A little bit of a shake up.

Other schools receiving votes
College	Record	Points	Prev.
Tyler Junior College	2-1	24.0	20
Georgia Military College	2-1	20.0	11
Ridgewater College	4-0	14.0	NR
College of DuPage	2-1	13.5	17
Rochester Community & Technical College	3-1	9.0	16
Dean College	2-1	5.0	NR
New Mexico Military Institute	3-1	3.5	NR

What a fu@#ing joke. 

MGCCC? really?  Please tell me how beating Coahoma, Holmes, and Hinds by an average of 32 points is better than beating Blinn, Dodge, Indy, and Fort Scott by an average of 50 points. Not just better, but so much better that it justified MGCC jumping over Butler in the polls?

I can accept Iowa Western's jump.  It has played well against good competition, but MGCCC?  Puh-lease.  To top it off, I don't think MGCCC even has to play another ranked team the rest of the regular season.  WTF?

Nassau at 7?
Lackawanna?

I haven't even heard of Loiusburg, Minnesota West Community and Technical College, or ASA College.  I am quite certain that they would all be dormats in any of the big 4 conferences.

this is an abortion. i don't have time to comment on this right now, but it's full of absurdities.

ANY VALIDITY THIS POLL HAD IS NOW THROWN OUT OF THE WINDOW!

So even the computers feel Minnesota schools are worthy of a top 20 ranking? Have them play one school out of their conference and that will fix that problem.  I think East Mississippi might be a little upset with getting eight first-place votes and getting bumped from first to fourth. This system needs some serious tinkering.

You all do realize that this will change quite a bit as the season progresses right?? SoS was accounted for and if you looked at one of the previous posts that had the opponents win loss record this should come as no real surprise. The teams who scheduled a tough non conf schedule or have played better conf opponents have been rewarded. Also, take a look at the points spread and notice how small some of them are because of the human poll accounting for the greater percentage. Untwist your panties and take a deep breath. It's also funny how some of the leagues that were the biggest supporters of this change are now crying about it...

Shank1012 wrote: You all do realize that this will change quite a bit as the season progresses right?? SoS was accounted for and if you looked at one of the previous posts that had the opponents win loss record this should come as no real surprise. The teams who scheduled a tough non conf schedule or have played better conf opponents have been rewarded. Also, take a look at the points spread and notice how small some of them are because of the human poll accounting for the greater percentage. Untwist your panties and take a deep breath. It's also funny how some of the leagues that were the biggest supporters of this change are now crying about it...

If this system were actually effective at taking into account SOS, then no team from Minnesota or the Northeast conference(s) would be in it.  Period. 

Obviously, the method of determining SOS is flawed.

You are right, though, that by the end of the season, this will likely sort itself out.  Since 80%+ of most teams' games are with in-conference teams, the records of those teams will, by necessity, be about 50%.  Once schedules are equalized by that fact, the extreme nature of the rankings should even out.

Perhaps my biggest concern is that the pollsters, who weren't doing a great job in the first place, will start to let the computer rankings impact their votes, resulting in a continually skewed poll.

We'll see how this plays out, I guess.

It is hard to wrap your brain around, but remember that EM's total opponents wins equals 1 right now. Yes 1. Now that will change quickly but MGC has most likely the best opponents record boosting them up. EM has arguably the worst opponents record and all that is separating them is 12.5 points. That shows how valuable the voters are to this new concept. It also shows this system was not built for a week 4 poll, but rather a week 12 poll. I'm not saying it is perfect, but it will give the old poll a bit of excitment by promoting early season big matchups and discouraging teams that schedule prep and jv teams.

As for the MN and a other schools ppl are wondering about... A. Does it really matter besides the top 10? B. a MN school always gets a courtesy ranking by the voters anyway. C. I like that IW got some well deserved respect here. They scheduled 2 teams from 2 of the 'elite' conferences early, traveled to both and came away with W's. Teams that do this should get rewarded in the polls.

Shank1012 wrote: 
As for the MN and a other schools ppl are wondering about... A. Does it really matter besides the top 10? B. a MN school always gets a courtesy ranking by the voters anyway. C. I like that IW got some well deserved respect here. They scheduled 2 teams from 2 of the 'elite' conferences early, traveled to both and came away with W's. Teams that do this should get rewarded in the polls.

A) i believe it matters because if strength of schedule comes into play, then playing ranked opponents helps/hurts rankings.  does anyone believe louisburg or minnesota west are really better than any of the ks/tx/ms schools?

B) courtesy rankings are not for official rankings.  official rankings should reflect the best and strongest teams, even if that excludes some of the "have not" conferences, despite their rankings.  bowl results attest to this.

C) IW deserves respect for their schedule and willingness to gamble (and win).  their strength of schedule will reflect how these teams do later in the computer rankings, i hope.  not a lot of protest on this point.