Battle of the Polls

[Professor Chaos]

Here's the final tally amongst how well the AGS Poll projected the playoff field in 2017 compared to the STATS and Coaches polls.

AGS Poll

The seeds
1. James Madison (-)
2. North Dakota St (-)
3. Central Arkansas (-1)
4. Jacksonville St (+1)
5. South Dakota St (-)
6. Sam Houston St (-)
7. Southern Utah (-1)
8. Wofford (+1)

At large
1. South Dakota St (5)
2. Sam Houston St (6)
3. Stony Brook (9)
4. Weber St (10)
5. Western Illinois (11)
6. Samford (13)
7. Northern Iowa (14)
8. Elon (15)
9. South Dakota (16)
10. Furman (18)
11. McNeese (19)
12. Eastern Washington (20)
13. Northern Arizona (21)
14. Delaware (22)

First teams out
23. New Hampshire
24. Monmouth
27. Sacramento St
28. Austin Peay
29. Montana
30. Illinois St
31. Nicholls



STATS

The seeds
1. James Madison (-)
2. Jacksonville St (-1)
3. Central Arkansas (-1)
4. North Dakota St (+2)
5. Sam Houston St (-1)
6. South Dakota St (+1)
7. Wofford (-)
8. Western Illinois (NR)
12. Southern Utah (+4)

At large
1. Sam Houston St (5)
2. South Dakota St (6)
3. Western Illinois (9)
4. Stony Brook (10)
5. Weber St (11)
6. Samford (14)
7. Elon (15)
8. South Dakota (16)
9. Eastern Washington (17)
10. McNeese (19)
11. Northern Iowa (20)
12. New Hampshire (21)
13. Furman (22)
14. Illinois St (23)

First teams out
25. Northern Arizona
26. Austin Peay
27. Nicholls
28. Monmouth


Coaches

The seeds
1. James Madison (-)
2. Jacksonville St (-1)
3. Central Arkansas (-1)
4. North Dakota St (+2)
5. Sam Houston St (-1)
6. South Dakota St (+1)
7. Weber St (NR)
8. Wofford (+1)
13. Southern Utah (+5)

At large
1. Sam Houston St (5)
2. South Dakota St (6)
3. Weber St (8)
4. Western Illinois (10)
5. Stony Brook (11)
6. Samford (14)
7. McNeese (15)
8. Elon (17)
9. South Dakota (18)
10. Eastern Washington (19)
11. New Hampshire (20)
12. Northern Iowa (21)
13. Nicholls (22)
14. Monmouth (23)

First teams out
25. Furman
26. Northern Arizona


NCAA SRS

The seeds
1. James Madison (-)
2. North Dakota St (-)
3. South Dakota St (-2)
4. Southern Utah (-4)
5. Central Arkansas (+1)
6. Jacksonville St (+3)
7. Weber St (NR)
8. Western Illinois (NR)
10. Sam Houston St (+4)
17. Wofford (+10)

At large
1. South Dakota St (3)
2. Weber St (7)
3. Western Illinois (9)
4. Sam Houston St (10)
5. Stony Brook (11)
6. Samford (13)
7. Furman (15)
8. Nothern Iowa (16)
9. South Dakota (18)
10. McNeese (19)
11. Elon (20)
12. Delaware (21)
13. Northern Arizona (22)
14. Monmouth (23)

First teams out
24. Eastern Washington
25. Richmond
26. Youngstown St
28. Nicholls
29. Illinois St
30. Montana
31. New Hampshire


I hate to say it but the Coach's poll actually did the best job of the 3 human polls getting 12 of 14 at large teams and the two they missed where the first two left out. The AGS and STATS polls each only had 11 of 14 but the AGS had the seeds pegged much better than either the Coach's or STATS polls did. Although the seeding was way off for the SRS also correctly projected 12 of the 14 at larges but the two teams it missed were a ways back in it's "first out" list.

[WestCoastAggie]

Did you see the SRS from the committee that released today?

[Professor Chaos]

Did you see the SRS from the committee that released today?
Yeah, I posted it in another thread a few minutes ago. The committees decisions, especially on the seeds, were much closer to the human polls than they were to the SRS. Although I do remember an interview the committee chairman gave this past week basically saying the only thing they use the SRS for is to quantify SOS among teams they're comparing/voting on.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Yeah, I posted it in another thread a few minutes ago. The committees decisions, especially on the seeds, were much closer to the human polls than they were to the SRS. Although I do remember an interview the committee chairman gave this past week basically saying the only thing they use the SRS for is to quantify SOS among teams they're comparing/voting on.

Well, how does the SRS stack up then....I mean if it is their tool then I would expect it to be fairly accurate. I hadn't looked at it except a quick glance before moving over to this thread.

[Professor Chaos]

Well, how does the SRS stack up then....I mean if it is their tool then I would expect it to be fairly accurate. I hadn't looked at it except a quick glance before moving over to this thread.
I'll add it but the seedings are waaaaaaaay off.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

I'll add it but the seedings are waaaaaaaay off.

Yeah, I figure they will be but this is their tool, and it is way off on what they do...so it's hard to figure why they would use it for anything...at all. It's been very poor before and that is why I asked the question.

If it is useless then they should just f'n discard it and come up with a system that a group can look at say "this is somewat legit" and use this going forward. They just need to try and use something that gives a little more consistency to outcomes.

[Professor Chaos]

Yeah, I figure they will be but this is their tool, and it is way off on what they do...so it's hard to figure why they would use it for anything...at all. It's been very poor before and that is why I asked the question.

If it is useless then they should just f'n discard it and come up with a system that a group can look at say "this is somewat legit" and use this going forward. They just need to try and use something that gives a little more consistency to outcomes.
Based on an interview I think the selection committee chair did with Haley from STATS he said the only thing they use the SRS for is to quantify strength of schedule. So I'd assume on each team's "resume card" they have a SOS ranking on there and the SRS is used to determine that.

[Professor Chaos]

Added the Coach's poll. As much as it pains me to say it, given the dumpster fire that is the Coach's poll, it actually projected the field the best of any poll including the SRS in that it projected 12 of the 14 at large teams and the two that it missed were the first two out (although the two it had in that were left out, McNeese and EWU, were projected in easily according to their respective placement in the Coach's poll).

You'll still never convince me that the Coach's poll is anywhere near as good as the AGS poll is. I've already details the bones I have to pick with the selection committee in other threads and the fact they seemed to be on a similar wavelength with the Coach's poll voters gives me all the reinforcement I need to legitimize the beefs that I have.

The AGS Poll did still blow away the other three when it came to pegging the seeds.

EDIT: I'm also not completely sure the Coach's poll voters didn't have the benefit of the field being released before they voted since it wasn't updated on the NCAA's website (http://www.ncaa.com/rankings/football/fcs/fcs-coaches-poll) until today around noon CT.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Added the Coach's poll. As much as it pains me to say it, given the dumpster fire that is the Coach's poll, it actually projected the field the best of any poll including the SRS in that it projected 12 of the 14 at large teams and the two that it missed were the first two out (although the two it had in that were left out, McNeese and EWU, were projected in easily according to their respective placement in the Coach's poll).

You'll still never convince me that the Coach's poll is anywhere near as good as the AGS poll is. I've already details the bones I have to pick with the selection committee in other threads and the fact they seemed to be on a similar wavelength with the Coach's poll voters gives me all the reinforcement I need to legitimize the beefs that I have.

The AGS Poll did still blow away the other three when it came to pegging the seeds.

Was the coaches poll released prior to the selections? I didn't see it so this is why I'm asking.

If it came out after the selection Show then how much change from the previous week would be the next question. Not that you need to answer those PC...just rambling here....xlolx

[Professor Chaos]

Was the coaches poll released prior to the selections? I didn't see it so this is why I'm asking.

If it came out after the selection Show then how much change from the previous week would be the next question. Not that you need to answer those PC...just rambling here....xlolx
Yeah, edited my first post and I don't think it was. I checked it on the NCAA website (http://www.ncaa.com/rankings/football/fcs/fcs-coaches-poll) several times over the last 24 hours and it wasn't updated as of 11AM CT this morning so it wasn't released until around noon CT today. I'm not sure if the votes had to be in before the selection show yesterday but I would doubt it if they waited until the normal time today to release it.

However, the changes didn't seem that out of line to me. As per their usual, teams that lost moved down and teams that were ranked behind teams that lost moved up. The only thing I noticed that was a little strange for them is they moved NDSU from 6 to 4 over SHSU and SDSU even though both those teams won. That's very abnormal for the Coach's poll voters so I wonder if the bracket release affected that???

EDIT: I also see that SUU moved up 5 spots including leaping ahead of a Samford team that won over a ranked Furman opponent. Another very odd thing for this poll this late in the year.

[kalm]

Based on an interview I think the selection committee chair did with Haley from STATS he said the only thing they use the SRS for is to quantify strength of schedule. So I'd assume on each team's "resume card" they have a SOS ranking on there and the SRS is used to determine that.

That doesn't make much sense given their selections unless SoS is of VERY little importance. 'We use it to determine SoS then basically disregard SoS when it comes to at larges and seeds.'

Their selections are all over the map in regards to 1). Their public statements, 2) their guidelines, and 3) selection history. Reconcile Albany's snub last year with this year's last in first out.

Btw, thx for posting this, Chaos. It questions accountability and justifications of which there appears to be very little from the committee.

[Professor Chaos]

That doesn't make much sense given their selections unless SoS is of VERY little importance. 'We use it to determine SoS then basically disregard SoS when it comes to at larges and seeds.'

Their selections are all over the map in regards to 1). Their public statements, 2) their guidelines, and 3) selection history. Reconcile Albany's snub last year with this year's last in first out.

Btw, thx for posting this, Chaos. It questions accountability and justifications of which there appears to be very little from the committee.
They don't disregard SOS. The selection committee chair said several time that SOS is what got NDSU the 2 seed. I believe in his interview with the NDSU radio guys he also said that's what got USD into the field. It's obviously what got SDSU bumped up to #5 ahead of SHSU.

The problem is they weren't consistent. SOS mattered for NDSU, SDSU, and USD... it didn't matter for EWU. That's not the only thing they were inconsistent on. Lack of quality wins mattered for McNeese and Austin Peay but it didn't matter for Monmouth. Having no bad losses mattered for NAU but having bad losses didn't matter for UNH. There was just a lot of double standards being applied this year it seemed moreso than I recall in the past.

[kalm]

They don't disregard SOS. The selection committee chair said several time that SOS is what got NDSU the 2 seed. I believe in his interview with the NDSU radio guys he also said that's what got USD into the field. It's obviously what got SDSU bumped up to #5 ahead of SHSU.

The problem is they weren't consistent. SOS mattered for NDSU, SDSU, and USD... it didn't matter for EWU. That's not the only thing they were inconsistent on. Lack of quality wins mattered for McNeese and Austin Peay but it didn't matter for Monmouth. Having no bad losses mattered for NAU but having bad losses didn't matter for UNH. There was just a lot of double standards being applied this year it seemed moreso than I recall in the past.

Yep. SoS didn't matter for SUU when it came to seeds. #9 SOS, 3-0 against playoff teams, 9-1 against FCS.

[Gil Dobie]

What I got from the committee interview, was the SRS and SOS was a tool they used. The hint I got was when they stated Austin Peay didn't really have a quality win versus a FCS opponent or a win out of conference.

[kalm]

What I got from the committee interview, was the SRS and SOS was a tool they used. The hint I got was when they stated Austin Peay didn't really have a quality win versus a FCS opponent or a win out of conference.

APSU had a OOC win against Moorhead. The OOC games were 3 FBS. What's their record if they play Lehigh, Lafayette, Bucknell, Hampton, and/or Albany OOC like Monmouth did?

Monmouth's only "quality" wins were within their conference. Nicholl's quality win was within conference. How does the SRS account for conferences that are weak? And again, why is SUU the #8 seed with 3 wins over playoff teams and the #9 SoS vs. Wofford with one win over a playoff team and the 45th SoS or SHSU with one win over a playoff team and the 69th SoS, or JSU with no wins over playoff teams and the 40th SoS?

Nicholl's big OOC win came against PVA&M.

Tell me again how they apply SoS?

[bluehenbillk]

That coaches poll had to be done well after the field was announced - no way they come in better than the AGS Poll otherwise....