[Bigsouthking]

Just went on espn.com looked at new top 25 poll for the week... VMI got 1 vote... I kid you not, don't know how to link but you can check it out. The AP poll.

[flamesbball84]

the AP poll always has boneheads voting in it. i always ignore that one and look at the coaches poll since the coaches actually know the game and often times the reporters don't. look at all the teams receiving votes in that poll: vmi, cal st. northridge, mercer, etc. those teams have no business receiving votes. in the final ap poll last year umbc, south alabama, and boise state received one vote - once again, three teams with no business of being in a top 25 poll.

[LUconn]

It seems like there's always an overreaction vote like this every week in the AP. I think there's a writer out there who just thinks he's funny.

[Bigsouthking]

the AP poll always has boneheads voting in it. i always ignore that one and look at the coaches poll since the coaches actually know the game and often times the reporters don't. look at all the teams receiving votes in that poll: vmi, cal st. northridge, mercer, etc. those teams have no business receiving votes. in the final ap poll last year umbc, south alabama, and boise state received one vote - once again, three teams with no business of being in a top 25 poll.

Disagree on that from last year... south alabama won over 20 games made the tournament, umbc and i think bosie st also made the tournament. so all three of those were worthy of votes....

mercer did beat alabama this weekend and vmi did beat UK and played UVA tough I think that's why they got a vote.

[flamesbball84]

the AP poll always has boneheads voting in it. i always ignore that one and look at the coaches poll since the coaches actually know the game and often times the reporters don't. look at all the teams receiving votes in that poll: vmi, cal st. northridge, mercer, etc. those teams have no business receiving votes. in the final ap poll last year umbc, south alabama, and boise state received one vote - once again, three teams with no business of being in a top 25 poll.

Disagree on that from last year... south alabama won over 20 games made the tournament, umbc and i think bosie st also made the tournament. so all three of those were worthy of votes....

mercer did beat alabama this weekend and vmi did beat UK and played UVA tough I think that's why they got a vote.

since when did 20 or more wins and a trip to the ncaa tournament automatically mean you deserve votes? oklahoma was 23-12, played in a drastically superior conference to those teams, and made the ncaa tournament but didn't get a single vote.

other teams who had 20 or more wins and an ncaa tournament berth who didnt receive a single vote - and and the first four were in a vastly superior conference as well: same can be said for miami (fl), kansas state, baylor, st. joe's, oral roberts, george mason, siena, belmont, csu fullerton, austin peay, portland state, american, san diego (and they made a run in the ncaa tournament for crying out loud!), and winthrop.

Those teams fit the same reasons you used to justify sa, umbc, and b st. for getting votes but those reasons obviously don't justify them receiving a vote one iota, because if it did, all the teams I cited should have received at least one vote...

[WinthropEagleFan]

the AP poll always has boneheads voting in it. i always ignore that one and look at the coaches poll since the coaches actually know the game and often times the reporters don't. look at all the teams receiving votes in that poll: vmi, cal st. northridge, mercer, etc. those teams have no business receiving votes. in the final ap poll last year umbc, south alabama, and boise state received one vote - once again, three teams with no business of being in a top 25 poll.

Disagree on that from last year... south alabama won over 20 games made the tournament, umbc and i think bosie st also made the tournament. so all three of those were worthy of votes....

mercer did beat alabama this weekend and vmi did beat UK and played UVA tough I think that's why they got a vote.

since when did 20 or more wins and a trip to the ncaa tournament automatically mean you deserve votes? oklahoma was 23-12, played in a drastically superior conference to those teams, and made the ncaa tournament but didn't get a single vote.

other teams who had 20 or more wins and an ncaa tournament berth who didnt receive a single vote - and and the first four were in a vastly superior conference as well: same can be said for miami (fl), kansas state, baylor, st. joe's, oral roberts, george mason, siena, belmont, csu fullerton, austin peay, portland state, american, san diego (and they made a run in the ncaa tournament for crying out loud!), and winthrop.

Those teams fit the same reasons you used to justify sa, umbc, and b st. for getting votes but those reasons obviously don't justify them receiving a vote one iota, because if it did, all the teams I cited should have received at least one vote...

The best thing about college basketball is that it doesn't really matter when it comes to the rankings...it's cool to see your school's name in the list, but at the end of the day, why does it matter who received a vote or two? Why does it even matter who is #1, except to give people something to argue about.