NUMP Mens Top 20--Feb 25 2009

[ager...@yahoo.com]

Please find below the National Ultimate Media Panels Mens Top 20 for
the weeks beginning Feb 25, 2009.

3 columns this week, rank, team name and points earned. First place
votes are in parentheses.
5 different teams earned first place consideration from the Panel
members.

This is Florida's second straight time atop the polls, following
Wisconsin's 2 straight #1 rankings.
Carleton was #3 in each of the first three polls, but leapfrogged
Colorado this week to claim #2.

rank team pts
1 Florida(11) 406
2 Carleton(6) 394
3 Colorado(2) 382
4 Georgia(1) 337
5 Wisconsin(1) 310
6 Oregon 297
7 Michigan 245
8 Pittsburgh 238
9 Cal Berkeley 234
10 Notre Dame 143
11 Iowa 139
12 North Carolina 126
13 Washington 120
14 Ohio State 109
15 Virginia 108
16 Arizona 103
17 Texas 97
18 Harvard 86
19 UC Santa Barbara 83
20 Stanford 61

Other teams earning votes this week included....
Western Washington 57, British Columbia 54, Cornell 44, North Texas 41
and Minnesota 29

Comments welcome.

[Jason Weddle]

--Pitt and Virginia should be higher.

--North Texas should be in the top 20 without a doubt. 41 TOTAL
points for the WEEK? That's it???

--Mike, are you sure you tabulated that correctly?

[ager...@yahoo.com]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

---am i tabulating correctly?
+/- a few points????????

i'm trying to tabulate perfectly........

normally i subract votes from some of the teams that i don't like.
(that is a fucking lie. just so we're straight....i begrudgingly
count all votes, even for the teams i don't like)

[cougaru...@yahoo.com]

I cannot believe there are teams in the top 20 who have only been to
one tournament.

I cannot believe there are teams in the top 20 with the records that
they have.

I cannot believe there are teams in the top 20 who have beat
absolutely nobody of worth

I cannot believe there are teams in the top 20 because they have a
name in College Ultimate

I cannot believe there are teams in the top 20 just because they went
to TiV

What I can believe is that the idiots who voted and decided on these
top 20 teams are just that; idiots. You are obviously terrible at
Ultimate on-the-field and clearly just as bad off-the-field. We are
all worse off for having ever looked at who you think are the Top 20
teams in the Nation.

Thank you once again for neglecting North Texas.

- Doc

[H]

The voters for the RRI are also idiots. They voted them to 34th!

[Torre]

While these poll results are interesting to see, it's nice to know
they don't mean shit when it comes to the Sectionals/Regionals/etc.

[joe]

i recommend spending less time posting on rsd, and more time preparing
to beat teams on sunday of morning.

i would also recommend submitting a bid next year to be a voting
member of the NUMP. the more people voting around the country, the
less likely a team gets overlooked.

that said, it isnt even march yet, if you are worried about where your
team is ranked in the NUMP, well thats just silly. luther is ranked
even lower than north texas, im sure their rant about why the rankings
blow is about to be posted...

[Jason Weddle]

> What I can believe is that the idiots who voted and decided on these
> top 20 teams are just that; idiots. You are obviously terrible at
> Ultimate on-the-field and clearly just as bad off-the-field. We are
> all worse off for having ever looked at who you think are the Top 20
> teams in the Nation.
>
> Thank you once again for neglecting North Texas.
>
> - Doc

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

-- If North Texas was in the top 20 you would think that NUMP was the
shit! At practice, you'd be all like "Hey did you guys see that we're
in the top 20 on NUMP this week. We're great and so is the NUMP
Panel."

N Texas should be in the top 20 though.

[rove...@yahoo.com]

On Feb 25, 11:40 am, Torre <themadhatta...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> While these poll results are interesting to see, it's nice to know
> they don't mean shit when it comes to the Sectionals/Regionals/etc.

Nothing means shit when it comes to sectionals...everyone gets in.

Which means it's pointless(like your statement), outside of practice
reasons, to count anything, or base anything on rankings...which no
one does, but it would be cool if NUMP did have a bit more
organization to it...kinda like the sport itself.

NUMP needs to designate a handful of tournaments in each region that
are counted towards NUMP voting....based on results and the actual
play of the teams in these tournaments only.
This way when a team goes to an easy tournament, the record won't
count towards rankings.

Maybe eventually when the sport gets big enough, rankings will begin
to matter who gets into sectionals, or atleast who gets into the
bigger NUMP sanctioned tournaments.

[Pippin]

So far I have only voted on the women's side this year as I have not
been exposed to the mens game yet this spring.

But I thought I would give my opinion about how hard the voting can
tend to be, or at least give you a look at what I consider when I was
doing my personal rankings.

First off, I tend to Ignore RRI as much as possible. Espcially early
in the season RRI is a horrible indicator or how strong a team can
be. Example: last year my friends who are still at hofstra on the
mens team played one day of a tournament and sunday was rained out.
But on saturday they played some pretty weak teams and won most game
with scores of 13-1 or something like that. This made their RRI
skyrocket and they were ranked 19th in the country for a week or two.
We all got a kick out of it but we knew it was horribly skewed.

So I really try to ignore RRI until I start to consider other things
like:

Strenght of tournaments attended. For example I thought winning
Presidents Day out in California (at least for the women's side I
looked at) was much harder than winning queens city tune up (so UCSB's
tournament victory looks much more impressive than Michigan's, not to
take away from Michigan, who also looks to have a great team this
year, but UCSB seems to have played stronger teams throught the entire
weekend to earn their Victory). I looked at the overall strenght of
all teams present and determined that to be true.

I look at head to head results. Who beat who.

Sunday counts for a little bit more in my book. Losing one on
saturday is ok if you crush on sunday and win it all.

I also spent a good amount of time looking at scores from teams who
have played common opponents but not each other. In all sports this
is a tricky field to navigate. Some teams just match up better
against certain other teams. So I attempt to gain as much knowledge
as possible from this without placing to much stock in this.

I look at each teams record and then try to examine quality wins.
wins against other "Top" teams.

I also look at overall record, first at face vaule, then I investigate
and see if they have blowout losses, or really close games. If Team X
is 6-4 and has close losses to teams ranked higher than them or a win
over a team ahead of them I consider that to be better than Team Y who
is 8-2 but has a loss to a much "weaker" team, or has few or no wins
against teams ranked above them, if they get blown out by teams above
them, i consider them weaker. (not the best example but i think you
get the point, close losses to good teams is more impressive than
blowing out bad teams and not being able to get any wins against a
quality opponent.)

I also try to read any recaps posted on RSD. Not a good indicator of
anything, but if a few sources confirm the weather was horrible, 30Mph
of wind and some rain, I will place less stock in game played under
those conditions. Sure one team was better in the conditions than the
other, but I feel sometimes the weather can make a huge difference on
who comes out on top. Sometimes the victor in a hurricane would get
beat handily by the same team under more "normal" conditions.

So Personally I spend a lot of time on making my rankings. I hope
everyone does. I think it is fun, and I hope other people enjoy
seeing the rankings each week. I know I enjoy seeing what everyone
else thinks, and I would have really loved it if I had seen something
like this 2 years ago when I was still in school.

Hope this helped give an insight in to how hard it can be to make the
rankings.

-Pippin

[Bacon]

> N Texas should be in the top 20 though.

Didn't UNT lose to an unranked (no votes from the panel?) UC San Diego
team last week?

[S]

No, North Texas got rocked by Luther at Mardi Gras in the prequarters
(16 over a 1 seed). As did a few other good teams. Luther played
exceptionally well.

[BrookDaves]

I CAN believe that Doc speaks with no idea of recourse.

I CAN believe that I will always have reasons to hate Doc.

Brooks
UNT

[cougaru...@yahoo.com]

Make no mistakes, I don't think that UNT should be in the top 20. That
would just put our heads even further up our own asses, and thats the
reason we lost to Luther first game on Sunday at Mardi Gras.

However, it is obvious that there was very little effort put into the
NUMP. I'm more likely to believe that the top 20 was randomly drawn
from a Hat, than a true representation of what they have done so far
this year. Once again the UPA and/or the people connected with it have
failed; epically.

- Doc

[cougaru...@yahoo.com]

>
> I CAN believe that Doc speaks with no idea of recourse.
>
> I CAN believe that I will always have reasons to hate Doc.
>
> Brooks

> UNT- Hide quoted text -

Brooks, nobody cares how much you hate you me. If they say they do,
they're just saying it so you don't feel left out.

[Jack]

Doctor, I hate you plenty. Does that count for anything?

[H]

I guess Luther had nothing to do with it?

h

On Feb 25, 1:32 pm, cougarultim...@yahoo.com wrote:
Make no mistakes, I don't think that UNT should be in the top 20.
That
would just put our heads even further up our own asses, and thats the
reason we lost to Luther first game on Sunday at Mardi Gras.

- Doc

[Austin]

At least they're trying...what are you doing to help?

[ager...@yahoo.com]

> I cannot believe there are teams in the top 20 who have only been to
> one tournament.

--why?
i don't think the number of tournaments makes one team better or worse
than another.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

> I cannot believe there are teams in the top 20 with the records that
> they have.

---i agree....Wisconsin was like....3-6 at one point in the season and
are still ranked this week.
they are probably terrible.....since they beat up on most of those
other terrible teams down at Mardi Gras
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

> I cannot believe there are teams in the top 20 who have beat
> absolutely nobody of worth

---why?
good teams can't beat bad teams?
the NUMP ain't no algarithm............
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

> I cannot believe there are teams in the top 20 because they have a
> name in College Ultimate

---some names in college ultimate earned those names because they are
good......
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

> I cannot believe there are teams in the top 20 just because they went
> to TiV

---"JUST" because they went to a tournament?
there probably aren't teams in the Top 20 JUST because they went to a
tournament....
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

> What I can believe is that the idiots who voted and decided on these
> top 20 teams are just that; idiots. You are obviously terrible at
> Ultimate on-the-field and clearly just as bad off-the-field. We are
> all worse off for having ever looked at who you think are the Top 20
> teams in the Nation.

---when we meet, we might fight.
so....be ready.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

> Thank you once again for neglecting North Texas.

---used to be a team i added points for.....now...probably not.

[ager...@yahoo.com]

base anything on rankings...which no
> one does,

---folks have reported that they use the NUMP to seed teams at
tournaments.
just what's been reported.

[ager...@yahoo.com]

it would be cool if NUMP did have a bit more

> organization to it....

----huh?
the NUMPanel is perfectly organized.
i see below your suggestions....but that doesn't make the NUMP more or
less organized.
if the NUMP followed your suggestions...it would simply be organized
in a totally different way.
you're ignorant to what we're doing, if you think it's not organized.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[ager...@yahoo.com]

> NUMP needs to designate a handful of tournaments in each region that
> are counted towards NUMP voting....based on results and the actual
> play of the teams in these tournaments only.
> This way when a team goes to an easy tournament, the record won't
> count towards rankings.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

----why in the fuck would the NUMP designate a handful of tournaments
in each region that would count towards voting?
that....that's stupid.
it's the NATIONAL Ultimate Media Panel....not the Regional Ultimate
Tournament Rankings.

with your dumbassed idea.....only the teams that go to those
tournaments could be ranked....and how would you 'level' those few
tournaments into one rankings?
who cares if a team goes to an easy tournament?

the NUMP Members this year and each year in the past have been pretty
fucking qualified to judge teams based on who they've played, how much
they've played and where they've played.

stop insulting the effort and intelligence of the Panelists while
making these dumb suggestions.

you're a fool

[ager...@yahoo.com]

> Maybe eventually when the sport gets big enough, rankings will begin
> to matter who gets into sectionals, or atleast who gets into the
> bigger NUMP sanctioned tournaments.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

---the NUMP isn't going to be sanctioning tournaments.
the Ultimate Observers Association might one day.....but not the NUMP.

the NUMP considers them all....all teams...all tournaments...

[ager...@yahoo.com]

> However, it is obvious that there was very little effort put into the
> NUMP.

---there might be very little effort on my part kicking your ass.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I'm more likely to believe that the top 20 was randomly drawn
> from a Hat, than a true representation of what they have done so far
> this year. Once again the UPA and/or the people connected with it have
> failed; epically.

---UPA??????
what are you writing about???
you are...just a moron, i guess.

[John....@gmail.com]

> Make no mistakes, I don't think that UNT should be in the top 20. That
> would just put our heads even further up our own asses, and thats the
> reason we lost to Luther first game on Sunday at Mardi Gras.

With such a big head that must hurt. I think Luther used their
advantage of practicing indoors all winter...

> However, it is obvious that there was very little effort put into the

> NUMP.I'm more likely to believe that the top 20 was randomly drawn

> from a Hat, than a true representation of what they have done so far
> this year.

Actually, it seems like Gerics puts a lot more effort than you do
before someone lets you loose on the keyboard. It's hard to argue
people's opinions. Also, the top 5 seem to be established strong
programs, hard to contend. I happen think the other 15 are also good
teams as well. Why not make your own poll, or even better just post
your own ranking system so we know exactly how the 'random' team
placing compares with your own. Plus we get to see another beloved
angry rant from the South Region's own Napoleon.

[rove...@yahoo.com]

I get it now...NUMP is a recreational ranker....boring,
if there is not a standard to rank teams upon, it is meaningless
won't pay attention to NUMP anymore....

[ager...@yahoo.com]

> I get it now...NUMP is a recreational ranker....boring,
> if there is not a standard to rank teams upon, it is meaningless

> won't pay attention to NUMP anymore....- Hide quoted text -
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

---what?
what standard do you suggest?
wins, losses, head to head????
you're meaningless....but...please give some examples of a standard by
which 50 panel members should base their votes.
damn...you're a dipshit.

[ager...@yahoo.com]

> > However, it is obvious that there was very little effort put into the
> > NUMP.I'm more likely to believe that the top 20 was randomly drawn
> > from a Hat, than a true representation of what they have done so far
> > this year.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

---it's possible...that you just don't know what your writing about.

[rove...@yahoo.com]

aren't you a ref for high school or something?
do high schools have teams ranked in 1A, 2AA, 3AAA, 4AAAA etc.?
do colleges have teams ranked in D1, D2, D3, NAIA, etc.?
why is this difference present at these two levels.....because the
standard of play is different, based on many factors, and until
ultimate organizes itself a bit better, 50 random people voting cause
they play the sport is not accurate.

dumbfuck

[johnmil...@gmail.com]

I personally think the bigger problem is all the teams that decide to
go X or Y to avoid things counting against their RRI / NUMP rankings.
You can be 0-50 and walk into sectionals and romp everyone, then do
the same at regionals. Man up and take your lumps with a smaller
squad sometimes and everyone stop being so concerned with their
rankings. None of it matters until May anyway and if you've gone to
some tourneys and beat who you should of you'll get the respect you
deserve.

Now as far as the fun of RRI or NUMP goes I'm all for it - if nothing
else it give teams some incentive to beat a 'ranked' opponent during
the year and feel better about themselves.

[joe]

i understand this is a college poll, and perhaps a lot of freshmen
dont understand the real world. but in actual varsity athletics,
colleges are often, and sometimes only, ranked by polls.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/rankings

the NUMP is probably the most legitimate aspect of college ultimate.
the organization and time that goes into this is quite substantial, so
instead of knocking the poll, take a second and thank mike for doing
the entire sport of ultimate a pretty big favor.

[Peterson]

> aren't you a ref for high school or something?
> do high schools have teams ranked in 1A, 2AA, 3AAA, 4AAAA etc.?
> do colleges have teams ranked in D1, D2, D3, NAIA, etc.?
> why is this difference present at these two levels.....because the
> standard of play is different, based on many factors, and until
> ultimate organizes itself a bit better, 50 random people voting cause
> they play the sport is not accurate.
>
> dumbfuck

Rover,

Looks like you got some learnin' to do. Your points or questions
(which I assume you are trying to meander around some kind of point)
make no sense. My understanding is that It is an opinion based poll
with a panel of members that are very experienced and qualified to
have a decent opinion about college ultimate teams. Seems like many
"real" college sports operate this way. Ironically if you shared your
opinion on the top 25 teams we could call it the RUMP. I'm sure if
you were "qualified" to become a panel member you could have a vote
too on the NUMP. But I'm sure you've forfeited that chance now by
showing your ignorance. Plus it is doubtful that you would have had a
1/4 of the qualifications of any one of the panel members.

Peterson
^^ not a NUMP panel member or college ultimate participant

[Pippin]

>
> aren't you a ref for high school or something?
> do high schools have teams ranked in 1A, 2AA, 3AAA, 4AAAA etc.?
> do colleges have teams ranked in D1, D2, D3, NAIA, etc.?
> why is this difference present at these two levels.....because the
> standard of play is different, based on many factors, and until
> ultimate organizes itself a bit better, 50 random people voting cause
> they play the sport is not accurate.

Just because there are no divisions to college ultimate does not make
the rankings any less acurate. I vote (and I can only assume the
other panel members do the same) by picking the best 20 teams and
ranking them accordingly. I dont eliminate a good team from getting
votes becuase they are from a small school or a large school. Top 20
is top 20. What is not accurate about that? If a small community
college started a team and went out and beat 10 of the current top 20
team I would most likely rank them top 20 somewhere. That shouldnt
make anything inaccurate.

I also agree with johnmiles in that a problem is college teams going X
or Y. It is one thing to go X and Y when you have too many people and
Split... and for developing new players I understand why A and B is
not always the best choice, especially early in the season mix the
team up to give a good balance of talent to each team will help newer
player develop. I just don't like when a team goes to a tournament as
Team X just because 2 or 3 of their better players can't make it out
that weekend or something.

And not to sing my own praises or anything but I wrote a pretty
detailed post (earlier in this thread) about how much thought I put
into my rankings and in my opinion I think I did/do a pretty decent
job in trying to accurately gauge where each team falls in the top 20,
or in determining who just misses the cut. Maybe you skipped over my
post and just started responding to newer ones if so give it a read
through. If you think I am inaccurate, well, I really wouldn't know
what to say to that. I put a good amount of thought into it. And
while I am sure there is room to debate my personal rankings I think
most people would be relatively satisfied with my overall choices.

And like I said I think it is fun and some other people seem to enjoy
it, even if they think their team should be higher, they still seem to
comment on the rankings.

Most other college sports have some differing opinions on where teams
should rank, why should ultimate be any different. If there was a
prefect system it wouldn't be fun, and it would be done by robots.

You aren't a robot are you?

-Pippin

[cougaru...@yahoo.com]

On Feb 25, 2:46 pm, H <ahalv...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I guess Luther had nothing to do with it?
>
> h

By no means. Luther played out of their ass on Sunday at Mardi Gras.
They had very few turnovers, some sick grabs in the endzone, and
prolly completed about 90% of their huck scores against us (6-7 of
their points; maybe more).

Luther is a good team.

[AMW]

It's pretty clear that the folks who are ragging on the NUMP were not
around before its existence, when plenty of people were arguing about
the uselessness of the old (pre-RRI) UPA rankings and wishing that
someone who knew something about college ultimate would put together a
ranking system that would take things like strength of schedule into
account, as well as all of the other considerations that Pippin's
post laid out nicely. You guys don't know how good you have it now.
Also, it's hardly made up of "random people." If it were random, they
might have picked this rover dude to be on the panel, even though he
clearly doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground.

-AM
(not a panelist)

[left...@hotmail.com]

On Feb 25, 3:08 pm, AMW <birdbra...@gmail.com> wrote:

AMW speaks truth, listen to her!!

Besides, Rover... if I'm not mistaken, UNT is the 2nd highest-ranked
team from the South Region so if NUMP voters are correct UNT is going
to UPA Championships. Why would you argue with that?

[cougaru...@yahoo.com]

Mike,

dont get so angry. I'm not angry and you can tell because I haven't
had to use any curse words or threaten to fight someone. There has
obviously been some miscommunication on my part though.

Did I say at any point that the entire NUMP rankings was a waste? Did
I say that the way teams are ranked should be changed? Did I say that
whoever created the NUMP ranking system should be thrown off a cliff?

No, I did not.

I'm just confused and frustrated by the inconsistency in what makes a
top 20 team and what does not. Apparently Im not the only one either
but you are going to have people who disagree when you base the NUMP
rankings on a few people's opinion. Now, granted, their opinions for
ranking the teams is based on statistics and analysis, but in the end
they're just opinions. Thats why I made the loose affliation with
pulling their names from a hat.

Sorry for calling you an idiot; I didn mean it. I just think the way
we justify the top 20 is "idiotic". However, if you still want to
fight, let me know. If you think we could settle it on the field, let
me know and I'll bring the cleats.

[joe]

the idea that none of it matters until May is not exactly true at all.
two years ago when i was playing college ultimate, i went with 9 (4 of
which b-team) guys total to a mistake of a tournament called arctic
vogue. this tournament is in the snow. it sucks. i am never going
back. point is, at the tournament we lost to a team. then when
regionals came around, even though we had beat better teams, and were
coming from a stronger section, we were seeded behind this other team
at regionals, solely because of a head-to-head loss in february, in
the snow of cincinnati.

you know what they told us when we informed the regional coordinator
(s) of the situation and state of the tournament, "you should have
gone as an x-team then".

if your roster is not well represented by the team you have going to a
tournament, there should be no shame in going as an x-team. when you
are going to be playing on sunday of regionals, your initial seed at
regionals is pretty important. all those lumps you take with a small
squad end up playing a critical role on the outcome of your season.
ill take the seed at regionals i deserve over feeling like a man
during february anyday.

[tyler kinley]

You:

> Did I say at any point that the entire NUMP rankings was a waste?

You:

"We are all worse off for having ever looked at who you think are the
Top 20 teams in the Nation."

You:
> No, I did not.

Us:
?

You:
"I'm just confused... Sorry for calling you an idiot; I didn[sic] mean
it. However, if you still want to fight, let me know."

Us:
ULTIVILLAGE

[johnmil...@gmail.com]

> you know what they told us when we informed the regional coordinator
> (s) of the situation and state of the tournament, "you should have
> gone as an x-team then".
>

The fact that your regional coordinator said this proves that he was
an idiot and looking for an easy way out.

> if your roster is not well represented by the team you have going to a
> tournament, there should be no shame in going as an x-team. when you
> are going to be playing on sunday of regionals, your initial seed at
> regionals is pretty important. all those lumps you take with a small
> squad end up playing a critical role on the outcome of your season.
> ill take the seed at regionals i deserve over feeling like a man
> during february anyday.

You gotta win or go home. It happens to teams all the time at
regionals who are 'misseeded.' How often do the seeding fall out as
they are laid out? I know in the south for both college and open it
hasn't happened since I've been playing. Maybe I'm just old school on
this, but you gotta beat the good teams to go to nationals and
represent your region. If you are looking for the easy route to
nationals then you are only hurting your region by sucking at
nationals.

Luther was not in the A bracket of Mardi Gras and they made semis...
Seeding didn't seem to hurt them in beating 2 good teams along the
way.
Wisconsin losing to Tennessee didn't stop them from beating everyone
after that.

[foot...@gmail.com]

Just as most agree that the human college football polls are better
than the computer rankings, so too is NUMP better than the UPA
(computer) rankings.

It would be nice if all the voters could go to all the tournaments and
watch all the games...but that aint gonna happen. Just take the
rankings for what they are...people trying to have fun and be involved
in college ultimate.

Its not perfect but its the best we got.

(former NUMP panelist)

[nichol...@gmail.com]

Just to elaborate....

Doc (and others) - I don't know why you're shitting on MikeG and the
NUMP panel. They're not getting paid to do this. They don't have the
luxury of flying to every single tournament and getting to see every
team. However, Mike is trying to make college ultimate more exciting
and volunteered several years ago to put this thing together. He's
every professional and organized about it (except for the one year
when he went AWOL from the Internets and sadly NUMP fell in the hands
of Cyle).

Every year about this time college players piss and moan about how off
the NUMP and UPA rankings are. That's because it's still early in the
season. Yeah, it's fun to track your team's progress up&down the
Top25, but there's no reason to get angry about it. It'll work itself
out by the end of the season. It always does.

Kohn
(ex-NUMP panelist)

[joe]

without question you have to beat the best to be at nationals. but
that doesnt mean you throw common sense aside and go to tournaments
with a shell of a team and pretend you are a full squad. thats not
fair to your team or any of the teams that you play. if the option
exists (and it does) then i think teams should be smart with that
decision. i would think the upa will make a stance on x-teams next
year when the regular season "officially" counts, and it could be a
good idea to not allow them. it could result in teams being more
selective of what tournaments they attend and ultimately allow for
better competition at those tournaments.

[johnmil...@gmail.com]

> without question you have to beat the best to be at nationals. but
> that doesnt mean you throw common sense aside and go to tournaments
> with a shell of a team and pretend you are a full squad. thats not
> fair to your team or any of the teams that you play. if the option
> exists (and it does) then i think teams should be smart with that
> decision. i would think the upa will make a stance on x-teams next
> year when the regular season "officially" counts, and it could be a
> good idea to not allow them. it could result in teams being more
> selective of what tournaments they attend and ultimately allow for
> better competition at those tournaments.

This wasn't an issue 5-10 years ago when teams didn't travel cross
country regularly for tournaments. There seemed to be more local
tournaments with regional / sectional teams. Part of this disappeared
when the regions got redrawn, and to tell the truth I probably didn't
help much with the likes of Mardi Gras getting bigger and bigger.
Regardless, I don't care for the X and Y stuff unless you are
splitting teams very early in the season (the fall primarily). I
think seeding teams based on 1 win 4 months prior to regionals is
silly anyway and something more needs to be done to fix the seeding
problems among out of section teams.

And as far as NUMP, I love the idea - it gets people talking about who
they think is the best and come regionals time it makes seeding a bit
easier along with RRI and the few matchups that might have happened
between teams. NUMP is better than the UPA in this regard that they
are ranking on a perceived strength. Doesn't mean someone won't break
their seed or there aren't mistakes. Tradition goes a long ways.
That's why Wisconsin was still in the NUMP top 10 with their record
after Vegas. Had an unestablished program done that they wouldn't be
anywhere near the the top 25. Perceived strength and possibly even
potential.

[christoph...@gmail.com]

>
> > Thank you once again for neglecting North Texas.
>
> ---used to be a team i added points for.....now...probably not.

Whoa whoa, let's not let one person ruin any favors you are doign for
UNT mike. Keep adding those points. We know you still have a man
crush on Glen, and despite your feelings for Doc and his intresting
critique of your system, I am sure many UNT players and alum are very
grateful for what you have done for college ultimate.

I still remember when I had to scan collegeulti.com to see if UNT made
the power rankings or whatever they were called. what happened to
that site anyway?

anyawy, strong work. UNT ultiamte rocks. need i remind you that our
ultiamte players have gone on to such lucrative careers as male
modeling???

-church

[dmattr...@gmail.com]

SCREW YOU CHURCH!!!!! Oh and Doc GO GET A JOB!!! Good luck UNT

[ager...@yahoo.com]

> > what standard do you suggest?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~>

> aren't you a ref for high school or something?
> do high schools have teams ranked in 1A, 2AA, 3AAA, 4AAAA etc.?
> do colleges have teams ranked in D1, D2, D3, NAIA, etc.?
> why is this difference present at these two levels.....because the
> standard of play is different, based on many factors, and until
> ultimate organizes itself a bit better, 50 random people voting cause
> they play the sport is not accurate.
>
> dumbfuck

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

---the way you signed your post is perfect.

[ager...@yahoo.com]

> aren't you a ref for high school or something?

---a ref.
~~~~~~~~~~~

> do high schools have teams ranked in 1A, 2AA, 3AAA, 4AAAA etc.?

--yes.
~~~~~~~~~

> do colleges have teams ranked in D1, D2, D3, NAIA, etc.?

---yes.
~~~~~~~~~

> why is this difference present at these two levels.....

---two levels? you listed 8 levels(1a, 2a, 3a, 4a, d1, d2, d3 and
naia.)
what is the difference in the levels?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

because the
> standard of play is different,

---there are rankings at those different levels because the standard
of play is different?
last year, Hoggard HS won the 4-single A state championship in
football.
New Bern won the 4-double A state championship in football, the
'bigger' "level"....
but Hoggard TROUNCED New Bern during the regular season.
So, the level of expectation was one thing....but the overall rank was
opposite.
is that what you're trying to prove, or disprove?

and....do you know how the state rankings are made?
what about the AP's College Basketball rankings?
i think they take a big ole vote from reporters that cover the
action...or that follow the action....
that's what the NUMP does.
crazy.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

based on many factors, and until
> ultimate organizes itself a bit better, 50 random people voting cause
> they play the sport is not accurate.

---ultimate has to organize itself better before 50 people can cast
their ballots to decide an accurate Top 20?
i don't know what accurate is....but i imagine that as the season
progresses...the rankings will get more and more accurate.
wouldn't you bet that?
did you know that college basketball rankings are done very much the
same as the NUMP?
reporters vote....someone counts up the votes....and then they
announce the rankings?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> dumbfuck

---i think that's a great way for you to sign your post

[ager...@yahoo.com]

On Feb 25, 5:16 pm, johnmilesmal...@gmail.com wrote:

> I personally think the bigger problem is all the teams that decide to
> go X or Y to avoid things counting against their RRI / NUMP rankings.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

---X/Y and phoney B should be DONE AWAY WITH by the upa score reporter
it's bullshit.

[ager...@yahoo.com]

> I personally think the bigger problem is all the teams that decide to
> go X or Y to avoid things counting against their RRI / NUMP rankings.
> You can be 0-50 and walk into sectionals and romp everyone, then do
> the same at regionals.  Man up and take your lumps with a smaller
> squad sometimes

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

---94 ECU Irates finished with the highest power ranking of all time
of any team....
we lost our only two games of the year at some new jersey tournament
that only about 1/2 the team went to....
i wonder if we could go back and retroactively X ourselves and finish
the year undefeated with an even HIGHER power rankings....

[ager...@yahoo.com]

> the NUMP is probably the most legitimate aspect of college ultimate.
> the organization and time that goes into this is quite substantial, so
> instead of knocking the poll, take a second and thank mike for doing

> the entire sport of ultimate a pretty big favor.- Hide quoted text -
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

---whoa!
that's nice.
thank you JOE!

[ager...@yahoo.com]

However, if you still want to
> fight, let me know. If you think we could settle it on the field, let
> me know and I'll bring the cleats.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

--i'll wear cleats and fight you on a field...i don't give a
fuck......
you're a fucking moron.

[cougaru...@yahoo.com]

Now I see where Glenn gets that attitude from.

For future reference, if anyone has any form of dessension towards
something Mike has done, be warned he will hate you for life.

Its not a good idea to question him or share your opinions if you
happen to disagree with him.

[werbs]

> For future reference, if anyone has any form of dessension towards
> something Mike has done, be warned he will hate you for life.
>
> Its not a good idea to question him or share your opinions if you
> happen to disagree with him.

welcome to RSD...

[3jane]

No, you could not.

[ager...@yahoo.com]

I just think the way
> we justify the top 20 is "idiotic".

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`

--well.......you can think in one hand and shit in the other, and see
which fills up faster.

[ager...@yahoo.com]

> For future reference, if anyone has any form of dessension towards
> something Mike has done, be warned he will hate you for life.

---you must think you're more memorable than you are.

[ager...@yahoo.com]

> Its not a good idea to question him or share your opinions if you
> happen to disagree with him.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

--i ain't seen no opinions....just some dumbasses bad mouthing the
time, effort and intelligence of a killer group of people working hard
to provide a Top 20 ranking in the Mens and Womens Divisions of
College Ultimate.

[ager...@yahoo.com]

> > ---94 ECU Irates finished with the highest power ranking of all time
> > of any team....
> > we lost our only two games of the year at some new jersey tournament
> > that only about 1/2 the team went to....
> > i wonder if we could go back and retroactively X ourselves and finish
> > the year undefeated with an even HIGHER power rankings....
>
> No, you could not

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

damn.

[eckoun...@aol.com]

good work NUMP pannel (not being sarcastic). Just one question; what
happend to Davidson!!!???? maybe you can help me out with some
insight as to why you rank North Carolina but you don't rank Davidson.
Also why are you so generous in your ranking of Texas? Did they not
play well at vegas for some reason?

[ager...@yahoo.com]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

---Davidson earned some votes........

[BrookDaves]

He does.

Mike G, thanks for doing the NUMP. I enjoy it as does many other
players across the nation. Also thanks for teaching Glenn how to
play, he's my favorite person to play with.

Brooks
UNT

[pkap...@gmail.com]

Gerics- thank you for creating, running, and making us all have a
great discussion piece...
that said-
come on folks- Cornell falls out and Virginia stays in after losing to
Cornell last weekend?
Also- Wisconsin belongs in the top10... whine about reputation, but
until your school has won back to back championships you got nothing.
If they dont make nationals we know that they get too much credit, but
come on- they are suddenly not perfect or nearly perfect and we think
they are not a contender?

[scpo...@hotmail.com]

On Feb 26, 11:54 am, cougarultim...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Feb 25, 9:56 pm, ageric...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> > However, if you still want to> fight, let me know. If you think we could settle it on the field, let
> > > me know and I'll bring the cleats.
>
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> > --i'll wear cleats and fight you on a field...i don't give a
> > fuck......
> > you're a fucking moron.
>
> Now I see where Glenn gets that attitude fr
>

> For future reference, if anyone has any form of dessension towards
> something Mike has done, be warned he will hate you for life.
>
> Its not a good idea to question him or share your opinions if you
> happen to disagree with him.

you called him an idiot and ripped on the NUMP panel, which Mike makes
happen on his own time and without getting paid for it. Then you put
your tail between your legs and come back and try to say sorry but
while the same time, still making little snide remarks discrediting
what Mike is doing with the NUMP panel. to top it off, you then make
it seem like you are man enough to accept the challenge from Mike on/
off the field. I would sure would hate to have you as a teammate or
even a friend. you are pretty good at talking shit and then trying to
make up for it by begging for forgiveness. ah, good stuff. lady
cougars are sure fun to crush!

[chrisda...@gmail.com]

On Feb 25, 1:39 pm, rover...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Feb 25, 11:40 am, Torre <themadhatta...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > While these poll results are interesting to see, it's nice to know
> > they don't mean shit when it comes to the Sectionals/Regionals/etc.

On Feb 25, 1:39 pm, rover...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Nothing means shit when it comes to sectionals...everyone gets in.
>
> Which means it's pointless(like your statement)

twenty bucks says torre's team won't qualify for sectionals this year.

[Torre]

> twenty bucks says torre's team won't qualify for sectionals this year.

if by not qualify you mean not have enough players(only 6) willing to
make the 8+ hour drive on Easter weekend- you are correct.

[catalyst]

hey thanks brooks! you too brother. (and i mean that the way black
people use it, which has more meaning i think)

Doc, you truly are retarded. how do you expect someone to not fly off
that handle with the way you
word things? then you say "don't take it so personal." spend more
time constructing your criticism
then put them together in a well organized train of thoughts. and if
you are going to be a dick, be a dick
for life, don't flip-flop! (you know, like how i am a dick all the
time)

take the time to get better on the field and lead UNT to the promise
land, then we don't have to worry about any
rankings cause we know where we are. that's how i play, i suggest you
join me in the battle.

glenn
Warrior 6
UNT 53

p.s. - i am refereeing that fight between Gerics and Doc...can't wait
to see Doc finally get his ass handed to him.

[ager...@yahoo.com]

> Doc, you truly are retarded.  how do you expect someone to not fly off
> that handle with the way you
> word things?  then you say "don't take it so personal."  spend more
> time constructing your criticism
> then put them together in a well organized train of thoughts.  and if
> you are going to be a dick, be a dick
> for life, don't flip-flop!  (you know, like how i am a dick all the
> time)
>
> take the time to get better on the field and lead UNT to the promise
> land, then we don't have to worry about any
> rankings cause we know where we are.  that's how i play, i suggest you
> join me in the battle.
>
> glenn
> Warrior 6
> UNT 53
>
> p.s. - i am refereeing that fight between Gerics and Doc...can't wait
> to see Doc finally get his ass handed to him.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

--now you see where IIIIIIIIIIIIII learned to be such a dick!
great post Glenn.
and....doc HASN'T had his ass handed to him BEFORE?????
hard to believe.

[sunday_morning31]

No love for Luther after their performance at Mardi Gras
SHAME!!!

[Garrett]

> come on folks- Cornell falls out and Virginia stays in after losing to
> Cornell last weekend?

Uh...these rankings are from a month ago.

Try this thread:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.sport.disc/browse_thread/thread/50337332f1dc729f/aba6033628577973?lnk=gst&q=nump#aba6033628577973