CSNbbs

We would also encourage voting members, or other conference board members to post on your boards the results for "The G5 Top 25 National Football Poll”. Each week during the season the new Poll/order will be 1st revealed on the G5 blog every Thursday. I will only post on the CUSA board. All members are welcome to copy and paste the poll or the link from the G5 Fan Forum blog to any media outlet, fan boards or other fan forums.

Week 2 G5 Top 25 2014 Football Poll * RESULTS* Thur. (Sept 11) ..... http://wp.me/p4IYx7-nn


We shall never forget

Great poll, OT, but it looks like we still have a little bit of homerism going on based on some obviously out-of-line first place votes. I like what you are doing. Keep up the good work.

Yeah, I'd recommend stripping whoever ranked BGSU #1 of their vote.

(09-11-2014 09:36 AM)keebler645 Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah, I'd recommend stripping whoever ranked BGSU #1 of their vote.

And while you are at it, put the two who ranked WKU and Arkansas State on very short leashes. I think we have a good thing going, but only if the voters can stay objective.

(09-11-2014 09:13 AM)ODU AGGIE Wrote: [ -> ]Great poll, OT, but it looks like we still have a little bit of homerism going on based on some obviously out-of-line first place votes. I like what you are doing. Keep up the good work.

Thanks AGGIE, I count every poll that is submitted by registered members. There seems to be a few voters each week that are skewed a little to the left or right. We, however are fortunate to have a large diverse group from across the country, from the Pacific to the Atlantic that levels out the overall playing field. I do think 95% of the voting appears to support impartial and fair evaluations of the g5 teams and results. Overall I think the poll reflects the changing flux of all the G5 teams for the first two weeks.

IMO, I think the poll shows more the parity at the G5 level for schools in the ranking range between 6-20. There clearly is separation at the very top from a few schools. Even though it is early in the season and we have had almost exclusively OOC games, when conference play starts the parity in the middle will start to show a more clear separation of the group in the middle rankings.

(09-11-2014 09:36 AM)keebler645 Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah, I'd recommend stripping whoever ranked BGSU #1 of their vote.

I also have an issue with a vote that clearly cannot be supported with any logical justification for that vote. The other teams on those poll(s) fit into the range of a bell curve of other voters. However as it was mentioned in another post, I will watch the future voting pattern of those polls and will put them on "very short leash". I feel strongly that, even though we all may have a bias opinion of the teams we vote into the Top 25, there is no reason to have any single team in your vote that cannot be supported for how "you vote".

In CSNbbs formatting:

1. Brigham Young (20)
2. Marshall (11)
3. Central Florida (1)
4. Northern Illinois (3)
5. East Carolina (2)
6. Cincinnati (1)
7. UTSA
8. Boise State (1)
9. Navy
10. Western Kentucky (1)
11. Nevada
12. San Diego State
13. Colorado State
14. Middle Tennessee
15. UAB
16. Louisiana Tech
17. North Texas
18. Arkansas State (1)
19. ULM
20. Ball State
21. Louisiana
22. Temple
23. Houston
24. Rice
25. Bowling Green (1)

Others Receiving 100+ votes: UTEP, Toledo, Central Michigan, Old Dominion, Utah State, Memphis, Fresno State, and Ohio

For now, the list is still evolving. For example, Cincinnati is ranked 6th, but they haven't played a down of football this year. It is entirely possible they are excellent and underrated. Equally, they may be awful and overrated. There may be sleeper teams that haven't hit their stride, and there may be great teams that had an off game. As the season continues, it will be much more difficult for homer voters to justify obviously biased votes. Eventually, it will work itself out without intervention.

(09-11-2014 11:10 AM)WEARE Wrote: [ -> ]For now, the list is still evolving. For example, Cincinnati is ranked 6th, but they haven't played a down of football this year. It is entirely possible they are excellent and underrated. Equally, they may be awful and overrated. There may be sleeper teams that haven't hit their stride, and there may be great teams that had an off game. As the season continues, it will be much more difficult for homer voters to justify obviously biased votes. Eventually, it will work itself out without intervention.

WTF, Cinci had 2 bye weeks to start the season?!?! Who's the scheduling mastermind responsible for that? I'd be pissed if I were a fan.

(09-11-2014 11:29 AM)mturn017 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-11-2014 11:10 AM)WEARE Wrote: [ -> ]For now, the list is still evolving. For example, Cincinnati is ranked 6th, but they haven't played a down of football this year. It is entirely possible they are excellent and underrated. Equally, they may be awful and overrated. There may be sleeper teams that haven't hit their stride, and there may be great teams that had an off game. As the season continues, it will be much more difficult for homer voters to justify obviously biased votes. Eventually, it will work itself out without intervention.

WTF, Cinci had 2 bye weeks to start the season?!?! Who's the scheduling mastermind responsible for that? I'd be pissed if I were a fan.

Good question. They have one off week, between their games at Tulane and versus East Carolina, and they finish the year at home against Houston on December 6th.

Sucks for cincy to waltz into their first game against a team that has played a couple. Toledo may give them a good ole fashioned ass whoopin

Short of it is that the Bearcats were scheduled to play FCS Stony Brook two weeks ago to start the season but the AD then dropped the game to add Miami FL game.

Long version: http://sports.yahoo.com/news/why-cincinn...56941.html

I hope Toledo whips their ass. As for Marshall, to be brutally honest, not sure we are deserving of our ranking. We haven't hit stride yet. We damn well better in a hurry. This three game stretch will tell us all we need to know. jmo.

(09-12-2014 07:46 AM)SVHerd Wrote: [ -> ]As for Marshall, to be brutally honest, not sure we are deserving of our ranking. We haven't hit stride yet.

Marshall is ranked high for the same reason Cincy is ranked high, benefit of the doubt. Which is the same reason why Oklahoma and Baylor are ranked so high right now in the real polls, despite not playing anybody to their level.

(09-12-2014 07:19 AM)CincyDave Wrote: [ -> ]Short of it is that the Bearcats were scheduled to play FCS Stony Brook two weeks ago to start the season but the AD then dropped the game to add Miami FL game.

Long version: http://sports.yahoo.com/news/why-cincinn...56941.html

And then aac officials wouldn't move a conference game into a first or second week slot.

(09-11-2014 11:16 PM)goherd24herdfans Wrote: [ -> ]Sucks for cincy to waltz into their first game against a team that has played a couple. Toledo may give them a good ole fashioned ass whoopin

Yup right on

I think Cincy will be the playoff buster this year.

UC had three weeks to gameplan for Toledo and the benefit of two weeks of game film on them. Toledo went in to the game with no film on UC and their new QB. Huge advantage for UC. With all that, it's 21-7 Toledo since the horrible start.

(09-12-2014 08:12 PM)banker Wrote: [ -> ]UC had three weeks to gameplan for Toledo and the benefit of two weeks of game film on them. Toledo went in to the game with no film on UC and their new QB. Huge advantage for UC. With all that, it's 21-7 Toledo since the horrible start.

Cincinatti has a potent offense, but the defense leaves much to be desired. It looked like a blow out the first half, but Toledo made a comeback in the second half. Last time I checked, it was a 7 point game.

58 to 34 final. UC looks really good. Their qb threw 6 touchdowns in his first college start.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk