LaxTV Forums | A Forum About The MCLA

Before the season starts and conversations are biased by team loyalties, I am wondering how the forum members and pollsters determine wins vs ranked teams.

Specifically, I am wondering if credit for a win over a ranked team is frozen by when they play, or do they shift over the season with various polls. To help understand my question consider these two hypotheticals:

Hypothetical #1: Team A is ranked #16 and beats a #9 ranked Team B. Team B thus falls outside of the top 15 in the next poll and never re-enters the top 15. Does Team A get credit for beating a top 10 team or have they yet to beat a top 15 ranked team?

Hypothetical #2: Team C is missing their starting All-American goalie for the first 4 games of the year. During that time Team D beats Team C. Both teams ranked between #20-25 in the subsequent poll. Team C regains it's goalie and goes on to beat several Top 10 teams, landing them in the Top 10 by the last poll of the season. Does Team D get credit for beating a Top 10 Team? or a Top 20 team?

I pose this question because it appeared that wins vs ranked teams was a major criteria for many of the forum members for a team to be in the national tournament, but there was no agreement on how to interpret wins vs ranked teams. During last seasons posts it was evident that some members would count their wins vs ranked opponents for various reason, but discredit other teams wins for some reason or another. I'm wondering what people's thoughts are, and if any pollsters will address how they handle these types of situations? (Just want to add that I know pollsters take into account alot more than just wins vs ranked opponents into their final seedings, and they do a great job evaluating and comparing teams from across the nation)

My 2 cents on this is that a wins over ranked opponents should be frozen by the last poll. You never know how an upset can send a good team spiralling, or how a change in strategy or personnel can inspire a team. Either way, a team should not be penalized or be given credit based on what another team does after they play. Since this is my biased on this topic, my hypotheticals may not be completely fair, so if there are any others people want to suggest, that would be great.

A team's wins & losses should always be put in context of the most current information. For example, a win against a #12 team early in the season might mean a lot more early than if the #12 team keeps dropping in the polls. If that #12 team 5 weeks later is unranked because they have a record 1-5, obviously that win means a lot less in the current context. There are a lot of factors involved in judging the quality of a team's wins & losses and relative place in the polls. I doubt that there is any way to quantify it exactly.

Wins over ranked/unranked teams probably are best viewed vs. the polls near the end of the season. Supposedly the polls change every week to reflect a team's entire body of work, and should most accurately show their relative strength/weakness near the end of the season.

In hypothetical #1, the team has yet to beat a top 15 team.

In hypothetical #2, the team gets credit for beating a top 10 team. Every team will have injuries, etc. and the only thing you can go on is wins and losses.

That said, it seems like the pollsters will reward an underdog team for keeping games close against teams that are heavily favored...

The points made so far reminded me, that I need to amend my 2 cents just a bit.

The rankings I would utilize would not include pre-season polls and the first official poll would be release only after a each league had played a certain number of games. This way schools from non-warm weather areas would have an equal chance of evaluation.

(I believe the new changes to poll number and release dates are a positive step)

Anyone know how this question is handled in other college sports?

I would say it's impossible to pick one over the other- there is just too much to take into account. I have faith in the people that really follow the goings-on in the league and those who become poll voters- it's why there is a screening process.

There are more to rankings behind how good a team is- upward momentum, coaching changes, injured players and so on. There is no reason to take a snapshot image of what a team was ranked "back when," neither is it necessarily accurate to use current rankings.

I do seem to notice a trend of people vehemently backing one over the other when it benefits a particular team- sometimes my eyes get tired from rolling so much. I trust in the ability of the pollsters to "read" the game situations and know the momentum and realistic quality of the teams playing, and I think they take into account a mix of the two extremes in their own personal blend.

Zamboni_Driver wrote:Anyone know how this question is handled in other college sports?

I know when media outlets (i.e. ESPN, Fox, etc.) say X-Team is 3-1 against ranked opponents, they are usually talking about when the teams played so the poll the week the game was played.

Even though I personally think the poll at the end of the year means more, that is just how they say it.