Preseason NCAA Coaches Poll

[goonys evil twin]

And the award for dumbest thing said in college football this week goes to...Bo Schembechler! Come on down!

 

Asked whether Michigan should continue its series with Notre Dame, Schembechler said: "We don't need Notre Dame. They need us more than we need them."

 

That's not that dumb. Michigan is guaranteed matchups with its conference schedule. Notre Dame has to rely on individual series like this one to build its schedule.

True, but I think it's fair to say that each big conference team should play at least one decent team out of conference, and if Michigan dropped ND, it'd be difficult for them to find another such team to play.

 

Not that difficult. Yeah, if they backed out today it would be tough, for both teams. But it wouldn't be that hard to find one quality non-conference matchup. They've played some other decent non-con teams, like NIU, Oregon and Utah in recent years.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

And the award for dumbest thing said in college football this week goes to...Bo Schembechler! Come on down!

 

Asked whether Michigan should continue its series with Notre Dame, Schembechler said: "We don't need Notre Dame. They need us more than we need them."

 

Bo is right.

[badgercub]

I still don't get how Wisconsin doesn't get any respect. Every year it seems like they start the season unranked, and by the end of the year they are in a New Years Day bowl. They completely dominated Auburn in the Capital One Bowl, with a second string defense for the most part, and somehow aren't even ranked.

 

Considering they lost 8 starters on offense including their top 3 receivers, both tight ends, their starting full back, and their all everything tailback, I can see why the voters wouldn't put them in the top 25.

 

On the plus side their defense should be much better this year since a lot of guys got experience due to injury last year. Their D-line has drawn comparison to the 2004 line and is at least 8 or 9 deep. On the offensive side the O-line should be good ave. over 6-6 and 319 pounds, they always seem to have a good running back waiting in the wings, their biggest problems will probably occur at WR, we'll see what Marcus Randall El can do if he can keep his nose clean off of the field, and not really having anyone to back up Stocco at QB.

[Andy]

And the award for dumbest thing said in college football this week goes to...Bo Schembechler! Come on down!

 

Asked whether Michigan should continue its series with Notre Dame, Schembechler said: "We don't need Notre Dame. They need us more than we need them."

 

Bo is right.

Why do you say that? Notre Dame is annually rated the most popular team in the nation. It's not like they have to compete with the Wolverines for fans. Although I despise Michigan and want to see the series continued for rivalry purposes, ND isn't really getting much out of the series other than road money.

[soccer10k]

And the award for dumbest thing said in college football this week goes to...Bo Schembechler! Come on down!

 

Asked whether Michigan should continue its series with Notre Dame, Schembechler said: "We don't need Notre Dame. They need us more than we need them."

 

Bo is right.

Why do you say that? Notre Dame is annually rated the most popular team in the nation. It's not like they have to compete with the Wolverines for fans. Although I despise Michigan and want to see the series continued for rivalry purposes, ND isn't really getting much out of the series other than road money.

 

It gives Notre Dame a usually guaranteed good matchup for their schedule. You know every year there are going to be a couple teams in every conference with 0, 1, or 2 losses so you'll get good games every single year in conference. Because they don't play in a conference, Notre Dame doesn't have many teams that are guaranteed to be good. Look at last year. Notre Dame's only good scheduled opponent was USC. Every other team they played was eh at best. Michigan provides them an opponent that is likely to be in the hunt for a BCS bowl year in and year out.

 

I think they both help each other but as Pedro said, Bo is right.

[shnsajax]

A lot of tough schedules in the Top 25. I could see two 1-loss teams playing for the NC. My favorites were Ohio St. and Oklahoma. Notre Dame reminds me of 05 USC, without the star RBs, i.e. defense will lose them a big game. UWV schedule is too easy, and they may luck into the NC game, due to being undefeated in a weak, albeit major conference. I'm more concerned about what Texas lost on defense than offense, and I think the winner b/w them and OU could be a contender. USC is in a similar boat. Still the most talent in the country, but it's raw. Should be a 1-loss team with a solid chance.

 

IIRC, USC's defense in 05 was young and had lost a lot of starters. Doesn't ND's 06 defense return a majority of it's starters from 05? And I would be worried about what Texas loses at QB considering they tailored that offense for Vince Young.

 

Yep, that's why I said, I'm worried about what UT lost on defense. And yes ND returns a lot of defense, but that's not a good thing, considering there's not much talent there.

 

Texas had so much depth last year that they should be ok. They changed out players more than just about anyone last year, and got some of their true freshman in the mix as well. That and with maybe the best defensive coordinator in the nation.

[CubColtPacer]

And the award for dumbest thing said in college football this week goes to...Bo Schembechler! Come on down!

 

Asked whether Michigan should continue its series with Notre Dame, Schembechler said: "We don't need Notre Dame. They need us more than we need them."

 

Bo is right.

Why do you say that? Notre Dame is annually rated the most popular team in the nation. It's not like they have to compete with the Wolverines for fans. Although I despise Michigan and want to see the series continued for rivalry purposes, ND isn't really getting much out of the series other than road money.

 

It gives Notre Dame a usually guaranteed good matchup for their schedule. You know every year there are going to be a couple teams in every conference with 0, 1, or 2 losses so you'll get good games every single year in conference. Because they don't play in a conference, Notre Dame doesn't have many teams that are guaranteed to be good. Look at last year. Notre Dame's only good scheduled opponent was USC. Every other team they played was eh at best. Michigan provides them an opponent that is likely to be in the hunt for a BCS bowl year in and year out.

 

I think they both help each other but as Pedro said, Bo is right.

 

The thing is though, Notre Dame has several series they have taken off thier schedule in order to get a slightly more managable schedule. If we lost Michigan, one of those teams would play us. Tennessee, Florida State, and to a lesser extent Boston College are three teams who ND has basically chosen only to play from time to time because of the strength of their schedule. I do think though that Michigan needs Notre Dame less for only one big reason. Michigan can get into a BCS bowl with a Notre Dame loss meaning very little if they do well in a conference. For Notre Dame, every loss is vitally important as it's all based on where they finish in the BCS standings-and I believe they now have to get top 8 to get considered starting this year, so that will make a loss even harder to take-which means to cushion themselves against a loss, they have to play a tough schedule, which includes Michigan.

[soccer10k]

And the award for dumbest thing said in college football this week goes to...Bo Schembechler! Come on down!

 

Asked whether Michigan should continue its series with Notre Dame, Schembechler said: "We don't need Notre Dame. They need us more than we need them."

 

Bo is right.

Why do you say that? Notre Dame is annually rated the most popular team in the nation. It's not like they have to compete with the Wolverines for fans. Although I despise Michigan and want to see the series continued for rivalry purposes, ND isn't really getting much out of the series other than road money.

 

It gives Notre Dame a usually guaranteed good matchup for their schedule. You know every year there are going to be a couple teams in every conference with 0, 1, or 2 losses so you'll get good games every single year in conference. Because they don't play in a conference, Notre Dame doesn't have many teams that are guaranteed to be good. Look at last year. Notre Dame's only good scheduled opponent was USC. Every other team they played was eh at best. Michigan provides them an opponent that is likely to be in the hunt for a BCS bowl year in and year out.

 

I think they both help each other but as Pedro said, Bo is right.

 

The thing is though, Notre Dame has several series they have taken off thier schedule in order to get a slightly more managable schedule. If we lost Michigan, one of those teams would play us. Tennessee, Florida State, and to a lesser extent Boston College are three teams who ND has basically chosen only to play from time to time because of the strength of their schedule. I do think though that Michigan needs Notre Dame less for only one big reason. Michigan can get into a BCS bowl with a Notre Dame loss meaning very little if they do well in a conference. For Notre Dame, every loss is vitally important as it's all based on where they finish in the BCS standings-and I believe they now have to get top 8 to get considered starting this year, so that will make a loss even harder to take-which means to cushion themselves against a loss, they have to play a tough schedule, which includes Michigan.

 

BCS Info

 

It says if Notre Dame finishes in the top 8 in the BCS standings they are guaranteed an at-large berth. So they can still make it if they don't finish in the top 8 but they wouldn't be guaranteed a birth.

[Andy]

And the award for dumbest thing said in college football this week goes to...Bo Schembechler! Come on down!

 

Asked whether Michigan should continue its series with Notre Dame, Schembechler said: "We don't need Notre Dame. They need us more than we need them."

 

Bo is right.

Why do you say that? Notre Dame is annually rated the most popular team in the nation. It's not like they have to compete with the Wolverines for fans. Although I despise Michigan and want to see the series continued for rivalry purposes, ND isn't really getting much out of the series other than road money.

 

It gives Notre Dame a usually guaranteed good matchup for their schedule. You know every year there are going to be a couple teams in every conference with 0, 1, or 2 losses so you'll get good games every single year in conference. Because they don't play in a conference, Notre Dame doesn't have many teams that are guaranteed to be good. Look at last year. Notre Dame's only good scheduled opponent was USC. Every other team they played was eh at best. Michigan provides them an opponent that is likely to be in the hunt for a BCS bowl year in and year out.

 

I think they both help each other but as Pedro said, Bo is right.

 

The thing is though, Notre Dame has several series they have taken off thier schedule in order to get a slightly more managable schedule. If we lost Michigan, one of those teams would play us. Tennessee, Florida State, and to a lesser extent Boston College are three teams who ND has basically chosen only to play from time to time because of the strength of their schedule. I do think though that Michigan needs Notre Dame less for only one big reason. Michigan can get into a BCS bowl with a Notre Dame loss meaning very little if they do well in a conference. For Notre Dame, every loss is vitally important as it's all based on where they finish in the BCS standings-and I believe they now have to get top 8 to get considered starting this year, so that will make a loss even harder to take-which means to cushion themselves against a loss, they have to play a tough schedule, which includes Michigan.

 

BCS Info

 

It says if Notre Dame finishes in the top 8 in the BCS standings they are guaranteed an at-large berth. So they can still make it if they don't finish in the top 8 but they wouldn't be guaranteed a birth.

I don't see any mention of what they need to do to be eligible however. Perhaps they must finish in the top 8 to get there?

[Transmogrified Tiger]

BCS Info

 

It says if Notre Dame finishes in the top 8 in the BCS standings they are guaranteed an at-large berth. So they can still make it if they don't finish in the top 8 but they wouldn't be guaranteed a birth.

I don't see any mention of what they need to do to be eligible however. Perhaps they must finish in the top 8 to get there?

 

I have to be missing something here.

[Andy]

BCS Info

 

It says if Notre Dame finishes in the top 8 in the BCS standings they are guaranteed an at-large berth. So they can still make it if they don't finish in the top 8 but they wouldn't be guaranteed a birth.

I don't see any mention of what they need to do to be eligible however. Perhaps they must finish in the top 8 to get there?

 

I have to be missing something here.

Soccer says they are guaranteed a spot if they finish in the top 8. I'm wondering if they can be eligible without being guaranteed a spot or if they must be in the top 8.

[CuseCubFan69]

I remember when Syracuse used to be a team that was mentioned in preseason football polls. How can a team that can have the #1 recruiting class in 2007 in basketball stink so much when it comes to recruiting in football?

[NewUserName]

A few years ago Michigan was trying to find another big time school that would give them some home and homes. They really had a hard time. If Michigan were to lose ND off their schedule I wonder if they would be able to get a quality team on their schedule every year. In the past Michigan has seemed to try to put together a non conference schedule that was at least competitive. The last couple of years it seems that ND is the only real competitive school on their non conference schedule. So maybe Michigan needs ND more than Bo thinks.

[SouthSideRyan]

Look at last year. Notre Dame's only good scheduled opponent was USC. Every other team they played was eh at best. Michigan provides them an opponent that is likely to be in the hunt for a BCS bowl year in and year out.

 

Ironic, considering ND played Michigan last year.

[hawkeyecub]

And the award for dumbest thing said in college football this week goes to...Bo Schembechler! Come on down!

 

Asked whether Michigan should continue its series with Notre Dame, Schembechler said: "We don't need Notre Dame. They need us more than we need them."

 

Bo is right.

Why do you say that? Notre Dame is annually rated the most popular team in the nation. It's not like they have to compete with the Wolverines for fans. Although I despise Michigan and want to see the series continued for rivalry purposes, ND isn't really getting much out of the series other than road money.

 

He's right because of what goony and soccer said. Michigan plays in a conference that is annually one of the top 2-3 in the country. That means they always have a difficult conference schedule (with some very tough games on the road) and usually have one other solid non-conference game.

When you play in a conference like the Big Ten, you don't run into a situation like Notre Dame last year where most of their big opponents had down years. Plus they have built in rivalries within the league.

It helps them to have Notre Dame in many years, but they really don't need them as much as Notre Dame does.

[CubColtPacer]

BCS Info

 

It says if Notre Dame finishes in the top 8 in the BCS standings they are guaranteed an at-large berth. So they can still make it if they don't finish in the top 8 but they wouldn't be guaranteed a birth.

I don't see any mention of what they need to do to be eligible however. Perhaps they must finish in the top 8 to get there?

 

I have to be missing something here.

Soccer says they are guaranteed a spot if they finish in the top 8. I'm wondering if they can be eligible without being guaranteed a spot or if they must be in the top 8.

 

My guess is that they have to be eligible now along with everyone else if they are ranked in the top 14 in the BCS (up from 12 last year-because the number of teams in the BCS went from 8 to 10). I think it was a compromise with ND-ND used to be eligible with either a 9 win team or a top 12 ranking, and had to be top 6 to be automatically in-now they have to have at least 9 wins and be in the top 14 like everyone else, with a top 8 bid getting them automatically in.

I also like that they have given a possible path to minor conferences-any team from a minor conference that finishes in the top 12 will be automatically in-and 13th through 16th if there is a major conference winner that is ranked below that (which there has been just about every year). So it is likely that we will see the best minor conference team in a BCS bowl pretty much every year-which I think their best usually deserves.

[soccer10k]

Look at last year. Notre Dame's only good scheduled opponent was USC. Every other team they played was eh at best. Michigan provides them an opponent that is likely to be in the hunt for a BCS bowl year in and year out.

 

Ironic, considering ND played Michigan last year.

 

That's why I included the word likely. Obviously it would be stupid to say that Michigan will be in the BCS hunt every single year because they won't be. But most years, Michigan will be a serious contender to win the Big 10.

[soccer10k]

BCS Info

 

It says if Notre Dame finishes in the top 8 in the BCS standings they are guaranteed an at-large berth. So they can still make it if they don't finish in the top 8 but they wouldn't be guaranteed a birth.

I don't see any mention of what they need to do to be eligible however. Perhaps they must finish in the top 8 to get there?

 

I have to be missing something here.

Soccer says they are guaranteed a spot if they finish in the top 8. I'm wondering if they can be eligible without being guaranteed a spot or if they must be in the top 8.

 

My guess is that they have to be eligible now along with everyone else if they are ranked in the top 14 in the BCS (up from 12 last year-because the number of teams in the BCS went from 8 to 10). I think it was a compromise with ND-ND used to be eligible with either a 9 win team or a top 12 ranking, and had to be top 6 to be automatically in-now they have to have at least 9 wins and be in the top 14 like everyone else, with a top 8 bid getting them automatically in.

I also like that they have given a possible path to minor conferences-any team from a minor conference that finishes in the top 12 will be automatically in-and 13th through 16th if there is a major conference winner that is ranked below that (which there has been just about every year). So it is likely that we will see the best minor conference team in a BCS bowl pretty much every year-which I think their best usually deserves.

 

This is over a year old but it's all I could find.

 

Notre Dame would still be eligible to be selected in the pool of eligible teams if they fall below eight. We haven't set yet that pool of eligible teams. Right now, it's nine wins and top 12. That may be expanded because of these extra at-large positions.

[Marmolade]

It's absolutely astonishing that A"STD"U finished with more votes than UCLA (some other sites have the complete vote counts... with Spurrier's requisite Duke vote of course

 

sadly, UCLA won't have much of a chance to climb up the rankings since the tough part of their schedule is backloaded with their first ranked opponent (ND) waiting for them in October

 

A fellow UCLA fan? And a UCI fan?

 

I am not shocked that ASU would be ranked higher than UCLA since all the national media see is Drew Olson, Lewis and Drew gone from last year's team. Personally, I'm just hoping the Bruins are above .500 and Ben Olson has a strong year. I'm pretty excited about the recruiting class for next year. :)

Well, I'm a UCLA football fan because I know UCI football won't lose a game this year, and it's no fun following a team that good.

 

I also like Bruins basketball but they rank behind UCI and then Illinois in my book. (that is, in a game between UI and UCLA I want UI to win, UCI vs. UI I want Illinois, etc)

[CaliforniaRaisin]

It's absolutely astonishing that A"STD"U finished with more votes than UCLA (some other sites have the complete vote counts... with Spurrier's requisite Duke vote of course

 

sadly, UCLA won't have much of a chance to climb up the rankings since the tough part of their schedule is backloaded with their first ranked opponent (ND) waiting for them in October

 

A fellow UCLA fan? And a UCI fan?

 

I am not shocked that ASU would be ranked higher than UCLA since all the national media see is Drew Olson, Lewis and Drew gone from last year's team. Personally, I'm just hoping the Bruins are above .500 and Ben Olson has a strong year. I'm pretty excited about the recruiting class for next year. :)

Well, I'm a UCLA football fan because I know UCI football won't lose a game this year, and it's no fun following a team that good.

 

I also like Bruins basketball but they rank behind UCI and then Illinois in my book. (that is, in a game between UI and UCLA I want UI to win, UCI vs. UI I want Illinois, etc)

 

Sweet, a Bruin football fan! Apparently UCIers have the same attitude to football as UCSD does (I was at UCSD for a quarter, the number of "undefeated football program" shirts on campus was hilarious).

 

I'll ignore the part about Illinois basketball...

[dew1679666265]

BCS Info

 

It says if Notre Dame finishes in the top 8 in the BCS standings they are guaranteed an at-large berth. So they can still make it if they don't finish in the top 8 but they wouldn't be guaranteed a birth.

I don't see any mention of what they need to do to be eligible however. Perhaps they must finish in the top 8 to get there?

 

I have to be missing something here.

Soccer says they are guaranteed a spot if they finish in the top 8. I'm wondering if they can be eligible without being guaranteed a spot or if they must be in the top 8.

 

My guess is that they have to be eligible now along with everyone else if they are ranked in the top 14 in the BCS (up from 12 last year-because the number of teams in the BCS went from 8 to 10). I think it was a compromise with ND-ND used to be eligible with either a 9 win team or a top 12 ranking, and had to be top 6 to be automatically in-now they have to have at least 9 wins and be in the top 14 like everyone else, with a top 8 bid getting them automatically in.

I also like that they have given a possible path to minor conferences-any team from a minor conference that finishes in the top 12 will be automatically in-and 13th through 16th if there is a major conference winner that is ranked below that (which there has been just about every year). So it is likely that we will see the best minor conference team in a BCS bowl pretty much every year-which I think their best usually deserves.

 

Come on now, you know that when ND is eligible it's just as good as them automatically getting in. :) No bowl turns ND down. As for the rest, the freakin' NCAA needs to give in and go to a playoff system and the minor conferences will have as good a shot as anybody to win. By the way, GO VOLS!

[SouthSideRyan]

Come on now, you know that when ND is eligible it's just as good as them automatically getting in. :) No bowl turns ND down.

 

Except for the 2 times that they were turned down from BCS.

[dew1679666265]

Come on now, you know that when ND is eligible it's just as good as them automatically getting in. :) No bowl turns ND down.

 

Except for the 2 times that they were turned down from BCS.

 

Really? I didn't realize that they ever were turned down. Those were a couple of dumb decisions since ND travels probably better than anybody.

[CubColtPacer]

Come on now, you know that when ND is eligible it's just as good as them automatically getting in. :) No bowl turns ND down.

 

Except for the 2 times that they were turned down from BCS.

 

Would you like to provide the years that they were eligible for the BCS and got turned down? Since the BCS has been in existence, Notre Dame has been eligible 3 times-2000, 2002, 2005-they've been invited twice

 

Edit: Actually, my mistake on this one. I originally thought they had been invited all 3 times, but then I realized that they had not been invited in 02 with 9 wins-the more I think about it though, I seem to remember that there was no choice-there were no at large bids available that year, as Iowa and Washington State both got in automatically due to their top 6 BCS ranking, even though they were both the second best team in thier conference (Ohio State and USC were above those two). So ND had no chance to be invited that year)-so they were invited both times the bowls had a spot to give them.

[dew1679666265]

Come on now, you know that when ND is eligible it's just as good as them automatically getting in. :) No bowl turns ND down.

 

Except for the 2 times that they were turned down from BCS.

 

Would you like to provide the years that they were eligible for the BCS and got turned down? Since the BCS has been in existence, Notre Dame has been eligible 3 times-2000, 2002, 2005-they've been invited twice

 

Edit: Actually, my mistake on this one. I originally thought they had been invited all 3 times, but then I realized that they had not been invited in 02 with 9 wins-the more I think about it though, I seem to remember that there was no choice-there were no at large bids available that year, as Iowa and Washington State both got in automatically due to their top 6 BCS ranking, even though they were both the second best team in thier conference (Ohio State and USC were above those two). So ND had no chance to be invited that year)-so they were invited both times the bowls had a spot to give them.

 

I knew they wouldn't turn you media darlings down. :P