Tweet
It's easier to play the "underdog, no respect card" when you're #7 than when you're #4, although convincing a bunch of teenagers they're not getting any respect when they're the #7 team in the nation can be a challenge.
-
The future's so bright - I gotta wear shades.
We like to cut down nets and get sized for championship rings. -
Just keep winning.Comment
-
As long as we keep winning we will be okay. However i am sure most of you realize that alot of our rankings early were taking into consideration the missing MM factor . His performance will weigh on our rankings moving forward. If he continues like last game it will hurt us. If he gets to 100% and just lets the game come to him we will start rising again. He is well aware of this and i am sure the pressure to performs weighs heavily on him each game. Markis just relax and play ball!! You got this!!Comment
-
No Way. We played well early on in spite of not having Markis and were ranked because we were highly thought of at the beginning of the year and we defeated good teams, in spite of not having Markis, not because of people feeling sorry for us. Additionally, you may have missed it, but while Markis had several turnovers because he was a little out of control a few times, he also had 9 rebounds, several offensive rebounds. As he forms into shape, we will only get better.
-
-
Continues like last game? He had 10 points (same FG% as CF) and led the team in rebounds (total, defensive and offensive). He drew a number of fouls that don’t all show in the box score and played solid defense. He had some turnovers, some very bad/stupid, but he was very valuable to that game.Originally posted by lmor1971 View Post
I don’t feel our rankings go up and down with one player. Our ranking is what it is because we play great as a team on both sides of the ball and that team chemistry wins us games.Comment
-
"Couch's AP basketball ballot explanation: On MSU, Purdue and the problem with Poll Attacks" - Lansing State Journal
Graham Couch, AP Voter
Published 3:30 p.m. ET Jan. 15, 2018 | Updated 4:36 p.m. ET Jan. 15, 2018
"This is the seventh installment of a weekly column in which Lansing State Journal columnist Graham Couch explains his AP Top 25 basketball ballot, which he sees as thorough independent analysis, even if it often leaves his ballot dubbed "most extreme" of the 65 AP poll voters. Read here for his criteria and further explanation.
Part of putting together a fair and honest AP top 25 ballot, I believe, is being willing to trust what you’re seeing in present day and admit you were either wrong previously or things have changed.
Sometimes quickly. Just because something was so in your analysis a week ago, doesn’t make it so now. Teams shouldn’t have to climb or fall slowly to justify earlier analysis....
The problem with ‘Poll Attacks’
USA Today’s Lindsay Schnell gave up her vote in the AP men’s college basketball poll last week. She was tired of the stress and time that accompanied the fear of being featured in Gary Parrish’s weekly “Poll Attacks” column on CBSSports.com.
If you’re not familiar with this column, Parrish picks out a voter or two each week whose ballot he sees as illogical and, with kid gloves, shames them publicly. It’s an entertaining read and done without malice. On its surface, I don’t have an issue with it. I’ve been featured in it I think four times in three seasons as an AP voter, a couple of those times, in hindsight, deservedly so.
But I’m a fairly thick-skinned bloke who likes a fight and doesn’t mind criticism. And I’m not easily worn down by abusive personal attacks on Twitter or via email. But I don't know the experience of being a woman or person of color in this sportswriter world. Neither does Parrish. What I know from friends who do know that experience of dealing with fans and readers on social media is that it can be pretty damn awful.
There is a general lack of kindness, empathy and civility in our society. Twitter has become a safe space for anger, ignorance, misogyny and racism. And while it is safely behind a screen, it can still be hurtful, overwhelming and tiring.
Based on some of the uncouth behavior I encounter from various fan bases after my AP ballot is made public each week, I can only imagine what it would be like if I were a woman or minority.
People have said things to me on Twitter that have reduced my wife to tears. And the venom I get from some folks there is nothing compared to what others endure.
When Parrish features you in his Poll Attacks column, he is siccing the worst of fandom on to you. And a lot good folks, too — you know which category you’re in. To be clear, there is nothing wrong with disagreeing with an opinion or saying something is a dumb take. That’s not what I’m talking about here.
Back to Schnell, who previously worked at Sports Illustrated and covers college basketball and football for USA Today. She knows her stuff. She texted me last week to say she was done voting in the AP men’s top 25 poll, in part because doing both the men’s and women’s AP polls had become too time-consuming. She’s keeping her vote in the women’s poll. But she also explained another reason: Each week she lived in fear of the Poll Attacks column because of the abuse that would follow. So much so that she would compare her ballot to other writers who share theirs early online and adjust hers accordingly to make sure there were no outliers — or “extreme” votes, as they’re called at collegepolltracker.com, where all of our ballots are made public.
Schnell said she knows of other writers who do the same or have done something similar — including one who told her he takes most of Sunday each week conforming his ballot so he can avoid being Poll Attacked. In other words, Parrish’s column critiquing AP voters is also shaping the AP poll and lessening the original thought and analysis that goes into it.
As an aside, for those of you who think my ballot regularly seems “extreme,” I’d argue — and have argued — this is partly why.
The argument for Parrish’s Poll Attacks column is that his criticism of AP voters is usually warranted, never sharp in tone and, frankly, a popular read. If a voter doesn’t have the time to do this volunteer gig right or is worried about being mentioned by Parrish, there’s an easy solution. No one is forcing us to do this. We were all asked and agreed to it.
Parrish ranks the “Top 25 (and 1)” every day. So we ought to be able to do it well once a week, right? Except, it’s actually easier if you’re doing it daily and if you’re paid to do it as part of your job, like Parrish, and if you don’t also cover football, like many of us. Still, some of the choices voters make are ridiculous and/or lazy and ripe for a call-out.
I’ve got no issue with Parrish personally, even when he singles out my ballot with his megaphone — even when I disagree.
But when I’m Poll Attacked, I’m not dealing with the same level of crass vitriol as Schnell or some of the other 64 voters.
If Poll Attacks could be only what it should to be — a fun read and a slap on the wrist, there’d be no harm in it. Unfortunately a decent segment of the Twitterverse is a disgrace."Comment
-
This is very concerning to me. Not the "Poll attacks column"... you work in media, want public attention ... it's not all going to be positive. The part that is concerning is that AP voters admit to using group think and adjusting their votes based on what others think. That's not how this is supposed to work. -
Stickboy is right. Group think is the lazy way out and some writers don't spend the time necessary to be educated AP voters. However, while one alternative is that they spend the amount of time necessary to become truly educated and fair voters, the other alternative is that they spend even less time (that is without Parrish's Poll Attacks column) and just do an extremely lazy voting job, not doing any or very little research, and voting only on their regional biases. While I don't agree with Parrish 100% of the time, he is a very educated voter/columnist. I think we all agree that his "Attacks" column is necessary and good for the poll to be taken seriously. Without it, this poll would be a joke. -
"But I don't know the experience of being a woman or person of color in this sportswriter world."
If I were a woman or a person of color, I would take issue with this guy insinuating that I couldn't handle criticism or jerks on Twitter in a professional manner as my non-female & non person of color colleagues do.
I also find it funny that a member of media is decrying the lack of kindness and civility in society, when members of the media have literally ruined lives. Living in North Carolina during the whole Duke Lacrosse situation, I remember media in NC generating hysteria that resulted in lynch mobs that could have easily led to people being killed.
I would agree with the writer that there is a lot of nastiness on the internet, but it's hard to get upset about members of the media getting a dose of their own medicine.
-
-
"Attacks column: It's not meant to be mean" - CBS Sports
By Gary Parrish, CBS Sports Writer
Posted: 01/18/18, 1:00am cst
Gary Parrish, after being questioned, explains why he writes the Poll Attacks each Monday
https://www.cbssports.com/college-ba...nt-to-be-mean/
"Graham Couch has been featured in my weekly Poll Attacks column multiple times over the years. He's always been a good sport about it, which is something I've appreciated. And it's among the reasons I felt obligated to read what he wrote early Monday and share it with people who follow me on Twitter.
(Here's a link, if you missed it.)
Obviously, you can read Couch's words in their entirety at the provided link. But his basic point was that the Poll Attacks column has created a world where AP voters are so scared of me writing about them that they vote in a way to ensure I won't, which by extension means I'm actually shaping the AP poll each Monday. And he used USA Today's Lindsay Schnell as an example because she recently told him what she has also told me -- that she gave up her AP vote last week, in part, because she was fearful of appearing in a Poll Attacks column and what it might mean for her Twitter mentions given that she's a woman.
I'll be honest, this all gave me pause.
The idea that people, other professionals in my industry, are living in fear of what I might write is weird and uncomfortable. I'm not perfect. But I'm also not mean. And I find no joy in causing people stress.
That said, what am I really doing with this column each week? Answer: I'm writing about nonsensical things that appear on AP ballots. That's it. I won't pretend I've never typed a word I would like to take back, or said something I wish I wouldn't have said. But, for the most part, the column is just me finding something some AP voter did that is, at least in my mind, impossible to intelligently defend. Then I basically write, "Here's a very specific thing I noticed on a ballot this week. It makes no sense. Here's why."
That's the column.
Every week.
And, I don't know if you've noticed, but the column often focuses on the same 10 to 15 voters because it's the same 10 to 15 voters who consistently file nonsensical ballots. Sometimes, frankly, I feel bad because it must seem like I'm piling on. But I'm honestly never piling on. I don't go look for certain people. I just look for nonsensical things. And it's amazing how often those nonsensical things lead me to the same group of people.
Anyway ...
You can read the replies here. Most of them came from readers who told me to keep writing the column, which was nice. And I especially liked the following tweet because it basically summarized how I feel:
Gianthammer
@NYG_WHU
Follow Follow @NYG_WHU
More
Replying to @GaryParrishCBS
If AP Voters do something egregious, they deserve to be embarrassed for it. Because of how widely used the AP Poll is, it should be as accurate as possible, so it truly does what it's supposed to: accurately paint a picture of the best teams in America.
The only thing I would change about that tweet is that my goal is not to "embarrass" somebody. It's why I never put anybody's name in the headline or on Twitter. My goal is simply to highlight something egregious on a ballot. Obviously, the embarrassment sometimes comes with it. I realize that. But I didn't start writing the column to "embarrass" people. I started writing the column because I kept noticing ridiculous things in the AP poll. And nobody else was writing about these ridiculous things. So I figured I would.
More than five years later, here we are.
And if the column has grown and turned into something that holds AP voters accountable and actually shapes the AP poll (as Eli Boettger suggested recently), well, I don't think that's the worst thing in the world. And to those AP voters who might live in fear every Monday afternoon, here's my advice: Just take your responsibility seriously. Put some time into it. And if you don't have the time, hey, I understand. We're all busy. But I have a wife and three kids. I host a radio show five days a week. I host a podcast three days a week. I travel to New York every week for television work in studio. I serve as a sideline reporter on games. I write columns. And I rank 26 basketball teams every morning. So if I can find time to take the responsibility seriously every morning, anybody can probably find time to do it once a week. But if not, again, I understand. Sincerely, I do. But, if that's the case, what you should do is pass along the opportunity and give somebody else a shot. Because here's the truth: The people who actually take the responsibility seriously, and spend time on it, and use logic and all of the resources available, rarely end up in the Poll Attacks.
That column focused, in part, on a writer who had Arizona ranked 18th one week. Then Arizona went out and beat Arizona State -- and he dropped the Wildcats five spots to No. 23 the following week. In other words, Arizona was on an eight-game winning streak that included a victory against a team that was ranked, at the time, in the top five of the AP poll. And yet he dropped Arizona five spots.
I'm sorry, but that's ridiculous.
It's careless.
There's no defense for it.
And I'm not sure why it's wrong to highlight something so careless and ridiculous when -- as the above tweet pointed out -- the AP Poll is, contrary to what some think, very important. It largely determines what highlights get on television. It determines what scores are on a scroll at the bottom of a screen. It determines what scores are highlighted on certain apps or in newspapers.
The AP poll matters.
And anybody who agrees to be a part of the process should take the process seriously. Earlier this season, one AP voter I highlighted in the Poll Attacks was asked by readers to explain his ballot. He essentially responded by saying he simply didn't have much time to spend on it. So if it looks crazy, that's why. And that's pretty lame, I think.
Either way, I'll close with this from Lindsay Schnell:Twitter Ads info and privacy
Lindsay Schnell✔@Lindsay_Schnell
Why is it cool for media members to attack other media members? (Answer: It’s not. Come up with a better story idea.) Good stuff from @Graham_Couch on voting, including why I gave up my vote. https://twitter.com/graham_couch/status/953003308431556609 …
3:55 PM - Jan 15, 2018
I guess I would respond this way: What she calls "attacking" I would call "holding accountable." Again, all I do is find nonsensical things each week, highlight them and explain in great detail why I think they're nonsensical. Which means I probably spend more time on my Poll Attacks column than most of the AP voters I'm writing about spend on their AP ballots. And the idea that media members shouldn't hold other media members accountable is ridiculous. The media can hold politicians accountable. And Hollywood actors and producers accountable. And corporations accountable. But somehow it's crossing a line to hold each other accountable?
Please.
And though I'm well aware that women -- especially women who work in sports -- and people of color deal with unfair criticism on social media more often than white men like me do, I've rarely noticed a woman or person of color dealing with harsher criticism after being featured in a Poll Attackscolumn than, say, Graham Couch has dealt with. Best I can tell, the readers who tweet at the people whose ballots I write about tend to focus on the exact thing I focused on. They tend to focus on the ballots.
Bottom line, yeah, I'm conflicted.
I don't like embarrassing anybody. But I do like the column. And I like that people like the column. And I think the column serves a purpose. So, to answer the question some have asked since I retweeted Graham Couch's words earlier ... Yes, I'm going to keep writing the column. I'll go out of my way to make sure there's nothing personal in the column. I'll stay super-focused on the ballot and not the man or woman who submitted the ballot. But the solution to this issue, to the extent that it's an issue, isn't for me to ignore AP voters who submit nonsensical ballots that can't be intelligently explained. The solution is for AP voters to be better.
So be better, AP voters.
And I'll be nicer.
And perhaps someday we'll get to a point where I'll stare at ballots on a Monday afternoon and find nothing too ridiculous to write about. Hasn't happened yet. But it might someday. And when it does, the column will die. But till then, it won't."Last edited by WuShock Reaper; January 16, 2018, 10:41 AM.Comment
-
If you’re bad or otherwise incompetent at your job, prepare to be criticized. Don’t think that’s an original thought for any of us.
For some reason, the 17 on their ACT, self-proclaimed Mensa members who make up most journalism grads and media members don’t consider that reasonable. Accountability for that thing you do, for which you were educated and now draw a check for performing? Nope, exclude them, even though it is literally a thing for every other segment of the employment market.Comment
-
If someone gives up their AP voting rights, they shouldn’t be voting in the first place. It just exposes them as not being confident in their abilities to analyze teams and vote.Comment
-
There's truth on both sides.
Parrish is correct that it's not wrong for him to criticize and hold accountable other journalists. There's some absolutely stupid--and I mean STUPID--**** on AP ballots every week. You should not be an AP voter if you can't take the time to seriously and analytically rank the top 25. Parrish is doing a valuable service to the integrity of college basketball.
At the same time, Couch is right in that our society has lost its civility, empathy, and kindness. People do and say things publicly today that 40 years ago would have been unthinkable. And the people who are hurt by these things are called "snowflakes." Seriously? GTFOH. Society was MUCH more courteous and polite when I was a kid than it is now. The evidence of a lack of personal responsibility can be found all over my facebook and twitter feeds--I don't have to find a welfare recipient to see it. Somehow, our society has devolved to the point some consider politeness and civility a weakness.
It's not Parrish's fault if he riles up Twitter scum. He's just doing his job. But don't criticize the reporter for wanting to avoid Twitter attacks. She may be a bad AP voter, she may be horrible at ranking college basketball teams, but she is a human being worthy of respect. There are quite a few people in this world who don't understand that."It's amazing to watch Ron slide into that open area, Fred will find him and it's straight cash homie."--HCGMComment
-
I hold it against absolutely nobody if they don't want to be in the public eye because of nastiness.
That said, if you want an exclusive job (one of just 65) establishing a highly publicized, and very important, ranking system, you better be ready for what comes with it. You don't have to like it, but you better darn be expecting it, and if you can't handle it, you need to leave the job because you aren't capable of doing it well. -
The problem with the Twitter sphere is a totally different issue from an AP voter or a United States Senator being held accountable for their part of their own SWAMP, but I digress. That is why I spend very little time on my computer communicating with people and making enemies (Shockernet is pretty much my only vice) of friends and family members. I would recommend that others not become so obsessed on the internet because if often doesn't end well. However, if someone is employed, they should take their job seriously, and while criticism should be civil, those who make money from their internet involvement shouldn't expect to avoid it. -
Criticism is one thing. So, yes, if you want to be one of just 65 people who rank CBB teams, you better be ready for criticism.
But what's at question is here are Twitter attacks, where some people call others horrific names, insulting deeply personal attributes, and hate speech. That's not criticism. That's horrifying behavior that's being normalized by the anonymity afforded by social media and the internet.
-
-
Originally posted by Rocky Mountain Shock View Post"Atthe same time, Couch is right in that our society has lost its civility, empathy, and kindness." Where was your civility, empathy, and kindness when you posted "GTFOH" Just saying and I hope you and the AP voter have a nice day.Comment
-
I find it almost unfathomable that someone would need "most of Sunday" in order to put out a decent update to a top 25. I'm sympathetic to some aspects of the article, and agree that online comments are often a cesspool, but in terms of the effort it takes to make a list, and even less so, to merely update your list after 1-2 games were played by each team... NO FRIGGIN' WAY IT TAKES THAT LONG OR IS THAT HARD.Originally posted by WuShock Reaper View Post
Comment
-
He's saying it takes that long to CONFORM it. i.e. He tries to find others ballots (maybe reaches out to them) and gets his to be similar to theirs so he isn't called out. It probably takes WAY longer to do that rather than just submit his true thoughts. -
Stickboy,
Sitting around all Sunday trying to reach out to other voters about what they are about to submit is ridiculous. I could spend a mere 10 minutes looking at game results, comparing them to last week’s poll results, and could put together a top 25 that would blend in nicely with the rest of the voters, all without seeing any of their ballots ahead of time. If the goal is to blend in, it is an incredibly easy and NOT time consuming task.
Even more so, the examples of team X suffering a bad loss and then moving up a bunch on a voter’s ballot have nothing to do with comparisons to other pollsters. Most of the poll attacks criticisms are about stupid “oversights” that have nothing to do with what other voters thought.
-
-
Also, um, it's possible to not read everything on the interwebz. If you are getting mad reading twitter, YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG.
Perhaps if one spent less time getting offended by tweeters and more time watching basketball, one would solve many problems at same time.Comment
-
Fair criticism. However, I said GTFOH. I didn't call anyone names, insult anyone's heritage, imply anything about anyone's life choices, serve death threats, or some of the other garbage that takes place on social media. People are now able to disseminate opinions faster and more broadly than ever before, and some people have absolutely no regard for the consequences of their words. Our society isn't becoming more sensitive than it has ever been--just the opposite, we're becoming more callous.Originally posted by SHOXJOCK View Post"It's amazing to watch Ron slide into that open area, Fred will find him and it's straight cash homie."--HCGMComment
-
Wow, so I guess you're acknowledging that you also lack civility and empathy.Originally posted by WSUwatcher
Seriously, how hard is it to just be nice? I don't blame her for giving up her voting duties if people like you lambast her on Twitter on a weekly basis. Twitter harassment can be hard to ignore when people are calling you names, calling your work garbage, etc, especially when you get each one in the form of a notification on your phone.Originally posted by WSUwatcher
Society will continue to spiral downward if we keep making fun of people for being upset about stuff that is actually upsetting. It's a vicious circle. Also, should we hold people accountable for their jobs? Sure, but lay off the name-calling.Comment
-
Sorry, Phi, but I can't comment on whether those who lambast her on Twitter are "people like (me)," because I don't use Twitter and none of my friends do, either. I agree that being nice is a good thing, but I reject unequivocally the poor little former voter's notion that being in the media gets you a pass for doing a second-rate job or exempts you from criticism for doing so.
This is pointless to continue, and I've already stated my opinion, so I'm moving on.
-
-
I am genuinely confused. Are you saying that you agree with her that Gary should stop writing the article because it hurts people’s feelings? Or are you just talking about Twitter?Originally posted by ShockerPhi View Post
Comment
Comment