Poll Stuff 1/16/12

[DukeBlueHeart4]

I just looked at the rankings for this week, specifically looking for Duke and Carolina. Carolina fell from third to eighth after the Tallahassacre. I'm not sure if I should have, but I expected them fall further. Duke fell from 3rd to 7th after a 22 point loss to the number 2 team in the nation. We fell from 5th to 8th after a 5 point loss to unranked Temple. My own silly logic led me to the conclusion that Carolina's 33 point drubbing by a no-longer ranked FSU team would drop them even further given our poll changes following losses.

[Ichabod Drain]

Duke is up to 4 now in both polls

[OldPhiKap]

I just looked at the rankings for this week, specifically looking for Duke and Carolina. Carolina fell from third to eighth after the Tallahassacre. I'm not sure if I should have, but I expected them fall further. Duke fell from 3rd to 7th after a 22 point loss to the number 2 team in the nation. We fell from 5th to 8th after a 5 point loss to unranked Temple. My own silly logic led me to the conclusion that Carolina's 33 point drubbing by a no-longer ranked FSU team would drop them even further given our poll changes following losses.

Hard to tell without really looking at how everyone else in the top 10 did each week. Not sure there's much difference between a 20 point loss and 30 point loss, either -- both are a drubbing.

PS I like the "Tallahassacre" name -- hope we avoid same.

[DukeBlueHeart4]

Hard to tell without really looking at how everyone else in the top 10 did each week. Not sure there's much difference between a 20 point loss and 30 point loss, either -- both are a drubbing.

PS I like the "Tallahassacre" name -- hope we avoid same.

I agree there isn't much of a difference in a 20 point loss and a 30 point loss but there is a difference in the level of competition faced in those games. I would much rather have a 22 point loss to Ohio State than a 22 point loss to FSU.

I noticed that UNLV dropped eight spots after their loss this week in the ESPN polls.

[ricks68]

Duke is up to 4 now in both polls

Boy, is that meaningless.:rolleyes: While I believe it makes the usual fan happy, I think we know better. I think we have a long way to go before we could even try to predict a win in a number of our upcoming games. It's almost as if we have to waste most of the first half of our games before we figure out just how to play with our own teammates that day, let alone how to figure out how to beat the opposing team. Yes, I trust our coach to get them there by March, but this year is just too unpredictable for my liking. Sure am glad that I don't have HTN.;)

ricks

[Ichabod Drain]

Boy, is that meaningless.:rolleyes: While I believe it makes the usual fan happy, I think we know better. I think we have a long way to go before we could even try to predict a win in a number of our upcoming games. It's almost as if we have to waste most of the first half of our games before we figure out just how to play with our own teammates that day, let alone how to figure out how to beat the opposing team. Yes, I trust our coach to get them there by March, but this year is just too unpredictable for my liking. Sure am glad that I don't have HTN.;)

ricks

I agree for the record, I don't think it means anything at all. But this was a thread on the recently released polls and the OP did not mention Duke's standing so I thought I would just throw it out there. Just trying to give some Duke related info on a Duke related board. ;)

[Wander]

This sort of whining is really silly and doesn't make us look good. Yes, a road blowout loss to Ohio State is better than a road blowout loss to FSU. And guess what? The polls reflect that - Duke is ranked several spots above Carolina.

Who should be ranked ahead of UNC? Indiana, on a two game losing streak, including a home loss to a previously winless conference team? Michigan State, with the same overall record but which lost a game to UNC on a neutral court?

The polls are remarkably fair, even if they're not overly meaningful, and I'm tired of people insinuating that there's some sort of pro-UNC bias in them because they have a good journalism school or something. There might be a slight bias in the polls toward basketball powerhouses in general (Kansas, Duke, UNC) etc, but that's about it.

[DukeBlueHeart4]

This sort of whining is really silly and doesn't make us look good. Yes, a road blowout loss to Ohio State is better than a road blowout loss to FSU. And guess what? The polls reflect that - Duke is ranked several spots above Carolina.

Who should be ranked ahead of UNC? Indiana, on a two game losing streak, including a home loss to a previously winless conference team? Michigan State, with the same overall record but which lost a game to UNC on a neutral court?

The polls are remarkably fair, even if they're not overly meaningful, and I'm tired of people insinuating that there's some sort of pro-UNC bias in them because they have a good journalism school or something. There might be a slight bias in the polls toward basketball powerhouses in general (Kansas, Duke, UNC) etc, but that's about it.

I wasn't insinuating a pro-UNC bias or whining. I was only highlighting my inability to ever predict what is going to happen with the polls. I never would have put Duke at 4 this week. I would probably still have Ohio State above us. The polls never do what I think they will, which is why I commented.

[ricks68]

I agree for the record, I don't think it means anything at all. But this was a thread on the recently released polls and the OP did not mention Duke's standing so I thought I would just throw it out there. Just trying to give some Duke related info on a Duke related board. ;)

Thanks for putting the poll numbers up there, as I hadn't been informed yet of where we were ranked today. No criticism at all towards you. I just wanted to throw it out there that this is going to be a very unpredictable year for us, in my opinion, and I am kinda a little apprehensive about our future play. Very strange year for me regarding the team. I could see us actually going on a losing streak------or not. I could also see Mason and/or Austin leaving---or staying. I could see our recruiting and scholarship situation get in a bind due to players not leaving-----or leaving. Just a lot of uncertainty. Kinda like the financial world out there that a few of my classmates had a major hand in causing.

So our positions in the polls, which I usually point to with pride, seem to have lost a lot of their luster for me. Still really nice to see us consistently up there again, however, inspite of my short rant.:)

ricks

[Newton_14]

Boy, is that meaningless.:rolleyes: While I believe it makes the usual fan happy, I think we know better. I think we have a long way to go before we could even try to predict a win in a number of our upcoming games. It's almost as if we have to waste most of the first half of our games before we figure out just how to play with our own teammates that day, let alone how to figure out how to beat the opposing team. Yes, I trust our coach to get them there by March, but this year is just too unpredictable for my liking. Sure am glad that I don't have HTN.;)

ricks

You are aware this team is now 15-2 right? That's fairly consistent if not predictable.:) Do they really have to win by 20 every game to earn the love?:cool:

Enjoy the ride! The team is growing and developing right before our eyes.

[Olympic Fan]

No. 3 Baylor lost for the first time Monday night -- getting manhandled by Kansas in Lawrence.

If Duke can take care of business next week at home, it's possible that Duke could climb another spo next week. I know Baylor still has just one loss, but the way the polls work, teams usually drop a bit if they lose and move up if the team/teams ahead of the lose.

[brevity]

I noticed that UNLV dropped eight spots after their loss this week in the ESPN polls.

The proper comparison should be made between UNC and UNLV. UNC falls 5 spots after losing by 33 at unranked FSU. UNLV falls 8 spots after losing by a last second shot at also-ranked SDSU. The mid-major argument doesn't really work here; those are essentially Pac-12 slots in the national rankings that no Pac-12 teams are good enough to occupy. (Interestingly, UNLV only fell 2 spots in the AP poll.)

At least this week, UNC has no business being in the top 10.


Who should be ranked ahead of UNC? Indiana, on a two game losing streak, including a home loss to a previously winless conference team? Michigan State, with the same overall record but which lost a game to UNC on a neutral court?

No to Indiana, but yes to Michigan State. Losing a head-to-head matchup does not necessarily mean that the Spartans should ALWAYS be ranked behind the Heels. They lost at Northwestern by 7, so they should fall in the polls some, but could arguably be ranked ahead of UNC.

A plausible Carolina-free top 10:

1. Syracuse
2. Baylor (prior to Monday's loss)
3. Kentucky
4. Missouri
5. Ohio State
6. Duke
7. Kansas
8. Murray State
9. Georgetown
10. Michigan State

Admittedly, this was harder than I thought it would be. By the time I got to Georgetown, I kind of lost enthusiasm. But the Hoyas and Spartans haven't been embarrassing on a national, College GameDay level.

[NYC Duke Fan]

I know that January rankings mean didly squat but I am just curious how Duke is ranked higher than Ohio State. Yes, Ohio State has 3 losses, at Indiana,( a top 15 team), at Kansas , ( a top 10 team) and at Illinois, and Duke has only 2, but Ohio State creamed Duke and Duke's other loss was to a team not even in te top 25, or for that matter a team not even get votes after the 25.

[Kedsy]

I know that January rankings mean didly squat but I am just curious how Duke is ranked higher than Ohio State. Yes, Ohio State has 3 losses, at Indiana,( a top 15 team), at Kansas , ( a top 10 team) and at Illinois, and Duke has only 2, but Ohio State creamed Duke and Duke's other loss was to a team not even in te top 25, or for that matter a team not even get votes after the 25.

Same reason Florida State isn't ranked ahead of UNC.

[Duvall]

I know that January rankings mean didly squat but I am just curious how Duke is ranked higher than Ohio State.

By losing less against a tougher schedule.

[SCMatt33]

One thing to keep in mind is that losses don't happen in a vacuum. There were a bunch of other teams that lost too. I rad a lot of stuff from voters claiming that they wanted to drop them more, but couldn't justify dropping them below teams with similar or worse resumes when both teams lost.

[UrinalCake]

By losing less against a tougher schedule.

Also by losing less recently. Teams fall when the lose, then slowly climb as other teams lose.

[Kedsy]

What amuses me about the current polls is remembering all the talk before the season how the top four teams (UNC, Ohio State, Kentucky, UConn) were sooooo dominant, locks for the Final Four, yada, yada, yada, and now only one of those teams is ranked in the top five and the other three dominators have 9 losses between them and it's only mid-January.

[slower]

What amuses me about the current polls is remembering all the talk before the season how the top four teams (UNC, Ohio State, Kentucky, UConn) were sooooo dominant, locks for the Final Four, yada, yada, yada, and now only one of those teams is ranked in the top five and the other three dominators have 9 losses between them and it's only mid-January.

Andy Glockner's (SI) latest bracket has Duke a #1 seed, Ohio St a #2 seed and The Holes a #3 seed.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/andy_glockner/01/17/Bracket.Watch/index.html

[UrinalCake]

Calling the Heels a #3 is a big stretch. They absolutely laid an egg against FSU, and their weaknesses were exposed, but they are not THAT bad of a team. Ask yourself who'd you want to play in the tournament? I'd rather face any of the other 2 and 3's in his bracket than UNC, with the possible exception of OSU.

[Jderf]

You are aware this team is now 15-2 right? That's fairly consistent if not predictable.:) Do they really have to win by 20 every game to earn the love?:cool:

Yes! For the love of god, yes! I demand double-digit wins, day-in day-out. My fragile self cannot handle all these games that are still in doubt with ten minutes to go. Call it spoiled or entitled if you want, but is it really my fault if others have conditioned me to expect these things? Seems like it is actually Duke's fault for being so damn good at basketball.

[... kidding around, obviously]

[Duvall]

Calling the Heels a #3 is a big stretch. They absolutely laid an egg against FSU, and their weaknesses were exposed, but they are not THAT bad of a team. Ask yourself who'd you want to play in the tournament? I'd rather face any of the other 2 and 3's in his bracket than UNC, with the possible exception of OSU.

That wasn't the question, though. UNC just hasn't assembled a strong body of work at this point, with a 15-3 mark against an above-average but not remarkable schedule. The Selection Committee doesn't really seed teams based on who they think is most dangerous, but based on each team's wins and losses. Picking winners is left for Vegas.

[SmartDevil]

FWIW

The writer who does the Washington Post version of "bracketology" has Duke seeded #3 overall, j #1 in the St. Louis bracket.

He did tell me yesterday that if things stayed the same next week, he'd likely switch Duke to the Atlanta bracket and Ky to the St. Louis bracket.

Of course, things may change as a result of Baylor's loss last night or other developments this week.

[CameronBornAndBred]

The women are ranked 5th in both. The scary thing is though that the difference between the 4th and 5th spot in the women's poll is pretty huge, and the difference between the 5th spot and the top 2 spots is a ginormous chasm. The heels just got handed the worst defeat in history by UCONN, and I'd usually be laughing about that for at least a week...but the truth is we get the Huskies in two weeks at home, and it might not be much prettier. Still...it's great to see the women up there given the adversity they've faced as a team this year with the players they have lost.

[tbyers11]

Calling the Heels a #3 is a big stretch. They absolutely laid an egg against FSU, and their weaknesses were exposed, but they are not THAT bad of a team. Ask yourself who'd you want to play in the tournament? I'd rather face any of the other 2 and 3's in his bracket than UNC, with the possible exception of OSU.

I believe Glockner does his bracket as of the moment and doesn't predict how future games will play out. If this is indeed true, then I don't think a 3 seed is a big stretch at all. Their only really good win was against Mich St on the aircraft carrier. Wisconsin (by 3 at home), Texas, Long Beach State and Miami (also at home) are their next best wins. They've lost all three of their road games, 2 of them (UNLV and FSU) in decisive fashion. A 1 point loss to UK at Rupp should almost count as a win, but the way the committee looks at things it is just a loss.

Now, do I think they end up as a 3 seed? No I don't. But right now it's not a big stretch.

[Olympic Fan]

I believe Glockner does his bracket as of the moment and doesn't predict how future games will play out. If this is indeed true, then I don't think a 3 seed is a big stretch at all. Their only really good win was against Mich St on the aircraft carrier. Wisconsin (by 3 at home), Texas, Long Beach State and Miami (also at home) are their next best wins. They've lost all three of their road games, 2 of them (UNLV and FSU) in decisive fashion. A 1 point loss to UK at Rupp should almost count as a win, but the way the committee looks at things it is just a loss.

Now, do I think they end up as a 3 seed? No I don't. But right now it's not a big stretch.

It's much too soon to pay much attention to bracketology, but both Palm and Lunardi (IMO the best two bracktologist -- both do their early brackets based on the current situation, not future projections) -- both have Duke as the fourth No. 1 seed. Both have UNC as a No. 2 seed.

Lunardi almost apologizies for making Duke a No. 1 seed, but can't get past the fact that Duke has seven wins over his at large teams ... and both losses are to NCAA at large teams.

[tbyers11]

It's much too soon to pay much attention to bracketology, but both Palm and Lunardi (IMO the best two bracktologist -- both do their early brackets based on the current situation, not future projections) -- both have Duke as the fourth No. 1 seed. Both have UNC as a No. 2 seed.

Lunardi almost apologizies for making Duke a No. 1 seed, but can't get past the fact that Duke has seven wins over his at large teams ... and both losses are to NCAA at large teams.

I looked at Glockner's seeds and the only 2 seed that I didn't think was definitely better to date than UNC was Georgetown. Of the 3 seeds, I think UNC is better than UConn and Indiana but comparable to Missouri. That makes UNC the 8th-10th overall team. I don't have a problem with them being the last 2 or a top 3.

Palm is pretty good, but I have never liked Lunardi's work. He always seems a bit off in several areas and his scores the last few years haven't been that good when you score brackets. To each his own.

Definitely agreed that it is way too early to discuss this is in detail. However, it is way better IMO than endlessly discussing whether Roy Williams should or should not have left his men behind.

[77devil]

Duke has the top SOS in all the 3 major mathematical based rating systems: RPI, Ken Pom, and Sagarin. It is unlikely to hold up as we move into the weaker part of the conference schedule, but it should remain one of the best among the high seeds come March. Should enure to Duke's benefit when the brackets are set other things being relatively equal.