GPI Through 11/5/07, Northern Iowa No. 1 <---CSN

[CSN-info]

Gridiron Power Index (GPI) Through 11/5/07, Northern Iowa No. 1
College Sporting News

The Gridiron Power Index (GPI), the hybrid ranking for FCS and top index indicator of at-large playoff selection has the University of Northern Iowa in the top spot for the sixth straight week. The Southern Conference is the top ranked league. The FCS's largest league, the Colonial Athletic Association has seven of their teams in the top 25; the Southern Conference placed five; the Gateway Football Conference placed four; the Great West Football Conference placed two; the Big Sky Conference, Ivy League, Mid-Eastern Athletic Conference, Ohio Valley Conference, Patriot League, Southland and Southwestern Athletic Conferences placed one each. (Games through 11/5/07)

READ MORE... http://www.collegesportingnews.com/article.asp?articleid=88801

GPI TOP 25
1. Northern Iowa (1.13)
2. N Dakota St (1.88)
3. McNeese St (4.13)
4. Delaware (4.75)
5T. Appalachian St (5.38)
5T. S Illinois (5.38)
7. Richmond (7.75)
8. Massachusetts (8.25)
9. Montana (9.75)
10T. James Madison (11.75)
10T. Georgia Southern (11.75)
12. Yale (12.00)
13. Wofford (12.50)
14. New Hampshire (14.88)
15. Elon (15.25)
16. Hofstra (15.75)
17T. Grambling (18.13)
17T. E Kentucky (18.13)
19. Youngstown St (19.75)
20. S Dakota St (20.88)
21. W Illinois (21.13)
22. Villanova (22.25)
23. Delaware St (22.75)
24. The Citadel (23.75)
25. Holy Cross (25.25)

Conference Rank
Rank, Conference (Average Rating)
1. Southern Conference (22.80)
2. Colonial Athletic Association (23.43)
3. Gateway Football Conference (27.82)
4. Great West Football Conference (29.85)
5. Southland Conference (39.86)
6. Big Sky Conference (45.35)
7. Patriot League (49.48)
8. Ivy League (50.47)
9. Southwestern Athletic Conference (52.58)
10. Big South Conference (54.40)
11. Ohio Valley Conference (55.48)
12. Mid-Eastern Athletic Conference (56.28)
13. Pioneer Football League (64.11)
14. Independents (65.54)
15. Northeast Conference (68.32)
16. Metro Atlantic Athletic Conference (77.19)

[GannonFan]

xwhistlex

[89Hen]

I do love the computers.

Sauceda
1. Northern Iowa
2. North Dakota State
3. Appalachian State
4. Delaware
5. Southern Illinois
6. McNeese State
7. Richmond
8. James Madison
9. Massachusetts
10. Wofford
11. Georgia Southern
12. Elon
13. South Dakota State
14. New Hampshire
15. Yale
16. Hofstra
17. Youngstown State
18. Western Illinois
19. Grambling State
20. Villanova
21. The Citadel
22. Montana
23. Eastern Kentucky
24. Furman
25. Holy Cross

So other than Yale the top 18 teams all come from the CAA, SoCon, Gateway and GWFC (and 20 of the 25). xlolx BTW, at least he got Montana right. xsmiley_wix

[ChickenMan]

BTW, at least he got Montana right. xsmiley_wix

now you did it... xoopsx

[Grizzaholic]

What poll is that? It might be correct.

[CSN-info]

Delaware inching up as well as Montana. As well as others.

[Ronin]

Originally Posted by 89Hen View Post
BTW, at least he got Montana right.

xoopsx xoopsx xoopsx xwhistlex

[ysubigred]

As I remember correctly the GPI usually does a great job of picking the 16 teams for the playoff's.

This year the GPI won't get the 16 teams right. "IF" YSU beats WIU and you remove Yale, Grambling and NDSU YSU would be in the top 16 xbawlingx

Too bad we couldn't get it done on homecoming xnonono2x

[TypicalTribe]

As I remember correctly the GPI usually does a great job of picking the 16 teams for the playoff's.

This year the GPI won't get the 16 teams right. "IF" YSU beats WIU and you remove Yale, Grambling and NDSU YSU would be in the top 16 xbawlingx

Too bad we couldn't get it done on homecoming xnonono2x

No, they wouldn't, because there are two automatic bid teams ranked behind them. They would not be one of the top 8 at-large teams in the rankings.

[ysubigred]

No, they wouldn't, because there are two automatic bid teams ranked behind them. They would not be one of the top 8 at-large teams in the rankings.

Oh... I see what your saying xthumbsupx "BUT"!! What does that tell you about the auto bid qualifers xeyebrowx

[appfan2008]

somehow the socon got 6 out of 8 teams in the top 25!

[89Hen]

As I remember correctly the GPI usually does a great job of picking the 16 teams for the playoff's.
No better than 99% of the posters here. xpeacex

[GannonFan]

No better than 99% of the posters here. xpeacex


GPI hasn't beaten me since its inception!!! :D :D :D :D :D

[Syntax Error]

xrolleyesx Like that's the point. xcoffeex

[GannonFan]

xrolleyesx Like that's the point. xcoffeex

Well, it used to be when the GPI's mission statement was to be a predictor of who would be the 8 at large teams in the playoffs. Now it's morphed off into some all-consuming barometer of the entire division, comparison of conferences, etc. Basically a version of the BCS in FBS, but luckily without the power that system has. Thank goodness for the selection committee and the playoffs!!!! xthumbsupx

[Syntax Error]

Well, it used to be when the GPI's mission statement was to be a predictor of who would be the 8 at large teams in the playoffs. Now it's morphed off into some all-consuming barometer of the entire division, comparison of conferences, etc. Basically a version of the BCS in FBS, but luckily without the power that system has. Thank goodness for the selection committee and the playoffs!!!! xthumbsupxYes, thank goodness for a committee that will hopefully use every tool they can to select the field. My take on the GPI is it's a consolidation of the best polls and computer rankings. So its another sort of ranking and has been remarkably good at indicating playoff selection and ranking every team.

[lizrdgizrd]

Yes, thank goodness for a committee that will hopefully use every tool they can to select the field. My take on the GPI is it's a consolidation of the best polls and computer rankings. So its another sort of ranking and has been remarkably good at indicating playoff selection and ranking every team.
Yep, but somebody's got to be #2 behind GannonFan. xsmiley_wix

[Syntax Error]

Yep, but somebody's got to be #2 behind GannonFan. xsmiley_wixDon't forget bluehenbillk and 89Hen! xlolx

Must be something in the Delaware water! xconfusedx xrolleyesx xcoffeex

[GannonFan]

So its another sort of ranking and has been remarkably good at indicating playoff selection and ranking every team.

That sums up our area of disagreement - playoff selection isn't rocket science, and in most years even a blind squirrel can pick 14 or 15 of the 16 playoff teams - it really isn't that difficult. That's why me and the GPI were tied for accuracy until last year, when the GPI erroneously predicted several teams who didn't in fact make the playoffs.

Just seems like an awful lot of work that goes into something that doesn't tell you anything more accurately than an in-tune, knowledgeable, FCS fan can already do. Kinda the equivalent of coming up with a complicated, satellite-based, computer program that if you put enough data into it can turn on your car - maybe - meanwhile I can just use my car key in the same car and it turns on all the time. I'll just use my key, thank you very much. xthumbsupx

[Syntax Error]

That sums up our area of disagreement..."So its another sort of ranking and has been remarkably good at indicating playoff selection and ranking every team."
What exactly are you disagreeing with?

[GannonFan]

"So its another sort of ranking and has been remarkably good at indicating playoff selection and ranking every team."
What exactly are you disagreeing with?

Come on, read the above post - it isn't any more remarkable at picking the playoff teams than 99% of the people on these boards. As for the ranking every team, who knows how good it is. I'm not getting worked up over who's #67th versus who's number #75 - since only 16 teams make the playoffs it really doesn't matter. Saying it's great at ranking those teams is meaningless since there's no way to prove it one way or the other.

[Syntax Error]

xblahblahx xblahblahx xblahblahx xblahblahx xblahblahx xblahblahx

xlmaox

[89Hen]

My take on the GPI is it's a consolidation of the best polls and computer rankings.
It's a consolidation of the only polls and some really shaky computer models. xrotatehx

[89Hen]

As for the ranking every team, who knows how good it is.
Pretty bad IMO. Because the polls stop at 25, once you get past 30ish teams, it's all computer... so it stinks. :p

[Syntax Error]

All seven computer rankings are in the top 11 of those available including Sagarin, Massey, etc.

http://www.masseyratings.com/cf/compare1aa.htm

[Grizzaholic]

xblahblahx xblahblahx xblahblahx xblahblahx xblahblahx xblahblahx

xlmaox

WOW is all I can say.

[89Hen]

All seven computer rankings are in the top 11 of those available including Sagarin, Massey, etc.
A dubious honor at best. The best seven soccer players at Herbert Hoover Elementary like their chances this week against Manchester United.

http://kingsclereyouthfc.intheteam.com/site/images/8964/U10%203.jpg

[Syntax Error]

A dubious honor at best.xblahblahx xblahblahx xblahblahx xblahblahx xblahblahx xblahblahx

I know its true because 89Hen told me so! :p

[bluehenbillk]

It's a consolidation of the only polls and some really shaky computer models. xrotatehx


Shaky is an understatement. What is this the new PR thread for a system that just like it's big brother in the FBS has a proven track record of breaking down. Heck last year when the PR effort derailed a couple of jokers that actually come up with these computer polls came on here. The one guy was as pompous as could be, but it was funny to hear the other guy say he didn't like how his own computer model was coming out. Computers aren't any smarter than humans, they just spit out what a human tells them to spit out.

***Be careful about criticizing the GPI, the management may remove your posts & privileges***

[Syntax Error]

***Be careful about criticizing the GPI, the management may remove your posts & privileges***xblahblahx xliarx xblahblahx xliarx xblahblahx xliarx xblahblahx xliarx xblahblahx

[bluehenbillk]

Don't forget bluehenbillk and 89Hen! xlolx

Must be something in the Delaware water! xconfusedx xrolleyesx xcoffeex


***MOD ALERT - Pot calling kettle black!!!***

It's funny how I hadn't posted in this thread but yet my name was used. I was told not to make things personal & use names. Guess that doesn't work the other way? Just curious. Big Brother has it their way.

P.S. The GPI, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

[grizbeer]

Shouldn't the Delaware guys embrace the GPI this year - if the selection committee used it you would have the #3 seed.

[bluehenbillk]

Shouldn't the Delaware guys embrace the GPI this year - if the selection committee used it you would have the #3 seed.

Probably a conspiracy to quiet us. The 3-letter mess is what it is, if anything reagrdless of the garbage it spits out we've been consistent in our criticisms and pointing out the shortcomings and faults for years.

[Syntax Error]

Shouldn't the Delaware guys embrace the GPI this year - if the selection committee used it you would have the #3 seed.Those three have been the biggest anti-GPI/computer rankings for years. In fact they are just about the only three. There was a poll done a while back and about 75% of the AGS voters said they like the GPI. These three are just loud and relentless. xcoffeex

[GannonFan]

Those three have been the biggest anti-GPI/computer rankings for years. In fact they are just about the only three. There was a poll done a while back and about 75% of the AGS voters said they like the GPI. These three are just loud and relentless and correct. xcoffeex

There, fixed up that post for ya!!! :p :p :p :p

[89Hen]

Those three have been the biggest anti-GPI/computer rankings for years. In fact they are just about the only three. There was a poll done a while back and about 75% of the AGS voters said they like the GPI. These three are just loud and relentless. xcoffeex
The only three that will speak up. I have NO problem being known as anti-computer rankings. They SUCK. I've shown it over and over and over again, and will continue to do so.

The sheer genius that is Massey (stands for MASSIVE ego) has DII Northeastern Omaha as the #30 team in all of NCAA football and must have a hard-on for teams with NORTH in their name. xconfusedx

Northern Iowa
Northeastern Omaha
North Dakota State
Appalachian State
North Dakota
Northwest Missouri
Delaware
McNeese State
Southern Illinois
Central Washington
Grand Valley State
Montana
Georgia Southern
Richmond
Massachusetts
Wofford
Elon
West Texas A&M
Delta State
Hofstra
Valdosta State
North Alabama
James Madison
Chadron State
Grambling

The Top 25 in I-AA includes 10 DII teams. xeyebrowx

[Syntax Error]

... Massey (stands for MASSIVE ego)
HE DOESN'T HAVE A MASSIVE EGO.
... The Top 25 in I-AA includes 10 DII teams.Don't know where you're looking but try here:
http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cf
Click on the FCS button to get his rankings of FCS. Here's his top 25:
Northern Iowa
N Dakota St
McNeese St
Delaware
Appalachian St
S Illinois
Richmond
James Madison
Massachusetts
Yale
Georgia Southern
Elon
New Hampshire
Wofford
Montana
S Dakota St
Hofstra
Grambling
W Illinois
Villanova
E Kentucky
Youngstown St
Cal Poly
The Citadel
Holy Cross

[danefan]

Umm I have a question that is not arguing the merits of the GPI, but instead the application:

I'm trying to figure out how to word this question.....does the number for each team in each column represent the team's current rank in the corresponding poll? Ie: 25 under Massey means that team is ranked 25th in Massey?

[89Hen]

Don't know where you're looking but try here:
Click on the FCS button to get his rankings of FCS. Here's his top 25
xnonox He DOES rank all NCAA's together. Are you saying the order I posted is not what he has?

[Syntax Error]

xnonox He DOES rank all NCAA's together. Are you saying the order I posted is not what he has?That's right. What you posted is not his top 25 of FCS like you said.

[danefan]

OK, so no answers? The reason I'm confused is because while Holy Cross is listed in the GPI with a 25 under Massey, they are certainly not #25 in the Massey ranking.

That's why I'm confused.

Same goes for Albany. Albany's Massey #for GPI is 46, but the massey rank is 35.

[Syntax Error]

OK, so no answers? The reason I'm confused is because while Holy Cross is listed in the GPI with a 25 under Massey, they are certainly not #25 in the Massey ranking.
That's why I'm confused.Check the MOV column. Holy Cross is #25.

[danefan]

Check the MOV column. Holy Cross is #25.

OK, what is the MOV column? Margin of Victory? I couldn't find an explanation for what the MOV is?

[Syntax Error]

OK, what is the MOV column? Margin of Victory? I couldn't find an explanation for what the MOV is?Yep. I think he said on WAVES that MOV is a bit better ranking but the BCS wanted him to use their formula.

[danefan]

OK, so I think I figured it out. MOV is the rankings taking into account Margin of Victory. The other rankings are not taking into account Margin of Victory.

Interesting how much difference it actually makes with MOV as compared to without MOV.

[FCS Preview]

That's right. What you posted is not his top 25 of FCS like you said.

But if you were to look at the rankings, starting with UNI, and going down 25 spots (discounting any FBS schools), you would have 15 FCS and 10 D-II schools.

NE Omaha is ahead of Purdue and Wisconsin, too.

[89Hen]

That's right. What you posted is not his top 25 of FCS like you said.
Semantics. Point still valid. xnodx

[terrierbob]

4 teams in the SoCon in top 16

[Syntax Error]

The Top 25 in I-AA includes 10 DII teams.Point invalid. :p

[89Hen]

Point invalid. :p
Fine. The Top 25 non I-A included 10 DII's. POINT, SET, MATCH.

[GannonFan]

4 teams in the SoCon in top 16


3 teams from the DII North Central Conference in the top 10. Way to go them!!! (btw, I'm pretty sure NE Omaha is Nebraska-Omaha, not Northeastern Omaha. ) xthumbsupx

[89Hen]

(btw, I'm pretty sure NE Omaha is Nebraska-Omaha, not Northeastern Omaha. ) xthumbsupx
:o xoopsx :p
Didn't make much sense when I typed it.

[lizrdgizrd]

:o xoopsx :p
Didn't make much sense when I typed it.
Everyone knows Northeastern Omaha is NAIA. xrolleyesx

[Syntax Error]

Fine. The Top 25 non I-A included 10 DII's. POINT, SET, MATCH.There ya go! xthumbsupx

[CamelCityAppFan]

Shaky is an understatement. What is this the new PR thread for a system that just like it's big brother in the FBS has a proven track record of breaking down. Heck last year when the PR effort derailed a couple of jokers that actually come up with these computer polls came on here. The one guy was as pompous as could be, but it was funny to hear the other guy say he didn't like how his own computer model was coming out. Computers aren't any smarter than humans, they just spit out what a human tells them to spit out.

***Be careful about criticizing the GPI, the management may remove your posts & privileges***


There's nothing wrong with the BCS ranking system. I think a lot of people would agree that it does a pretty good job of figuring out who the best 16 teams (and on down) are by the end of regular season BCS play.

The problem is that the BCS chooses the top 2 and declares that they shall play for the National Championship instead of bracketing up the top 16 and playing them off for 4 weeks. That's what we have in the FCS, that's what everyone wants for the BCS.

Now, people will always argue about the bubble teams. But arguing about who should be in at the 15 and 16 positions is LOT different from who should be in at the #1 and #2 positions.

We've got it pretty good in the FCS, and the GPI is a good tool for the playoff committee to use. There are always going to be arguments made at the bottom of the playoff field, and there is always someone left out that has a somewhat compelling argument for why they should be in. But at the end of the day, the obvious playoff teams are in, and we have a good and legimate playoff bracket.

[bluehenbillk]

Yep. I think he said on WAVES that MOV is a bit better ranking but the BCS wanted him to use their formula.

GOTCHA! See, that's the goal of this system, replicate it on a different level and eventually eliminate a human committee & give it the same power as it's big brother in the FBS. As much as you tell us it's not the BCS, it's not the BCS you step into saying something like this. The "C" is not necessary the other 2 letters are more than enough.

[Syntax Error]

GOTCHA! See, that's the goal of this system, replicate it on a different level and eventually eliminate a human committee & give it the same power as it's big brother in the FBS. As much as you tell us it's not the BCS, it's not the BCS you step into saying something like this. The "C" is not necessary the other 2 letters are more than enough.GOTCHA!

The GPI doesn't use the BCS formula. The BCS formula lacks punch and I am on the record as saying that system stinks. The FCS is best.

[GannonFan]

We've got it pretty good in the FCS, and the GPI is a good tool for the playoff committee to use. There are always going to be arguments made at the bottom of the playoff field, and there is always someone left out that has a somewhat compelling argument for why they should be in. But at the end of the day, the obvious playoff teams are in, and we have a good and legimate playoff bracket.

And the point being that even before the GPI came into existence there was never any real uproar over the first 14-15 teams into the playoffs - it's rather elementary to pick those teams. Where debate starts is on the last 1-2 teams into the playoffs, and the GPI does no better picking those teams than any other system. Such a grandiose tool that in effect does nothing. xcoffeex

[89Hen]

The BCS formula lacks punch and I am on the record as saying that system stinks.
xeyebrowx very xeyebrowx

[Syntax Error]

... the GPI does no better picking those teams than any other system...Name one that has done better over the last seven years when the GPI started. Hint: you can't.

[Syntax Error]

very That's right. It stinks very much and I have said that many times. xnodx Any system that uses their mix of polls and computers to choose two teams to play for the "national championship" stinks.

[bluehenbillk]

GOTCHA!

The GPI doesn't use the BCS formula. The BCS formula lacks punch and I am on the record as saying that system stinks. The FCS is best.

Then why model the GPI after it. You've said so yourself that's where it was borne from??? Talk out both sides of your mouth much?

[GannonFan]

Name one that has done better over the last seven years when the GPI started. Hint: you can't.

Me, 89Hen, BHBK... give me some time, I'll go through the AGS members list and pick more out - heck, you're probably better too!!! Again, it ain't rocket science, especially when 14-15 of the playoff picks are no-brainers. All this effort and computer modelling to do such a simple thing - waste of effort, especially when it exceeds its original scope.xnonono2x

[Syntax Error]

Then why model the GPI after it. You've said so yourself that's where it was borne from??? Talk out both sides of your mouth much?xrolleyesx xrolleyesx xnonono2x xnonono2x xrolleyesx xrolleyesx

You can't tell the difference so what does it matter to you? xcoffeex All you can do is insult AGS members.

[Syntax Error]

Me, 89Hen, BHBK... give me some time, I'll go through the AGS members list and pick more out - heck, you're probably better too!!! Again, it ain't rocket science, especially when 14-15 of the playoff picks are no-brainers. All this effort and computer modelling to do such a simple thing - waste of effort, especially when it exceeds its original scope.xnonono2xThat's what I thought, you can't name one system. xrulesx xcoffeex

[CamelCityAppFan]

And the point being that even before the GPI came into existence there was never any real uproar over the first 14-15 teams into the playoffs - it's rather elementary to pick those teams. Where debate starts is on the last 1-2 teams into the playoffs, and the GPI does no better picking those teams than any other system. Such a grandiose tool that in effect does nothing. xcoffeex

No argument here-- I agree that the GPI model generally reflects what blindingly obvious to most followers of I-AA football, that these 12, 13, 14 teams should be included in the playoffs, and that the discussion is always about who gets left out, who should not have gotten in. Same thing happens in March at the bottom the BB playoff field.

What I was responding to was the argument that the I-A system was broken because of a flawed BCS ranking system. The BCS ranking system is not flawed, it does the same thing that the GPI does-- it confirms what we all know-- who the 12, 13, 14 obvious playoff participants would be if the BCS had a playoff system. The I-A system is broken not because the ranking system is broken, but because they only pick 2 teams for the "playoffs"!

The I-A system is REALLY broken because in many years there are #3s and #4s with a VERY legitimate argument that they should have a shot at the title-- this year could very well be another one.

In our system, we argue about the bottom of the field, teams that are (take a deep breath everyone, I know there is an exception out there) generally not around in the semi-final round. If you are in a snit because you didn't make it in to one of those last couple of spots, then win more games next year.

But, regardless of what tools and information the selection committee uses to fill the field, whether it's a computer ranking or how well the cheerleaders fill out the sweaters, there will always be a gripe about the bottom of the field!

And isn't that much, much better than arguing about which 2 teams get the only 2 playoff spots?

[89Hen]

That's right. It stinks very much and I have said that many times. xnodx Any system that uses their mix of polls and computers to choose two teams to play for the "national championship" stinks.
Then you're saying the USE of the BCS standings stink.

[bluehenbillk]

xrolleyesx xrolleyesx xnonono2x xnonono2x xrolleyesx xrolleyesx

You can't tell the difference so what does it matter to you? xcoffeex All you can do is insult AGS members.


xcoffeex xcoffeex xcoffeex xcoffeex I normally take my issues right to the PR Department.

[Syntax Error]

No argument here-- I agree that the GPI model generally reflects what blindingly obvious to most followers of I-AA football, that these 12, 13, 14 teams should be included in the playoffs, and that the discussion is always about who gets left out, who should not have gotten in. Same thing happens in March at the bottom the BB playoff field.

What I was responding to was the argument that the I-A system was broken because of a flawed BCS ranking system. The BCS ranking system is not flawed, it does the same thing that the GPI does-- it confirms what we all know-- who the 12, 13, 14 obvious playoff participants would be if the BCS had a playoff system. The I-A system is broken not because the ranking system is broken, but because they only pick 2 teams for the "playoffs"!

The I-A system is REALLY broken because in many years there are #3s and #4s with a VERY legitimate argument that they should have a shot at the title-- this year could very well be another one.

In our system, we argue about the bottom of the field, teams that are (take a deep breath everyone, I know there is an exception out there) generally not around in the semi-final round. If you are in a snit because you didn't make it in to one of those last couple of spots, then win more games next year.

But, regardless of what tools and information the selection committee uses to fill the field, whether it's a computer ranking or how well the cheerleaders fill out the sweaters, there will always be a gripe about the bottom of the field!

And isn't that much, much better than arguing about which 2 teams get the only 2 playoff spots?xthumbsupx Though I still like a human committee in most circumstances.

[Syntax Error]

Then you're saying the USE of the BCS standings stink.The BCS system stinks.

[Syntax Error]

xcoffeex xcoffeex xcoffeex xcoffeex I normally take my issues right to the PR Department.Then why don't you do it instead of insulting and forcing AGS members to read your same gripe tens of thousands of times. WE GET IT! Anything more and it looks like you're a looney toon. xnodx

[bluehenbillk]

Then why don't you do it instead of insulting and forcing AGS members to read your same gripe tens of thousands of times. WE GET IT! Anything more and it looks like you're a looney toon. xnodx


Well, since you asked, my PM ability has been removed on here for over a year I guess because some of the mods wanted me to capitulate to not questioning higher authority, etc etc etc. Then again, isn't that what they do in countries like Cuba, Nazi Germany, China, etc where you're not free to dissent in public??

[Syntax Error]

Take it to the Lounge or Poli board. Still no need to insult me or others.

BTW, there's no PM ability here to reach CSN which does the GPI. Try their website.