwise, I'm genuinely interested in seeing it. I read on one of your other posts that you are a data/statistics kind of guy, so I'm guessing if you're saying it, then you might have data to back it up.

Frankly, though, I don't buy the idea that there is much parity across the FCS landscape. As a Bison fan, my perspective may be a bit tainted, but there's clearly a wide gap between the mean or median team of the MVFC or CAA and the SWAC or MEAC.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[MR. CHICKEN]

About half of the AGS members picking in the CAA Pick-em Thread are achieving accuracy picking winners equal to or better than Massey. It's obvious that many poster consider Massey and Sagarin as a definitive source of empirical information about FCS football, not the shallow and flawed measurement it actually is.

......LUCK BE UH LADY.....AN' NO ONE'S GETTIN' FAT.....'CEPT MAMA CASS...(VEGAS).............BRAWK!!

[Professor Chaos]

for the record, I am not the latter, and I think a lot of people think I am
I also think there's a lot fewer people than you think, if any, who actually believe that YSU is a top 10 team right now as Sagarin suggests. For me personally computer rankings are a good way to identify teams that may be better or worse than their record indicates they are. I don't take the computer's rankings as law in that case but it means those teams whose computer rankings are better/worse than their "human rankings" get a little more scrutiny from me just to see if the computers might be on to something.

[Serpentor]

......LUCK BE UH LADY.....AN' NO ONE'S GETTIN' FAT.....'CEPT MAMA CASS...(VEGAS).............BRAWK!!

Penalty! 15 yards for obscure Mamas and Papas reference in 2017...

[KPSUL]

I'm not sure I agree. I think many posters consider Massey and Sagarin as a legitimate source of empirical evidence that shouldn't be completely ignored because human bias suggests something must be flawed. I think there are many other posters who DO completely (or nearly completely) disregard the computers because of one or two things that don't make intuitive sense, so then EVERYTHING must be wrong.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

Your argument supposes that there are only a very few, random and isolated issues with M & S. That is simply not correct. When a group of self selected amateurs can consistently beat the accuracy of the computer based systems then there are deep systemic flaws in the estimation models. Consequentially it is reasonable and rational to pay little attention to them. Instead, what I frequently see on AGS is too many posters trying to use M & S as the "be all end all" factor in how teams should be ranked. Now it may just be a disproportionate number of the AGS members who frequently post on this type of thread who do that, not the entire voting pool. But before it is accepted as valid and reliable empirical evidence, which you seem to be advocating, any computer model should be required to prove accuracy well beyond, not below, Kentucky windage.

[Professor Chaos]

Your argument supposes that there are only a very few, random and isolated issues with M & S. That is simply not correct. When a group of self selected amateurs can consistently beat the accuracy of the computer based systems then there are deep systemic flaws in the estimation models. Consequentially it is reasonable and rational to pay little attention to them. Instead, what I frequently see on AGS is too many posters trying to use M & S as the "be all end all" factor in how teams should be ranked. Now it may just be a disproportionate number of the AGS members who frequently post on this type of thread who do that, not the entire voting pool. But before it is accepted as valid and reliable empirical evidence, which you seem to be advocating, any computer model should be required to prove accuracy well beyond, not below, Kentucky windage.
I wouldn't say this is the case for Massey or Sagarin. There may be a some in the group who can go a year and predict better than Massey or Sagarin but there are also going to be some who won't. A couple years back MTFan4Life put a bracket into the AGS bracket pool that was 100% based on Massey's score predictions (it wasn't his personal bracket but he added one just for fun) and I believe it won the pool.

Established computer rankings like Massey and Sagarin shouldn't be the be all end all but they shouldn't be completely dismissed either because of a few anomalies. I remember there was a poster who used to vote in the AGS poll a few years back (dystopiamembrane or something was his username) and he would just put Massey's top 25 in for his ballot each week. His justification was something like "the human mind can't process all the data points for every FCS team each week but a computer can". He was roundly criticized for it, and rightly so, but I don't recall anyone but himself trying to defend it.

[thebootfitter]

Your argument supposes that there are only a very few, random and isolated issues with M & S. That is simply not correct. When a group of self selected amateurs can consistently beat the accuracy of the computer based systems then there are deep systemic flaws in the estimation models. Consequentially it is reasonable and rational to pay little attention to them. Instead, what I frequently see on AGS is too many posters trying to use M & S as the "be all end all" factor in how teams should be ranked. Now it may just be a disproportionate number of the AGS members who frequently post on this type of thread who do that, not the entire voting pool. But before it is accepted as valid and reliable empirical evidence, which you seem to be advocating, any computer model should be required to prove accuracy well beyond, not below, Kentucky windage.

Ha ha! You are starting from a false premise. There's nothing that says a formula should beat the prediction of an educated human. There are no systemic flaws, but rather just limitations in the data. No model will be perfect, but if it beats a 50/50 coin toss, then it has some value. The closer it comes to 100% accuracy, the better. 75-80% is pretty darn good as far as computer models go.

The computers use essentially one variable to make their unbiased predictions and achieve that level of accuracy. Educated humans are able to use several different variables. If you were able to remove unwanted human bias (like the computer models do) but still apply judgment from variables that a computer can't take into account, you will very likely achieve pretty accurate results. I'd say this is pretty much what the AGS poll does quite well.

You have to understand, though, that there is still some uncertainty in any predictions. There is a standard deviation... Variance... Area under the curve surrounding the mean... However you want to state it. The standard deviation for the computer models is roughly 14 points. I'm not certain that football scores necessarily follow a normal distribution, but the notes below indicate what that standard deviation roughly means.

* 68% of actual scores fall within 14 pts +/- from the prediction
* 95% fall within 28 pts +/-
* 99.7% fall within 42 pts +/-

That's pretty big degree of variance. And is the reason that the game is played on the field. Even when a computer model is "wrong" in a prediction, it will fall somewhere under the curve of uncertainty. There are far too many real life variables for a computer to capture and predict. Some that happen during the game itself... A good/bad bounce that sways momentum. Unbalanced officiating. An injury. Etc.

You started with a false premise. It's no surprise that your conclusion is also false. It is not reasonable and rational to pay little attention to the computer models when they offer a sound metric for determining the relative strength of teams. It is important, however, to understand their limitations and use human judgment where necessary to overcome the limitations.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[UNIFanSince1983]

Massey's goal is not to predict future results. He does have a prediction feature, but that is not the goal of the computer rating. It is to use previous results to rate teams.


Ratings are designed to reflect past performance, namely: winning games, winning against good competition, and winning convincingly. As a consequence, the ratings have some ability to predict the outc​ome of future games.
For many sports, I post predictions of upcoming games and monitor their success. In most cases, I would trust a computer's prediction over a human's. However, while this is often the most popular and entertaining application of computer ratings, it is not my primary purpose.

[thebootfitter]

Massey's goal is not to predict future results. He does have a prediction feature, but that is not the goal of the computer rating. It is to use previous results to rate teams.

It may not be the primary goal, but it is certainly a natural and logical extension of the primary goal.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[walliver]

The BCS downgraded computer ratings during its history, and the current CFP uses a FCS-like committee whose job it is to select the SEC and ACC champions and two others (while trying to find a justification for a second SEC team).
Strength of schedule plays a big role in computer rankings even though it is somewhat subjective. For example, a team going 0-5 against the top 5 rated teams could in fact be the #6 team, but it could also be Davidson. A team going 5-0 against the bottom 5 teams could be the sixth worse team in the country, or could be JMU. Is there any computer model out there that definitively proves the AFC East is better than the Patriot League?

Computer models have their uses, but their limitations need to be considered. A thoughtful human observer can look at a game and figure in, consciously or subconsciously, numerous factors including emotion, injuries, weather, poor officiating and how many players are in jail for each of many games, and can frequently make judgments equal to, and in many cases superior to computer models.

When the committee meets that will go over the SRS and various other criteria - and then the conference and regional politics will take over. The end result will be at least one WTF admission and one woofed team.

[thebootfitter]

The BCS downgraded computer ratings during its history, and the current CFP uses a FCS-like committee whose job it is to select the SEC and ACC champions and two others (while trying to find a justification for a second SEC team).
Strength of schedule plays a big role in computer rankings even though it is somewhat subjective. For example, a team going 0-5 against the top 5 rated teams could in fact be the #6 team, but it could also be Davidson. A team going 5-0 against the bottom 5 teams could be the sixth worse team in the country, or could be JMU. Is there any computer model out there that definitively proves the AFC East is better than the Patriot League?

Computer models have their uses, but their limitations need to be considered. A thoughtful human observer can look at a game and figure in, consciously or subconsciously, numerous factors including emotion, injuries, weather, poor officiating and how many players are in jail for each of many games, and can frequently make judgments equal to, and in many cases superior to computer models.

When the committee meets that will go over the SRS and various other criteria - and then the conference and regional politics will take over. The end result will be at least one WTF admission and one woofed team.
The bolded portion is key. However, we must also recognize that a thoughtful human observer WILL be subject to bias that a computer is not. That's why I'm of the opinion that both human judgment and computer formulas need to be applied carefully in the process of ranking teams. One without the other may offer a decent picture, but both together should offer a better panoramic view of the entire landscape.

[Reign of Terrier]

Computers can definitely be and are biased.

Bias is simply prioritizing and applying information. Bias is just part of prioritizing information (My eyes are biased towards sudden movement in the sense that if something moves suddenly, I look at it as does most humans; that's a bias and there's nothing wrong with it). What we don't like is sub-optimal bias that projects inaccurate forecasts of reality.

The difference of opinion in this conversation is that those on the pro-Sagarin or Massey side think that the bias of the computers is more in tune with reality/will forecast an accurate outcome while those who don't, don't.

[thebootfitter]

Computers can definitely be and are biased.

Bias is simply prioritizing and applying information. Bias is just part of prioritizing information (My eyes are biased towards sudden movement in the sense that if something moves suddenly, I look at it as does most humans; that's a bias and there's nothing wrong with it). What we don't like is sub-optimal bias that projects inaccurate forecasts of reality.

The difference of opinion in this conversation is that those on the pro-Sagarin or Massey side think that the bias of the computers is more in tune with reality/will forecast an accurate outcome while those who don't, don't.

I disagree in the particulars, though I agree with the principle you are stating. (I think.)

The calculations themselves that drive the computer ratings are completely unbiased. They treat all teams the same. Team names are only present for labeling so that we can put the results into context. Otherwise, it is just a machine crunching inputs and generating outputs. That aspect is not biased in any way.

You could (and I believe you are) make the point that the nature of the formulas may be biased to benefit teams that perform a certain way more than those that perform another way. Or don't give enough credit. For example, my understanding is that the computer formulas generally have a diminishing impact on the rating after margin of victory exceeds a threshold. So you could argue that the formulas are biased against teams that run up the score. But my point is that the same formulas are applied equally to all teams. Thus, no bias in the calculations.

Could the formulas be changed to produce a different outcome? Of course. Human judgment is being applied to determine what goes into the calculations, and I agree that an inevitable bias enters at this stage. But I don't think that bias benefits MVFC teams more than other conferences. (Which is one point it seems you are making.)

[walliver]

I think much of the current argument is really just over the meaning of the word "bias". Humans can be biased by homerism, elitism, or a general dislike of the hideous color purple. Although computers are incapable of those biases, bias does get introduced in the programming: which factors are included or ignored, and how individual data are weighted. It is unlikely that Massey or Sagarin have any affection or animosity towards individual teams or conferences, however, the formulae they include in their calculations will tend to affect the ratings of teams. Probably one of the more biased rankings is the NCAA's infamous SRS which treats a Pioneer team with a winning record better than a power conference team with a non-winning record.

Football is a game of preparation, skill, effort, emotion, preparation and chance. As a result, there is no "gold standard" by which to compare any model, computer generated or observational.

[Hammerhead]

I didn't take time to double-check my results, but it looks like Sagarin eas 15-8 in picking the winners in last year's playoffs and I wasn't factoring in home field advantage. The first round was the worst for Sagarin where he was only 4-4. Sagarin picked all 4 quarterfinal games correctly and then went 0-2 in the semis.

[thebootfitter]

I didn't take time to double-check my results, but it looks like Sagarin eas 15-8 in picking the winners in last year's playoffs and I wasn't factoring in home field advantage. The first round was the worst for Sagarin where he was only 4-4. Sagarin picked all 4 quarterfinal games correctly and then went 0-2 in the semis.Out of curiosity, was that using the end of year Sagarin ratings? Or the ratings for the week when the game was played?

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[kalm]

Computers can definitely be and are biased.

Bias is simply prioritizing and applying information. Bias is just part of prioritizing information (My eyes are biased towards sudden movement in the sense that if something moves suddenly, I look at it as does most humans; that's a bias and there's nothing wrong with it). What we don't like is sub-optimal bias that projects inaccurate forecasts of reality.

The difference of opinion in this conversation is that those on the pro-Sagarin or Massey side think that the bias of the computers is more in tune with reality/will forecast an accurate outcome while those who don't, don't.

What if you aren't pro-computer but just consider them another data point?

[thebootfitter]

What if you aren't pro-computer but just consider them another data point?Ding ding ding!

I feel sometimes I come across as very pro-computer, but it's mostly to counterbalance those who express that the computers have little or no value.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[Professor Chaos]

Ding ding ding!

I feel sometimes I come across as very pro-computer, but it's mostly to counterbalance those who express that the computers have little or no value.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
Yeah, I get the feeling that this crusade against computer rankings came about mostly because there are some on here who thought that others really believed that Sagarin was absolutely right and that there were 7 MVFC teams (including YSU who was 3-5 at the time) in the top 8 FCS teams nationally.

[Thumper 76]

Yeah, I get the feeling that this crusade against computer rankings came about mostly because there are some on here who thought that others really believed that Sagarin was absolutely right and that there were 7 MVFC teams (including YSU who was 3-5 at the time) in the top 8 FCS teams nationally.

This debate seems to rotate conferences between attacking and praising the computers depending on what conference is the dominant one at the time and what one feels they are being disrespected.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Professor Chaos]

This debate seems to rotate conferences between attacking and praising the computers depending on what conference is the dominant one at the time and what one feels they are being disrespected.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
CAA=Statler
SOCON=Waldorf

Starting circa 2003:
"You know these computer rankings are pretty great"
"I'll say, these Massey and Sagarin guys really do get it"
"Why have humans do it when computers rank so well"
"Although after 3 straight titles by App St things are starting to get out of whack"
"Meh, it could be better but it's still good"
"True, after seeing Nova be the 4th CAA program this decade to win a title these rankings can be redeemed"
"You know they're really starting to get bad now after this upstart NDSU has won two titles"
"You wanna talk about bad... losing App and GSU strapped an anchor on the SOCON's rankings"
"The CAA is now behind the MVFC, what's going on here"
"The MVFC is nothing but NDSU and a collection of stiffs"
"These computers must have viruses or something, they're biased and terrible"
"Agreed... computers are horrible ranking tools... BOOOOOOOOOO"
"BOOOOOOOOOOOOOO"

And here we are today.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-no4tpOZ8_4w/UmcO89tIn-I/AAAAAAAACYY/_A187xFeqkk/s1600/ibo_et_non_redibo_Statler_Waldorf.jpg

[Serpentor]

Yeah, I get the feeling that this crusade against computer rankings came about mostly because there are some on here who thought that others really believed that Sagarin was absolutely right and that there were 7 MVFC teams (including YSU who was 3-5 at the time) in the top 8 FCS teams nationally.

I've seen The Terminator​, I know what happens when you put your faith in computers...

[Hammerhead]

I used the ratings from each week before every round of the playoffs.


Out of curiosity, was that using the end of year Sagarin ratings? Or the ratings for the week when the game was played?

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[Bison56]

I've seen The Terminator​, I know what happens when you put your faith in computers...

Maybe its already begun. xdontknowx

[TheKingpin28]

Maybe its already begun. xdontknowx

I just want THE Bender Bending Rodriguez for a friend. Is that too much to ask for?

[ST_Lawson]

I just want THE Bender Bending Rodriguez for a friend. Is that too much to ask for?

https://i.imgflip.com/1zcuhw.jpg

[TheKingpin28]

https://i.imgflip.com/1zcuhw.jpg

https://gifimage.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/bow-down-gif-3.gif

That's my kind of playoffs!

[ST_Lawson]

https://gifimage.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/bow-down-gif-3.gif

That's my kind of playoffs!

You're welcome...

https://i.imgur.com/g7jTo8v.png?2 (https://i.imgur.com/g7jTo8v.png)

[JSUSoutherner]

You're welcome...

https://i.imgur.com/g7jTo8v.png?2 (https://i.imgur.com/g7jTo8v.png)

NDSU has no business on the hooker side. Every time I watch their games I see more than a fair share of ugly Bison-esque women.

[ST_Lawson]

NDSU has no business on the hooker side. Every time I watch their games I see more than a fair share of ugly Bison-esque women.

Seeding based on current conference standings.
Hooker bracket must be whichever side has WIU because we had our way with Coastal Carolina. (http://www.espn.com/college-football/recap?gameId=400944843)

And in case you missed it, or forgot...relevant link is relevant: Coastal Carolina cheerleading team suspended amid prostitution allegations (http://www.wral.com/ccu-cheerleading-team-suspended-cheerleader-says-anonymous-letter-alleged-prostitution-misconduct/16625626/)

[TheKingpin28]

You're welcome...

https://i.imgur.com/g7jTo8v.png?2 (https://i.imgur.com/g7jTo8v.png)

Yes! Also, after seeing what SDSU "produces" for their cheerleaders, it's best we keep them on the Blackjack side.

Q: Why don't they let the cheerleaders for SDSU out at halftime











































































































A: It's cause they are afraid they might catch them grazing.

[SU FAN]

Wish they would release a top 10 this week, and beyond that maybe even a top 25

[UNIFanSince1983]

Seeding based on current conference standings.
Hooker bracket must be whichever side has WIU because we had our way with Coastal Carolina. (http://www.espn.com/college-football/recap?gameId=400944843)

And in case you missed it, or forgot...relevant link is relevant: Coastal Carolina cheerleading team suspended amid prostitution allegations (http://www.wral.com/ccu-cheerleading-team-suspended-cheerleader-says-anonymous-letter-alleged-prostitution-misconduct/16625626/)

We would technically be the 2 seed with the H2H win over SDSU.

[ST_Lawson]

We would technically be the 2 seed with the H2H win over SDSU.

I was just going off the order on the MVFC website, which sorts by conference record, then by overall record, which puts 8-2 SDSU ahead of 6-4 UNI.

[clenz]

I was just going off the order on the MVFC website, which sorts by conference record, then by overall record, which puts 8-2 SDSU ahead of 6-4 UNI.

UNI is in second, officially.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ST_Lawson]

UNI is in second, officially.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

c'mon man...it's a joke bracket that I threw together in 5 minutes in photoshop. you expect it to be actually accurate?

[clenz]

Duh


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[clenz]

I haven’t event looked it. I’m in tapatalk and haven’t clicked the image to enlarge. No idea what t even is.

xlolx


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bison56]

Did someone say hookers? Yummyxlovex

[JSUSoutherner]

Did someone say hookers? Yummyxlovex

This comment here is an example of how diseases are spread.

[UNIFanSince1983]

This comment here is an example of how diseases are spread.

The good kind though right?

[JSUSoutherner]

The good kind though right?
The itchy kind.

[Schism55]

The good kind though right?
Hepatitis J-Q xsmiley_wix

[TheKingpin28]

The itchy kind.

You mean the kind that gives you a backscratch to get rid of the itch? I like those kind since my shoulder blades sometimes flare up and just getting a nice scratch on them feels great.

[70MilesFromCanada]

A toast to the annual computer ranking/seeding debate:


xdrunkyx

xbangxxbangxxbangxxbangxxbangx

xdrunkyx

xbangxxbangxxbangxxbangxxbangx

xdrunkyx

[Professor Chaos]

A toast to the annual computer ranking/seeding debate:


xdrunkyx

xbangxxbangxxbangxxbangxxbangx

xdrunkyx

xbangxxbangxxbangxxbangxxbangx

xdrunkyx
We're well past that now and onto the annual hooker/STD debate. Keep up.