ELynah Forum

General Category => Hockey => Topic started by: Chris '03 on January 05, 2009, 02:27:55 PM

Title: Polls 1/5/09 (Cornell #6/8)
Post by: Chris '03 on January 05, 2009, 02:27:55 PM
Cornell up to 8 with 1 first place vote in the USCHO:

1   Notre Dame   (47)   16-3-2   994   1
2   Boston University( 2)   13-4-1   940   3
3   Minnesota      10-3-5   886   4
4   Northeastern      12-4-2   782   6
5   Denver              13-6-2   720   5
6   Miami              12-5-3   697   2
7   Princeton      13-3-0   690   8
8   Cornell   ( 1)           9-1-3   673   10
9   Boston College      9-5-2   660   7
10   Colorado College   11-6-5   534   9
10   Michigan      13-7-0   534   12
12   Vermont              11-4-2   513   13
13   New Hampshire      9-6-3   298   15
14   Air Force      15-4-1   288   11
15   Dartmouth      9-5-0   198   20
16   Ohio State      13-6-1   197   NR
17   Wisconsin      10-9-3   153   14
18   Nebraska-Omaha      12-6-3   130   16
19   Alaska              10-6-4   123   18
20   Minnesota-Duluth   9-5-6   118   NR
Others Receiving Votes: Quinnipiac 111, North Dakota 88, Minnesota State 86, Yale 33, Maine 30, Massachusetts 8, St. Cloud State 7, Michigan State 6, Niagara 3


#6 with 1 first place in USA Today:
1   Notre Dame           504   (32)   1   16-3-2
2   Boston University   472   (1)   3   13-4-1
3   University of Minnesota   435      4   10-3-5
4   Northeastern University   360      6   12-4-2
5   Princeton University   332      8   13-3-0
6   Cornell University   316   (1)   9   9-1-3
7   University of Denver   309      5   13-6-2
8   Miami (Ohio) University   277      2   12-5-3
9   Boston College           261      7   9-5-2
10   University of Vermont   218      13   11-4-2
11   University of Michigan   200      11   13-7-0
12   Colorado College   164      10   11-6-5
13   UNH                   74      14   9-6-3
14   U.S. Air Force Academy   50      12   15-4-1
15   Ohio State University   38      NR   13-6-1
Others receiving votes: Quinnipiac University 18, Dartmouth College 14, University of Maine 8, University of Nebraska Omaha 8, University of Wisconsin 8, Yale University 6, University of North Dakota 4, University of Alaska 2, Michigan State University 2.
Title: Re: Polls 1/5/09 (Cornell #6/8)
Post by: scoop85 on January 05, 2009, 02:57:18 PM
I saw some of BU's win over Denver, and they were extremely impressive.
Title: Re: Polls 1/5/09 (Cornell #6/8)
Post by: mnagowski on January 05, 2009, 03:17:20 PM
Any thoughts as to who might be giving Cornell their first place vote?
Title: Re: Polls 1/5/09 (Cornell #6/8)
Post by: TimV on January 05, 2009, 03:45:45 PM
Goon from North Dakota?
Title: Re: Polls 1/5/09 (Cornell #6/8)
Post by: Rosey on January 05, 2009, 03:48:55 PM
Who the hell is giving us first-place votes?
Title: Re: Polls 1/5/09 (Cornell #6/8)
Post by: CM cWo 44 on January 05, 2009, 04:07:26 PM
[quote Kyle Rose]Who the hell is giving us first-place votes?[/quote]

Someone who thinks record is the most important consideration.
Title: Re: Polls 1/5/09 (Cornell #6/8)
Post by: Trotsky on January 05, 2009, 04:29:41 PM
[quote CM cWo 44][quote Kyle Rose]Who the hell is giving us first-place votes?[/quote]

Someone who thinks record is the most important consideration.[/quote]PWR, probably.
Title: Re: Polls 1/5/09 (Cornell #6/8)
Post by: KeithK on January 05, 2009, 05:10:45 PM
[quote Trotsky][quote CM cWo 44][quote Kyle Rose]Who the hell is giving us first-place votes?[/quote]

Someone who thinks record is the most important consideration.[/quote]PWR, probably.[/quote]If you believe strongly in the ranking systems then it makes complete sense to vote for Cornell.  Or Princeton, for that matter - they've been right up at the top along with us.  The voters appear to be trusting more in their subjective assesments of who they think is best and are opting for ND (6th in both PWR and KRACH).  Not that that's necessarily a bad thing.  Polls are supposed to be subjective.  [Obligatory disclaimer:] Fortunately we get to decide things on the ice.
Title: Re: Polls 1/5/09 (Cornell #6/8)
Post by: Al DeFlorio on January 05, 2009, 05:27:14 PM
Still having a problem with being placed--subjectively--behind Princeton in the polls,  [Sorry, Beeej.;-)] especially given the Tigers' fine performance yesterday.  Do I care?  No.  [That's to avoid the usual ration of crap from the peanut gallery.::uhoh::]  But it just puzzles me.
Title: Re: Polls 1/5/09 (Cornell #6/8)
Post by: Beeeej on January 05, 2009, 05:35:01 PM
[quote Al DeFlorio]Still having a problem with being placed--subjectively--behind Princeton in the polls,  [Sorry, Beeej.;-)] especially given the Tigers' fine performance yesterday.  Do I care?  No.  [That's to avoid the usual ration of crap from the peanut gallery.::uhoh::]  But it just puzzles me.[/quote]

No problem, Awl.

Mathematically, it's possible that a majority of poll voters placed us ahead of Princeton, but a small minority of them placed us far enough behind Princeton to make up for it (despite even a first-place vote).  They're stupid, stupid people, Al, and clearly they should be shot.

(In addition to everything I said last time, polls almost always reflect trends, not just immediate records and PWR.  Princeton started off higher, and Cornell started off lower, so any convergence resulting from Cornell performing better than Princeton was going to be gradual as long as Princeton didn't completely tank.  If the voters had yanked Cornell up several spots and Princeton down several a month ago, then Cornell had lost even a single game on a weekend when Princeton swept, they'd look pretty goofy.  Movement is slow.  If Cornell "deserves" to be ahead of Princeton in the polls, eventually they'll get there.)

(Plus, the polls still don't actually matter.)  :-)
Title: Re: Polls 1/5/09 (Cornell #6/8)
Post by: Jim Hyla on January 05, 2009, 08:17:10 PM
[quote Beeeej](In addition to everything I said last time, polls almost always reflect trends, not just immediate records and PWR.  Princeton started off higher, and Cornell started off lower, so any convergence resulting from Cornell performing better than Princeton was going to be gradual as long as Princeton didn't completely tank.[/quote]

True, so true and exactly why I think there should not be any polls till at least the season is 1/3 completed, in every sport. Not that I ever expect it will happen,::bang:: but if we realize that you can't come out with an accurate computer ranking till about 1/2 way through, why do we think humans are that much smarter?::screwy:: or is it?::drunk::
Title: Re: Polls 1/5/09 (Cornell #6/8)
Post by: Beeeej on January 05, 2009, 08:28:39 PM
[quote Jim Hyla][quote Beeeej](In addition to everything I said last time, polls almost always reflect trends, not just immediate records and PWR.  Princeton started off higher, and Cornell started off lower, so any convergence resulting from Cornell performing better than Princeton was going to be gradual as long as Princeton didn't completely tank.[/quote]

True, so true and exactly why I think there should not be any polls till at least the season is 1/3 completed, in every sport. Not that I ever expect it will happen,::bang:: but if we realize that you can't come out with an accurate computer ranking till about 1/2 way through, why do we think humans are that much smarter?::screwy:: or is it?::drunk::[/quote]

We bother because while you're right to an extent, people will always disagree about when it's worth bothering and how accurate poll voters are, and so if you think it should start at the beginning of January, but I think mid-December, you'll think I'm as crazy as I think the guy is who wants to start in late November.  Since you'll never get a consensus on how long after the beginning to start, and since we do at least have some knowledge about returning players and incoming rookies, there's no good reason not to start at the beginning.

Plus, who said it was about humans being "smarter"?  I don't think the poll is ever intended to predict the season's outcome, I think it's intended to reflect exactly what it reflects - the opinions of the voters in any given week.

My problem is with the final poll of the season, which if I recall correctly comes after the first two rounds of the NCAAs.  That's definitely a "why bother?" situation.
Title: Re: Polls 1/5/09 (Cornell #6/8)
Post by: dragonfan on January 05, 2009, 08:41:51 PM
We did beat princeton but it was the first game of the season and it was a close game. We got out shot by like 20 or so,they are just waiting for the game at lynah that will decide alot.
Title: Re: Polls 1/5/09 (Cornell #6/8)
Post by: Beeeej on January 05, 2009, 08:51:06 PM
[quote dragonfan]We did beat princeton but it was the first game of the season and it was a close game. We got out shot by like 20 or so,they are just waiting for the game at lynah that will decide alot.[/quote]

I can assure you with nearly 100% certainty that absolutely none of the poll voters thought to themselves, "Well, Princeton and Cornell haven't played at Lynah yet, and the shutout on the road might have been a fluke because the Big Red got badly outshot, so I'm going to leave Princeton ahead of Cornell for now" before sending in their votes.  Except perhaps Guy Gadowsky, if he's got a vote.

Really, I would be surprised if any of the voters take more than three minutes filling out their ballots each week, after maybe four minutes scanning the previous week's results.  We spend way more time debating it here than I think any voter does, probably by degrees of magnitude.

Plus, remember, a lot of the voters are in the west, never see us play personally, and haven't the slightest idea of the relative strengths of two sissy-Ivy schools who wouldn't know a real college hockey program if it came up to them and offered them a full scholarship in Canadian dollars, but they do remember Princeton won the ECACs last year and haven't lost many games, so by golly, I'll give 'em a few points.
Title: Re: Polls 1/5/09 (Cornell #6/8)
Post by: Trotsky on January 05, 2009, 09:18:43 PM
Polls were invented by newspapers to generate interest, sell copies, and make money.  They've never been anything more than that.
Title: Re: Polls 1/5/09 (Cornell #6/8)
Post by: dbilmes on January 05, 2009, 09:22:39 PM
[quote Trotsky]Polls were invented by newspapers to generate interest, sell copies, and make money.  They've never been anything more than that.[/quote]
Based upon how newspapers are going belly up financially, it appears the polls aren't doing their job!
Title: Re: Polls 1/5/09 (Cornell #6/8)
Post by: Beeeej on January 05, 2009, 09:26:19 PM
[quote dbilmes][quote Trotsky]Polls were invented by newspapers to generate interest, sell copies, and make money.  They've never been anything more than that.[/quote]
Based upon how newspapers are going belly up financially, it appears the polls aren't doing their job![/quote]

You don't know that.  They could be keeping the newspapers from going belly up financially faster.  :-)
Title: Re: Polls 1/5/09 (Cornell #6/8)
Post by: Swampy on January 05, 2009, 09:26:59 PM
[quote dbilmes][quote Trotsky]Polls were invented by newspapers to generate interest, sell copies, and make money.  They've never been anything more than that.[/quote]
Based upon how newspapers are going belly up financially, it appears the polls aren't doing their job![/quote]

Because they've been usurped by web sites like USCHO and INCH.
Title: Re: Polls 1/5/09 (Cornell #6/8)
Post by: Jim Hyla on January 05, 2009, 10:38:00 PM
[quote Beeeej][quote Jim Hyla][quote Beeeej](In addition to everything I said last time, polls almost always reflect trends, not just immediate records and PWR.  Princeton started off higher, and Cornell started off lower, so any convergence resulting from Cornell performing better than Princeton was going to be gradual as long as Princeton didn't completely tank.[/quote]

True, so true and exactly why I think there should not be any polls till at least the season is 1/3 completed, in every sport. Not that I ever expect it will happen,::bang:: but if we realize that you can't come out with an accurate computer ranking till about 1/2 way through, why do we think humans are that much smarter?::screwy:: or is it?::drunk::[/quote]

We bother because while you're right to an extent, people will always disagree about when it's worth bothering and how accurate poll voters are, and so if you think it should start at the beginning of January, but I think mid-December, you'll think I'm as crazy as I think the guy is who wants to start in late November.  Since you'll never get a consensus on how long after the beginning to start, and since we do at least have some knowledge about returning players and incoming rookies, there's no good reason not to start at the beginning.

Plus, who said it was about humans being "smarter"?  I don't think the poll is ever intended to predict the season's outcome, I think it's intended to reflect exactly what it reflects - the opinions of the voters in any given week.

My problem is with the final poll of the season, which if I recall correctly comes after the first two rounds of the NCAAs.  That's definitely a "why bother?" situation.[/quote]

But the first bold of your quote is the exact good reason why I think polls shouldn't start at the beginning of the season. While in hockey they may not matter, they certainly do in football.
Title: Re: Polls 1/5/09 (Cornell #6/8)
Post by: ugarte on January 05, 2009, 11:03:46 PM
[quote Jim Hyla]But the first bold of your quote is the exact good reason why I think polls shouldn't start at the beginning of the season. While in hockey they may not matter, they certainly do in football.[/quote]
Your objection assumes that a lack of a formal poll implies a lack of opinions. You wouldn't have to ban polling, you'd have to ban all informal comparisons of teams to each other or any newspaper from making a top 20 list. If the polls weren't taken and all of the newspapers had a single columnist that ranked the teams, someone would aggregate the polls and that would become the defacto ranking until the official polls were released. The BCS tries to hide the rankings until midseason but it isn't hard to find an unofficial BCS ranking after the first week of competition.

Polls are collections of opinions. They are as good as the data that goes in, which is why the first week's polls usually look silly at the end of the year. But so what? The early polls are strictly for bullshitting at the bar - if you didn't have the polls, what would you argue with? And how would the networks advertise an early-season game between two 'highly ranked' teams if, well, nobody was ranked?

You are arguing against the tides, Jim.
Title: Re: Polls 1/5/09 (Cornell #6/8)
Post by: Jim Hyla on January 06, 2009, 12:41:52 AM
[quote ugarte][quote Jim Hyla]But the first bold of your quote is the exact good reason why I think polls shouldn't start at the beginning of the season. While in hockey they may not matter, they certainly do in football.[/quote]
Your objection assumes that a lack of a formal poll implies a lack of opinions.[/quote]

I don't know where you get from my thought that not doing polls till after the season has been in play implies a lack of opinions. Huh? I'm trying to argue that having meaningless polls even before the season starts makes it easier for the well known teams to stay at the top, and therefore harder for upcoming teams to crack through.

QuoteYou wouldn't have to ban polling, you'd have to ban all informal comparisons of teams to each other or any newspaper from making a top 20 list. If the polls weren't taken and all of the newspapers had a single columnist that ranked the teams, someone would aggregate the polls and that would become the defacto ranking until the official polls were released.

I don't care what informal polls someone wants to start whenever, just that "official polls" would be more acurate of the current situation if they waited until after the season was in force.

QuoteThe BCS tries to hide the rankings until midseason but it isn't hard to find an unofficial BCS ranking after the first week of competition.

But the reason, I believe, that the BCS is not released sooner is that the computer rankings would be meaningless. Afterall it's hard for computers to come up with rankings if there is no data, meaning no games played. That's precisely why I think the human polls are also meaningless early on, but worse yet harmful to up and coming teams.

QuotePolls are collections of opinions. They are as good as the data that goes in, which is why the first week's polls usually look silly at the end of the year. But so what?

I think this is a repeat of before and I already answered it.

QuoteThe early polls are strictly for bullshitting at the bar - if you didn't have the polls, what would you argue with?

You name it I can argue with it.

QuoteAnd how would the networks advertise an early-season game between two 'highly ranked' teams if, well, nobody was ranked?

Why should I care?

QuoteYou are arguing against the tides, Jim.

So what, that's never stopped me before. After all, isn't that your point, we have polls so we can argue?::twak::::thud::
Title: Re: Polls 1/5/09 (Cornell #6/8)
Post by: dragonfan on January 06, 2009, 12:45:12 AM
I was just trying to point out that the game at lynah will mean alot in the league and the national outlook considering we are so close in the polls #5/6-7/8 I am certain they realize that.
Title: Re: Polls 1/5/09 (Cornell #6/8)
Post by: ftyuv on January 06, 2009, 09:49:32 AM
[quote Jim Hyla]
QuoteThe early polls are strictly for bullshitting at the bar - if you didn't have the polls, what would you argue with?

You name it I can argue with it.[/quote]
No you can't (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teMlv3ripSM).
Title: Re: Polls 1/5/09 (Cornell #6/8)
Post by: Jim Hyla on January 06, 2009, 01:06:19 PM
[quote ftyuv][quote Jim Hyla]
QuoteThe early polls are strictly for bullshitting at the bar - if you didn't have the polls, what would you argue with?

You name it I can argue with it.[/quote]
No you can't (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teMlv3ripSM).[/quote]

Yes I can!
Title: Re: Polls 1/5/09 (Cornell #6/8)
Post by: Roy 82 on January 06, 2009, 05:00:44 PM
You're not arguing, you're mereley contradicting.:-}
Title: Re: Polls 1/5/09 (Cornell #6/8)
Post by: KeithK on January 06, 2009, 05:40:36 PM
[quote Roy 82]You're not arguing, you're mereley contradicting.:-}[/quote]
No you're not.
Title: Re: Polls 1/5/09 (Cornell #6/8)
Post by: Jeff Hopkins '82 on January 07, 2009, 12:23:07 PM
You snotty-faced heap of parrot droppings!  Your kind makes me puke!  You vacuous, toffee-nosed, malodorous pervert!
Title: Re: Polls 1/5/09 (Cornell #6/8)
Post by: Josh '99 on January 07, 2009, 02:49:01 PM
[quote Jeff Hopkins '82]You snotty-faced heap of parrot droppings!  Your kind makes me puke!  You vacuous, toffee-nosed, malodorous pervert![/quote]Look, I came here to have an argument...
Title: Re: Polls 1/5/09 (Cornell #6/8)
Post by: Trotsky on January 07, 2009, 06:15:22 PM
[quote Josh '99][quote Jeff Hopkins '82]You snotty-faced heap of parrot droppings!  Your kind makes me puke!  You vacuous, toffee-nosed, malodorous pervert![/quote]Look, I came here to have an argument...[/quote]Oh.  Sorry, this is Abuse.
Title: Scrivens piece on USCHO
Post by: Al DeFlorio on January 07, 2009, 06:45:31 PM
Gentle Ben gets some props for Cornell's success so far: http://www.uscho.com/news/college-hockey/id,16351/TheCloser.html

[Aside:  Got a fundraising call from Scrivens last night.  Nice kid.  Really wanted UMass's second goal back.]
Title: Re: Polls 1/5/09 (Cornell #6/8)
Post by: Swampy on January 07, 2009, 11:39:22 PM
In addition to all this, #4 at INCH (http://insidecollegehockey.com/5Polls/0809/polls_0715.htm) and #1 in PWR (http://www.uscho.com/rankings/pwr.php)

[quote Chris '03]Cornell up to 8 with 1 first place vote in the USCHO:

1   Notre Dame   (47)   16-3-2   994   1
2   Boston University( 2)   13-4-1   940   3
3   Minnesota      10-3-5   886   4
4   Northeastern      12-4-2   782   6
5   Denver              13-6-2   720   5
6   Miami              12-5-3   697   2
7   Princeton      13-3-0   690   8
8   Cornell   ( 1)           9-1-3   673   10
9   Boston College      9-5-2   660   7
10   Colorado College   11-6-5   534   9
10   Michigan      13-7-0   534   12
12   Vermont              11-4-2   513   13
13   New Hampshire      9-6-3   298   15
14   Air Force      15-4-1   288   11
15   Dartmouth      9-5-0   198   20
16   Ohio State      13-6-1   197   NR
17   Wisconsin      10-9-3   153   14
18   Nebraska-Omaha      12-6-3   130   16
19   Alaska              10-6-4   123   18
20   Minnesota-Duluth   9-5-6   118   NR
Others Receiving Votes: Quinnipiac 111, North Dakota 88, Minnesota State 86, Yale 33, Maine 30, Massachusetts 8, St. Cloud State 7, Michigan State 6, Niagara 3


#6 with 1 first place in USA Today:
1   Notre Dame           504   (32)   1   16-3-2
2   Boston University   472   (1)   3   13-4-1
3   University of Minnesota   435      4   10-3-5
4   Northeastern University   360      6   12-4-2
5   Princeton University   332      8   13-3-0
6   Cornell University   316   (1)   9   9-1-3
7   University of Denver   309      5   13-6-2
8   Miami (Ohio) University   277      2   12-5-3
9   Boston College           261      7   9-5-2
10   University of Vermont   218      13   11-4-2
11   University of Michigan   200      11   13-7-0
12   Colorado College   164      10   11-6-5
13   UNH                   74      14   9-6-3
14   U.S. Air Force Academy   50      12   15-4-1
15   Ohio State University   38      NR   13-6-1
Others receiving votes: Quinnipiac University 18, Dartmouth College 14, University of Maine 8, University of Nebraska Omaha 8, University of Wisconsin 8, Yale University 6, University of North Dakota 4, University of Alaska 2, Michigan State University 2.
[/quote]
Title: Re: Scrivens piece on USCHO
Post by: DeltaOne81 on January 08, 2009, 11:56:06 AM
[quote Al DeFlorio]
[Aside:  Got a fundraising call from Scrivens last night.  Nice kid.  Really wanted UMass's second goal back.][/quote]

Me too! :) (the fundraising call part, not the wanting the second goal back part)
Title: Re: Scrivens piece on USCHO
Post by: ugarte on January 08, 2009, 12:39:55 PM
[quote DeltaOne81][quote Al DeFlorio]
[Aside:  Got a fundraising call from Scrivens last night.  Nice kid.  Really wanted UMass's second goal back.][/quote]

Me too! :) (the fundraising call part, not the wanting the second goal back part)[/quote]
He admitted to you that he let it slip by on purpose?
Title: Re: Scrivens piece on USCHO
Post by: French Rage on January 08, 2009, 12:42:09 PM
[quote ugarte][quote DeltaOne81][quote Al DeFlorio]
[Aside:  Got a fundraising call from Scrivens last night.  Nice kid.  Really wanted UMass's second goal back.][/quote]

Me too! :) (the fundraising call part, not the wanting the second goal back part)[/quote]
He admitted to you that he let it slip by on purpose?[/quote]

Well sure, otherwise he'd get bored out there.  Gotta keep it interesting!