Play Fantasy The Most Award Winning Fantasy game with real time scoring, top expert analysis, custom settings, and more. Play Now
Blog Entry

The Poll Attacks

Posted on: November 15, 2010 3:41 pm
Edited on: November 16, 2010 12:27 pm
 
Remember how two voters got Poll Attacked for putting Kansas State No. 1 in the preseason?

Well, they've changed their votes this week and put Duke No. 1.

That means their ballots now look more sensible.

But they're gonna get Poll Attacked again, still.

Let's go!

(Details of AP ballots courtesy of PollSpeak.com. )

Associated Press poll: The only thing sillier than ranking Kansas State No. 1 in the preseason is dropping KSU after a 75-61 win over James Madison, but that's precisely what Dave Jones and Kevin Dunleavy did this week, presumably because they were worried about being featured in consecutive Poll Attacks. Well now look. Trying to avoid the Poll Attacks has landed them right back in the Poll Attacks, because neither understand how to properly rank and predict. So allow me to offer a lesson, and that lesson is this: Always stick with it until you can't anymore!

When I do something stupid -- like leave Northern Iowa unranked all last season, for example -- I stand strong until there's no way to stand anymore. It took a little dude hitting a wacky shot against top-ranked Kansas for me to admit my mistake about UNI, and rest assured I was never going to admit it otherwise. I might be stubborn, but I don't go out like a little B. So if I would've been off enough to rank Kansas State No. 1 in the preseason, there's no way I would've changed before Kansas State lost and made me change. That's where Dave and Kevin went wrong with this ballot. They gave up too soon. Now they look crazy twice.

Coaches poll: Villanova ahead of Kansas. Kansas ahead of Villanova. Honest to God, it doesn't matter to me because we're way too early in the season to be seriously debating whether a team that lost Scottie Reynolds is better than a team that lost Sherron Collins, Xavier Henry and Cole Aldrich. Me? I have Villanova ranked No. 8 and Kansas ranked No. 11, but if you wanted to put Kansas at No. 8 and Villanova at No. 11, I'm cool with it.

In other words, they appear to be the same class of team.

We could find out differently later.

But for now, they seem to be in the same class. And they both won their openers with ease. Which is why I can't understand why Kansas was ahead of Villanova in the first coaches poll but is now behind Villanova in the second coaches poll. KU was sixth and Villanova was seventh. Now Villanova is sixth and KU is seventh. Why the flipflop? Is it because Josh Selby isn't available (because the reality is that he was never going to be available in the first week anyway)? And does anybody really think Selby is merely the difference between the Jayhawks being sixth and seventh in the country? More likely, he's the difference between them being top five or top 15 (just like Enes Kanter is the difference between Kentucky being top five or top 15).

Those are all rhetorical questions, by the way.

Here's the truth: The reason for the flipflop is because many coaches have no idea what their first ballot looked like. They just sat down Sunday and scribbled names with little regard to what they scribbled on their first ballot, causing inexplicable changes to rankings that give me something to Poll Attack even when a ranked team has yet to lose.
Comments

Since: Apr 3, 2007
Posted on: November 16, 2010 9:04 pm
 

The Poll Attacks

yeah, sorry for the name calling, but I just felt it was warranted given that Parrish had the nerve to personally call out these two writers and call them "Little B's".  I figured if he can dish out the name calling, he should have to take it.  That was a classless move.



Since: Nov 16, 2010
Posted on: November 16, 2010 7:06 pm
 

The Poll Attacks

I'm a Duke fan, but I don't think the #1 KSU rankings are that crazy. The two guys should have waited a week before they chickened out. Duke will play Kansas State in 7 days in Kansas City (more of a home game for KSU than nuetral for Duke), Duke will be favored but not by much. I would say they have a fair chance at the upset and is there any doubt they would then be the consensous #1 team in the AP and Coaches Polls? Who would look like a dumbass then? Maybe these two guys were just looking ahead. Duke is young and I expect them to take a few lumps early.



Since: Aug 25, 2006
Posted on: November 16, 2010 6:49 pm
 

The Poll Attacks

Maybe the two voters watched the Duke and Kansas State games and decided Duke looked like the better team.



Since: Oct 30, 2008
Posted on: November 16, 2010 3:35 pm
 

The Poll Attacks

The two reporters that flip flopped are idiots.  As the article mentioned, stick to your guns until you are proven otherwise.  They might look like idiots then for voting that way, and now for changing their vote, but if they would have stuck to their guns, and Duke loses first, they would look like the best predictors.  It isn't that far fetched to think Duke will lose before Kansas State.  Duke sure as hell is not going undefeated this year.  They are in to good of a conference, and personally, I do feel like they are over ranked. 

Look at last year.  Was UNC not in the top ten at the beginning of the year.  That means that all these reporters had them viewed highly.  Look where they ended up, barely in the NIT.  Granted they almost won the tournament, but they probably would not have been given the invitation if their name was not University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.



Since: Feb 4, 2008
Posted on: November 16, 2010 11:36 am
 

The Poll Attacks

The article is already long term by internet standards...I think its been going for 2 years plus.  This was a weak one, but later in the season he catches pollsters that obviously are just not watching or reacting to games at all.  I'll defend GP a bit here, but his ranking of Purdue is inexcusable.



Since: May 20, 2010
Posted on: November 16, 2010 11:33 am
 

The Poll Attacks

Couldn't agree more. Look, articles are great when they stimulate discussion about teams. But when they attack/flame individuals who are at least at competent as the article's writer, it becomes rather silly and almost juvenile. Especially in this case, where the pollsters are vilified for doing what they are supposed to do: pick'em preseason, watch the games, and draw opinionated conclusions. Why have polls at all if you're going to crucify people for doing their jobs correctly? Sounds like this article's concept may end up being a dud long-term. OHIO_LAWYER's comment is excellent rebuttal, sans the name-calling.



Since: Feb 4, 2008
Posted on: November 16, 2010 10:54 am
 

The Poll Attacks

I keep looking back at my post and wondering where I said Purdue would beat a team composed of Durant, Rose, and Wall.  If you think UK or KU brought in talent like that, you're crazy.  Also you're a little misinformed because the final four last year was dominated by Sophmores, Juniors, and Seniors.

I'm not sure why I'm even arguing that point though, because my main point was that people aren't docking UK or KU much for losing what were supposed to be key players (one of those dominating freshman according to you), but they are docking Purdue big time for losing a key player and ignoring what's still intact.



Since: Sep 3, 2007
Posted on: November 16, 2010 10:13 am
 

The Poll Attacks

Alright Master, your comments seem to be a little misinformed or at the least misguided.  Purdue losing Hummell is much more detrimental to the Boilermakers than KU losing a guard because they out recruit you guys on a yearly basis.  This isnt football where a team that returns 22 is obviously ahead of a team that returns 10, but instead a sport where the best player in the country is consistently a one and done freshman.  Think about that for a minute, and let it settle.  If you brought KDurant, Rose, and Wall in on the same team as Freshman you would have more power and more edge than anyone in the league.  Purdue would need more than 3 Hummels to contend with that squad without a doubt.

This is why it doesnt matter that Purdue RETURNS more scoring than the big dogs of the NCAA basketball scene.  In a sport where 18 year olds dominate upper classmen quite regularly, returning scoring numbers become much more insignificant.  That is why your post is full of logical holes from the outset.  Ill take Durant, Rose, Wall, and Xavier Henry over any senior that Purdue has recruited.  I really dont care how many points that they averaged last year, because there are unproven guys who will do more with less experience. 

Keep an eye on Tristan Thompson, Corey Joseph, and Jordan Hamilton this year.........



Since: Apr 3, 2007
Posted on: November 16, 2010 10:10 am
 

The Poll Attacks

I'm honestly going to have to stop reading this trash.  Parrish is an idiot.  Ripping people for ranking a consensus top 3 team #1 on your preseason ballot is a joke.  No one had played, yet parrish thinks he is allknowing.  If you're good enough to be in the top 3 on almost everyone's ballot, you're good enough to be considered the best in some people's minds. 

That was point #1 as to why Parrish is an idiot.  Point #2 relates to this week's Poll Attack.  Now, he compounds his ignorance and flames these same two people who originally ranked KSU #1 in their preseason poll for dropping them after watching them play.  HMM, Gary, you may be a stubborn fool, but thankfully, other people who have a vote actually watch the games and make their decisions based on the play on the court.  Your logic of sticking to an incorrect pick just because you had it that way before is ludicrous and is why idiots like you shouldn't have a vote.  The polls should be fluid and based on what the voters sees during the games.  By sticking to a preseason ranking that was based on not having seen a single game, even after watching a game and changing your mind, you would be rendering the polls and the regular season useless.  A voter voting based on observation is ALWAYS better than one based on preseason guesses.

So while you may disagree that Duke looked that much better than KSU in their first games, these voters obviously felt differently (and I tend to agree with them because James Madison should have been handled by more than 14).  And since your opinion means crap (as shown by your terrible logic that I have already described), maybe you should let those with brains make their polls as they see fit.  You can stick with your preseason poll all year and look like an idiot again this year by holding out on voting for deserving teams simply because they weren't in your preseason poll.



Since: Oct 19, 2009
Posted on: November 16, 2010 9:58 am
 

The Poll Attacks

I agree Duke is the team to beat this year. However, you shouldn't have mentioned the Princeton game and the Plumlees together. Laughing They combined for 7 points and 6 rebounds. That is not awesome.


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com