Pet peeve at the AP Voters

[DefenseBB]

Look I know the AP Poll is just for current discussion of the sport to keep the public interested but I do get frustrated with some of the illogic some of the voters utilize each week. I just think some voters do not take this role seriously or make any real effort to compare and contrast teams. To me, they fall into 3 categories:
1. AP are capricious, rewarding wins way too much without acknowledging that the wins achieved may have been over "lesser competition" or over teams that were vastly overrated and penalize certain teams' way too much..
2. AP voters prefer ALL P4 teams as worthy of votes despite questionable resume's vs. better mid-major teams. Sure, an occasional voter will list a mid-major near the very bottom of their ballot but by an large, they prefer a bottom level P4 team. Should that mid-major suffer a loss to a P4, they are immediately banished to the nether world.
3. They want to reward "participation trophy's" to teams that in clearly do not belong in the top 25.

Let me qualify with examples:
#1 Duke was ranked #7 preseason on their strong NCAAT results, thinking that they didn't lose many players and added a top 5 ranked player. They ignored the complete lack of offense Kara regularly puts on the floor. They lost to Baylor, ranked #16 preseason, so based on that, they thought "well Baylor MUST be much better so let's bump them up to #7 while simultaneously penalizing Duke down to #15. To me, yes, Duke was atrocious in that game and deserved #15 but Baylor NEVER should have been bumped up 9 spots. So based off that one win, Baylor was given far too much credit so when Baylor lost to Iowa, "well, Iowa MUST be really good so they jumped 8 spots from 19 to 11. Baylor fell back to 15.
Basically, way too much volatility so early and especially when linking one win for a team to make an assumption about another. Iowa State is undefeated with the #46 Massey OOC ranked schedule but their "bump" in the AP poll came in week 3 after such compelling wins over Marquette and Indiana. They got a furth bump with their win over Iowa at home. I get that Audi Crooks is an "interesting story" but come one. THEY ARE NOT THE 10TH BEST TEAM IN THE COUNTRY. Richmond was initially listed at #24 but after losses to Texas they were pushed to the "Also receiving votes" losses to TCU and then the loss to Fairfield banished them out of the TOP 25. Fairfield is a good mid-major so these 3 losses are not bad at all. NC State lost to TCU and then to Rhode Island (and to Oklahoma and SoCal) yet they are still receiving votes. Capricious I say, CAPRICIOUS!
#2. P4 less deserving teams. Why oh why were teams like Kansas State, Minnesota, Arizona State, Georgia, Alabama and even BYU getting votes? LOOK AT THEIR SCHEDULES! Seriously, these teams gaudy records at the time of their receiving votes were "straw man" arguments. There are currently 6-P4 teams receiving votes with Massey OOC >50. While some may be deserving of votes (LSU and TCU) others are NOT. See the above teams. Shouldn't a team actually play and beat someone of note?
#3. "Oh, this mid-major is worthy of my #24 or #25 slot as they are doing all they can". Does anyone really believe Fairfield, South Dakota, South Dakota State, Richmond, Columbia and now Princeton are really the 24th or 25th best team in the country? It is a nice story but they do need to WIN the P4 games they play and that has NOT happened. I laud them for playing a MUCH better schedule than the likes of LSU/Alabama/Georgia/ASU/TCU but come on. Worse yet are the voters who put South Dakota on their ballot. They have a 149th rating, with an OOC of 282. The voters were impressed with their win over Kansas State in week 3 to get them votes....I like Jeff Mittie but come on, this KSU team will finish 8-12th in mediocre Big12. Revoke that writers voting access!

I am not saying the Voters ballots should resemble the various rating entities BUT there should be apparent logic to each ballot.

There have been 45 teams that have received votes thus far this year. The current egregious ballots that have Alabama, ASU, Georgia and BYU are absurd. Though to be fair, if BYU were to beat TCU tomorrow, that will say a lot about both teams-come on BYU (I am willing to eat crow for this win). Past trespasses have been Columbia, Fairfield, Kansas State, Kansas, Minnesota, SD, SDSU, Richmond and the current Princeton. Look I am happy for Carla but come on, she would lose to Oregon, Washington, WVU, Duke, NC State and any number of other teams not in the top 25.

Just because a team may make the NCAAT field of 68 does not mean they are top 25. There are some great stories like ASU and even BYU but are they really TOP 25?

Ok, rant over...back to your New Year's eve festivities.

 

[typhaon]

I think after maybe about 12 teams (where you have a different level of athletes) that are capable of making the Elite 8 - there is a lot of overlap amongst the next 30ish teams. Who can beat who depends on matchups, location, or who just plays better on that day.

You mention Fairfield a few times, so I'll say this. I don't know if Fairfield IS the 25th best team in the country, but I think they could certainly beat whoever is ranked #25.

In the end, polls are just polls. It's for sports chatter and conversation.

 

[LwrcasefaN]

The level of accuracy/reliability is about that of the weatherman. Lower your expectations and it will cure your frustration. My wife shared that with me as the reason she hasn’t left me. 🤣

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

Early polls are way too volatile because they are almost always based on the prior poll, as the OP shows in some of his argument. And the first poll is pure guesswork.

Yes, teams play a wide variety of competition, and while I realize opponents are a choice OOC, I still think a certain amount of "you can only beat who you play" is a reality.

I don't think the polls are all that bad once conference play begins. Pretenders will accumulate too many losses to be included. Not accurate enough to guess winners and losers in games, but more realistic.

 

[TheFarmFan]

Look I know the AP Poll is just for current discussion of the sport to keep the public interested but I do get frustrated with some of the illogic some of the voters utilize each week. I just think some voters do not take this role seriously or make any real effort to compare and contrast teams. To me, they fall into 3 categories:
1. AP are capricious, rewarding wins way too much without acknowledging that the wins achieved may have been over "lesser competition" or over teams that were vastly overrated and penalize certain teams' way too much..
2. AP voters prefer ALL P4 teams as worthy of votes despite questionable resume's vs. better mid-major teams. Sure, an occasional voter will list a mid-major near the very bottom of their ballot but by an large, they prefer a bottom level P4 team. Should that mid-major suffer a loss to a P4, they are immediately banished to the nether world.
3. They want to reward "participation trophy's" to teams that in clearly do not belong in the top 25.

Let me qualify with examples:
#1 Duke was ranked #7 preseason on their strong NCAAT results, thinking that they didn't lose many players and added a top 5 ranked player. They ignored the complete lack of offense Kara regularly puts on the floor. They lost to Baylor, ranked #16 preseason, so based on that, they thought "well Baylor MUST be much better so let's bump them up to #7 while simultaneously penalizing Duke down to #15. To me, yes, Duke was atrocious in that game and deserved #15 but Baylor NEVER should have been bumped up 9 spots. So based off that one win, Baylor was given far too much credit so when Baylor lost to Iowa, "well, Iowa MUST be really good so they jumped 8 spots from 19 to 11. Baylor fell back to 15.
Basically, way too much volatility so early and especially when linking one win for a team to make an assumption about another. Iowa State is undefeated with the #46 Massey OOC ranked schedule but their "bump" in the AP poll came in week 3 after such compelling wins over Marquette and Indiana. They got a furth bump with their win over Iowa at home. I get that Audi Crooks is an "interesting story" but come one. THEY ARE NOT THE 10TH BEST TEAM IN THE COUNTRY. Richmond was initially listed at #24 but after losses to Texas they were pushed to the "Also receiving votes" losses to TCU and then the loss to Fairfield banished them out of the TOP 25. Fairfield is a good mid-major so these 3 losses are not bad at all. NC State lost to TCU and then to Rhode Island (and to Oklahoma and SoCal) yet they are still receiving votes. Capricious I say, CAPRICIOUS!
#2. P4 less deserving teams. Why oh why were teams like Kansas State, Minnesota, Arizona State, Georgia, Alabama and even BYU getting votes? LOOK AT THEIR SCHEDULES! Seriously, these teams gaudy records at the time of their receiving votes were "straw man" arguments. There are currently 6-P4 teams receiving votes with Massey OOC >50. While some may be deserving of votes (LSU and TCU) others are NOT. See the above teams. Shouldn't a team actually play and beat someone of note?
#3. "Oh, this mid-major is worthy of my #24 or #25 slot as they are doing all they can". Does anyone really believe Fairfield, South Dakota, South Dakota State, Richmond, Columbia and now Princeton are really the 24th or 25th best team in the country? It is a nice story but they do need to WIN the P4 games they play and that has NOT happened. I laud them for playing a MUCH better schedule than the likes of LSU/Alabama/Georgia/ASU/TCU but come on. Worse yet are the voters who put South Dakota on their ballot. They have a 149th rating, with an OOC of 282. The voters were impressed with their win over Kansas State in week 3 to get them votes....I like Jeff Mittie but come on, this KSU team will finish 8-12th in mediocre Big12. Revoke that writers voting access!

I am not saying the Voters ballots should resemble the various rating entities BUT there should be apparent logic to each ballot.

There have been 45 teams that have received votes thus far this year. The current egregious ballots that have Alabama, ASU, Georgia and BYU are absurd. Though to be fair, if BYU were to beat TCU tomorrow, that will say a lot about both teams-come on BYU (I am willing to eat crow for this win). Past trespasses have been Columbia, Fairfield, Kansas State, Kansas, Minnesota, SD, SDSU, Richmond and the current Princeton. Look I am happy for Carla but come on, she would lose to Oregon, Washington, WVU, Duke, NC State and any number of other teams not in the top 25.

Just because a team may make the NCAAT field of 68 does not mean they are top 25. There are some great stories like ASU and even BYU but are they really TOP 25?

Ok, rant over...back to your New Year's eve festivities.

Anchoring bias. AP voters literally just adjust from whatever the last poll had. This is why I only ever care about Massey et al - advanced stats are distorted early in the season, but they're never susceptable to arbitrary bias beyond what the model has baked in. And it cuts both ways: Creme has Duke as a "last four in" and Stanford as a comfortable 8 seed. Yet I feel (sadly) confident that on a neutral floor Duke would grind out a slow and offensively challenged 52-48 win over the Card...

 

[YKCornelius]

FarmFan, "anchoring bias"....love that term!

 

[Bigboote]

Anyone wanna hazard a guess how many games (or parts of games) the average AP voter watches? Especially games of Richmond, South Dakota State, Princeton, URI, etc?

And a better question: Does anyone know if the voters (in either poll) are paid? If not, I’d suggest the poll open up to, say, 100 voters. Better sampling through statistics.

When we had a Boneyard poll, I thought those results were much closer to reality than the nationwide polls.

 

[TheFarmFan]

FarmFan, "anchoring bias"....love that term!

It's literally the behavioral psychology / economics term for what OP was describing. Once you set a mental anchor for something, you're always adjusting from the anchor, not a fresh baseline:

Anchoring Bias - The Decision Lab

And AP voters are exceptionally guilty of it. Schools like Baylor and UNC have been huge beneficiaries of it this season. And it's why I just don't care about the AP - Warren Nolan NET Sheets (which break out quad wins), ELO, and Massey are all far more accurate predictors of future performance.

 

[Vowelguy]

Anyone wanna hazard a guess how many games (or parts of games) the average AP voter watches? Especially games of Richmond, South Dakota State, Princeton, URI, etc?

And a better question: Does anyone know if the voters (in either poll) are paid? If not, I’d suggest the poll open up to, say, 100 voters. Better sampling through statistics.

When we had a Boneyard poll, I thought those results were much closer to reality than the nationwide polls.

I doubt they are paid. Or it’s only a nominal amount. It is more likely a feather in ones cap to say they are an AP voter.

More is not always better. If you are randomly selecting voters from a pool of knowledgable analysts, then yes, but I’m skeptical there are 100 AP writers who are closely following WCBB. Given that, any additional voters would be non -random and depress quality.

Also to be clear this is not an NCAA activity. This is AP saying “here is what our experts say are the top teams.” Anyone can make their own poll — indeed there is a coaches poll, which is not as highly regarded.

It’s not the APs fault if readers place more importance on the poll than is warranted .