Polls 1/5/09 (Cornell #6/8)

[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!

[Beeeej]

[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.  :-)

[Swampy]

[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.

[Jim Hyla]

[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.

[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. 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.

[Jim Hyla]

[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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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

The 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.

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

Why should I care?

You 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::

[dragonfan]

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.

[ftyuv]

[quote Jim Hyla]

The 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.

[Jim Hyla]

[quote ftyuv][quote Jim Hyla]

The 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.[/quote]

Yes I can!

[Roy 82]

You're not arguing, you're mereley contradicting.:-}

[KeithK]

[quote Roy 82]You're not arguing, you're mereley contradicting.:-}[/quote]
No you're not.

[Jeff Hopkins '82]

You snotty-faced heap of parrot droppings!  Your kind makes me puke!  You vacuous, toffee-nosed, malodorous pervert!

[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...

[Trotsky]

[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.

[Al DeFlorio]

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.]