Week-4 Pete's Power Poll

[Pete's Weekly]

The Power Poll and Conference Poll is out.
BTW: UNH was our #1 last week, and remains there for week-4.

Don't forget to check out this week's preview and pick your winners/losers.

Pete's Power Poll and I-AA Weekly (http://petespoll.com)

[th0m]

SC State at #2.

Wow.

I do like the way you say you don't calculate preseason stuff and stick to performance, but then why is JMU that high?

[TexasTerror]

What's that smell? Pete, you smoking crack?!?

Have you guys seen this? Our old dart-throwing buddy (or was it picking numbers out of a hat, Pete?) has Texas State- San Marcos as the #6 SLC team behind SFA, Nicholls, NW State, McNeese and Sam...

This guy makes absolutely no sense. He has South Carolina State at #2. And is it not funny how he brags that he had UNH as #1 last week? That an effort to gain some sort of credibility. Go figure...

[89Hen]

Eastern Washington: #40 (1-2) I realize that most polls have the Eagles in the top-20. However, with a losing record; I do not see how. This is why you need an unbiased, performance-based poll like Pete's ... and not someone's opinion on how good a team 'can' be. I have no doubt that EWU will continue to win; and when they do, they will move up accordingly.

This comment had me scratching my head a little when you see...

Georgia Southern: #22 (2-2)
Montana St.: #23 (2-2)
William and Mary: #24 (2-2)
Jacksonville St.: #32 (1-3)
Eastern Kentucky: #37 (1-3)

[kmax]

Eastern Washington: #40 (1-2) I realize that most polls have the Eagles in the top-20. However, with a losing record; I do not see how. This is why you need an unbiased, performance-based poll like Pete's ... and not someone's opinion on how good a team 'can' be. I have no doubt that EWU will continue to win; and when they do, they will move up accordingly.

This comment had me scratching my head a little when you see...

Georgia Southern: #22 (2-2)
Montana St.: #23 (2-2)
William and Mary: #24 (2-2)
Jacksonville St.: #32 (1-3)
Eastern Kentucky: #37 (1-3)
Think BCS, those teams have "higher quality losses." xlolx

[TexasTerror]

This is why you need an unbiased, performance-based poll like Pete's ... and not someone's opinion on how good a team 'can' be.

Since when did Pete have a poll? Last I checked, it was just one individual making the decisions. Biased anyone? I think if you had more than just our good friend Pete, it would be less biased with more opinions outside of the dart-throwing, NBA lottery-style poll he runs now...

[grizchik]

Very interesting OPIONION that Pete (who?) has! I too can pull names out of a hat. Now I just need my own website!! :confused:

[HPCAT]

Texas St.: #43 (2-1) After an outstanding game against A&M, their is definitely something to cheer about in San Marcos. However, with wins over a sub-IAA and a hapless SUU ... it is time for the Bobcats to play some quality I-AA competition.

Does this really make sense ?

You almost beat IA A&M in one of the most hostile places to play on the road and you are on the way down ?

A top 10 DII team is probably better than the bottom third of IAA, just as a top 10 IAA is probably better than the bottom third of IA football.

I would prefer not to play DII teams myself, but at least it was a top 10 DII team.

[TexasTerror]

The funny thing about it all is that Pete is very "defensive" about his product. He's sent me a PM not too long ago telling me that he gets "emails from losers like you every day & I have been doing this for many years".

Apparently, all those years of experience have not helped too much. Perhaps Pete should take a redshirt this yar if it's not too late and reorganize how he does his poll. He can vote in the AGS poll if he wants if he qualifies as I'm sure his bias and lack of knowledge of I-AA football would be just as bad as some our bias and lack of I-AA football knowledge in that poll.

If anything, Pete is bad for I-AA football. Am I the only one that thinks this? If we're going to present I-AA football to the nation, it should atleast be done properly and not in a way that diminishes how good some teams on the I-AA football scene really are...

[Ivytalk]

Although Pete explains his basis for excluding the Ivies and the SWAC as non-playoff conferences, that exclusion further reduces the credibility of his poll. The rankings simply boggle the mind, but I'll leave that to other posters with more of a stake in what Pete says.

[crunifan]

I bolded my personal favorites :rolleyes:

1. New Hampshire
2. South Carolina St
3. Hampton
4. Delaware
5. James Madison
6. Southern Illinois
7. Appalachian St
8. Cal-Poly
9. Illinois St
10. Massachusetts
11. Western Kentucky
12. Montana
13. Lehigh
14. Furman
15. Portland St
16. Bethune-Cookman
17. UC-Davis
18. North Dakota St
19. Northern Iowa
20. Coastal Carolina

[GannonFan]

Another week, another Peter Power Poll, and another week of chuckling. Man, this guy can deliver week in and week out - it's hard being this absurd week after week - even MassMan makes some sense every 100th post.

[griz37]

Although Pete explains his basis for excluding the Ivies and the SWAC as non-playoff conferences, that exclusion further reduces the credibility of his poll. The rankings simply boggle the mind, but I'll leave that to other posters with more of a stake in what Pete says.

I think his poll is so absurd that nobody has a stake in what he says. I just hope non-IAA fans don't see it and think this is a true representation of the state of our division.

[TexasTerror]

When you folks are done smacking on the discussion board please sharpen your talons for the GPI which debuts for 2005 next week.

GPI is more legit in my eyes, as it's more of a poll or collection compared to one man's baseless ideologies of what he thinks I-AA is as he self-promotes himself through his "Power Poll"...

Ralph, any chance you can put up a post explaining each GPI contributor. Obviously, we're all up to par on the AGS Poll, Sports Network and ESPN/USA Today. Would love to know more about Massey, Lazz, Dwiggins, etc...

[Tailbone]

Another week, another Peter Power Poll, and another week of chuckling. Man, this guy can deliver week in and week out - it's hard being this absurd week after week - even MassMan makes some sense every 100th post.

And UMassFan, every 1000th. :D

[kmax]

When you folks are done smacking on the discussion board please sharpen your talons for the GPI which debuts for 2005 next week.
Do we get a "it's too early to be real but here it is anyway" look at this week's GPI like you did last week?

[colgate13]

The funny thing about it all is that Pete is very "defensive" about his product. He's sent me a PM not too long ago telling me that he gets "emails from losers like you every day & I have been doing this for many years".



You got Pete's hate mail too?!?!? Now I don't feel so special. I was an "ignorant crone". :rolleyes: He tried to take me to task for making fun of his NCAA sanction business. Funny thing is that he is out here making it seem like an NCAA sanctioned website means that his poll is more legit than AGS while in the PM it's nothing of the sort.

'Pete' has one of the thinnest skins around. I'd 'ignore' him, but it's too entertaining.

[Ivytalk]

You got Pete's hate mail too?!?!? Now I don't feel so special. I was an "ignorant crone". :rolleyes: He tried to take me to task for making fun of his NCAA sanction business. Funny thing is that he is out here making it seem like an NCAA sanctioned website means that his poll is more legit than AGS while in the PM it's nothing of the sort.

'Pete' has one of the thinnest skins around. I'd 'ignore' him, but it's too entertaining.

Cripes, 13, he called you a "crone"? Webster's defines "crone" as a "withered old woman." Is there something you aren't telling us? Or he might be referring to Eric "End Zone" Crone, Harvard '73, who raced into his own end zone for a safety to protect a four-point lead late in the '71 Yale game. :rolleyes:

[GannonFan]

When you folks are done smacking on the discussion board please sharpen your talons for the GPI which debuts for 2005 next week.

When such unscientific dribble as this power poll is also allowed on the discussion board then of course some smack will follow.

[ucdtim17]

At least someone is ranking UCD above the other 2-loss teams after losing by 3 to #1 UNH and beating Stanford. :rolleyes:

Someone's got it right

[Pete's Weekly]

I bolded my personal favorites :rolleyes:

1. New Hampshire
2. South Carolina St
3. Hampton
4. Delaware
5. James Madison
6. Southern Illinois
7. Appalachian St
8. Cal-Poly
9. Illinois St
10. Massachusetts
11. Western Kentucky
12. Montana
13. Lehigh
14. Furman
15. Portland St
16. Bethune-Cookman
17. UC-Davis
18. North Dakota St
19. Northern Iowa
20. Coastal Carolina

Nice to see some resemblance of a question.

SCS=3-0. Alabama St. and Bethune-Cookman are 2 very tough wins & not many teams in the various top-25's would fair as well, or have played as good. WHen they do, they will be ranked accordingly.

ILS=Simply playing in the top-10 at this point. 3-1, 125-19 in points against 3 I-AA's .. although Drake is not quite a I-AA. A fantastic game against a ranked IA club. Closer in points than then ranked Iowa. Heck, ISU held Iowa to only 3 points. So what is not top-10 about that?

WKU= 2-1. What is WVa Tech? NAIA? Barely beat a 1-3 EKU. Lost big to a IA. Why are they higher than other 3-1 clubs? Because EKU is much better than their record (as the scores show) & Auburn is ... Auburn. At least they put up some token scores late, and that helps in the points. But a loss is still a loss. You schedule a money game, you suffer the results. I nice check is on the way.

Montana=2-1 Fort Lewis? Lost big in their money game. Barely beat a team they were much higher ranked than in SDSU.

UNI=2-1 & yet to play a I-AA scholarshipped club. Warm-up, Non-scholarshipped Drake, and lost to Iowa. Honestly, I think UNI is the best team in the GFC & maybe in the country ... they have yet to prove, or disprove it, on the field.

UNH= 3-0. All scholarshipped, all I-AA. Including a win over a good UCD.


As to the "Crack" comment. Where have you been texas? I missed that last week. I think that was all last year & the first 2 weeks of this. I thought you might have forgotten ... or had discovered a sense of diversity ;)

As to the NCAA 'sanction'. It simply means we have an arrangement ... the term "affiliation" would mean there is an association. Pete's can, and does, post more more than public releases, with the NCAA's permission. But if you can think of a better word ... let me know. I was actually worried that the term "sanctioned" would be taken negatively.

As far as UNH being number-1 for 2 weeks ... I simply stated a fact. Does it "lend a sense of credibility to the poll" ... no, it shows credibilty in the poll..

As to the bias .. simply put ... your opinion, mine, coaches, or media ... it is still an opinion, and it is still biassed. That is like saying one elected official would do a better job than another ... simply because he won the election. And Ralph, if you released the GPI from the pre-season on, it would look very skewed as well until week 4 or 5 ... that is why you wait to release it. It is much easier to fight a fire when the building is already destroyed; is it not? We just choose to show it all from the beginning. Most fans appreciate it & watching your teams movement throughout the season is half the fun.

[FU97]

Can't do the GPI until all the systems are reporting. Many do not report until after the fifth game. No use doing bogus rankings is there?

Clearly he doesn't agree with you.......

[TexasTerror]

As to the "Crack" comment. Where have you been texas? I missed that last week. I think that was all last year & the first 2 weeks of this. I thought you might have forgotten ... or had discovered a sense of diversity ;)

Yay for shoutouts! I wasn't around last year, Pete. Would've chuckled a good deal last year too, just like everyone else.

And Pete, why call it a poll? It's just you. Just check out Webster's and see that's a survey or sample of public opinion, not just one individual, then again, Don Hansen calls it a poll, but I think it's more to point people to his site instead of including it in the title of his poll as you do...

poll n.

1. The casting and registering of votes in an election.
2. The number of votes cast or recorded.
3. The place where votes are cast and registered. Often used in the plural with the.
4. A survey of the public or of a sample of public opinion to acquire information.
5. The head, especially the top of the head where hair grows.
6. The blunt or broad end of a tool such as a hammer or ax.

[89Hen]

SCS=3-0. Alabama St. and Bethune-Cookman are 2 very tough wins & not many teams in the various top-25's would fair as well, or have played as good. WHen they do, they will be ranked accordingly.
:confused:
Massey:
61. Alabama St
73. Bethune-Cookman

[89Hen]

although Drake is not quite a I-AA.
:cool:

[kmax]

He already said it was a ranking system but Poll fit better with Pete than Rankings.
Maybe the GPI should be renamed Ralph's Ranking then, that seems to roll right off the tongue. ;)

[Grande Rosso]

Ralph, any chance you can put up a post explaining each GPI contributor. Obviously, we're all up to par on the AGS Poll, Sports Network and ESPN/USA Today. Would love to know more about Massey, Lazz, Dwiggins, etc...

Here is a link to a "Consolidated Rankings" site. Just click on the particular ranking name at the top and it will (usually) take you to their site and an explanation of how it is developed.

Some of these are pretty hard to figure out, too.

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

[Pete's Weekly]

Can't do the GPI until all the systems are reporting. Many do not report until after the fifth game. No use doing bogus rankings is there?



That was what I said. There is nothing wrong with waiting until week 4 or 5. I have thought about it many times, but a couple of others involved (yes my good crack buddy TT, it is more than just me) convinced me to post from day-1. I would still have to run the numbers every week, so why not show it?

[kmax]

hahahahahaaaa :D
Plus, it is an index and not a stand-alone formula.
I know, that was part of the joke since Pete's Poll isn't a poll either.

[GSUhooligan]

Geez guys, lay off. From what I've seen, none of your rankings are perfect either. Be glad this guy is spending his valuable time discussing and following I-AA instead of the B.C.S. Its healthy to see other people's opinions and not just your own. Isn't that why we come to these boards in the first place?