|
|
#172
10-12-2006, 09:55 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Top10 college teams (10/4/2006)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Ok. they should be 3rd ahead of USC and Michigan. [/ QUOTE ] FYP [/ QUOTE ] negative. [/ QUOTE ] FYP? [/ QUOTE ] negative. 
|
|
#173
10-12-2006, 09:56 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Top10 college teams (10/4/2006)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] This finding isn't just limited to this year, either. Until they start playing a bit more outside of their backyard, I'm not going to give them a whole lot of credit. [/ QUOTE ] I agree the scheduling is strange this year, but UF goes back to a home/home vs Miami in 2008 to go with of course FSU. Tell me that's not playing outside your backyard. FSU OOC every year is tough enough as it is. [/ QUOTE ] Last I checked, Tallahassee and Miami are in Florida's backyard. [/ QUOTE ] You're arguing semantics now. Come on. Everyone & I meant away games.
|
|
#174
10-12-2006, 09:57 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Top10 college teams (10/4/2006)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] This finding isn't just limited to this year, either. Until they start playing a bit more outside of their backyard, I'm not going to give them a whole lot of credit. [/ QUOTE ] I agree the scheduling is strange this year, but UF goes back to a home/home vs Miami in 2008 to go with of course FSU. Tell me that's not playing outside your backyard. FSU OOC every year is tough enough as it is. [/ QUOTE ] Wow, 1 whole team out of the 4-5 top SEC teams. Of the top SEC teams mentioned, tell me list how many tough OOC away games they've played in since 2000. Florida was about the only one really, when they played Miami. I think they've played them once, away, in that time. Someone else played a tough away game. Who else? Mind you, were talking about 4-5 teams spanning 6 years. Also show how often those teams played more than 4 away games the whole year in that span. Playing about 66% of your games at home, regularly, isn't playing out of your own backyard. Especially when the greater majority of OOC games are also at home. It's actually pretty advantageous. b [/ QUOTE ] Then I agree with you whole heartedly. I was only speaking for UF. I don't know about the rest's OOC away/home schedule. It should certainly be tougher.
|
|
#175
10-12-2006, 09:58 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Top10 college teams (10/4/2006)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] This finding isn't just limited to this year, either. Until they start playing a bit more outside of their backyard, I'm not going to give them a whole lot of credit. [/ QUOTE ] I agree the scheduling is strange this year, but UF goes back to a home/home vs Miami in 2008 to go with of course FSU. Tell me that's not playing outside your backyard. FSU OOC every year is tough enough as it is. [/ QUOTE ] Wow, 1 whole team out of the 4-5 top SEC teams. Of the top SEC teams mentioned, tell me list how many tough OOC away games they've played in since 2000. Florida was about the only one really, when they played Miami. I think they've played them once, away, in that time. Someone else played a tough away game. Who else? Mind you, were talking about 4-5 teams spanning 6 years. Also show how often those teams played more than 4 away games the whole year in that span. Playing about 66% of your games at home, regularly, isn't playing out of your own backyard. Especially when the greater majority of OOC games are also at home. It's actually pretty advantageous. b [/ QUOTE ] Edit: I meant to include Fl St. playing Florida through that time. But the other top SEC teams have pretty lame schedules when referring to OOC, especially regarding away games. b [/ QUOTE ] Yup, agreed.
|
|
#176
10-12-2006, 12:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Top10 college teams (10/4/2006)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Ok. they should be 3rd ahead of USC and Michigan. [/ QUOTE ] FYP [/ QUOTE ] negative. [/ QUOTE ] FYP? [/ QUOTE ] negative. [/ QUOTE ] So you're telling me you think Michigan and USC would have better resumes than an undefeated Cal team? Cal quality wins (in this hypo): Tennessee, Oregon, Arizona State USC: Nebraska, Washington Michigan: Notre Dame, Wisconsin Overall wins for each team (in this hypothetical): Cal: Tennessee, Minnesota, Oregon State, Oregon, Arizona State, Portland State USC: Nebraska, Arkansas, Washington, Washington State, Arizona Michigan: Notre Dame, Wisconsin, Michigan State, Vanderbilt, C. Michigan, Minnesota Now, the competition for each team is pretty close, but then you look at how Cal has blown everybody out since Sept. 2, and they'd be an easy pick for #3 in my book.
|
|
#177
10-12-2006, 12:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Top10 college teams (10/4/2006)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Ok. they should be 3rd ahead of USC and Michigan. [/ QUOTE ] FYP [/ QUOTE ] negative. [/ QUOTE ] FYP? [/ QUOTE ] negative. [/ QUOTE ] So you're telling me you think Michigan and USC would have better resumes than an undefeated Cal team? Cal quality wins (in this hypo): Tennessee, Oregon, Arizona State USC: Nebraska, Washington Michigan: Notre Dame, Wisconsin Overall wins for each team (in this hypothetical): Cal: Tennessee, Minnesota, Oregon State, Oregon, Arizona State, Portland State USC: Nebraska, Arkansas, Washington, Washington State, Arizona Michigan: Notre Dame, Wisconsin, Michigan State, Vanderbilt, C. Michigan, Minnesota Now, the competition for each team is pretty close, but then you look at how Cal has blown everybody out since Sept. 2, and they'd be an easy pick for #3 in my book. [/ QUOTE ] You're aware that playing a harder schedule doesn't inherently mean you're a better team, right? Give the Chicago Bears a helping I-AA teams...they'd still be the best in DI-A. In any event, Michigan hasn't had a competitive game yet, either. Not many blowouts per se, but teams haven't done much against the D until garbage time. Someone remind me why we're having a debate on where Cal should be ranked if they had beaten UT instead of getting blown out? It seems even more worthless than regular internet message board discussions.
|
|
#178
10-12-2006, 03:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Top10 college teams (10/4/2006)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Ok. they should be 3rd ahead of USC and Michigan. [/ QUOTE ] FYP [/ QUOTE ] negative. [/ QUOTE ] FYP? [/ QUOTE ] negative. [/ QUOTE ] So you're telling me you think Michigan and USC would have better resumes than an undefeated Cal team? Cal quality wins (in this hypo): Tennessee, Oregon, Arizona State USC: Nebraska, Washington Michigan: Notre Dame, Wisconsin Overall wins for each team (in this hypothetical): Cal: Tennessee, Minnesota, Oregon State, Oregon, Arizona State, Portland State USC: Nebraska, Arkansas, Washington, Washington State, Arizona Michigan: Notre Dame, Wisconsin, Michigan State, Vanderbilt, C. Michigan, Minnesota Now, the competition for each team is pretty close, but then you look at how Cal has blown everybody out since Sept. 2, and they'd be an easy pick for #3 in my book. [/ QUOTE ] You're aware that playing a harder schedule doesn't inherently mean you're a better team, right? Give the Chicago Bears a helping I-AA teams...they'd still be the best in DI-A. In any event, Michigan hasn't had a competitive game yet, either. Not many blowouts per se, but teams haven't done much against the D until garbage time. Someone remind me why we're having a debate on where Cal should be ranked if they had beaten UT instead of getting blown out? It seems even more worthless than regular internet message board discussions. [/ QUOTE ] It is quite pointless. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] I thought about dropping it earlier, but I really have a problem when results don't translate into the polls. People vote on "potential" or what they THINK it better talent. My opinion is that when people vote in polls or talk about who is better RIGHT NOW, you should only evaluate what they have already done. And in the stupid hypothetical situation, Cal's resume would be better than USC's or Michigan's. It's pretty clear, too.
|
|
#179
10-12-2006, 03:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Top10 college teams (10/4/2006)
yup...Florida does a good job, but most SEC teams should be embarrassed by their non-conf
Tenn did just play a home and home with Notre Dame and is now doing the same with Cal, so there are signs there LSU playing the Arizona teams, Oregon St, and Fresno St does not impress me Auburn had a home and home with Southern Cal and then Georgia Tech...replacing that with Washington St is a dropoff Auburn claims that none of the good teams will schedule them. This claim is disputed. Georgia has G Tech every year and played Clemson a few times. They're now with Colorado back-2-back and Colorado had won the BigXII North 5 of the last 7 seasons IIRC wait??? Did this just make sense? So, while not the toughest, they definitely have tried to play some games. It's just a notch lower than most teams, but it's not dreadfully lower as some have reported.
|
|
#180
10-12-2006, 05:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Top10 college teams (10/4/2006)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Ok. they should be 3rd ahead of USC and Michigan. [/ QUOTE ] FYP [/ QUOTE ] negative. [/ QUOTE ] FYP? [/ QUOTE ] negative. [/ QUOTE ] So you're telling me you think Michigan and USC would have better resumes than an undefeated Cal team? Cal quality wins (in this hypo): Tennessee, Oregon, Arizona State USC: Nebraska, Washington Michigan: Notre Dame, Wisconsin Overall wins for each team (in this hypothetical): Cal: Tennessee, Minnesota, Oregon State, Oregon, Arizona State, Portland State USC: Nebraska, Arkansas, Washington, Washington State, Arizona Michigan: Notre Dame, Wisconsin, Michigan State, Vanderbilt, C. Michigan, Minnesota Now, the competition for each team is pretty close, but then you look at how Cal has blown everybody out since Sept. 2, and they'd be an easy pick for #3 in my book. [/ QUOTE ] Ok, you've convinced me. Only because I agree with this: "that when people vote in polls or talk about who is better RIGHT NOW" I just get the feeling that in rank of "best teams"(potential included) I would go(its changed) 1)OSU 2)UF 3)USC 4)CAL 5)Michigan
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
