R. David Smith writes:
>One does have to worry a bit about the national rankings because without them,
>you don't get invited to the big dance at the end of March.
 
But I think many people put more weight on the polls than they truly are meant
to represent.  The polls have absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the seedings
or on which teams get bids.  They are only the collective opinions of writers
and coaches.
 
The only poll that can be construed as having any relationship to the teams
that go is the NC** poll, and that has not even been released yet!  On top
of that, the final set of statistics/records/etc. is what the committee goes
by when it makes its choices in March.  Not the writers or coaches' polls,
or even the committee's own poll.  Throw it all out the window.  So why get
worked up over it now?
 
>As for Clarkson's dropping a spot in the polls after losing to UNH, I am from
>the camp that says you should never be penalized for winning.  Anybody can beat
>anybody if enough flukes happen; so, if you can win, you've proven yourself
>until you lose.
 
Are you sure?  What if a team goes undefeated but plays competition of a much
lower caliber than another team which might have lost a couple of games to
good teams?  No doubt, I think strength of schedule should be a factor.  You
should not look at it as a penalty for winning.  Rather, it is a case of the
*other* team earning a bonus for defeating better competition.  And this is
precisely how the selection committee ranks teams for the tournament.
 
I should mention that I did agree with the other points you made, but
to send a message saying just that would have been boring, wouldn't it? :-)
 
 
- mike