AGS Poll - Week 12 Results

[AGSPoll]

Any Given Saturday Poll Top 25

(First place votes in parenthesis), Points
1. James Madison (83) 2290
2. Appalachian St. (8) 2207
3. Cal Poly 2057
4. Northern Iowa 1918
5. Montana 1857
6. Villanova 1828
7. Richmond 1765
8. Weber St. (1) 1698
9. Southern Illinois 1635
10. Wofford 1528
11. New Hampshire 1330
12. Elon 1150
13. Central Arkansas 1111
14. Maine 950
15. William & Mary 931
16. McNeese St. 930
17. South Carolina St. 885
18. Harvard 750
19. Tennessee-Martin 529
20. Furman 441
21. Colgate 437
22. Western Illinois 277
23. Jacksonville St. 254
24. Liberty 248
25. South Dakota St. 165
Others receiving votes (minimum of 5 votes): Eastern Kentucky (35), North Dakota St. (34), Massachusetts (24), Holy Cross (23), Albany (18), Prairie View A&M (16), Tennessee St. (16), Montana St. (14), Texas St. (14), Grambling St. (7), Georgia Southern (5)

MOST SIGNIFICANT WIN OF THE WEEK: New Hampshire
MOST SIGNIFICANT LOSS OF THE WEEK: Furman

[Chi Panther]

Opps, UNI over-rated again.....xnonono2x

[achrist70]

The poll looks pretty much right, Weber maybe should be a little higher, UNI and Montana lost a few points, due to winning by not as much as expected, and possibly other reasons?

[WrenFGun]

I think Holy Cross probably warrants sniffing this poll. I think I may have had an oversight with Furman.

[Grizaholic17]

The poll looks pretty much right, Weber maybe should be a little higher, UNI and Montana lost a few points, due to winning by not as much as expected, and possibly other reasons?

yep, 29-10 and 28-0....horrible showings by the two top 10 teams xrolleyesx xrolleyesx

[Saint3333]

The poll looks pretty much right, Weber maybe should be a little higher, UNI and Montana lost a few points, due to winning by not as much as expected, and possibly other reasons?

Likely due to voters (me included) who realized that Weber St. was underrated in their polls.

[WrenFGun]

I think Elon's slightly too high, also.

[tribe_pride]

Harvard #18 and Dayton does not even get five votes. This is getting to be one of the worst FCS polls in the land. Not much more than a popularity contest among FCS fans. Too bad....

:D

[ValleyChamp]

It seems as though most people on AGS believe that UNI is not one of the top 4 seeds, yet every week this poll comes out with UNI in the top 4.xrolleyesx

[danefan]

Harvard #18 and Dayton does not even get five votes. This is getting to be one of the worst FCS polls in the land. Not much more than a popularity contest among FCS fans. Too bad....

:D


I'm still waiting for someone to point out a valid reason to rank Harvard above 20. I haven't seen one yet.......

[Saint3333]

I'm still waiting for someone to point out a valid reason to rank Harvard above 20. I haven't seen one yet.......

Just like in year's past when Hampton was ranked top 15. Once you get in the poll and continue to win you move up as teams above you lose. Is it right, probably not, but it can be seen in every poll in every sport.

[Ivytalk]

I'm still waiting for someone to point out a valid reason to rank Harvard above 20. I haven't seen one yet.......

OK, danefan. I've had it. So who's the Harvard of the SUNY system? Could it be.. Geneseo? New Paltz?xwhistlex

[mango43]

Surprised to see SDSU still ranked

[appfan2008]

well danefan I for one have albany higher than harvard in my poll...

[danefan]

OK, danefan. I've had it. So who's the Harvard of the SUNY system? Could it be.. Geneseo? New Paltz?xwhistlex

I don't know how your question relates to the poll, but the most selective SUNY school is Binghamton.

But once again, I don't understand why that matters.

And its not about Albany vs. Harvard. Its about the Ivy league being overrated. Plain and simple. If you don't believe Albany should be ranked higher than Harvard, then that is your opinion. But what I haven't seen is any reason why any Ivy school should be ranked higher than 20.

And FWIW, I have Harvard ranked higher than Albany because Harvard has a better record. But I have Albany at 25 and Harvard at 23 with Colgate squeezed in between.

[Ivytalk]

I don't how your question relates to the poll, but the most selective SUNY school is Binghamton.

But once again, I don't understand why that matters.

Just jerkin' your chain, danefan. Lighten up.xrolleyesx

[danefan]

Just jerkin' your chain, danefan. Lighten up.xrolleyesx

Sorry, misunderstood.....darn sarcasm button didn't work.......:D ;)

[LehighFan11]

I believe Nothern Iowa is overrated at 5. I have had them ranked 7th for a few weeks now but decided to drop them to 10 this week. After last weeks poll, I told myself i would re-examine all of the top 10 teams based on the entire season. I found UNI's resume to be very average. Although they have no bad losses, they don't have a signature win. Wins vs. SDSU, NDSU, and W Ill are all solid wins but none close to top 15. I felt like Weber, Montana, So Ill, and Wofford all had a stronger body of work than UNI, therefore I dropped them to #10.

[Go...gate]

Surprised Holy Cross not in there.

[Eight Legger]

I know we have discussed this, but should not the pecking order be:

Weber State
Montana
Cal Poly?

Someone care to enlighten me?

[LehighFan11]

I know we have discussed this, but should not the pecking order be:

Weber State
Montana
Cal Poly?

Someone care to enlighten me?

Some have high expectations for Poly and questions about Weber.

[Eight Legger]

Some have high expectations for Poly and questions about Weber.

I guess I would at least think Montana would be ahead of Cal Poly, since Montana won that game. And since Weber killed Montana and has only lost to FBS schools, seems they ought to be ahead of Montana.

[blur2005]

I guess I would at least think Montana would be ahead of Cal Poly, since Montana won that game. And since Weber killed Montana and has only lost to FBS schools, seems they ought to be ahead of Montana.
Agreed. If I were voting this year, which I'm not, I would definitely reflect this obvious order (Weber, then Montana, then Cal Poly) in my poll. Can't understand why that's not the case in the AGS poll. If we're going to talk up the fact we decide the championship on the field I think the fact one team beat another (Weber>Montana>Cal Poly) should be reflected in the poll.

[CrunchGriz]

I guess I would at least think Montana would be ahead of Cal Poly, since Montana won that game. And since Weber killed Montana and has only lost to FBS schools, seems they ought to be ahead of Montana.

While head-to-head is a good measuring stick, rankings often don't conform to it. Other factors come into play, e.g.:

1. Overall season's record - Montana has a better record on the season than Weber, for instance (10 wins versus 9, 9 FCS wins versus 7, less games against sub-FCS competition, overall better performance against common opponents)

2. Current play - How a team is playing as the playoffs approach has an influence on voters, and if a team is playing noticeably better than it was earlier in the season, it gets rewarded in the rankings; until this past week, Montana was getting points on this, too, playing much better over recent weeks than earlier in the season

3. When losses occur - if you lose earlier in the season you have more time to move back up the rankings than if you lose late in the season; Cal Poly is a beneficiary of this phenomenon, losing its only game in the second week of the season, and having the rest of the season to move up

[danefan]

While head-to-head is a good measuring stick, rankings often don't conform to it. Other factors come into play, e.g.:

1. Overall season's record - Montana has a better record on the season than Weber, for instance (10 wins versus 9, 9 FCS wins versus 7, less games against sub-FCS competition, overall better performance against common opponents)

2. Current play - How a team is playing as the playoffs approach has an influence on voters, and if a team is playing noticeably better than it was earlier in the season, it gets rewarded in the rankings; until this past week, Montana was getting points on this, too, playing much better over recent weeks than earlier in the season

3. When losses occur - if you lose earlier in the season you have more time to move back up the rankings than if you lose late in the season; Cal Poly is a beneficiary of this phenomenon, losing its only game in the second week of the season, and having the rest of the season to move up

I agree. Head-to-head can only take you so far.

[Engy0]

blah blah blah Dayton isn't in the top 25 and Harvard is, blah blah blah blah blah blah. I can't believe I beat DetroitFlyer to it xthumbsupx

[Houndawg]

While head-to-head is a good measuring stick, rankings often don't conform to it. Other factors come into play, e.g.:

1. Overall season's record - Montana has a better record on the season than Weber, for instance (10 wins versus 9, 9 FCS wins versus 7, less games against sub-FCS competition, overall better performance against common opponents)

2. Current play - How a team is playing as the playoffs approach has an influence on voters, and if a team is playing noticeably better than it was earlier in the season, it gets rewarded in the rankings; until this past week, Montana was getting points on this, too, playing much better over recent weeks than earlier in the season

3. When losses occur - if you lose earlier in the season you have more time to move back up the rankings than if you lose late in the season; Cal Poly is a beneficiary of this phenomenon, losing its only game in the second week of the season, and having the rest of the season to move up

xeyebrowx By these criteria SIU should get a hard look if they come in at 9-2 on a seven-game winning streak during which they trailed for 00:00 minutes.

We've been getting ignored all year because we were supposed to finish fifth in our conference and only have thirteen seniors.

[JMU2K_DukeDawg]

Head to head is a measure of last resort to me. If all else is equal, you look at head to head. Others like to look at it first. It's a methodological question.

I like to look at the body of work, and then work back towards head to head if they look to be similar.

Style can also play into some people's rankings. For example, UNH has often received style points for their big offensive wins, while tough as nails defensive teams do not necessarily garner as many accolades. In the end, it's decided on the field, so I am fine with the different rankings.

[Eight Legger]

I guess I have no problem with a team being ranked ahead of a team it lost to, as long as there are other circumstances at work. For instance, UR lost to Villanova but if Villanova loses to Delaware this week, then I would move UR ahead of Villanova.

But with the 3 western teams, there really are no outside factors. Montana's only loss is to Weber. Weber's only losses are to FBS teams. Cal Poly's only FCS loss is to Montana. Seems to be pretty straightforward.

[coover]

Dayton does not even get five votes

I had Dayton at #126.

[coover]

I guess I would at least think Montana would be ahead of Cal Poly, since Montana won that game. And since Weber killed Montana and has only lost to FBS schools, seems they ought to be ahead of Montana.


Your logic makes sense.

However, in the cases of Weber State vs. Montana, and Montana vs. Cal Poly, the inferior teams beat the superior teams.

In the Poly - Montana game, this was obvious to almost anyone who actually saw the game. If these two teams played a 10 game series, Poly would probably win 8 times.

The Montana - Weber State game was affected by the weather. Both teams, of course, suffered problems because of it, but Montana's performance seemed to suffer a lot more than Weber State. In Horse Racing, there is a lot of talk about horses who run better in the mud. In this game, Weber State was the better "mudder."

[blur2005]

But with the 3 western teams, there really are no outside factors. Montana's only loss is to Weber. Weber's only losses are to FBS teams. Cal Poly's only FCS loss is to Montana. Seems to be pretty straightforward.
It is straightforward. Head to head isn't the only determiner of things but when you compare teams that have played each other and have similar bodies of work, e.g. Montana and Weber State, it seems pretty clear that Weber State should be ahead of Montana in the poll because Weber State beat Montana on the field of play; in fact, the Wildcats won pretty soundly.

[Khan4Cats]

It is straightforward. Head to head isn't the only determiner of things but when you compare teams that have played each other and have similar bodies of work, e.g. Montana and Weber State, it seems pretty clear that Weber State should be ahead of Montana in the poll because Weber State beat Montana on the field of play; in fact, the Wildcats won pretty soundly.

But they don't have similar bodies of work.

Yes, Weber State played 2 FBS schools. They lost both.

Montana played a top 5/10 FCS school on the road. And won.

Both teams played a D-II.

Weber State played an NAIA. Montana played two more middish-level FCS schools, and won them.

Montana has played and produced a better resume. Therefore, to me at least, head to head isn't as big a factor.

[Houndawg]

But they don't have similar bodies of work.

Yes, Weber State played 2 FBS schools. They lost both.

Montana played a top 5/10 FCS school on the road. And won.

Both teams played a D-II.

Weber State played an NAIA. Montana played two more middish-level FCS schools, and won them.

Montana has played and produced a better resume. Therefore, to me at least, head to head isn't as big a factor.


Who is the conference champion?

[slycat]

SDSU is too high.

[Khan4Cats]

Who is the conference champion?

Doesn't matter.

Hasn't mattered to the committee either. If being a conference champ is a requirement for a seed, SIU would not have gotten a seed last year.

And it doesn't have to be a 2nd seed thing either. In 2005, Nicholls State won the Southland and was sent on the road 1st round, while co-champ (and head-to-head loser) Texas State received the 4 seed and hosted 3 games.

[Houndawg]

Doesn't matter.

Hasn't mattered to the committee either. If being a conference champ is a requirement for a seed, SIU would not have gotten a seed last year.

And it doesn't have to be a 2nd seed thing either. In 2005, Nicholls State won the Southland and was sent on the road 1st round, while co-champ (and head-to-head loser) Texas State received the 4 seed and hosted 3 games.


It should. What are conferences for?

[Khan4Cats]

SDSU is too high.

No, Western Illinois is too high. SDSU is about right at 25. They or NDSU will be 3rd place in the MVFC and that should warrant 20-25 range (at worst) this year.

[Khan4Cats]

It should. What are conferences for?

They determine auto-bid. But with the at-larges, other factors come into play with seeding. Overall resume needs to be evaluated. South Carolina State is undefeated in the MEAC. Should they be getting a seed because of that? How about the Colgate/Holy Cross winner?

Or are you wanting to suggest that they do away with at-larges? That's a whole different argument, and your Dawgies wouldn't be on this consecutive play-off streak if they did.

[Houndawg]

They determine auto-bid. But with the at-larges, other factors come into play with seeding. Overall resume needs to be evaluated. South Carolina State is undefeated in the MEAC. Should they be getting a seed because of that? How about the Colgate/Holy Cross winner?

Or are you wanting to suggest that they do away with at-larges? That's a whole different argument, and your Dawgies wouldn't be on this consecutive play-off streak if they did.

Tough call. In the system we have I don't think a second place team should get a seed over their conference champ unless the circumstances are extraordinary. I agree Montana deserves something for scheduling tougher than WSU, but if they're clearly better then they shouldn't have lost to WSU. I don't think both of them deserve a seed over the MVC champ, whoever it turns out to be; even if this is a down year we're still at least the equal of the BSC and the GWC. I dunno, just sayin'.....

[ValleyChamp]

I believe Nothern Iowa is overrated at 5. I have had them ranked 7th for a few weeks now but decided to drop them to 10 this week. After last weeks poll, I told myself i would re-examine all of the top 10 teams based on the entire season. I found UNI's resume to be very average. Although they have no bad losses, they don't have a signature win. Wins vs. SDSU, NDSU, and W Ill are all solid wins but none close to top 15. I felt like Weber, Montana, So Ill, and Wofford all had a stronger body of work than UNI, therefore I dropped them to #10.

Some of those victories that UNI has do not look as good now in part because UNI beat them all and put another loss on all of their resumes. WIU, SDSU, and NDSU were all ranked fairly well when they played UNI.

[ValleyChamp]

They determine auto-bid. But with the at-larges, other factors come into play with seeding. Overall resume needs to be evaluated. South Carolina State is undefeated in the MEAC. Should they be getting a seed because of that? How about the Colgate/Holy Cross winner?

Or are you wanting to suggest that they do away with at-larges? That's a whole different argument, and your Dawgies wouldn't be on this consecutive play-off streak if they did.

I agree, Conference championships are for the auto-bid and should be, but definitley should not be the deciding factor when choosing the seeds.

[Houndawg]

I agree, Conference championships are for the auto-bid and should be, but definitley should not be the deciding factor when choosing the seeds.

They certainly should be a deciding factor, especially when two teams have seven or eight common opponents. Now, I can see the #2 from the BSC getting a seed in normal circumstances over the MEAC or the PL champ, clearly different talent levels. Not so the MVC.

[ValleyChamp]

But, it cannot be THE deciding factor. A team could theoretically schedule a bunch of Indiana State's in the non. conference season and then be in a conference race with one other team that is good while the rest of the conference stinks.

Meaning they really would only have one real tough game to win to get the auto-bid, while that other team may have played a really demanding non conference schedule.

[LehighFan11]

Some of those victories that UNI has do not look as good now in part because UNI beat them all and put another loss on all of their resumes. WIU, SDSU, and NDSU were all ranked fairly well when they played UNI.
Of course when UNI beats them they receive one more loss, but those teams have had their troubles outside of playing UNI. Having 3 wins vs. SDSU, NDSU, and WIU is impressive because UNI didn't fall flat in one of those games. Their record maybe indicative of a top 5 ranking, but I don't think the body of work is there. They haven't had many poor performances vs. teams they should smack, but a close win over YSU is questionable.

[ValleyChamp]

Don't forget, the YSU was a road game in which we started a Freshman QB for the first time.

Although I agree with you that the body of work is not as impressive as it has been in years past, It is not UNI's fault that the other teams could not win their non conference games. We held our serve, they didn't, and that is hurting UNI.

[Chi Panther]

Of course when UNI beats them they receive one more loss, but those teams have had their troubles outside of playing UNI. Having 3 wins vs. SDSU, NDSU, and WIU is impressive because UNI didn't fall flat in one of those games. Their record maybe indicative of a top 5 ranking, but I don't think the body of work is there. They haven't had many poor performances vs. teams they should smack, but a close win over YSU is questionable.

How closely do you follow UNI?

You do understand that YSU wants to beat UNI soo bad they started the game with an onside kick?

Additionally, there is a thing call Farley ball....where he is notorious for sitting on a lead. Those 4 teams you mentioned above, UNI was winning against SDSU 14-3 at half, NDSU 23-6 at half, WIU 20-3 at half and YSU 14-7 at half. Not too exciting, but effective.

Farley ball struggles against the CAA however....

[petethepenguin15]

I am liking the rankings this week. I am glad to see some over due respect for the Jackrabbits. UNI is still over-rated I would put them closer to 8 and 9 rather than 5. But overall i am happy :)

[Jacks99]

Wouldn't have a problem with the Jacks being under 25 this week. However, Western Ill. should not be that high or above the Jacks. SDSU has been pounding the bottom teams and should have beat SIU. But, many close wins are a still all losses. This weeks game with NDSU/SDSU will settle that debate, whoever wins will likely finish top 25.

[LehighFan11]

How closely do you follow UNI?

You do understand that YSU wants to beat UNI soo bad they started the game with an onside kick?

Additionally, there is a thing call Farley ball....where he is notorious for sitting on a lead. Those 4 teams you mentioned above, UNI was winning against SDSU 14-3 at half, NDSU 23-6 at half, WIU 20-3 at half and YSU 14-7 at half. Not too exciting, but effective.

Farley ball struggles against the CAA however....
I haven't been able to watch a UNI game this year. I can understand that YSU is an in-conference rivalry opponent, but a top 5 team should blow out YSU. The half-time scores are interesting, shows that UNI may of had more control over the game than the final score indicates. I wish I could easily watch UNI on TV every week, sadly that isn't the truth.

[Houndawg]

Wouldn't have a problem with the Jacks being under 25 this week. However, Western Ill. should not be that high or above the Jacks. SDSU has been pounding the bottom teams and should have beat SIU. But, many close wins are a still all losses. This weeks game with NDSU/SDSU will settle that debate, whoever wins will likely finish top 25.

xnonox Obviously you weren't there.

I was, and, FYI, SIU never trailed in the game and scored on offense, defense, and special teams. When it was nut-cutting time SIU made the big plays. They completely dominated the first half, and after sleep-walking through the 3rd quarter and allowing SDSU to tie the game, took the ball early in the 4th quarter and burned 9 minutes off of the clock with a 14 play, 70 yard drive for the go ahead FG, after which defensive pressure forced a bad throw for an INT.