|
|
Post by gorabbits on Oct 1, 2015 15:06:32 GMT -6
www.masseyratings.com/cf/compare1aa.htmThe Massey Composite averages rankings from all FCS polls and computer rankings each week. The Coyotes are currently ranked 17th in the composite averages. Congratulations. The MVFC has 5 of the top 8 in the nation and 7 of the top 19. At the bottom of the page the conferences are ranked and no one is even close to the MVFC.
|
|
|
|
Post by Yotes on Oct 1, 2015 15:43:09 GMT -6
I'm of the opinion that the MVFC's level of play would sack up pretty well with the Sun Belt of the FBS. Miles ahead of the rest of the FCS.
|
|
|
|
Post by gorabbits on Oct 1, 2015 16:30:23 GMT -6
I'm of the opinion that the MVFC's level of play would sack up pretty well with the Sun Belt of the FBS. Miles ahead of the rest of the FCS. I agree with you. In fact the Sagarin computer rankings, which I personally think is probably the best, puts the MVFC ahead of both the Sunbelt and Conference USA and only slightly behind the MAC and MWC and AAC. sagarin.com/sports/cfsend.htm\ |
|
|
|
Post by Yotes on Oct 1, 2015 16:39:46 GMT -6
I can't help but notice the only two teams with winning records in the Sun Belt right now are Georgia Southern and Appalachian State, two very storied FBS programs. If Division 1 football gets reclassified again I do hope the entire MVFC is put into the division just outside the Power 5.
|
|
|
|
Post by jackl on Oct 1, 2015 17:52:49 GMT -6
It's already been pointed out that computer rankings don't have enough data and are flawed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Coyote Fan on Oct 1, 2015 18:01:49 GMT -6
I have no doubt that the tops teams in FCS are as good or better than the lower or even mid level FBS programs. I also believe that the top teams in D2 are as good or better than the lower or even mid level FCS programs. When the Coyotes were still in D2 UNI had all kinds of trouble on their home field beating many of the D2's from the not too distance past. That is an example of UNI who has always been a powerfull FCS program. I am sure the lower level FCS teams would have really struggled with some of their D2 counterparts.
That is one of the reasons that I would like to see the Coyotes play programs such as Wyoming rather than matchups against the Big 10, Pac 10 (or whatever it is called these days) or Big 12. With some program improvement the Yotes could go into a place like Western Michigan and walk out with a win on a somewhat regular basis.
|
|
|
|
Post by fightsd on Oct 2, 2015 6:57:21 GMT -6
I have no doubt that the tops teams in FCS are as good or better than the lower or even mid level FBS programs. I also believe that the top teams in D2 are as good or better than the lower or even mid level FCS programs. When the Coyotes were still in D2 UNI had all kinds of trouble on their home field beating many of the D2's from the not too distance past. That is an example of UNI who has always been a powerfull FCS program. I am sure the lower level FCS teams would have really struggled with some of their D2 counterparts. That is one of the reasons that I would like to see the Coyotes play programs such as Wyoming rather than matchups against the Big 10, Pac 10 (or whatever it is called these days) or Big 12. With some program improvement the Yotes could go into a place like Western Michigan and walk out with a win on a somewhat regular basis. This has been pointed out before. We play the big time schools to get the big time paycheck. I don't disagree that scheduling games we could potentially win sounds great, but beating a middle of the pack MAC team does little for exposure and most of those type teams are outside the hotbeds for our recruiting territory and alumni base. I wouldn't hate the Wyoming matchup since it's fairly close geographically, but the profit we would turn from that game is a fraction of what we take home for a power 5 game. |
|
|
|
Post by coyotecrazie5 on Oct 2, 2015 7:22:18 GMT -6
This ranking is nice and all, but I want to see the on the field play and what the ranking is at the end of the year. This week will be a good test to see where we are in in terms of standing in the MVFC.
These ranking also have SDSU at #1, so I will take with a grain of salt (insert stupid smiley)
|
|
|
|
Post by Cousin Eddie on Oct 2, 2015 8:53:54 GMT -6
Just win baby.
|
|
|
|
Post by coyote70 on Oct 2, 2015 10:17:28 GMT -6
It's already been pointed out that computer rankings don't have enough data and are flawed. Yes, they are flawed, just as the coaches poll and similar which rely on subjective judgment. Personally, I think many computer rankings get more reliable as the season moves along whereas the more subjective polls are less indicative of a team's ranking. Probably not a big issue for many schools, though, unless you're on the bubble for a playoff spot. |
|
|
|
Post by gorabbits on Oct 2, 2015 12:53:32 GMT -6
It's already been pointed out that computer rankings don't have enough data and are flawed. Yes, they are flawed, just as the coaches poll and similar which rely on subjective judgment. Personally, I think many computer rankings get more reliable as the season moves along whereas the more subjective polls are less indicative of a team's ranking. Probably not a big issue for many schools, though, unless you're on the bubble for a playoff spot. Certainly none of the polls or computer rankings are perfect. The thing I like about Massey Composite is that it averages all of the available polls and computer rankings and therefore averages out some of the biases in individual polls/rankings. Thus it is closer to accurate than any single one. I actually vote in one of the polls (AGS) and know that is impossible to be totally accurate, but it is still fun to follow them from week to week. And, I think they do become more accurate as the season progresses. |
|
