Preseason NCAA Coaches Poll

[wolf stansson]

Can we have a separate ND thread for those like me who don't give a crap about them?

While ND is the specific example used in this thread, I wouldn't say this is "separate thread"-ish. I think examining where traditional powers are helped out by polls and nontraditional powers are hurt is a valid discussion on all counts.

True, but you guys who have huge wood about the upcoming season can barely keep it in your pants now. Just think what's going to happen once the season starts. I think a separate ND thread is a very good idea.

[Andy]

Texas, no. 2 without Vince Young? come on.

There is almost no reason at all for a team that loses a Heisman finalist to be ranked in the top 5. Maybe they will be fine, but it's ludicrous to put them that high. Hell, USC lost TWO Heisman winners and are ranked 3rd.

[Andy]

Can we have a separate ND thread for those like me who don't give a crap about them?

While ND is the specific example used in this thread, I wouldn't say this is "separate thread"-ish. I think examining where traditional powers are helped out by polls and nontraditional powers are hurt is a valid discussion on all counts.

True, but you guys who have huge wood about the upcoming season can barely keep it in your pants now. Just think what's going to happen once the season starts. I think a separate ND thread is a very good idea.

In theory, but separate ND threads have been created before, and everyone stops talking then for whatever reason.

[wolf stansson]

Can we have a separate ND thread for those like me who don't give a crap about them?

While ND is the specific example used in this thread, I wouldn't say this is "separate thread"-ish. I think examining where traditional powers are helped out by polls and nontraditional powers are hurt is a valid discussion on all counts.

True, but you guys who have huge wood about the upcoming season can barely keep it in your pants now. Just think what's going to happen once the season starts. I think a separate ND thread is a very good idea.

In theory, but separate ND threads have been created before, and everyone stops talking then for whatever reason.

 

I'll tell you why. This is how every thread involving Notre Dame inevitably goes:

 

ND FAN: nd is awesome charlie weiss best coach ever i want brady quinn's seed he is awesome nd is the best program ever gnute rockne 4 life

 

Other people: Shut up, we don't care. Yes he is a good coach, yes BQ is a good QB, yes they have an excellent history, no we don't want to hear about.

 

If you had your own thread, the people who don't give a damn about ND wouldn't be there to say that they don't want to hear about it. Then you ND fans wouldn't be able to tell us why we should care.

 

ND is the Yankees of College Football. Do you want to hear about how awesome Jeter is constantly? Do you want to hear about what a great manager Joe Torre is?

[Andy]

Can we have a separate ND thread for those like me who don't give a crap about them?

While ND is the specific example used in this thread, I wouldn't say this is "separate thread"-ish. I think examining where traditional powers are helped out by polls and nontraditional powers are hurt is a valid discussion on all counts.

True, but you guys who have huge wood about the upcoming season can barely keep it in your pants now. Just think what's going to happen once the season starts. I think a separate ND thread is a very good idea.

In theory, but separate ND threads have been created before, and everyone stops talking then for whatever reason.

 

I'll tell you why. This is how every thread involving Notre Dame inevitably goes:

 

ND FAN: nd is awesome charlie weiss best coach ever i want brady quinn's seed he is awesome nd is the best program ever gnute rockne 4 life

 

Other people: Shut up, we don't care. Yes he is a good coach, yes BQ is a good QB, yes they have an excellent history, no we don't want to hear about.

 

If you had your own thread, the people who don't give a damn about ND wouldn't be there to say that they don't want to hear about it. Then you ND fans wouldn't be able to tell us why we should care.

 

ND is the Yankees of College Football. Do you want to hear about how awesome Jeter is constantly? Do you want to hear about what a great manager Joe Torre is?

Actually, it usually goes more like, me or Adam or SSR voices our ND-related opinion on something, usually never even making any kind of proclamation about anything, then an overzealous ND hater makes a smartass comment about money or not being in a conference or having an easy road to the BCS or a national TV deal etc. which then forces us to defend them (you wouldn't let someone make a negative statement you disagreed with about the Cardinals, would you?), then more ND-haters start arguing with me/Adam/SSR, and soon the thread is completely hijacked. Adam and SSR have been better than me in this regard, but I'd say all three of us as well as the other ND fans on this board have done a pretty damn good job not being argumentative in these threads.

[soccer10k]

Texas, no. 2 without Vince Young? come on.

There is almost no reason at all for a team that loses a Heisman finalist to be ranked in the top 5. Maybe they will be fine, but it's ludicrous to put them that high. Hell, USC lost TWO Heisman winners and are ranked 3rd.

 

Just because a team loses a Heisman trophy winner or finalist doesn't mean they shouldn't be ranked high in the polls the next year. USC lost Carson Palmer going into the 2003 season and ended up winning a share of the National Title. Last year USC returned both Reggie Bush and Matt Leinart but their downfall was their defense.

 

The thing that should matter when it comes to Texas losing Vince Young is the fact that the team's offense will be radically different this year without him as quarterback. Young had so much leeway in the offense and was able to do things that few other quarterbacks can do. Texas will have to get rid of a good number of offensive plays (re: virtually every play that involved Vince Young running the ball or given the option of running) because the new quarterback can't do what Vince did. It's much more likely that USC will be able to have another quarterback step in to replace Leinart without missing a beat (much like Leinart replacing Palmer) than Texas replacing Young without missing a beat.

 

Another thing that favored Texas, and favors them even more now, is the Big 12 not being a great conference. With Bomar out, I expect Texas to run the gauntlet and finish at least 11-1 going into the Big 12 title game. The winner of the Texas-Ohio State game will be an easy pick to make the National Title game.

[Andy]

Texas, no. 2 without Vince Young? come on.

There is almost no reason at all for a team that loses a Heisman finalist to be ranked in the top 5. Maybe they will be fine, but it's ludicrous to put them that high. Hell, USC lost TWO Heisman winners and are ranked 3rd.

 

Just because a team loses a Heisman trophy winner or finalist doesn't mean they shouldn't be ranked high in the polls the next year. USC lost Carson Palmer going into the 2003 season and ended up winning a share of the National Title. Last year USC returned both Reggie Bush and Matt Leinart but their downfall was their defense.

Oh, I don't disagree that teams can turn out to be just as good without their Heisman finalist/winner. I just don't believe that you can assume that said team will be just as good by ranking them so high. I'll probably be saying this again next season when ND is ranked way too high in the preseason polls.

[soccer10k]

Can we have a separate ND thread for those like me who don't give a crap about them?

While ND is the specific example used in this thread, I wouldn't say this is "separate thread"-ish. I think examining where traditional powers are helped out by polls and nontraditional powers are hurt is a valid discussion on all counts.

True, but you guys who have huge wood about the upcoming season can barely keep it in your pants now. Just think what's going to happen once the season starts. I think a separate ND thread is a very good idea.

 

Notre Dame fans have a right to be excited. They're return 16 starters and have a quarterback that is a favorite to win the Heisman Trophy. If their defense (where they return 9 starters which is very important) improves a bit, they are going to be tough to stop. That is the question mark and I like their chances going into year 2 of the Charlie Weis era. I don't blame Notre Dame fans for being excited about the upcoming year.

 

Wow. I can't believe I just defended Notre Dame and their fans. I must be in the Bizarro World right now.

[soccer10k]

Texas, no. 2 without Vince Young? come on.

There is almost no reason at all for a team that loses a Heisman finalist to be ranked in the top 5. Maybe they will be fine, but it's ludicrous to put them that high. Hell, USC lost TWO Heisman winners and are ranked 3rd.

 

Just because a team loses a Heisman trophy winner or finalist doesn't mean they shouldn't be ranked high in the polls the next year. USC lost Carson Palmer going into the 2003 season and ended up winning a share of the National Title. Last year USC returned both Reggie Bush and Matt Leinart but their downfall was their defense.

Oh, I don't disagree that teams can turn out to be just as good without their Heisman finalist/winner. I just don't believe that you can assume that said team will be just as good by ranking them so high. I'll probably be saying this again next season when ND is ranked way too high in the preseason polls.

 

I think another part of it is the fact that there aren't any clear cut favorites to make the national championship game this year like USC in the past couple years, Texas last year, Oklahoma a couple years ago, etc. All of the potential contenders have serious question marks.

 

Ohio State is replacing 9 defensive starters. Texas is replacing Vince Young. USC with Leinart/Bush/White. Notre Dame's defense. Oklahoma was replacing a big portion of their offense and have now lost Bomar. The SEC teams all seem to beat up on each other and none of them stand out. West Virginia plays in a weak conference and should be cautious because Louisville was expected to roll through the Big East last year.

 

I actually don't have a problem with the rankings at all and I don't think anybody was ranked more than a spot or two higher or lower than they should have been.

[jjgman21]

Texas, no. 2 without Vince Young? come on.

There is almost no reason at all for a team that loses a Heisman finalist to be ranked in the top 5. Maybe they will be fine, but it's ludicrous to put them that high. Hell, USC lost TWO Heisman winners and are ranked 3rd.

 

Just because a team loses a Heisman trophy winner or finalist doesn't mean they shouldn't be ranked high in the polls the next year. USC lost Carson Palmer going into the 2003 season and ended up winning a share of the National Title. Last year USC returned both Reggie Bush and Matt Leinart but their downfall was their defense.

 

The thing that should matter when it comes to Texas losing Vince Young is the fact that the team's offense will be radically different this year without him as quarterback. Young had so much leeway in the offense and was able to do things that few other quarterbacks can do. Texas will have to get rid of a good number of offensive plays (re: virtually every play that involved Vince Young running the ball or given the option of running) because the new quarterback can't do what Vince did. It's much more likely that USC will be able to have another quarterback step in to replace Leinart without missing a beat (much like Leinart replacing Palmer) than Texas replacing Young without missing a beat.

 

Another thing that favored Texas, and favors them even more now, is the Big 12 not being a great conference. With Bomar out, I expect Texas to run the gauntlet and finish at least 11-1 going into the Big 12 title game. The winner of the Texas-Ohio State game will be an easy pick to make the National Title game.

 

yes, the loss of basically their entire offense had more to do with my statement than the loss of a winner of a trophy. but I don't know that the pollsters take conferences and computers and things like that into account. I think for the most part they say 'who is the best team in CFB' and vote accordingly. although I do agree with the above that there is no clear cut favorite, so it makes the pre-season voting a little more difficult this year than most.

[jjgman21]

I don't think it's coincidence either that the Irish - arguably the most traditional of all the traditional powers - are the only team in history not to drop in the polls after a loss after that USC game last year.

 

I actually have no problem with that and wonder why it has to be unprecedented. a loss like ND suffered to SC last year does not make them any lesser of a team. I have no idea why a close loss (and basically unlucky loss) to a fantastic team makes the loser any worse than they were going in and thus deserving of a lower ranking. it's all just another part of the 'that's the way it always has worked' mentality instead of using analysis and actually thinking to come to determinations of who is better than who.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

The SI college preview arrived in the mail today. Here are their preseason rankings:

 

1. Ohio State

2. Notre Dame

3. Texas

4. LSU

5. USC

6. West Virginia

7. Auburn

8. Cal

9. Florida

10. Michigan

 

There are some surprises there. I was astonished to see LSU fourth and ahead of Auburn.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Dang, Cal is starting to get too much love from the national media...

[fiver]

The SI college preview arrived in the mail today. Here are their preseason rankings:

 

1. Ohio State

2. Notre Dame

3. Texas

4. LSU

5. USC

6. West Virginia

7. Auburn

8. Cal

9. Florida

10. Michigan

 

There are some surprises there. I was astonished to see LSU fourth and ahead of Auburn.

 

It definitely contradicts every other poll I've seen so far. They play each other really early in the year as I recall.

[Derwood]

have I mentioned my absolute disdain for preseason polls? IMO, they shouldn't put out the first poll until after Week 6. But god forbid NBC or ESPN can't put little numbers next to the team names in their ads :roll:

[Andy]

The SI college preview arrived in the mail today. Here are their preseason rankings:

 

1. Ohio State

2. Notre Dame

3. Texas

4. LSU

5. USC

6. West Virginia

7. Auburn

8. Cal

9. Florida

10. Michigan

 

There are some surprises there. I was astonished to see LSU fourth and ahead of Auburn.

As long as Chad Henne is Michigan's quarterback, there is no way that the Wolverines will ever reach the top 10, at least not without being ranked there to start the year. I'm surprised USC is as low as they are, but otherwise no real surprises.

[soccer10k]

The SI college preview arrived in the mail today. Here are their preseason rankings:

 

1. Ohio State

2. Notre Dame

3. Texas

4. LSU

5. USC

6. West Virginia

7. Auburn

8. Cal

9. Florida

10. Michigan

 

There are some surprises there. I was astonished to see LSU fourth and ahead of Auburn.

 

It definitely contradicts every other poll I've seen so far. They play each other really early in the year as I recall.

 

September 16. For the record, Auburn is taking the SEC this year.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Who's pumped up for some football?

 

http://fightmusic.com/index.html

[Jon]

I got my season tickets via UPS on Tuesday. I had been checking the front door about every 15 minutes and they didn't come until about 6 in the evening.

 

Regardless, I'm soooo psyched. And Meet the Team night is on Sunday.

 

Oh, and on a related note, does anyone know of a way to get just a single ESPNU game? I don't really want to pay $20 for a week of the online ESPN Gameplan, especially if I don't know whether or not it'll be blacked out.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Haha, Mike Hall (MU Grad) just introduced kU as the beakers during the Big XII preview on ESPNU.

[CoolHandLuke]

NIU over OSU. book it.

 

:lol:

[Andy]

Just two weeks until Ball State vs EMU. :D

[NCCubFan]

Hopefully Ball State will get off to a faster start this year. Last year I remember they were short-handed the first several weeks due to suspensions.

[Andy]

Hopefully Ball State will get off to a faster start this year. Last year I remember they were short-handed the first several weeks due to suspensions.

Three non-conference opponents (all games that BSU was significantly shorthanded): 157

Ball State in those three games: 3

 

Oddly enough, in the MAC opener against BG that fell in between the first two games, BSU damn near won the game and would have if DE Cortlan Booker had not dropped a pass that Jacobs threw right at him. BSU ended up losing 40-31.

 

This year though they start with 4 out of 5 at home, which has to be the first time in team history. (Only Purdue is on the road in that span.) If the Cards can upset IU in Muncie on Sept. 9th, there's no reason they can't be 5-1 after the first 6 (their 6th game is against Buffalo, ranked the worst team in the country by at least one system in preseason), which would be huge.

[wolf stansson]

then an overzealous ND hater makes a smartass comment about money or not being in a conference or having an easy road to the BCS or a national TV deal etc. which then forces us to defend them (you wouldn't let someone make a negative statement you disagreed with about the Cardinals, would you?)

It's a daily occurence on this board and in life (I live in Illinois after all).

 

Except I recognize the disconnect between sports and life, so I am able to either brush it off, respond blandly, or further stoke the fire by speaking my mind with the consequences well in mind (consequences being a mind-numbingly dumb argument that proceeds).

 

I've got no problem with Notre Dame per say, I just think it's funny when ND fans don't understand why people don't like them. You understand why people don't like the Yankees don't you? Duke basketball? Same reasons.