PDA

View Full Version : Women's DIII 2010-2011 Fan Opinion Poll



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32

PrezdeJohnson09
12-07-2010, 12:35 PM
was that your vote ?? :)

Nope. I went with the R.I.T. Tigers. :)

Mania
12-08-2010, 07:26 AM
1. Plattsburgh
2. RIT
3. Amherst
4. Norwich
5. River Falls
6. Gustavus
7. Middlebury
8. Stevens Point
9. Lake Forrest
10. Trinity

Captain Obvious
12-08-2010, 08:29 AM
1. RIT
2. Platty
3. Falls
4. Norwich
5. Amherst
6. Gusties
7. M'bury
8. Trinity
9. Point
10. Forrest

rinky dink
12-08-2010, 08:48 AM
1. RIT
2. Platty
3. UW River Falls
4. Middlebury
5. Amherst
6. Norwich
7. Gustavus
8. Trinity
9. UW Stevens Point
10. Elmira

LtPowers
12-08-2010, 09:04 AM
1. Plattsburgh
2. RIT

Trying not to jinx the Tigers? =)


Powers &8^]

Mania
12-08-2010, 12:05 PM
Trying not to jinx the Tigers? =)


Powers &8^]

I've had Plattsburgh above RIT the whole year. I won't move them ahead until Plattsburgh starts losing.

spike
12-08-2010, 12:48 PM
Its not that hard to figure out is it. All of the teams above them stumble and they moved above them. Amherst in 3rd, stumbled with the tie to Trinity, Gustavus at 4 lost to an unranked team, Norwich lost. River Falls won. I don't see the big shocker in them moving up to 3rd..except of course the eastern ego coming into play.

There are only 4 undefeated teams in the country...1,2,3 and Middlebury at 7(who wasn't ranked at the beginning of the year(right?) and have had some "close" calls with much more inferior teams. We'll know more about them early Jan.

and it could be something as simple as a different ballot was counted this week than before.

As I recall last year your criticism of Middlebury was that their ties with Plattsburgh, Amherst and Norwich and their OT loss to Elmira weren't "wins", and if you don't win you shouldn't be ranked. Now you are questioning that some of their wins were "close calls"? Either evaluate each game or look at W-L, but please try to at least be consistent.

nyi19
12-08-2010, 01:20 PM
I've had Plattsburgh above RIT the whole year. I won't move them ahead until Plattsburgh starts losing.

Glad someone said something about this, because I didn't want to be the first.
This goes more for the national poll, not the fan opinion one.
How can one team (RIT) jump another team (Plattsburgh), without Plattsburgh having lost a game? If they were going to jump Plattsburgh after beating Amherst, then they should have just been ahead of Plattsburgh to begin with. As far as I'm concerned, Mania, you've got it right. How sensible!

spike
12-08-2010, 02:01 PM
Glad someone said something about this, because I didn't want to be the first.
This goes more for the national poll, not the fan opinion one.
How can one team (RIT) jump another team (Plattsburgh), without Plattsburgh having lost a game? If they were going to jump Plattsburgh after beating Amherst, then they should have just been ahead of Plattsburgh to begin with. As far as I'm concerned, Mania, you've got it right. How sensible!

I agree with your analysis, but there is a reasonable explanation for jumping RIT above Plattsburgh, and that would be that the voters acknowledge underestimating RIT at the beginning of the season. I'm not necessarily endorsing this, but if it is OK to give the benefit of the doubt to a defending champ, it should also be no surprise if some voters had RIT further down the list based on prior year failures. Now that they have shown they are for real, voters are giving them more respect.

nyi19
12-08-2010, 02:06 PM
I agree with your analysis, but there is another reasonable explanation for jumping RIT above Plattsburgh, and that would be that the voters acknowledge underestimating RIT at the beginning of the season. I'm not necessarily endorsing this, but if it is OK to give the benefit of the doubt to a defending champ, it should also be no surprise if some voters had RIT further down the list based on prior year failures. Now that they have shown they are for real, voters are giving them more respect.

I agree with you, as well, with the stipulation, like you said, that I don't endorse that thinking.
But fact of the matter is too we're talking about their piror failures as reason for why they were ranked so low. So instead they jumped a team who they were ranked below and have not played yet this season. In the meantime, Plattsburgh was 3-0-0 against them last year and Plattsburgh's schedule is being held against it right now. RIT had the first shot at the national champs. They won and you can't take that away from them. But you can't hold Plattsburgh's schedule against it like that. Until Plattsburgh loses to a team that RIT beat, the poll is off, in my opinion.

But...oh well :)

LtPowers
12-08-2010, 03:40 PM
I don't understand that kind of thinking. It's not all about won/loss record. Is it a little unfair that RIT got "first crack" at Amherst? Maybe, but the poll is just a snapshot of the season-to-date. When you have two undefeated teams with very little overlap in common opponents, you either have to toss a coin, or start looking at who has the more impressive wins, or even just which team appears to have played better.

The voters gave Amherst a lot of slack for being the defending champions, so now RIT gets some slack for scheduling (and beating) Amherst early. Everything shakes out in the end.


Powers &8^]

gojackets
12-08-2010, 03:50 PM
As I recall last year your criticism of Middlebury was that their ties with Plattsburgh, Amherst and Norwich and their OT loss to Elmira weren't "wins", and if you don't win you shouldn't be ranked. Now you are questioning that some of their wins were "close calls"? Either evaluate each game or look at W-L, but please try to at least be consistent.

i don't understand what your issue is. Do you not consider a 3-2 win over Conn College or 3-1 over Potsdam a close call?

spike
12-08-2010, 04:10 PM
i don't understand what your issue is. Do you not consider a 3-2 win over Conn College or 3-1 over Potsdam a close call?

Sorry if you missed my point. I don't know if those were close calls or not. But last year you expressed your opinion that close call ties and close call losses to highly ranked teams were not sufficient to rank Midd. You suggested that wins are what counts. Now you seem to be suggesting that wins aren't good enough if they are close call wins. So my point was either look at W-L or look at how a team wins and loses, but don't waffle back and forth to suit your biases.

Phil D. Stands
12-08-2010, 04:13 PM
i don't understand what your issue is. Do you not consider a 3-2 win over Conn College or 3-1 over Potsdam a close call?
I thought CC was a 4-2 (but perhaps ENG?)
Anyhow, for "close calls" -- Midd seemed to be outshooting all those opponents by at least double if not triple.
Wouldn't a "close call" be Norwich-Plattsburgh where I believe Plattsburgh won 4-2 after being outshot 43-17 or something like that? wow...
based on those numbers (and weighting my personal ranking by shots, not W-L, or close calls) ---- here is my poll (shot like a dribbler from the red line -- COUNT IT!):
1) RIT
2) UWRF
3) Norwich
4) Amherst
5) Plattsburgh
6) Midd
7) GAC
8) Trinity
9) UWSP
10) Lake Forest
10)

gojackets
12-08-2010, 05:45 PM
I thought CC was a 4-2 (but perhaps ENG?)
10)

collegehockeystats has it at 3-2

Plugger
12-08-2010, 07:01 PM
collegehockeystats has it at 3-2

......and shots 44-26

Phil D. Stands
12-08-2010, 07:44 PM
......and shots 44-26

Phil D. stands corrected once again -- not stupid -- just blithely ignorant.

Conn College -- second game of season at Conn -- you can't just jump on a Camel and expect to ride them -- they're gonna try and spit in your face and step on your foot first -- very awkward beast to control

Mania
12-08-2010, 10:30 PM
The voters gave Amherst a lot of slack for being the defending champions, so now RIT gets some slack for scheduling (and beating) Amherst early. Everything shakes out in the end.
Powers &8^]

I gave Amherst the benefit of the doubt to let them prove they were as good as last year, but once I saw what they were not the same I weighed them based on how they have done so far this season. I still may be generous but we'll have to see.

Plattsburgh is 4-1 against RIT the past two years so I am going to give them the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise.

spike
12-09-2010, 08:39 AM
I gave Amherst the benefit of the doubt to let them prove they were as good as last year, but once I saw what they were not the same I weighed them based on how they have done so far this season. I still may be generous but we'll have to see.

Plattsburgh is 4-1 against RIT the past two years so I am going to give them the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise.

I won't be quite as quick to downgrade Amherst. They continue to out-shoot opponents (including RIT)which tells me that their offensive prowess is still there. Perhaps the big difference is they are giving up more goals against. I don't think Hu suddenly lost her touch, I think we are seeing the impact of their defensive zone play coming down a notch. I would think they will figure it out and by playoff time I would expect them to be right in the thick of it. I do like the post that credits RIT for having caught Amherst early in the season when they were ranked #1. In theory, if Amherst had been ranked #5 or #6 at the time, maybe RIT would only be ranked #2 or #3. But, because they swept #1, they get to be #1. January 2 will feature Amherst vs. Plattsburgh. If Amherst wins, I think that will solidify RIT's ranking. If Plattsburgh wins, could we possibly be looking at a poll that does not include Amherst?

Plugger
12-09-2010, 09:27 AM
I won't be quite as quick to downgrade Amherst. They continue to out-shoot opponents (including RIT)which tells me that their offensive prowess is still there. Perhaps the big difference is they are giving up more goals against. I don't think Hu suddenly lost her touch, I think we are seeing the impact of their defensive zone play coming down a notch. I would think they will figure it out and by playoff time I would expect them to be right in the thick of it. I do like the post that credits RIT for having caught Amherst early in the season when they were ranked #1. In theory, if Amherst had been ranked #5 or #6 at the time, maybe RIT would only be ranked #2 or #3. But, because they swept #1, they get to be #1. January 2 will feature Amherst vs. Plattsburgh. If Amherst wins, I think that will solidify RIT's ranking. If Plattsburgh wins, could we possibly be looking at a poll that does not include Amherst?

I agree with most of what you say, but I am not so sure I would downgrade Amherst out of the top 10 if they lose their next game. After their warm up weekend against Wesleyan, no other team comes close to having the schedule Amhest has.

Their next 8 games are against top 10 teams. That is an incredibly difficult schedule to start the year out with.

Also, I am sure Amherst does not care where they rank early on, as over the last 2 years they peaked at the end of the season, and showed that they were the best team in the country, and there is no reason to think they won't be there again this year. Time will tell.