Re: FCS Poll 10/5 -- <h1>IVY LEAGUE SPORTS BOARD</h1>

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, [7], 8, 9, 10 ]

Subject: Re: FCS Poll 10/5

Author:
John Harvard (Disappointing Poll)

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 13:31:39 10/06/25 Mon
In reply to: ET 's message, "FCS Poll 10/5" on 12:41:42 10/06/25 Mon

I've been expecting that the polls would penalize our league for its late start. This, to me, is clearly evident in the new poll. Harvard reigned in the horses so as to only beat Brown 41-7. There was no scoring in the final 25 minutes as Harvard ran the ball conservatively and eventually pulled Jaden Craig. Harvard outgained Brown 479 yards to 157.

Otherwise, Brown has been strong, blowing out a weak Georgetown squad 46-0 and then upsetting former #8 URI 28 to 21. It is likely significant that URI turned the ball over 4 times while Brown did not at all. URI gained 452 yards vs Brown's 341.

So, how is Harvard #22, Brown #31, and URI #18. Clearly, the voting coaches aren't buying Harvard's SOS. But, at the same time they must be ignoring Brown's comparative performances against Harvard and URI.

Also, how does Lafayette get votes while Princeton, which beat Lafayette 38-28 in Easton, get none.

The Crimson will just have to continue winning while teams ranked above them lose. If Harvard stumbles, it will have to start the climb all over again.

Also, expect a bias against Ivy teams intended to prevent a 2 bid Ivy.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> [> Subject: Princeton didn't get votes for the same reasons that Dartmouth didn't get votes
Author: Go Green [ Edit \| View ]	Date Posted: 13:42:44 10/06/25 Mon Each has a (perceived) bad loss. But both P and D have an opportunity to look good this coming Saturday.

[> [> [> Subject: Re: Princeton didn't get votes for the same reasons that Dartmouth didn't get votes
Author: Bengal [ Edit \| View ]	Date Posted: 14:02:04 10/06/25 Mon FWIW, Mercer is ranked 19 in the coaches poll. Y had no votes. Brown did have some votes. This will be a very tough game for P. We have to keep improving. We have one sack in 3 games.

[> [> Subject: Re: FCS Poll 10/5
Author: Penn Nation [ Edit \| View ]	Date Posted: 17:43:01 10/06/25 Mon Playing Stetson is going to hurt any rankings, as they are clearly a Division 2 or a Division 3 team at best.

[> [> [> Subject: Re: FCS Poll 10/5

Author:
John Harvard (Historical Bias)
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 12:43:55 10/07/25 Tue

There has been a historical FCS Poll bias which apparently lingers. Previously, the FCS, coaches and fans certanly didn't want an Ivy squad ranked in the top 16, as that would imply that a non-top 16 squad made the postseason. It was obvious as the season wore on that the Ivy leading team would linger just outside the cutoff. It was easy because of our late start to the season to start outside the rankings and begrudginly move us up close, but often not within, the slot needed to qualify. Apparently, that has become systemic. After Cornell and Merrimack, it will be possible that Harvard is 5-0, averaging over 50PPG and allowing around 10PPG, sitting its starters for almost half of those snaps, and still outside the top 16.

Scheduling Holy Cross and even Merrimack shouldn't be questioned. HC is a perennial FCS tournament participant. Stetson is a weak choice, but, given that it's the leagues opening week vs teams playing their 4th game, opening week is certainly the time to schedule down.

[> [> [> [> Subject: Re: FCS Poll 10/5
Author: Ed S. [ Edit \| View ]	Date Posted: 14:22:22 10/07/25 Tue Not scheduling down that far :)

[> [> Subject: Re: FCS Poll 10/5

Author:
ET
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 11:31:17 10/07/25 Tue

That's one way to frame it. I would put it this way: It is likely significant that Brown forced 4 turnovers while limiting mistakes on offense. Speaking to a Herald reporter after the game, DB Elias Archie said the team "talked about all week how (the Rams) weren’t very good with the ball. That’s something we practiced a lot during the week — trying to get the ball out — and it ended up paying off and helping us out." Perhaps we can give the Bears a little agency in making those fumbles and interceptions happen.

But I agree, Harvard should be ranked above URI given these results. There is definitely a bias against our league, and rankings are often slow to punish teams ranked so high going into the season. See: Notre Dame sticking around in the top 25 at 0-2 a few weeks ago.