RealGM

Posted: **Sun Oct 7, 2007 7:38 pm**

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex

LSU is now the true #1 team in the nation, after their win exciting win vs. Florida last night.

The rest of the Top 10 looks like this:

2. Cal - 5-0 and waiting for USC.

3. Ohio State - Clearly the best team in the Big 10 this season.

4. Boston College - Surprise team from the ACC? Hardly, Matt Ryan's doing a great job.

5. South Florida - Got a scare from the Hooters, but this Cinderella's clock hasn't struck midnight yet.

6. Oklahoma - Big win at the State Fair makes this team a real threat for the National Championship.

7. South Carolina - Beat the other cinderella team this season (Kentucky) quite convincingly.

8. West Virginia - Looked beatable early, pulled through in the 2nd half.

9. Oregon - IMO, the best 1 loss team in football.

And, to round out the Top 10:

USC. This really makes me angry and here's why: They lose to a team who's coach says USC is the best team in the nation. Yet, when they get the chance to seal off the game and pull away, they continued to let Stanford creep back up, and ultimately win the game.

USC only drops from 2 to 10 in the AP and from 1 to 7 in the Coaches Poll, while Wisconsin (who was the the worst Top 5 team byfar) loses to a much more formidable opponent in Illinois, and drops from 5 to 19 in the AP and 5 to 15 in the Coaches!

This special treatment from the voters has got to stop, it's making me sick. If USC somehow ends up in the National Title game (pending they run the table from here on), then there should be a huge riot by every other fan of another 1 loss team.

Posted: **Sun Oct 7, 2007 7:53 pm**

We had a true number 1 from the start, it just took the rest of the nation a while to catch on

Posted: **Sun Oct 7, 2007 7:58 pm**

gunnabdaschwab09 wrote:This special treatment from the voters has got to stop, it's making me sick. If USC somehow ends up in the National Title game (pending they run the table from here on), then there should be a huge riot by every other fan of another 1 loss team.

Don't worry, they won't be playing for the NC. They will lose to either one of Cal or Oregon, possible to both. Hell, it's still possible that they can lose again to Oregon State...but the Beavers really need to get their s**t together on offense quickly to make that happen.

Posted: **Sun Oct 7, 2007 8:27 pm**

gunnabdaschwab09 wrote:http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex

LSU is now the true #1 team in the nation, after their win exciting win vs. Florida last night.

The rest of the Top 10 looks like this:

2. Cal - 5-0 and waiting for USC.

3. Ohio State - Clearly the best team in the Big 10 this season.

4. Boston College - Surprise team from the ACC? Hardly, Matt Ryan's doing a great job.

5. South Florida - Got a scare from the Hooters, but this Cinderella's clock hasn't struck midnight yet.

6. Oklahoma - Big win at the State Fair makes this team a real threat for the National Championship.

7. South Carolina - Beat the other cinderella team this season (Kentucky) quite convincingly.

8. West Virginia - Looked beatable early, pulled through in the 2nd half.

9. Oregon - IMO, the best 1 loss team in football.

And, to round out the Top 10:

USC. This really makes me angry and here's why: They lose to a team who's coach says USC is the best team in the nation. Yet, when they get the chance to seal off the game and pull away, they continued to let Stanford creep back up, and ultimately win the game.

USC only drops from 2 to 10 in the AP and from 1 to 7 in the Coaches Poll, while Wisconsin (who was the the worst Top 5 team byfar) loses to a much more formidable opponent in Illinois, and drops from 5 to 19 in the AP and 5 to 15 in the Coaches!

This special treatment from the voters has got to stop, it's making me sick. If USC somehow ends up in the National Title game (pending they run the table from here on), then there should be a huge riot by every other fan of another 1 loss team.

The Trojans have 4 one loss teams in front of them and it bothers you they only dropped to 10. Wow!

Posted: **Sun Oct 7, 2007 9:17 pm**

LSU was always the true number one. USC isn't even the second best team in my opinion.

Posted: **Sun Oct 7, 2007 9:19 pm**

There is no reason what so ever that USC should be top 10.

I also wonder if WV should be top 10.

I am happy the voters got it right and put CAL at #2. Nothing against OSU as they are a very good team but CAL has a better resume and deserves #2.

:clap:

Posted: **Sun Oct 7, 2007 9:33 pm**

opzoneworld wrote:There is no reason what so ever that USC should be top 10.

I also wonder if WV should be top 10.

I am happy the voters got it right and put CAL at #2. Nothing against OSU as they are a very good team but CAL has a better resume and deserves #2.

WVU has no business in the top ten. They have played one respectable team all year and they were handled with ease.

Posted: **Sun Oct 7, 2007 11:57 pm**

Once again, the AP poll proves why it's more accurate than the coaches' poll by a mile. It starts, of course, with five undefeated teams in college football in the top 5 spots, and then the best one-loss team in the sixth position.

Still, USC is too high and Florida is too low.

Posted: **Mon Oct 8, 2007 1:38 am**

We deserve to be in the top 10. We're a great team, USF just has our number :-?

but LMAO AT USC :rofl:

Posted: **Mon Oct 8, 2007 2:19 am**

gunnabdaschwab09 wrote:USC. This really makes me angry and here's why: They lose to a team who's coach says USC is the best team in the nation. Yet, when they get the chance to seal off the game and pull away, they continued to let Stanford creep back up, and ultimately win the game.

USC only drops from 2 to 10 in the AP and from 1 to 7 in the Coaches Poll, while Wisconsin (who was the the worst Top 5 team byfar) loses to a much more formidable opponent in Illinois, and drops from 5 to 19 in the AP and 5 to 15 in the Coaches!

This special treatment from the voters has got to stop, it's making me sick. If USC somehow ends up in the National Title game (pending they run the table from here on), then there should be a huge riot by every other fan of another 1 loss team.

I wouldn't call subjective opinion "special treatment". Is USC being provided the benefit of the doubt partly based on reputation? Yes. If you have a problem with that, start your battle with the fact that Top 25 polls are made in the pre-season when no team has proven anything.

However, the fact of the matter is that there's more information here than your computer-ish analysis. When a team reaches a high ranking by simply not losing to bad teams, them losing to a non-Top 25 team tells people that the team had no business being so high. Whereas, when the most dominant program in college football starts off dominating tough teams and then loses to a team that they are clearly capable of slaughtering on a day when they are 100%, it simply says that they are inconsistent.

Posted: **Mon Oct 8, 2007 2:48 am**

Doctor MJ wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

I wouldn't call subjective opinion "special treatment". Is USC being provided the benefit of the doubt partly based on reputation? Yes. If you have a problem with that, start your battle with the fact that Top 25 polls are made in the pre-season when no team has proven anything.

However, the fact of the matter is that there's more information here than your computer-ish analysis. When a team reaches a high ranking by simply not losing to bad teams, them losing to a non-Top 25 team tells people that the team had no business being so high. Whereas, when the most dominant program in college football starts off dominating tough teams and then loses to a team that they are clearly capable of slaughtering on a day when they are 100%, it simply says that they are inconsistent.

Wait a minute...are you suggesting that this should reflect how people should think of USC? If so, explain to me exactly which "tough team" they started off against. Would that be the mighty powerhouse of Idaho...a team that has yet to win a D-I game this year (in fact, I don't think they have even won a D-I game). Would that be Washington State...a team that has woefully underachieved all season. Would it be Nebraska...a now unranked team that really has not been all that special this season either. Or maybe their "tough opponent" was their bye they had in the second week.

I keep hearing all of these excuses for USC but no acknowledgment that they are just not as good as they were hyped to be. They have a strong chance of being a 3-loss team this season. I hope prepare yourself for that disappointment.

Posted: **Mon Oct 8, 2007 11:35 am**

USC losing to Stanford is worse than Michigan losing to App State. The line was 39.5 points for USC; there weren't odds on the UM-ASU game but if you extrapolate the Sagarin odds system UM would have only been 32.5 point favorites.

Look at how USC has played this year--at some point you have to come to the conclusion that they're not just underacheiving but accept that they just aren't that good. All that talent doesn't automatically mean they're a great team. Ask Buckeye fans in the early 90s, or Texas fans pre-Vince Young, or Tennessee fans the last decade...

Posted: **Mon Oct 8, 2007 11:40 am**

gunnabdaschwab09 wrote:http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex

LSU is now the true #1 team in the nation, after their win exciting win vs. Florida last night.

The rest of the Top 10 looks like this:

2. Cal - 5-0 and waiting for USC.

3. Ohio State - Clearly the best team in the Big 10 this season.

4. Boston College - Surprise team from the ACC? Hardly, Matt Ryan's doing a great job.

5. South Florida - Got a scare from the Hooters, but this Cinderella's clock hasn't struck midnight yet.

6. Oklahoma - Big win at the State Fair makes this team a real threat for the National Championship.

7. South Carolina - Beat the other cinderella team this season (Kentucky) quite convincingly.

8. West Virginia - Looked beatable early, pulled through in the 2nd half.

9. Oregon - IMO, the best 1 loss team in football.

Hard to argue with the Top 7 there. I would put Oregon ahead of WVU as well, but I'd also put VaTech and Mizzou ahead of both of them. Then USC, Illinois, Arizona State, Cincy, Florida.

Posted: **Mon Oct 8, 2007 7:33 pm**

KingInExile wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Wait a minute...are you suggesting that this should reflect how people should think of USC? If so, explain to me exactly which "tough team" they started off against. Would that be the mighty powerhouse of Idaho...a team that has yet to win a D-I game this year (in fact, I don't think they have even won a D-I game). Would that be Washington State...a team that has woefully underachieved all season. Would it be Nebraska...a now unranked team that really has not been all that special this season either. Or maybe their "tough opponent" was their bye they had in the second week.

I keep hearing all of these excuses for USC but no acknowledgment that they are just not as good as they were hyped to be. They have a strong chance of being a 3-loss team this season. I hope prepare yourself for that disappointment.

I'm a UCLA fan bro. It's no skin off my back if USC sucks. I defend them simply because I disagree with the extreme statements others say about them (Meanwhile, if anyone cared enough to bash my Bruins, I probably wouldn't disagree)

It is a solid point that teams like Nebraska have underachieved. On the other hand, if you are trying to say that Stanford would slaughter Nebraska, I think you're being silly. This USC team that lost to Stanford is clearly not the same as the one they started the season with.

As far as them not being as good as they were hyped to be, as I said they deserved to be knocked, and in doing so clearly fall well below what there hype was. But c'mon, people here have been knocking USC well before this season. This is less about people deciding right now to bash USC, and more about retribution for years of glory.

Posted: **Mon Oct 8, 2007 7:40 pm**

Icness wrote:USC losing to Stanford is worse than Michigan losing to App State. The line was 39.5 points for USC; there weren't odds on the UM-ASU game but if you extrapolate the Sagarin odds system UM would have only been 32.5 point favorites.

I was honestly astonished at that line. For several years now, USC has made a habit of not beating the odds in mid-season. I am shocked that they lost, but I'm not at all shocked that it was close.

I can't imagine thinking of this as the equal of the Michigan upset, and I say that as a Michigan fan. Michigan scheduled ASU to get a walkover. USC scheduled Stanford because they a part of the Pac 10, one of the major conferences in the country. Every year some big time programs get upset by a weak sister in conference play. Top 5 programs don't lose to programs like App. State.

Posted: **Mon Oct 8, 2007 9:53 pm**

Icness wrote:Hard to argue with the Top 7 there. I would put Oregon ahead of WVU as well, but I'd also put VaTech and Mizzou ahead of both of them. Then USC, Illinois, Arizona State, Cincy, Florida.

I didn't realize how badly Mizzou beat Nebraska until I walked into my newspaper class today, and one of my friends kept saying "41-6!" over and over again.

After watching some highlights today and reading some articles on the game, I now believe Mizzou should be at least the #8 team in the nation. And, if they can beat Oklahoma next week in Norman, they should easily be a Top 5 team.

Posted: **Mon Oct 8, 2007 11:27 pm**

Doctor MJ wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

I was honestly astonished at that line. For several years now, USC has made a habit of not beating the odds in mid-season. I am shocked that they lost, but I'm not at all shocked that it was close.

I can't imagine thinking of this as the equal of the Michigan upset, and I say that as a Michigan fan. Michigan scheduled ASU to get a walkover. USC scheduled Stanford because they a part of the Pac 10, one of the major conferences in the country. Every year some big time programs get upset by a weak sister in conference play. Top 5 programs don't lose to programs like App. State.

App State would win the MAC East this year, no question in my mind about that. Does that mean they should beat Michigan--no, but UM did struggle to beat a truly awful EMU team last Sat. There's a lot of legit BCS-conference talent at many of the I-AA schools (whatever they go by now) and App State has had that for years now. Caveat scheduler for BCS schools. I think Michigan's D is a heck of a lot worse than anyone expected too, and Michigan was badly overrated preseason.

I see what you're saying about it being a conference game, but IMO that makes it even worse--USC knew exactly what they were facing and still dogged it to a team that probably would finish in the bottom 3 of the WAC. Stanford wasn't within 24 points of the other PAC-10 teams they've played. You simply cannot lose that game at home in conference play when you already have current game film and scouting plus just the experience of playing so many of those players before.

Put it this way--I'd rather my Buckeyes lose to James Madison or App State in the opener than lose a home game in October to Northwestern (lately) or Indiana (in the 90s).

Posted: **Tue Oct 9, 2007 12:15 am**

I think time will tell where the Stanford program is, my guess is they will beat some more good teams. Same with UW, their learing to win and have some good young talent. To look at a 41 pt spread and say it means anything is rediculous, those are Vegas numbers made by people who know nothing about football.

USC has struggled but i didnt see any mass hysteria when LSU struggled against Tulane.

Posted: **Tue Oct 9, 2007 12:33 am**

^^We struggled and we still won 34-9.

Damn that was a close one.

Posted: **Tue Oct 9, 2007 2:12 am**

JoeyH wrote:^^We struggled and we still won 34-9.

Damn that was a close one.

I dont see any big powerhouse in LSU they're a good team but seem average in certain areas. Hopefully they'll get better.

RealGM

After 6 Weeks, We Finally Have A True #1

After 6 Weeks, We Finally Have A True #1

Re: After 6 Weeks, We Finally Have A True #1

Re: After 6 Weeks, We Finally Have A True #1

Re: After 6 Weeks, We Finally Have A True #1

Re: After 6 Weeks, We Finally Have A True #1

Re: After 6 Weeks, We Finally Have A True #1

Re: After 6 Weeks, We Finally Have A True #1

Re: After 6 Weeks, We Finally Have A True #1