I find myself putting much more stock in this rating system than in
the innumerable polls which seem far too influenced by "gut feelings" and
hopes for the future rather than the simple facts of how teams have
done (although I believe both methods serve a function...).  I have a
couple of questions, however (please pardon if this has been hashed about
in the list before and I missed it.):
 
1) Is there a concept of the "relative worth" of a team other than just the
   ranking? AND
2) If so, does this mean that a highly ranked team A playing a lowly ranked
   team B and having beaten them twice earlier in the year, could then
    throw the third meeting and RISE in the rankings as a result due to
   the greater value thus attributed to team B?
 
The reason I ask this is that it used to be the property of a similar "points"
system used for high school basketball in Maine that this could occur.
 
-Doug
MAINE:
Always a bridesmaid, never a bride.
St. Paul or Bust, baby.
 
PS - Did anyone get a chance to view the solid drubbing of the Black Bears
of Maine by the Fluffy Dogs of BU?  It was an ugly sight indeed, 7-4.
See mike's forthcoming summary for details (film at eleven) ;-)