Home Sports Talk

College Football 2014

ESPN put up there way too early 2014 top 25. ESPN Link.

Nice to see my Pac 12 getting some love with 3 in the top 10.

Yes, I know there are still kids deciding to go pro or not, others deciding what college to attend, injuries/suspensions, etc... that's why ESPN calls it the way-too-early top 25.

FSU
Bama
Oregon
Stanford
Auburn
Michigan State
UCLA
Oklahoma
Ohio State
LSU
Georgia
Baylor
South Carolina
U$C
Wisconsin
Texas A&M
UNC
Clemson
Washington
Ole Miss
Iowa
ASU
ND
UCF
Fla


«134

Comments

  • CNoteCNote Posts: 2,070
    Washington in the top 25? Sankey and Safarian-Jenkins declared, and Price is gone too. Even though it's the "too early top 25", that's silly.
  • orioles93orioles93 Posts: 3,463 ✭✭✭✭✭
    UCF wont be as good next year either without Blake Bortles and Storm Johnson.
    What I Collect:

    PSA HOF Baseball Postwar Rookies Set Registry- (Currently 77.97% Complete)


    PSA Pro Football HOF Rookie Players Set Registry- (Currently 19.26% Complete)


    PSA Basketball HOF Players Rookies Set Registry- (Currently 6.02% Complete)
  • SanctionIISanctionII Posts: 11,660 ✭✭✭✭✭
    When is the Preseason Top 25 list for the 2015 season going to be released?

    Hopefully it will be very soon. I just have to know (and know now) who will be in the Top 25 when College Football kicks off in late August, 2015.

    I mean, the 2014 season is already old news, isn't it?image
  • Now that we have a four team playoff, I think it would serve Ohio State and friends well to schedule some tough non-conference games early in the year so
    that they can gain more respect when it comes time to picking the "final four".



  • JustacommemanJustacommeman Posts: 22,847 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Now that we have a four team playoff, I think it would serve Ohio State and friends well to schedule some tough non-conference games early in the year so
    that they can gain more respect when it comes time to picking the "final four". >>



    They have Kent State, Navy, Virginia Tech, and Cincinnati next year BUT they play Maryland and Rutgers within their new division. They will not play Iowa, Nebraska, Wisconsin and Northwestern which will hurt them.

    MJ
    Walker Proof Digital Album
    Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
  • 1985fan1985fan Posts: 1,952 ✭✭


    << <i>Now that we have a four team playoff, I think it would serve Ohio State and friends well to schedule some tough non-conference games early in the year so
    that they can gain more respect when it comes time to picking the "final four". >>



    OSU is a bunch of relics. They think they can schedule cream puffs out of conference and they think their in-conference schedule should carry them. Apparently they haven't gotten the memo that the Big 10 is the Big Stink and until they realize this, they're going to be on the outside looking in.
  • CNoteCNote Posts: 2,070
    Agreed. The Big 10 is not the Pac 12 or SEC where the in-conference schedule is like a playoff in itself.
  • Nonsense. The sec teams had powder puff non conference schedules as well. Michigan state beat the pac 12 champion. The acc and big 10 this year had the 2 best teams in the country.
  • orioles93orioles93 Posts: 3,463 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Big ten isn't the only school that plays easy games. If I recall correctly, Alabama had a game late in the season against Chattanooga this year.
    What I Collect:

    PSA HOF Baseball Postwar Rookies Set Registry- (Currently 77.97% Complete)


    PSA Pro Football HOF Rookie Players Set Registry- (Currently 19.26% Complete)


    PSA Basketball HOF Players Rookies Set Registry- (Currently 6.02% Complete)
  • Florida State plays Oklahoma State (who will lose a lot of starters), Florida, and Notre Dame out of conference next year. The last two are at home while Okie state is at Jerry World.
  • 1985fan1985fan Posts: 1,952 ✭✭


    << <i>Nonsense. The sec teams had powder puff non conference schedules as well. Michigan state beat the pac 12 champion. The acc and big 10 this year had the 2 best teams in the country. >>



    Unlike the Big 10, the SEC actually has some decent/good teams in it.


  • << <i>

    << <i>Nonsense. The sec teams had powder puff non conference schedules as well. Michigan state beat the pac 12 champion. The acc and big 10 this year had the 2 best teams in the country. >>



    Unlike the Big 10, the SEC actually has some decent/good teams in it. >>



    If you don't think the big 10 has good teams than you are delusional. The two highest ranked sec teams lost. Alabama lost by 14 to a mediocre Oklahoma team.
  • PM770PM770 Posts: 320 ✭✭
    Here are the future home and home series that Ohio State has set up for the future:

    2014 & 15: Virgina Tech
    2016 & 17: Oklahoma
    2018 & 19: TCU
    2020 & 21: Oregon & Boston College
    2022 & 23: Texas

    I show this to illustrate how far in advance non-conference schedules are made. When Ohio State set up their home & home with Cal they looked like an up-and-coming program. Remember they were ranked #2 at some point during the 2007 season. The TCU series was set up when they were going to back-to-back BCS bowls.

    Can anyone look at those non conference opponents and honestly say that is cream puff scheduling?

    Source: NationalChamps.net
  • coinkatcoinkat Posts: 22,721 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Ohio State has played Texas Christian and Oregon in the past- good to see that they will play them again.

    Off hand, I do not recall a prior match up with Oklahoma or BC

    Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.

  • I admit that is a very good job of tOSU.
  • coinkatcoinkat Posts: 22,721 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Part of the problem remains that advanced schedules do not guarantee that programs will be peeking to produce the desired match up

    Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.

  • I wonder how many schools turn ohio state down? Notre dame for one.
  • coinkatcoinkat Posts: 22,721 ✭✭✭✭✭
    in all fairness, that is a reasonable question. Further, these scheduled games have to make economic sense for both schools

    Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.

  • larryallen73larryallen73 Posts: 6,055 ✭✭✭


    << <i>Here are the future home and home series that Ohio State has set up for the future:

    2014 & 15: Virgina Tech
    2016 & 17: Oklahoma
    2018 & 19: TCU
    2020 & 21: Oregon & Boston College
    2022 & 23: Texas

    I show this to illustrate how far in advance non-conference schedules are made. When Ohio State set up their home & home with Cal they looked like an up-and-coming program. Remember they were ranked #2 at some point during the 2007 season. The TCU series was set up when they were going to back-to-back BCS bowls.

    Can anyone look at those non conference opponents and honestly say that is cream puff scheduling?

    Source: NationalChamps.net >>



    Very true but Boston College? When was the last time they were good? When Doug Flutie was QB?
  • PM770PM770 Posts: 320 ✭✭


    << <i>Part of the problem remains that advanced schedules do not guarantee that programs will be peeking to produce the desired match up >>



    Very true, as illustrated by the Cal scheduling. Oregon has had a outstanding run for the past 10 years or so, but who knows where the program will be in 2020. If they get hit with sanctions, PO Phil Knight, or just are unsuccessful replaing a coach who leaves, they may be 4-8 program by the time 2020 come around. Same with any of these schools. Oklahoma had a horrid stretch in 90s. Texas was down before Mac Brown came in.

    The larger point is that scheduling in the non-conference is such a moving target. Its unfair to accuse someone of cream puff scheduling unless the schedule is filled up with the I-AA and Sun Belt and MAC schools (And I say this as a proud Akron grad/diehard).

  • stownstown Posts: 11,321 ✭✭✭


    << <i>The larger point is that scheduling in the non-conference is such a moving target. Its unfair to accuse someone of cream puff scheduling unless the schedule is filled up with the I-AA and Sun Belt and MAC schools (And I say this as a proud Akron grad/diehard). >>



    + 1
    So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
  • JustacommemanJustacommeman Posts: 22,847 ✭✭✭✭✭
    wrong thread. oops
    Walker Proof Digital Album
    Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
  • 1985fan1985fan Posts: 1,952 ✭✭


    << <i>I wonder how many schools turn ohio state down? Notre dame for one. >>



    I wonder how many schools OSU turn down? I'd be willing to bet any and all SEC teams.
  • larryallen73larryallen73 Posts: 6,055 ✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>The larger point is that scheduling in the non-conference is such a moving target. Its unfair to accuse someone of cream puff scheduling unless the schedule is filled up with the I-AA and Sun Belt and MAC schools (And I say this as a proud Akron grad/diehard). >>



    + 1 >>



    +2

    I love seeing the SEC playing against SE Tennessee Tech Vocational Junior College, etc.... I don't care how tough your conference schedule is scheduling I-AA schools should be forbidden. Schedule a horrible I-A school but not those little ones. Or even DII. LOL. Was it Michigan that lost to the D-II school a few years ago!? Classic!
  • PM770PM770 Posts: 320 ✭✭


    << <i>I wonder how many schools OSU turn down? I'd be willing to bet any and all SEC teams. >>



    So they are willing to schedule home and home with Oklahoma, Texas and Oregon and you take this as a sign of them ducking opposition.


  • << <i>

    << <i>I wonder how many schools OSU turn down? I'd be willing to bet any and all SEC teams. >>



    So they are willing to schedule home and home with Oklahoma, Texas and Oregon and you take this as a sign of them ducking opposition. >>



    Not to mention USC. 1985 is a big 10 hater, so his opinions are not based on facts.
  • 1985fan1985fan Posts: 1,952 ✭✭
    I specified the SEC. Turns out OSU has never beaten an SEC team in a bowl game, either, so their opposition to playing the SEC is fear based.
  • PM770PM770 Posts: 320 ✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>

    << <i>I wonder how many schools OSU turn down? I'd be willing to bet any and all SEC teams. >>



    So they are willing to schedule home and home with Oklahoma, Texas and Oregon and you take this as a sign of them ducking opposition. >>



    Not to mention USC. 1985 is a big 10 hater, so his opinions are not based on facts. >>



    Based on the comment directly before this one I'd say just a run of the mill internet troll.


  • << <i>I specified the SEC. Turns out OSU has never beaten an SEC team in a bowl game, either, so their opposition to playing the SEC is fear based. >>



    Wrong they beat a top 10 sec team in the sugar bowl 3 years ago.


  • << <i>

    << <i>

    << <i>

    << <i>I wonder how many schools OSU turn down? I'd be willing to bet any and all SEC teams. >>



    So they are willing to schedule home and home with Oklahoma, Texas and Oregon and you take this as a sign of them ducking opposition. >>



    Not to mention USC. 1985 is a big 10 hater, so his opinions are not based on facts. >>



    Based on the comment directly before this one I'd say just a run of the mill internet troll. >>



    You are correct.
  • 1985fan1985fan Posts: 1,952 ✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>I specified the SEC. Turns out OSU has never beaten an SEC team in a bowl game, either, so their opposition to playing the SEC is fear based. >>



    Wrong they beat a top 10 sec team in the sugar bowl 3 years ago. >>



    False. They played with ineligible players and were forced to vacate this win.


  • << <i>

    << <i>

    << <i>I specified the SEC. Turns out OSU has never beaten an SEC team in a bowl game, either, so their opposition to playing the SEC is fear based. >>



    Wrong they beat a top 10 sec team in the sugar bowl 3 years ago. >>



    False. They played with ineligible players and were forced to vacate this win. >>



    Yes, because tattoos helped them win the game image
  • 1985fan1985fan Posts: 1,952 ✭✭
    The players should not have been on the field for breaking NCAA rules. As idiotic as the rules are the players broke them and the team won Asa a result of these ineligible players. Therefore the win has been vacated and OSU continues its lifetime winless streak against SEC teams.


  • << <i>The players should not have been on the field for breaking NCAA rules. As idiotic as the rules are the players broke them and the team won Asa a result of these ineligible players. Therefore the win has been vacated and OSU continues its lifetime winless streak against SEC teams. >>



    Sorry, but that's not going to fly with the fans or the players. You cant take away a game that was already played. By your logic, Auburn's 2010 championship should be vacated because everyone knows there was enough evidence on cam newton that he should've been ineligible.
  • PM770PM770 Posts: 320 ✭✭
    dftt, soundgard, dftt
  • 1985fan1985fan Posts: 1,952 ✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>The players should not have been on the field for breaking NCAA rules. As idiotic as the rules are the players broke them and the team won Asa a result of these ineligible players. Therefore the win has been vacated and OSU continues its lifetime winless streak against SEC teams. >>



    Sorry, but that's not going to fly with the fans or the players. You cant take away a game that was already played. By your logic, Auburn's 2010 championship should be vacated because everyone knows there was enough evidence on cam newton that he should've been ineligible. >>



    Why are you trying to equate a GUILTY party with one that hasn't been proven as such? Oh because OSU is the gulty one? Sorry pal but you're wrong here. Should have been isn't the same as WAS.

    OSU still has yet to defeat an SEC team in a a bowl game. Talk about 0-forever!


  • << <i>

    << <i>

    << <i>The players should not have been on the field for breaking NCAA rules. As idiotic as the rules are the players broke them and the team won Asa a result of these ineligible players. Therefore the win has been vacated and OSU continues its lifetime winless streak against SEC teams. >>



    Sorry, but that's not going to fly with the fans or the players. You cant take away a game that was already played. By your logic, Auburn's 2010 championship should be vacated because everyone knows there was enough evidence on cam newton that he should've been ineligible. >>



    Why are you trying to equate a GUILTY party with one that hasn't been proven as such? Oh because OSU is the gulty one? Sorry pal but you're wrong here. Should have been isn't the same as WAS.

    OSU still has yet to defeat an SEC team in a a bowl game. Talk about 0-forever! >>



    Wrong again. Guilty is guilty. Everyone knows OJ was guilty. If you think otherwise you are delusional.
  • 1985fan1985fan Posts: 1,952 ✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>

    << <i>

    << <i>The players should not have been on the field for breaking NCAA rules. As idiotic as the rules are the players broke them and the team won Asa a result of these ineligible players. Therefore the win has been vacated and OSU continues its lifetime winless streak against SEC teams. >>



    Sorry, but that's not going to fly with the fans or the players. You cant take away a game that was already played. By your logic, Auburn's 2010 championship should be vacated because everyone knows there was enough evidence on cam newton that he should've been ineligible. >>



    Why are you trying to equate a GUILTY party with one that hasn't been proven as such? Oh because OSU is the gulty one? Sorry pal but you're wrong here. Should have been isn't the same as WAS.

    OSU still has yet to defeat an SEC team in a a bowl game. Talk about 0-forever! >>



    Wrong again. Guilty is guilty. Everyone knows OJ was guilty. If you think otherwise you are delusional. >>



    False. Auburn still has their national title because allegations against them could not be substantiated whereas OSU had their win VACATED.

    Get lost.
  • TabeTabe Posts: 5,920 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Very true but Boston College? When was the last time they were good? When Doug Flutie was QB? >>


    2005: 9-3
    2006: 10-3
    2007: 11-3
    2008: 9-5
  • TabeTabe Posts: 5,920 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>I love seeing the SEC playing against SE Tennessee Tech Vocational Junior College, etc.... I don't care how tough your conference schedule is scheduling I-AA schools should be forbidden. Schedule a horrible I-A school but not those little ones. Or even DII. LOL. Was it Michigan that lost to the D-II school a few years ago!? Classic! >>


    It was a 1-AA school. Not that it makes it any better but that 1-AA school (Appalachian State) was the defending national champion (in the midst of three straight titles) and would have been favored over at least half of the schools in 1-A. Doesn't make Michigan's loss any better but the reality is that the game was a cupcake in name only.

    FWIW, that wasn't even the biggest upset of the season. Stanford beating USC that year was a bigger upset (by point spread).
  • larryallen73larryallen73 Posts: 6,055 ✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>I love seeing the SEC playing against SE Tennessee Tech Vocational Junior College, etc.... I don't care how tough your conference schedule is scheduling I-AA schools should be forbidden. Schedule a horrible I-A school but not those little ones. Or even DII. LOL. Was it Michigan that lost to the D-II school a few years ago!? Classic! >>


    It was a 1-AA school. Not that it makes it any better but that 1-AA school (Appalachian State) was the defending national champion (in the midst of three straight titles) and would have been favored over at least half of the schools in 1-A. Doesn't make Michigan's loss any better but the reality is that the game was a cupcake in name only.

    FWIW, that wasn't even the biggest upset of the season. Stanford beating USC that year was a bigger upset (by point spread). >>



    Thanks for the correction. I am not a U$C fan but I suspect they sleep much better with their loss to Stanford than Michigan fans for losing to a Iaa team. That's a horrible embarrassment no matter how "good" App State was. They shouldn't have even scheduled them.
  • 1985fan1985fan Posts: 1,952 ✭✭


    << <i>Michigan State had a better argument to be in the national title game than Auburn. And while I'm not an Ohio State fan, the future nonconference scheduling speaks for itself, and probably was done thanks to Urban Meyer. Once he gets his full compliment of players at OSU, they're going to look and play like a SEC team. >>



    What makes you say Michigan State had a better argument? Auburn was ranked in the top 10 in strength of schedule in every computerized system except one. Michigan State was nowhere to be found in any top 10 ranking.



  • << <i>Michigan State had a better argument to be in the national title game than Auburn. >>



    Agreed.

    Michigan state was one bad call away from being undefeated.
  • TabeTabe Posts: 5,920 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Thanks for the correction. I am not a U$C fan but I suspect they sleep much better with their loss to Stanford than Michigan fans for losing to a Iaa team. That's a horrible embarrassment no matter how "good" App State was. They shouldn't have even scheduled them. >>


    All of what you say is true. It was a horrible embarrassment, especially coming off of the 2006 season where Michigan had started 11-0 and had a great argument for playing in the national championship. Then to come back with nearly every player back and lose to a 1-AA school - thanks to TWO blocked FGs - was just a horrible embarrassment.
  • PM770PM770 Posts: 320 ✭✭


    << <i>Michigan State had a better argument to be in the national title game than Auburn. And while I'm not an Ohio State fan, the future nonconference scheduling speaks for itself, and probably was done thanks to Urban Meyer. Once he gets his full compliment of players at OSU, they're going to look and play like a SEC team. >>



    Texas I believe is post-Meyer. I'm certain Oklahoma & Virginia Tech are Tressel era, I think as far back as '05 or '06. I'm pretty sure the Oregon scheduling dates back to the Tressel days as well.

    Remember they had home and home with Texas, USC and Miami back during the Tressel years and Miami was scheduled around '01, '02 ish.
  • 1985fan1985fan Posts: 1,952 ✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>Michigan State had a better argument to be in the national title game than Auburn. >>



    Agreed.

    Michigan state was one bad call away from being undefeated. >>



    Auburn played a much tougher schedule than Michigan state so they were rightfully in the title game. Lets not even get started on how easy OSU's schedule was.


  • << <i>

    << <i>

    << <i>Michigan State had a better argument to be in the national title game than Auburn. >>



    Agreed.

    Michigan state was one bad call away from being undefeated. >>



    Auburn played a much tougher schedule than Michigan state so they were rightfully in the title game. Lets not even get started on how easy OSU's schedule was. >>



    Means nothing. FSU had a weaker schedule than Michigan state and FSU beat Auburn. Auburn should've lost to Georgia and got SPANKED by LSU.

    Michigan State was way more deserving.
  • 1985fan1985fan Posts: 1,952 ✭✭


    << <i>
    Means nothing.p >>



    It obviously means SOMETHING, as it was Auburn in the title game. You aren't good at this debate thing, you know that?



    << <i> FSU had a weaker schedule than Michigan state and FSU beat Auburn. Auburn should've lost to Georgia and got SPANKED by LSU.

    Michigan State was way more deserving. >>



    Michigan State was more deserving because they played a much softer schedule, and still couldn't go undefeated? Ok pal, its only 1pm on the west coast and you're already drunk.



  • << <i>

    << <i>
    Means nothing.p >>



    It obviously means SOMETHING, as it was Auburn in the title game. You aren't good at this debate thing, you know that?



    << <i> FSU had a weaker schedule than Michigan state and FSU beat Auburn. Auburn should've lost to Georgia and got SPANKED by LSU.

    Michigan State was way more deserving. >>



    Michigan State was more deserving because they played a much softer schedule, and still couldn't go undefeated? Ok pal, its only 1pm on the west coast and you're already drunk. >>



    Nah not really. The sec teams were overhyped and overranked. Look how bad Alabama looked against Oklahoma. Michigan state beat 2 top 5 teams back to back. They would've been undefeated if the refs wouldn't had screwed them.

    Time to take your sec glasses off.
Sign In or Register to comment.