October 7, 2007
Week 6 College Football Polls - 2007
College football top 25 polls for games played through October 7, 2007.
AP College Football Top 25 Poll
1. LSU (65)
2. California
3. Ohio State
4. Boston College
5. South Florida
6. Oklahoma
7. South Carolina
8. West Virginia
9. Oregon
10. USC
11. Missouri
12. Virginia Tech
13. Florida
14. Arizona State
15. Cincinnati
16. Hawaii
17. Kentucky
18. Illinois
19. Wisconsin
20. Kansas
21. Florida State
22. Auburn
23. Texas
24. Georgia
25. Tennessee
USA Today Coaches College Football Top 25 Poll
1. LSU (58)
2. California
3. Ohio State (2)
4. Boston College
5. South Florida
5. Oklahoma
7. USC
8. Oregon
9. West Virginia
10. Virginia Tech
11. Missouri
12. South Carolina
13. Arizona State
14. Florida
15. Wisconsin
16. Hawaii
17. Cincinnati
18. Kentucky
19. Illinois
20. Kansas
21. Florida State
22. Texas
23. Georgia
24. Purdue
25. Auburn
Harris Interactive College Football Top 25 Poll
1. LSU (113)
2. California
3. Ohio State
4. Boston College
5. Oklahoma
6. South Florida
7. USC
8. West Virginia
9. South Carolina
10. Oregon
11. Missouri
12. Virginia Tech
13. Florida
14. Arizona State
15. Wisconsin
16. Hawaii
17. Cincinnati
18. Kentucky
19. Illinois
20. Kansas
21. Texas
22. Florida State
23. Georgia
24. Purdue
25. Auburn
Master Coaches Poll
1. LSU (17)
2. Ohio State
3. California
4. Boston College
5. Oklahoma
6. USC
7. South Florida
8. Florida
9. Oregon
10. South Carolina
11. West Virginia
12. Missouri
13. Virginia Tech
14. Illinois
15. Arizona State
16. Wisconsin
17. Hawaii
18. Cincinnati
19. Kentucky
20. Kansas
21. Texas
22. Purdue
23. Auburn
24. Tennessee
25. Florida State
Comments:
Diggs the Mountie said:
posted on October 7, 2007 3:53 PM — 76.114.231.180 — link — abuse?
TE,
CBS Sportsline has WVU vs. Florida in the Sugar Bowl......Lets just say I'm hoping it pans out that way.
Yes, there is doubt they would throttle USF, USC, WVU......just look at OLe Miss as an example.
That's why we paly the games.........I hope CBS Sportslines prediction pans out though I really do.
Cock'n'Fire South Carolina said:
posted on October 7, 2007 4:21 PM — 96.10.98.113 — link — abuse?
yehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
south carolina ranked 7th...if u dont count the 1984 season thats the highest south carolina has been ranked in school history
but in 1984 we were ranked 5th then 2nd then 9th then 7th at the end of the season
the ol ball coach is really gonna get the ball rolling this yeer but i still dont think south carolina is getting enough love...we could probly beat a few of those teams ahead of us...and we could very well beat LSU in a rematch at home or a neutral site...tiger stadium was too much
Go Cocks! (#7) 5-1 (3-1) SEC
badgerballer
posted on October 7, 2007 4:53 PM — 71.34.157.128 — link — abuse?
said:
Ouch. Oh well, all honeymoons have to end sooner or later. 17-2 under our new coach, both losses on the road - we've got little to complain about. #19 is a pretty serious drop, considering other top 10's that have lost to unranked opponents, but hey, we lost.
Bottom line is our defense simply cannot handle spread offenses. Its that simple. We give up WAY too many big plays to teams that spread the field out with 4, 5 sometimes 6 receiver sets. We need to score at least 35 a game in order to win, as soon as our offense failed to crack 30 or 35, that was bound to be the end of the run b/c the D can't hold anybody to under 30. (except UNstink'nLV)
*sigh*
Oh well.
1st_and_NOLE
posted on October 7, 2007 5:10 PM — 71.14.108.232 — link — abuse? said:
Back in the top 25.
I think it's a crime S. Carolina didn't move up in the Coach's Poll.... what a effin joke.
The fact west coast USC is still in the top 10 is a joke considering Michigan was knocked all the way out of the polls. I know M lost to a 1AA team but... the point spread for USC over Stanford was actually a larger margin then Michigan over App St was.
Andrew R said:
posted on October 7, 2007 6:16 PM — 75.90.78.100 — link — abuse?
Wait, let me get this straight. Wisconsin looses to an undefeated Illinois and falls to 19th and two weeks ago Florida looses to a two loss Auburn and falls to 9th. With wins over Western Carolina and Troy and now 2 losses, how are they even in the top 15? I guess a win over a two loss and now 25th ranked Tennessee goes a lot further than I once thought.
Also Michigan looses to the best 1-AA team there is and falls out of the top 25 and yet USC looses to 40 point dogs, 1-3 Stanford and yet stay in the top 10.
Think the AP already have their favorites?
collegefootball said:
posted on October 7, 2007 6:24 PM — 74.195.11.224 — link — abuse?
Let me just say I am a LSU fan and I was at the game. Florida is tough and Tebow who I thought was over rated is not. he is superman, just another example of the SEC beating up on each other, Florida even with 2 loses should still be in the top 10
Tom Blogical
posted on October 7, 2007 6:35 PM — 24.95.77.153 — link — abuse? said:
TE (#1):
"Who-other than Jim Tressel-is the idiot from the Big 10 that keeps voting them #1?"
I guarantee that neither of the 2 idiots voting for Ohio State is Jim Tressel. You can take that to the bank.
don't tempt me said:
posted on October 7, 2007 6:58 PM — 205.188.116.136 — link — abuse?
how is it that florida moves down 4 spots after losing to the no. 1 team, and usc stays in the top 10 after losing to stanford?!
and i can assume one of those 2 votes is pete carroll...i think that man would die before voting for lsu!
grcunning said:
posted on October 7, 2007 7:46 PM — 71.72.42.64 — link — abuse?
Tom Blogical is right, Jim Tressel voted for LSU. The two who voted for the Buckeyes are probably coaches who played them, not some idiot that doesn't even bother to watch the games, cause he's too busy singing SEC fight songs.
and TE@1,let me try to get your logic...
Wisconsin lost to a very good Illinois team(also in the big 10), and thats your evidence that the Big 10 is just pretenders....
and Florida loses to a good Auburn team(at home), and thats your evidence that everyone in the SEC is just underrated?????
and if the two best teams played last night, what does that make Auburn, 1.5?????
LSU has proven on the field that they are the best team in the country, but Florida, with 2 losses has no business in any top ten. Who have they beaten? Troy? Western Ky? They did beat an average Tennessee team, but they have lost to every good team they played.
Florida is too young, and too reliant on one player (although he is a stud) to be considered a top team.
Try to actually watch the games and not just listen to the Gameday crowd...oh that's right, Cosro, Hirbstreit, and that idiot Holtz have all jumped off of the Florida and USC ship and onto the Buckeye express. (I'm not sure thats a good thing for us, and they all love LSU by the way.)
GO BUCKEYES!
indieguy06 said:
posted on October 7, 2007 8:13 PM — 69.108.151.43 — link — abuse?
USC's lost was not like Michigan's lost: USC lost to a conference team, Michigan lost to a division 1-AA team; USC had a lot of key players injured before the game, Michigan was at 100 %; USC had 460 yard total yards to Stanfords 235, Michigan had 480 yards to App states 390; USC gave up 5 turnovers to Stafords 1, and Michigan gave up 2 turnovers to App states 3; JDB fractured one of his fingers on his throwing hand before the end of the half; Stanfords win was a fluke while App state won by simply outplaying Michigan. USC is still ranked because of these circumstances, where Michigan fell out of the rankings because A.)they lost to a div 1-aa school B.)they were simply outplayed by a div-1aa school. The rankings make sense.
grcunning said:
posted on October 7, 2007 8:19 PM — 71.72.42.64 — link — abuse?
hey gatorstud, where are you? you get lost on that long drive?
My friends thought I was crazy, but I was rootin with you last night..you guys played a great game. I think you should make it through Ky and Ga, and if you can find a way to beat a really good SC team on the road, you may get another shot at them.
I do think that you should be around #17 or #18 though.
and the USC ranking really bugs me. I know that anyone can lose any game, but to lose to that team, at home, as a 40 point favorite...they should have dropped out of the top ten at least.grcunning said:
posted on October 7, 2007 8:35 PM — 71.72.42.64 — link — abuse?
indieguy06@18
after thinking about it a little bit, you're right about the USC/Michigan thing.
USC should never have lost that game, but at least it was to an in-state conference rival.
Michigan lost to.....awww hell, I don't care who they lost to, I'm just happy that they lost. Muck Fichigan.Lennie Collins
posted on October 7, 2007 8:42 PM — 67.67.223.182 — link — abuse? said:
Indieguy06 (Comment #18), you came with stats and facts BUT remember Michigan was PRESEASONED RANKED #5. They did not "play" their way to that ranking/position. USC was "supposed" to beat everyone they played this year with "ease". Stanford has been the "joke" of the Pacific-10 conference since Ty Willingham left. Most college football stadiums have undergone EXPANSION at one point over the last 10 years or so, not Stanford. Stanford is the only school in the Major BCS conferences that downgraded their stadium capacity. Why? Because fans were losing interest in football. The Stanford fans only supported baseball and basketball. After last night win...the fans will return and stadium expansion will be talked about in the near future.
1st_and_NOLE
posted on October 7, 2007 8:55 PM — 71.14.108.232 — link — abuse? said:
Again...
The point spread was LARGER for USC over Stanford then it was for Michigan over App St. Why?
Because most people knew App St was a good team. While it was shocking, it wasn't like people didn't know who App St was. App St is the two time defending champions. App St played LSU very tough a couple years ago and has beaten other major BCS D1 schools.
USC has looked awful all year. They haven't beaten anyone convincingly despite the fact is was supposedly one of the best USC teams - ever.
USC lost to the Duke of the west coast.
They shouldn't be ranked higher then 20th - if at all.
Major poll bias.
posted on October 7, 2007 8:57 PM — 205.188.116.136 — link — abuse?War Eagle Atlanta
said:
Andrew R: Good point about USC. If Michigan fell out of the polls dropping to APP State, USC should drop to at least #20 losing to 40 point underdogs.
What a crazy year so far, and we are far from over. I say that 70% of the current top ten don't finish that high.
Les Miles is one lucky SOB. What a good game though. LSU hung in there strong. Their season is not over yet, though.
Even though Wisconsin lost, I still say they have a good shot at winning the Big11.
What a disparity between the AP and the coach's poll this year. What's up with that?
Florida with 2 SEC losses. Wouldn't you like to see a Capital One Bowl pitting them against the Fighting Zooks of Illinois?
U. of S. C. 1978 said:
posted on October 7, 2007 9:27 PM — 97.82.188.250 — link — abuse?
With my week 5 and 7 Re-Action to reality plan, this next weekend would feature the following match ups.
1. LSU (65)
2. California3. Ohio State
4. Boston College5. South Florida
6. Oklahoma7. South Carolina
8. West Virginia9. Oregon
10. USC11. Missouri
12. Virginia Tech13. Florida
14. Arizona State15. Cincinnati
16. Hawaii17. Kentucky
18. Illinois19. Wisconsin
20. Kansas21. Florida State
22. Auburn23. Texas
24. GeorgiaLeftover teams get matched up by the AP voters. Let us face the fact fellows, all of the other polls have no credibility what so ever.
Now tell me how these match ups would not un-muddy the waters? Especially if week 5 had been through my schedule system?
These match ups clarify the "best" picture.What I am suggesting is a "with in the season playoff", capped off by a bowl season finale.
It is better than what exists now. It is workable. I am hollering "PULL", shoot at it boys!Bevo Boy said:
posted on October 7, 2007 9:39 PM — 64.12.116.136 — link — abuse?
USC did play one good game, at Nebraska. That doesn't look as good as it did at the time, but they beat the crap out of a ranked team. That doesn't by any means make up for losing to Stanford but I suppose it's like Michigan vs. App. St. and Texas at the beginning of the year; they overlooked their opponents and didn't know what to do when they had a close game. They have the most talent and will probably get into a BCS game (unless Cal beats them and doesn't slip up elsewhere). They have enough talent to win out and work themselves back into the title game. They just have to get John David Booty's confidence back.
U. of S. C. 1978 said:
posted on October 7, 2007 9:46 PM — 97.82.188.250 — link — abuse?
I understand that some of these match ups have already occurred or might occur. Some stipulations are needed, please point those out. My whole point is that we turn a part of the regular season into a playoff system. Let the BCS as it exists now, finalize the whole thing. Teams and fans are able to react to the Bowls, they can react to uncertainty earlier in the season as well.
lbaldwin said:
posted on October 7, 2007 9:51 PM — 68.206.158.30 — link — abuse?
How the H@LL does USC rate being in the top ten??? Who in the world are the idiots voting for this??? Michigan loses to an unranked, unthought of team and they fall completely from the top 25, which I do agree with.....but then USC not only can barely beat Washington, but loses in thier OWN backyard to Stanford, and there are enough votes by these idiots to keep this OVER RATED, UNDERACHIEVING, powder puff tem in the top ten, HOW?? People obviousely vote for this team, time and time again solely based upon the name USC, not anything else! Two years case and point, USC was continually voted #1, and Reggie Bush was given the heisman, SOLEY due to name recognition. Then in the championship game, they lose, and the real winner of the heisman makes all the pollsters choke on thier ballots as He Vince Young shows the world how politically motivated this voting system is, and how EACH BALLOTT CAST FOR BUSH, AND THE #1 RANKING WAS AN OBVIOUS JOKE!!!! Now here we go again in 2007, USC collects enough first place votes for a month, barely escapes with a win against nobody Washington, and comes out with the #2 spot. Then they lose to a powderpuff team like the Cardnals, and they still remain in the top ten.....???? What a joke. Pete Caroll and his whole team are over rated, and undeserving of votes that they obtain!!! Can anyone vote fairly, and not vote based upon thier wishes for the name of USC to regain former glory? The whole voting system is obviousely in ruins, and has no validity to the average American. This weeks poll proves it, how do you vote USC over UNBEATEN Missouri???? Enough said, all do to name recognition, no more, no less.
Cock'n'Fire South Carolina said:
posted on October 8, 2007 12:58 AM — 96.10.98.113 — link — abuse?
post 14 dont tempt me
if you may have noticed when south carolina lost to LSU they dropped 4 spots too...they were 12th and dropped to 16th
and post 5 1st and nole
amen i dont understand that poll
and and post 27 u of sc
that sounds like a good idea but first you have to think of those unranked teams that are good enough to be in the top 25 but didnt get voted in the top 25...that already eliminates them
go cocks! #7 5-1 (3-1) SEC
Tomcat said:
posted on October 8, 2007 3:18 AM — 69.148.173.234 — link — abuse?
#32 Enjoyed your post and I will agree that with the competetion or parity that exist today in CFB that just about anybody can beat anybody and that a teams name or history should not determine how folks vote,however thats exactly what happens. A few turnovers, penalties, and missed tackles can help unranked teams pull off the huge upsets and we have seen alot of them this year.Every game is different and some teams execute better on some days and some teams match up differently against their opponents.
Your example Mizzu Tigers 5-0 with some wins over some good opponents Illinos and Ole Miss.
Then they blew away Nebraska 41-6
Next week they travel to Norman OK
The Sooners are 5-1
The 1 loss coming to the CU Buffs 4-2
The Buffs surprized everybody and both of their loses came to quality opponents Az St and FSU.
Then the Buffs beat BU by 20 points a team that beat them last year at home.
XII next week
Mizzu at OU Looks like a good one
TTech 5-1 vs Texas A&M 5-1
TTech's only loss came to OK State
A&M beat OK State 24-23 doesnt mean they win at TTech against the Air Raid Raiders
A&M's only loss came to UM at team that lost to OU and NC? Thats why the game is played, just because OU beat UM and UM beat A&M doesnt mean that OU would beat A&M.
The OU vs Mizzu game is real big and we may see these teams face each other again in the XII champ game.
USC vs Stanford I'd didnt see the game, however I understand that there were like 6 turnovers by USC. I watched last weeks game S.Miss vs Rice and the same kinda thing happened. S.Miss had like 6 turnovers and Rice won. You cant beat Rice or Stanford with 6 turnovers.
Oklahoma beat Texas 28-21 and it was a great game.Texas had two turnovers and OU had zero, and other than one blown coverage by the Texas D.This was a very hard fought evenly matched contest that could have gone either way.
By the end of the season we should have alot of quality teams with loses including the so-called big dogs.There will also be alot of really good
teams at 9-3 and 8-4 that can beat anybody.
Hookem-Horns
posted on October 8, 2007 8:19 AM — link — abuse? said:
Parity? Seriously? Where's the parity in a dog team like Stanford going on the road and jumping up to beat USC? That's not parity. That wasn't a question of equals. That was a really good team didn't care about playing a really bad team and it bit them in the ass.
Parity - in my opinion - is every team playing like Kansas State or Georgia Tech. Maybe they'll win, maybe they won't. They're middlers. If every game in the country had a 2.5 point betting line - that would be parity.
But that doesn't exist in college football today. There are several GREAT teams that will be favorites in every single game they play.
An underdog beating a top team is not parity, guys. That's football.
gatorstud said:
posted on October 8, 2007 8:28 AM — 69.95.111.248 — link — abuse?
wow..what a trip..what a game....congrats again to lsu...great game....sucks being on the losing end...but , oh well...
i got home late and started watching the replays of game i missed...and there is one team that no-one is talking about and they should be....
the indiana hoosiers......to put together a 5-1 season after losing terry h. before the beginning of the season...those kids there had every excuse to pack it in and not play well this year after the death of their head coach....instead they have risen up and responded with winning....they may not play for a national title...or win the big ten....but they are winning now...and that is what counts....
go hoosiers go.....
go gators.....and hokies...(this ones for you tom b.)...and buckeyes....
Tampa Hurricane
posted on October 8, 2007 9:18 AM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse? said:
Can someone explain to me how a 3-2 team is supposed to be the 25th best team in the nation? Sure Tennessee does have wins over So Miss, Arkansas State, and Georgia, but come on, how in the hell are they considered the 25th best team in the nation?
AUTigers03 said:
posted on October 8, 2007 11:16 AM — 74.239.251.222 — link — abuse?
Tampa Hurricane
Post #41
Tennessee is # 25 at 3-2 because they have only lost to Cal #2 and Florida #13 and beat the hell out of a #24 Georgia team. Who should be the 25 team in the country?
Besides it's all opinions what does it really matter right now it all usually comes out in the wash by the end of the year any way.
Lennie Collins
posted on October 8, 2007 1:01 PM — 67.67.223.182 — link — abuse? said:
Hey fellow bloggers I was watching Cold Pizza this morning and that Stanford win over Southern California is currently the "BIGGEST" upset as far as "The Point Spread" or "Style Points" as DmanLV calls it is concern. Earlier this year Syracuse were 37 point underdogs against Louisville, and well we all know what happened. I agree with all of you that USC should not be ranked and the Top 10 BUT they are getting a lot of love. Why? I do not know! I aslo believed Oklahoma should not have stayed in the Top 10 when they lost to Colorado. I wanna say that in case USC fans decide to return to the blog and state I'm being BAIS! Did anyone catch John Booty comments after the lost? I think he suffered a concussion!
TampaGator said:
posted on October 8, 2007 2:16 PM — 64.12.116.136 — link — abuse?
AuTigers03/#42:
Excellent post. I stopped paying attention to the polls before mid to late November years ago. It's a waste of time. It will play itself out in due time. You worry about what's on your plate, and then-if and only if--your team's getting snubbed in the polls approaching bowl time--you raise a fuss. Otherwise you're just begging to eat crow, when you squak about your team not getting the love--then they lay an egg once later in the season.
e.g.--Gators can still win the SEC East--and therefore the SEC; that's all we can control. Why should we worry about the polls? If we can't take care of that business, the polls will mean nothing to us.
My $.02.
GO GATORS!!
TampaGator said:
posted on October 8, 2007 2:17 PM — 64.12.116.136 — link — abuse?
AuTigers03/#42:
Excellent post. I stopped paying attention to the polls before mid to late November years ago. It's a waste of time. It will play itself out in due time. You worry about what's on your plate, and then-if and only if--your team's getting snubbed in the polls approaching bowl time--you raise a fuss. Otherwise you're just begging to eat crow, when you squak about your team not getting the love--then they lay an egg once later in the season.
e.g.--Gators can still win the SEC East--and therefore the SEC; that's all we can control. Why should we worry about the polls? If we can't take care of that business, the polls will mean nothing to us.
My $.02.
GO GATORS!!
gatorstud said:
posted on October 8, 2007 2:50 PM — 69.95.111.248 — link — abuse?
hey t-gator.....what in the hell was meyer thinking letting all that time go off the clock at the end of the game when lsu had the ball close to our goaline....i keep watching the end of the game and i am counting 38-39 seconds that ran off the clock....wtf....
i think floridas caoching staff also needs to learn how to finish games....i was not real happy with the play calling on our last drive (3 & out) last week vs. auburn....and i am not happy after watching the end of the lsu game.....
lose two games by a combined 7 points.....da-gummit....
go gators...and hokies
FromVT said:
posted on October 8, 2007 2:53 PM — 76.31.204.151 — link — abuse?
To anyone who talks about losses because of turnovers, yes that is why they lost, but that is also the reason they are not as good as expected. How many turnovers did USC have? That's because they are not nearly as good as they have been ranked.
Rankings are ridiculous. Now that USC is still top 10 they can still be in the National Championship even if Missouri ends up undefeated. Do you really think that Missouri can jump USC in the polls if USC does not lose another game, I really doubt it, and that is what sucks. I only use Mizzou because they are still ranked below USC when some other undefeated teams are not. South Carolina should be ranked higher that USC, what are the coaches thinking. Florida is most likely still a top 5 team even with 2 losses, basically the polls stink. Too much is still based on pre-season perceptions of how good teams are, that is a shame.
gatorhippy
posted on October 8, 2007 3:44 PM — 70.121.185.56 — link — abuse? said:
g-stud (#46):
Funny you should mention the timeout thing...
We were all wondering why it wasn't called either and then suddenly burned when the play clock was at like 8-10 secs...
As a matter of fact...
The old guy next to me was screaming for the TO (as was I) and then when Meyer called it late...
Dude got so pissed that he went to stomp his feet and slipped and fell into the next row of bleachers taking out three other fans...
My bigger question is why was Moore not given any carries after his fumble...
He was ripping it up, keeping the Tiger D off balance and on his way to a 100 yard game...
He fumbles once and it was like Mullen lost all faith in him...
JMHO...
gatorstud said:
posted on October 8, 2007 3:54 PM — 69.95.111.248 — link — abuse?
g-hippy...LMFAO.....too funny....we had some guy in our section trip on the steps with a armload of goodies, on his way back from the concession stand....went down like 10-15 steps before he stopped....effin hillarious.....
man, tiger stadium is one loud place but, i couldn't believe how loud it got when they announced that USC had lost...talk about rockin...
i agree w/ you on moore... it seemed once we gave up our first turnover, the offense got tight....like they were trying not to lose instead of trying to win....
jmho
go gators...and hokies
TampaGator said:
posted on October 8, 2007 3:58 PM — 64.12.116.136 — link — abuse?
Gatorstud/#46:
I have no idea. Maybe he thought he could redeem his timeouts after the game for points or money...
I just try to enjoy the games these days. I used to let myself get all worked up about what the coach should've done, or not, what this player or that one could've or should've done...after a while though, I realized that the only thing I accomplished was getting myself all worked up.
Our time management could definitely use some improvement--I'll leave it at that.
Hopefully we can make it back to the ATL, and have a second crack at them Tigers (be they AU or LSU)--and manage the clock better!
GO GATORS!!
AUTigers03 said:
posted on October 8, 2007 4:56 PM — 74.239.251.222 — link — abuse?
Tampa Gator
I would love to see rematches of either game at this point. I think those have been the best two games all year. OU and Texas was a good one too.
But we need to beat LSU,Arkansas,Bama and ya'll have to beat USC,Kentucky,and Georgia. Neither of which will be easy to do.
But I hope to see ya there
GO TIGERS!!!!!!AUTigers03 said:
posted on October 8, 2007 4:56 PM — 74.239.251.222 — link — abuse?
Tampa Gator
I would love to see rematches of either game at this point. I think those have been the best two games all year. OU and Texas was a good one too.
But we need to beat LSU,Arkansas,Bama and ya'll have to beat USC,Kentucky,and Georgia. Neither of which will be easy to do.
But I hope to see ya there
GO TIGERS!!!!!!Big Tide said:
posted on October 8, 2007 6:04 PM — 12.208.88.211 — link — abuse?
I said a couple of weeks back that Houston would play Alabama tough. I listened to most of that game on the radio and those cougars never gave up. For a program trying to build on something that was a great win for my Crimson Tide. Kudos to Houston - they've got a solid program and are going to jump into the "upset pool" pretty soon.
We very well could have seen the National Championship game Saturday night in Baton Rouge. Two great programs going at it full throttle. I'd put Florida and LSU up against any two teams in the country.
FANofFLA said:
posted on October 8, 2007 7:47 PM — 72.69.2.100 — link — abuse?
FANofFLA (aka g-stud)
big tide # 53.....ther have been a lot of good games so far, and i'm sure that there will be more exciting games to come......but, for back to back saturday night games.....sec does it right...tight tough "whoever has the last possesion is going to win" games....
I LOVE COLLEGE FOOTBALL......
go gators...and hokies
U. of S. C. 1978 said:
posted on October 8, 2007 9:02 PM — 97.82.188.250 — link — abuse?
Columbia, S.C. - South Carolina defensive end Eric Norwood and quarterback Chris Smelley each earned honors from the SEC following their performances last Thursday in the Gamecocks' 38-23 win against Kentucky. Norwood received SEC Defensive Player of the Week accolades with Smelley named Freshman of the Week for a second consecutive week.
GOCOCKS! GOCOCKS! GOCOCKS!
Zac said:
posted on October 8, 2007 10:11 PM — 64.12.116.136 — link — abuse?
TE (Post 1), are you serious about the question you asked "...is there any doubt that Florida would throttle teams like the USF Bulls, the USC Trojans, or the West Virginia Mountaineers?" If you are, the answer is "Yes." There certainly was room for doubt on Sept 22, not to mention Sept 29, but not too much room for doubt the rest of the way.
The bases: No "doubt" you've heard the phrase, "on any given day". Not good enough? Try the Rich Rodriguez theory of football, though, mind you, it may not be totally his. He has said on more than one occasion, not only do teams have to be good; sometimes they have to be lucky.
Don't agree? Riddle me this. How many times have any of us seen reliable RB's fumble, or reliable WR's drop passes delivered to their numbers for a 1st down, or in the EZ?
How about Reliable QB's throwing into tight coverage, or to an opponent with no eligible receiver near by?
With rules that allow QB's to throw the ball away outside the tackles, how is it some of the most reliable QB's still take sacks, or run out-of-bounds for losses?
How many times have we seen tipped passes go right to the opposition, or fumbles bounce right into the hands of a defender in full stride?
How many bad calls have we witnessed; how many no calls?
How many times have we expected a reviewed call to be upheld only to see it reversed? How many times have we expected calls under review to be reversed only to be upheld?
How many times have we seen bad snaps, blocked punts, shanked punts, blocked FG attempts, missed FG's, missed Xtra pts, when it looks as if the kickers mechanics were sound?
What about missed tackles, missed assignments?
How about those almost sacs, where a play is made on 3rd down or for a score? How about those almost interceptions, where teams that almost threw them score on the following play?
How many times have we witnessed plays where you have to wonder if devine intervention is involved, only to see another that makes you wanna scratch your sack?I could go on. The point is this. It's not just about preparation, condition, and execution, it's also about timing.
Case in pt: Last year, FL had 3 games they won by 1 pt. On those days, better teams would have beaten them. Last year, FL crushed OSU. On that evening no team in college football could have beaten FL. No "doubt" you could come up with a few examples yourself.
Now, in retrospect, is FL better than S FL? It's arguable, but had it been FL who played S FL on 9/28, the result may not have been much different for the Bulls. Is FL better than USC? Last week they were, but on 9/22 arguably they were not. Is FL better than WVU? Don't know, but wouldn't you really like to find out? Let's face it; neither team will be playing for the NC. So, why not match em up in a bowl? Or, are you still so certain the answer to your question is "No". If that's the case, lest we forget, no one gave WVU a chance in the 2005 Sugar Bowl. We all saw how that turned out; didn't we.
Tomcat said:
posted on October 8, 2007 11:36 PM — 69.148.173.234 — link — abuse?
#38 Kevin-good post, wrong terminology on my part. Would you not agree that perhaps USC is not as good as projected, say maybe #20-#25 and that perhaps Stanford is a little better than given credit, like instead of #90 maybe #65?.
Now the #25 team plays like sh-t and the #65 team plays their best and given all the different things brought up by Zac post #56 couldnt David knock off Goliath- appearantly so- Upset yes
Now when I heard about Utah stomping UCLA that didnt surprize me one bit, then last week ND put it on them, I figured thats an upset.
I'll agree somewhat your comment about teams like G Tech and K State, and thats why the game is played and probably why we as fans love it so much.I personaly beleive that undefeated teams should be ranked higher than teams with losses and that there is no team that is unbeatable including LSU, Cal and Boston college.
adios TomcatDiggs the Mountie said:
posted on October 9, 2007 4:31 AM — 76.114.231.180 — link — abuse?
Kevin,
So you're saying there's been no "parity" this College Football Season?
o.k. Didn't expect that from you? But o.k.
I wasn't talking about the Stanford Cardinal beating USC as my main reference here......Look at the big picture.
This game was just another nail in the parity coffin.
The days of tradition are numbered in College Football. Sure you'll have the usuals still able to win and win consistently.
But they're not going to dominate year in and year out like "the good ol' days".
Tomcat said:
posted on October 9, 2007 6:29 AM — 69.148.173.234 — link — abuse?
Hey Diggs I Agree The Names mean nothing anymore.
For Example Big dogs of the XII
Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Texas A&M all have losses and the undefeated Kansas and Missouri?
Big Dogs Big East
Louisville, West Virginia,Rutgers -losses
undefeated S Fla and Cinn
Big Dogs ACC
FSU, Miami, V Tech,G Tech,Clemson,-losses
undefeated Boston College
Pac-10
USC,Oregon,UCLA
undefeated Cal
Wheres the love for the Mighty Stanford Cardinals? Heck they knocked off #2 right?
Stanford is 2-3 and all three of their loses came against ranked teams except UCLA which was ranked at the time, the other two loses were Oregon and Arizona St still ranked highBig games this week
TCU 3-3 at Stanford 2-3
Stanford has the home feild advantage riding the momentun of their big victory over USC. TCU is on the road after lossing to a good Wyoming team.
Can the TCU defense stop the Cardinals Offensive attack? I really guess I'd have to give the edge to Stanford? Heck they scored against a Pete Carrol Defense arguabaly one of the best according to Brent Mushmouth & Keith Jackson
Go Frogs
posted on October 9, 2007 7:15 AM — link — abuse? said:
Yeah, I don't really feel like parity is an issue in CFB and I think you have to be very careful not to look at any one year in a vacuum, because the life cycle of a college football team is roughly three years.
Look at the NFL - the best team is separated from the worst team by what? Maybe a four point spread when they meet? Not so in CFB. You still have a distinct class of 20-30 top teams, year in and year out. We go through some flux/churn, but that's usually trading 3-4 teams in that elite list, not 20+.
Look at the last seven years.... Oklahoma, USC, Ohio State, and Texas are all on their way back up, but never really fell out of the top tier. Florida State, Alabama, Penn State, Miami, and Michigan all came back to the pack, but -- even so -- never truly fell out of the top tier.
And while there are going to be some teams that rise up and grab the ring, it's rarely an issue of statistical equality, per se. If you look at Wake Forest last year, they won the ACC, but -- on paper -- there are several games that were a W on the scoreboard that they lost statistically. Now, sometimes that's just football, right?
Look at this year's big upsets.... If those same schools played ten straight games, do you think it would be a five-five split? Probably not, but sometimes the better teams don't play all that well.
Look at OU-Colorado.... The Sooners should have won that game and ought to win 10 out of 10 times... but they didn't. Why? A big break here or a key turnover there? But that doesn't mean that the two teams are equal or that there is parity in the conference.
I can understand people making the point that there seems to be more mid-conference teams sneaking up on big teams (UCF scaring Texas, for example)... but I think if you went man-for-man down the lineup, you would have to take the Texas player almost every time. That's not parity. There's no statistical equality there. And yet... UCF nearly won. But how many times would you pick UCF in ten games against Texas? I probably wouldn't pick them at all.
It's easy to use terms like parity, especially when we see so many games on TV from so many different conferences. It certainly helps confirm the belief that there are a lot of teams that fairly good... and that's true.
Again, you can't take any one year in a vacuum. But when you start looking at how they stack up, college football still seems like a very cyclical game of mostly the same "haves" & then... everybody else.
Tomcat said:
posted on October 9, 2007 7:42 PM — 70.132.194.10 — link — abuse?
#60 Kevin good post, I guess most fans like myself love upsets and while there have been some shining moments for some teams other programs consistantly have winning programs.
I honestly beleive that while a team like TCU can beat an OU, that they probably couldnt do it consistantly year after year, but it sure is fun to watch.USF will probably whup UCF, but I'll be pulling for UCF,Kinda like pullin for Houston to knock off Bama.
Like Zac's post 56 there are alot of different factors determing the winner of a game on a particular day- Match em up later and the results could be completeley different.
Hookem-Horns
Adios Tomcat
Go Owls beat HoustonBig Tide said:
posted on October 9, 2007 9:20 PM — 12.208.88.211 — link — abuse?
Kevin (Post #60) I agree with Tomcat on your post but I have to respectfully disagree to some extent. The state that I live in, Florida, produces about 400 Div. 1 scholarship football athletes per year. I huge pool of talent. That's why it's not a real shocker that USF has suddenly fielded a solid, winning team. Miami proved this in the 80's. Even after the big boys (FSU, FL and Miami) get through picking there are still plenty of quality athletes to go around. The difference in the haves and the have nots, in my opinion, is coaching. Ron Zook is just the latest coach to turn a program around. When Bobby Bowden got to FSU in the early 70's he didn't have any problem finding enough talent to win. Sure, the winning got easier once he could get the pick of the litter, but the difference was coaching, confidence preperation, etc. Not every school can afford to spend 4 million a year on a coach like Alabama did. Many people forget that Bear Bryant won the SEC while coaching at Kentucky. Now Duke or Vandy is never going to compete with the top football schools because the standards academically are too high, but if they relaxed those standards things would be different. I agree with your comments regarding the depth of talent at say USC or Ohio State as compared to Stanford or Houston, but only 11 players can be on the field at any given time and all an offense needs are one or two playmakers to make a huge difference, especially at positions like QB and WR. Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that the parity is in the coaching. There are more good coaches than ever simply because the rewards are SO BIG. As the second tier schools, for lack of a better descriptive term, begin to invest more in their coaches and facilities they will become first tier schools just like FSU, Miami, UCF, etc.
Tomcat said:
posted on October 9, 2007 10:28 PM — 69.148.173.234 — link — abuse?
Hey Zac #65 My Big East Friend, not meaning to diss the UConn Huskies, I left them and a couple of others off intentionally, because I was trying to recall from memory and didnt want to include a one loss team on a undefeated list.
BTW I really enjoyed your post #56 and would like to include Coaching mistakes, inclimate weather, crowd noise and bonehead penaltys to your list of different contributing factors.
Then of course one of the most important contrbuting factors in my opinion is mometum and mental attitude.Another thing to consider is the time of the season that the game was played.Every year every team is different some more than others and there is no pre-season or warm-up game.
You kinda have to admit that alot of these upsets or near misses happen early in the season and a saw alot of sloppy play from alot of teams.
In other words you dont have a couple of weeks to come together and play as a team. Right now in the season with 5 or 6 games under their belts alot of these teams would definetly like a rematch and as the season progresses the pretenders will be separated from the condenders.
Hookem-Horns
Go Tigers
Go Owls
Sicem-BearsZac said:
posted on October 10, 2007 8:11 PM — 209.36.193.14 — link — abuse?
GA Boy (Post 67), I think that's one prediction you can take with a grain of salt. Now, I'm not a GA fan, but I think the DAWGS rate something a little higher than a date with UTEP at the Liberty.
BTW, TC, I knew you weren't dis'ing anyone. Given UConn's schedule to date, I'd be surprised if they ran the table. But, as we've already seen, stranger things HAVE happened.
TE
said:
posted on October 7, 2007 3:47 PM — 70.180.45.10 — link — abuse?Who in the **** are the two idiots not voting LSU the #1 team in the nation?
Wait...Let me rephrase that...Who-other than Jim Tressel-is the idiot from the Big 10 that keeps voting them #1?
The Big 10 is full of pretenders, and another one got exposed last night in Wisconsin. OSU's time up top won't last long, but it really p!sses me off that two coaches are giving that kind of slap to LSU after a performance of such epic proportions...
By the way, in case you all don't realize it...the two best teams in America played in Baton Rouge last night...is there any doubt that Florida would throttle teams like the USF Bulls, the USC Trojans, or the West Virginia Mountaineers?
Florida may have a letdown and lose another game this season, but I truly hope they don't...They are clearly the class of the SEC, along with the Tigers...
But, those two coaches are dolts...