Options
So, the AP Poll is out........................
Gator5220
Posts: 1,194
in Sports Talk
I'm a little surprised that Michigan is rated ahead of Ohio State. Maybe they are expecting Texas to beat OSU?
Florida looks about right at #10. They could be good enough to be top 5, or they could struggle to grasp the system and finish #20.
F$U looks about right at #14. That's usually where 3-4 loss teams finish.
Florida looks about right at #10. They could be good enough to be top 5, or they could struggle to grasp the system and finish #20.
F$U looks about right at #14. That's usually where 3-4 loss teams finish.
0
Comments
edited to add: what will Zooks do at Illinois?
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
<< <i>There are high hopes in Ann Arbor this year... You should have considered attaching the poll for reference. SC will be tough
edited to add: what will Zooks do at Illinois? >>
I haven't found a site I can link to that has it listed, so I'll just list it here:
1. USC
2. Texas
3. Tennessee
4. Michigan
5. LSU
6. Ohio St.
7. Oklahoma
8. Virginia Tech
9. Miami
10. Florida
11. Iowa
12. Louisville
13. Georgia
14. Florida St.
15. Purdue
16. Auburn
17. Texas A&M
18. Boise St.
19. California
20. Arizona St.
21. Texas Tech
22. Boston College
23. Pittsburgh
24. Fresno St.
25. Virginia
Strange that Alabama wouldn't be ranked in the Top 25. I do think that Zook will upgrade the talent at Illinois. He is a fantastic recruiter. He was the reruiting coordinator at Florida in the early 90's. But he is going to have a tough year this season because the cupboard is bare, at least for now.
OSU V. Texas!
I'm worried about that one and at the same time cannot wait to watch it!
Go Ginn Go!!!
I've noticed COLLEGE FOOTBALL creeping closer and closer to the top on the ESPN page! Best time of the year if you ask me!
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
<< <i>
"See, Matt, God blessed us by putting us in the PAthetiC-10."
USC @ Hawaii
Texas v Lousiana (Lafayette)
Tennessee v UAB
Michigan V Northern Illinios
LSU V North Texas
You know why these teams are where ther are? Cause they are scared of putting it on the line. It looks
like the only teams putting it on the line every year right from the start is UM and FSU.
You don't prove anything playing community colleges. Once a sissy always a sissy..when are these
supposed powerhouses going to grow some balls???? Why doesn't Carroll and his sissy boyfriend
Linart come south the play?? I think we all know that answer. *USSY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
PATHETIC
GO NOLES
JS
<< <i>Lets take a look at what sissies the top 5 are. Here is what each team scheduled the first week:
USC @ Hawaii
Texas v Lousiana (Lafayette)
Tennessee v UAB
Michigan V Northern Illinios
LSU V North Texas
You know why these teams are where ther are? Cause they are scared of putting it on the line. It looks
like the only teams putting it on the line every year right from the start is UM and FSU.
You don't prove anything playing community colleges. Once a sissy always a sissy..when are these
supposed powerhouses going to grow some balls???? Why doesn't Carroll and his sissy boyfriend
Linart come south the play?? I think we all know that answer. *USSY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
PATHETIC
GO NOLES
JS >>
FSU and UM is now a conference game. The ACC decides when they play, not the two schools.
They are playing each other first for the same reason the ACC put them in opposite divisions, which is money.
Since these are considered the top 2 teams in the conference, the ACC's hope is to put two teams into the BCS, which equates to about $25 million for the conference and it's members. Or, at the very least, set up a rematch in Jacksonville for the conference championship.
Of course, Virginia Tech could just as easily get there as well.
USC's schedule is pathetic, with no team on their schedule ranked higher than 19 in any of the major polls. But FSU chose to follow their upcoming loss to Miami by paying "THE" Citadel to come to Tally for a little healing. "THE" Citadel is a Division 1-AA team. Now that's pathetic.
it..they don't hide behind 2A schools. and don't give me that the schedule is made up far in advance
and they don't know crap...none of those teams are and will ever be good.
candy *ss is all it is candy *ss. It should be mandatory if you are in the top 10..you must play
first and second week against someone who appears in the top 25 the last year. Weed out this
community college crap
JS
<< <i>hmmm I guess it was about money last year too? garbage...its about balls and those two teams have
it..they don't hide behind 2A schools. and don't give me that the schedule is made up far in advance
and they don't know crap...none of those teams are and will ever be good.
candy *ss is all it is candy *ss. It should be mandatory if you are in the top 10..you must play
first and second week against someone who appears in the top 25 the last year. Weed out this
community college crap
JS >>
Actually, it was all about money last year. Last year was Miami and VA-Tech's first year in the ACC. The ACC mandated that Miami and FSU play to open the season. There was no championship game because they did not have the minimum required 12 schools (Boston College joined effective with the 2005 season).
The ACC wanted these two to play first to give the loser a chance to climb back into the top 5 and possibly land two teams in the BCS, which as I stated before, would translate into $25 mil into the conference coffers.
Too bad Va-Tech screwed it up last year by beating Miami to end the season. And of course UF's 20-13 win at FSU kept the noles out of the BCS also.
<< <i>Why doesn't Carroll and his sissy boyfriend
Linart come south the play?? I think we all know that answer. *USSY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
PATHETIC
GO NOLES
JS >>
I believe we shutdown Auburn on the road to open the 2003 season and beat Virginia Tech in a neutral-site, but essentially road, game to start last year. That would be the same VT team that beat Miami, which, of course, was the same team that beat Florida State for the 28th straight time.
"Go Ducks"
Ken
<< <i>Pathetic-10....how short some of your memories are. Same old stuff from the same old worn out posters here.
"Go Ducks"
Ken >>
?????
What does this mean? The only to judge the strength of a team is from
recent memory, which is last year. What a team did 4-5 years ago is
irrelevant.
Notre Dame has won like 68 Nat'l Championships, but they are not the power they were 15 years ago, at least not yet.
<< <i> I believe we shutdown Auburn on the road to open the 2003 season and beat Virginia Tech in a neutral-site, but essentially road, game to start last year. That would be the same VT team that beat Miami, which, of course, was the same team that beat Florida State for the 28th straight time. >>
True, but that was an Auburn team that was a year away from being a contender. They didn't even score a TD until their third game.
You also played VT first, which was also a benefit to USC. But I think you would have beaten them whether it was week 1 or week 12.
USC has a very good team, no doubt. But the last two years you have been fortunate to avoid playing the best team in the NC game. Auburn last year (which beat VT also) would have been a much better opponent. LSU would have been much stiffer competition in 2003 also
As for the PAC-10, its, well, not very good. But in USC's defense, you can't control how good your conference opposition is. But USC has not faced the stiff tests that other previous NC's have had to face.
Why don't you guys watch some west coast footall before you complain about USC not being a 'real' champion and not having to face any challenges. I think it's plan and simple ENVY that USC has back to back national championships, will roll to a third, and Leinert's got a great shot at back to back Heismann's.
Grow up and quit being such homers.
<< <i>I think all these old fogeys who whine about the PAC 10 not being a good division must be in bed by the time they play their games.
Why don't you guys watch some west coast footall before you complain about USC not being a 'real' champion and not having to face any challenges. I think it's plan and simple ENVY that USC has back to back national championships, will roll to a third, and Leinert's got a great shot at back to back Heismann's.
Grow up and quit being such homers. >>
I never said they weren't a "real" champion, just an untested one.
Check the polls: The play three ranked teams, none of them higher than #19.
They avoided Auburn, which was a better team than Oklahoma, and they avoided LSU the year prior.
But there's apparently no shame in playing a weak schedule to win a NC. FSU and Miami did it for years. At least Miami and FSU made it point to play each other, and FSU plays Florida every year.
What elite team does USC have on the schedule???
<< <i>
<< <i>Pathetic-10....how short some of your memories are. Same old stuff from the same old worn out posters here.
"Go Ducks"
Ken >>
?????
What does this mean? The only to judge the strength of a team is from
recent memory, which is last year. What a team did 4-5 years ago is
irrelevant.
Notre Dame has won like 68 Nat'l Championships, but they are not the power they were 15 years ago, at least not yet. >>
So just exactly what does ND have to do with what I said ?
You eastern boys have been saying the Pac-10 is weak for years and years. Hmmm... it seems like every year one or maybe two of the Pac-10 teams come up and just kick the chit out of one of your Eastern or Mid Western heros during the Bowl Season.
Granted last year was not a great year but we still had the National Champion and did not have to share it with some inferior team that was all hype and no show.
So Gator get back to me at the end of the season and lets see who is correct.
Let the Season Begin.
Ken
Let's compare the #1 USC and #2 Texas schedules:
USC key games
@ #20 Arizona St.
@ #19 California
#24 Fresno State
Texas key games
@ #6 Ohio St.
#7 Oklahoma (@ Dallas)
#21 Texas Tech
@ #17 Texas A&M
Who do you think has the easier path to a NC?
Do you catch the drift Gator ?
Ken
I'm not saying USC is not a great team, because they are. But they are untested because they don't face stiff competition.
Texas, Ohio St, Tennessee, Florida, Miami, etc., all play schedules which are far more difficult than USC's.
No wonder there is a bias against west coast teams.
Face it man !!
Also I wish my Michigan guy would pop in here and relate exactly what happened to them by the then "Other Votes" Oregon team a couple of years ago. It could happen to USC but then you would just say USC is/was a huge pretender.
Hey why don't you stay up a little later this year and watch some Pac-10 Football ?
Ken
By the way you did not catch the drift. How could a pollster even give the Ducks a vote when they have not proved a thing yet ? Certainly the 96 votes, or what ever it was, are not deserved, because of last years performance, untill something is done on the field. That also goes for everyother team that received votes. So in saying a team or conference is strong or weak at this point is just a bunch of chit. The field will be the test of strength not some writer, that goes to bed early and then picks up the paper or gets on the computer the next morning for scores, telling fans with a slanted story who is strong and who is not strong.
Have you got it now ?
Ken
To put much if any weight on the poll besides the (obvious) #1 team of USC is comedy. Why don't you look at your precious 'big' team fared against the 'untested' team of USC in the title game last year?
It's obvious they are the best team by far in the land...until they are knocked off, they should (and will) retain their number one rankings, no matter what the whiners from the east coast say.
However, I will agree with you that the polls are fluid for the first few weeks of the season.
Everybody knows that USC has a very good team. But if they played in the SEC they would not be enjoying such a lengthy winning streak.
But I've always liked that sigline, Gator.
<< <i>Last time I checked, games that matter are actually played on the gridiron. USC has not only not lost one in a long time, they completely annihilated their opponent in the most meaningful game of their current run. You can prattle on and on about polls and schedules and throw out if's, and's and but's all you like, but it's not going to change the fact that heading into the 2005 season, the best program in the NCAA hails from the PAC-10.
But I've always liked that sigline, Gator. >>
I agree with everything you said!
the league and played no one to get their. Right now, as the system is, a team who plays nobody but doesn't lose will always win
out against a team who played good teams but lost one..that isn't right.
You want balls, go out to someones stadium and take them on there....Hawaii only means one thing: SISSY
USC knows they can't win east of the Mississippi! Carroll is a wimp and he is scared of 3/4ths of the country!
JS
Did you not see the drubbing that USC put on in the national title game? Or do you just talk like you know what you're talking about (oh wait, we've already determined that's the case).
USC would dominate anyone anywhere, and the national title game proved it. All this talk about 'oh they don't play anyone' is plain and simple jealousy.
on the road against a great team. It looks like that will reamin the same this season as they have NO tough away
games on their schedule.
They are wimps..why does the BCS allow these fairies to play this kind of schedule and still put them #1?? When is the last time
USC went to a top 10's place and played.....2003 Cal..LOSS 2002 Wash St LOSS 2002 K St. LOSS
they know it, we know it..FRAUDS!!
JS
You sound like a big baby whining about this and that.
There's plenty of people who know a whole hell of a lot about college football that had NO problem giving USC the well-deserved #1 ranking. You sitting there whining like a baby who lost his candy is pathetic.
It's hillarious, if USC had whipped up on Auburn, you'd be sitting there saying how they're lucky they didn't have to play Oklahoma. You west-coast haters are all alike; you know NOTHING about football.
<< <i>I'm a little surprised that Michigan is rated ahead of Ohio State. Maybe they are expecting Texas to beat OSU?
Florida looks about right at #10. They could be good enough to be top 5, or they could struggle to grasp the system and finish #20.
F$U looks about right at #14. That's usually where 3-4 loss teams finish. >>
lol@Florida being ranked that high based on just potential! hah!
if were a 3-4 loss team that what are the gators? Boy I bet Miss. State is licking their chops waiting to play you in the swamp this year!
Talk all you want now, we will see who's talking at the end of the season. And incase you havent noticed....drew weatherford isn't a joke. Just check his stats from todays scrimmage! Let's just say to say he played "Good" is an understatement....
Noles in 05, don't think no different.
<< <i>drew weatherford isn't a joke. Just check his stats from todays scrimmage! >>
I guess only check them when things go well. When Lee completes less than 10% of his passes and throws for negative yards then it's just *practice*.
No doubt about USC being the best team; however, overall the PAC10 is very weak. Other conferences are loaded with great teams and they beat each other up, making it near impossible to go undefeated. USC plays 2 maybe 3 games this year where they'll be favored by less than 3 touchdowns.
<< <i>
No doubt about USC being the best team; however, overall the PAC10 is very weak. Other conferences are loaded with great teams and they beat each other up, making it near impossible to go undefeated. USC plays 2 maybe 3 games this year where they'll be favored by less than 3 touchdowns. >>
The 'weak' pac 10 (as you and many others called it) had 3 teams with 8 or more wins last year; the SEC with 2 more (bottom-feeding) teams had just 4.
Top to bottom they are both heavier on the top end than the bottom; this myth that the PAC10 is weaker when the SEC had 3 teams with 3 or less wins, the PAC10 had 2.
No matter how the media or it's (rabid) fans want to spin it, the SEC is not significantly better than the PAC10 top to bottom.
USC will roll to another national title as they have everyone back on offense, Leinert will win another Heismann, and Reggie Bush will roll and dominate.
<< <i>
<< <i>
No doubt about USC being the best team; however, overall the PAC10 is very weak. Other conferences are loaded with great teams and they beat each other up, making it near impossible to go undefeated. USC plays 2 maybe 3 games this year where they'll be favored by less than 3 touchdowns. >>
The 'weak' pac 10 (as you and many others called it) had 3 teams with 8 or more wins last year; the SEC with 2 more (bottom-feeding) teams had just 4.
Top to bottom they are both heavier on the top end than the bottom; this myth that the PAC10 is weaker when the SEC had 3 teams with 3 or less wins, the PAC10 had 2.
No matter how the media or it's (rabid) fans want to spin it, the SEC is not significantly better than the PAC10 top to bottom.
USC will roll to another national title as they have everyone back on offense, Leinert will win another Heismann, and Reggie Bush will roll and dominate. >>
Where did I mention SEC? Any of the other "big" conferences, whether the SEC, Big 10, Big 12, & ACC are superior. If USC played in one of these conferences, they would not go undefeated.
<< <i>The 'weak' pac 10 (as you and many others called it) had 3 teams with 8 or more wins last year; the SEC with 2 more (bottom-feeding) teams had just 4.
Top to bottom they are both heavier on the top end than the bottom; this myth that the PAC10 is weaker when the SEC had 3 teams with 3 or less wins, the PAC10 had 2.
No matter how the media or it's (rabid) fans want to spin it, the SEC is not significantly better than the PAC10 top to bottom.
USC will roll to another national title as they have everyone back on offense, Leinert will win another Heismann, and Reggie Bush will roll and dominate. >>
Ha! Now you sound like an uneducated college football fan.
USC will be exposed...whenever they travel to A REAL SCHOOL to play.
Like JS pointed out that when they travel to a real school, they lose.
Let the season play out and then come back with your trash, if you can.
Southern Jail Ball. You gotta Love It.....NOT !!!!
Ken
I am fairly happy with Michigans placement in the polls, but think it may be a little high. Their offense should be very good, but a suspect D lost some big help from last years team and will need to pick up the slack to remain a strong competitor in the Big 10. Watch Grady though, their freshman RB. Hart had a superb freshman year last year, putting up excellent numbers. At the beginning of the spring, Carr said we have a solid starter in Hart and Grady will be a guy we can use late in games. Last week, Carr said the job is very close... I saw Grady play 2 games last year, and this kid is going to be a great player IMO.
<< <i>USC is obviously a strong team, simply based on their play from the previous 2 years. I don't think they play in the strongest conference by any means, but it's not their fault if many of the other Pac-10 teams suck. Heck, FSU had been playing in a dump known as the ACC for years and I'm sure most of the FSU fans here weren't complaining about the lack of competition in the ACC during that span. >>
I have said this ad nauseum on this board. USC is very, very good, and they have no control over how good their opposition is. It does, however give them an easier road to a NC than others with fewer tests. This was the exact road that Miami and FSU have taken for years.
No question that the SEC and Big 10 are tougher conferences top to bottom.
<< <i>Fairlaneman, just curious, are you a supporter of USC? I don't recall seeing which team you put your support behind. >>
Down and down I hate USC but I am also a person that can see talent when it is put in front of you. Some of you folks just refuse to do this.
I am a Pac-10 guy though. Along with the Pac-10 I have also followed certain teams for over 40 years. So happens that LSU is one of them. Billy Cannon was a hero way back when. The Big Ten has Wisconsin on my side. Most hated team is Washington. Got a clue yet on who my team is ?
Anyway do away with the bias attitudes and let the season play out, if the pollsters will let really 2 best teams play for the championship. That would be very cool, HUH ?
Ken
in the SEC for much of the 80's and 90's AND mixed in Notre Dame. As a matter of fact we played Florida every year at the end
of the season where a loss would take you out of the NC race......now what other team even comes close to doing that??
and so now the ACC is powerful...do we drop Florida?? NO we are right there, playing them at the end, where someone is always
knocked out of the race.
Its simple and no one wants to admit it, but teams are soft now..call it money, call it what ever you want...USC has no balls..they have
a soft schedule and have had one for 3 years now. Doesn't it bother anyone that the top 5 are playing cupcakes?? Its funny everyone
is so against the BCS and against the computers deciding the champ..but these teams are too scared to settle it on the field. Play
cupcakes....win them all...hope the computers pick you....*itch and moan when they don't......garbage
JS
<< <i>
<< <i>Fairlaneman, just curious, are you a supporter of USC? I don't recall seeing which team you put your support behind. >>
Down and down I hate USC but I am also a person that can see talent when it is put in front of you. Some of you folks just refuse to do this.
I am a Pac-10 guy though. Along with the Pac-10 I have also followed certain teams for over 40 years. So happens that LSU is one of them. Billy Cannon was a hero way back when. The Big Ten has Wisconsin on my side. Most hated team is Washington. Got a clue yet on who my team is ?
Anyway do away with the bias attitudes and let the season play out, if the pollsters will let really 2 best teams play for the championship. That would be very cool, HUH ?
Ken >>
I don't deal in riddles, but I would guess you support Washington St., since they are a rival of Washington, your most hated team. Why not just say it from the outset?
Second, find one single post where I put down either the talent level or the ability of USC. I'll save you the trouble, because I haven't. I said they haven't faced the same tests of some of the previous Nat'l Champs, so they are untested. As much as I despise FSU, at least they have tried to play a respectable non-conference schedule, save Citadel this season. They have played Miami and Florida since footballs were round. Miami has spoiled FSU NC hopes many times, same for Florida and FSU. If you ask me, USC should go out of their way to play tough non-conference games to offset their weak conference schedule, unless of course the only thing they are concernced with is going undefeated.
If USC played in the SEC East and played Florida, Tennessee, Georgia, LSU, Alabama, every season there is no way in the round world they would be on a 22-game winning streak. Even when Florida was way ahead of the conference in the early to mid 90's the best they could muster was 24-2. There's just too much competition in the SEC. That's not bias, that's a fact, unless of course you only read west-coast publications. Log-on to ESPN, SI, CBSSportsline and see for yourself.
Talent and strength for football, how can one person assess that ? Just opinions I would say. Now if we were talking basketball that would be a different story.
Ken