Random question...was anybody watching the Auburn-Mississippi State game last week? If so, were any of you distracted by the lead official looking like a young version of Marc Alaimo??
The College Football Thread
- Thread starter Commander Vaughn
- Start date
Cardassia would totally own the game of football. 
A win is a win. And Best looked liked a monster. It was the toughest place (IMO) that the bears will have to play this year.
Cardassia would totally own the game of football.
Strategy, brutality, psychology, discipline--yeah, I'd say we've got it covered!
(So did anybody else see the guy I'm talking about?)
I'm a bit worried about going up to Oregon next week. Utah had the longest streak in the country until Oregon today. Hopefully Cal doesn't look past that game. And Yeah, Best did look awesome today, despite the fact that the Gophers pretty much shut down the run game. That's impressive.
Very happy that Colorado State is 3-0, and they're getting votes for at least two top 25 polls. That will change when they play BYU, though...
*sigh*
*sigh*
I'd suggest rereading my applicable post. What I mean is apparent therein.
JM's Top Twenty-Five, Week Ending 19 September 2009
1 – Florida (3-0)
That win over Tennessee was not at all impressive, in light of having vowed to annihilate the Vols.
2 – Texas (3-0)
Didn't mean as much as last year's game, but that had to have been sweet.
3 – Miami, Florida (2-0)
One can say it's premature, but those victories over Georgia Tech and Florida State are the best pair of wins for any team thus far this year.
4 – Cincinnati (3-0)
At this point, I'm not sure blowing out Rutgers means anything, but taking out the Beavers in Corvallis is quite a feat.
5 – Louisiana State (3-0)
Who would've thought even two weeks ago that the Tigers could proudly point to a victory in Seattle as a high-quality win?
6 – Alabama (3-0)
They really didn't look a lot better than Rutgers did against FIU.
7 – Auburn (3-0)
You've got to start worrying once the War Eagles begin dropping 41—on anybody.
8 – Boise State (3-0)
So what happens if just about everyone has two losses at year's end? Do you match an unbeaten BSU (and it's entirely possible they're going to be unbeaten) against UF for the national title?
9 – Houston (2-0)
This may be the briefest top ten stay ever, but ... they won at Oklahoma State, which merits them a spot herein.
10 – Mississippi (2-0)
Due credit for surviving the swine flu unbeaten.
11 – California (3-0)
So ... when do they shit the bird, as they invariably do?
12 – Florida State (2-1)
They should have beaten Miami.
13 – Oklahoma (2-1)
BYU's blowout loss to Florida State reflects badly on the Sooners.
14 – UCLA (3-0)
I have a feeling they're gonna do some damage.
15 – Washington (2-1)
Laugh all you want: They also gave LSU quite the tussle.
16 – Michigan (3-0)
So they took a year off. So what?
17 – Pittsburgh (3-0)
They certainly looked better against Navy than the Buckeyes did.
18 – North Carolina (3-0)
Wins over East Carolina and UConn don't seem like much to brag about—now.
19 – Southern California (2-1)
I think they lose at least three games this year ... and said this long before Saturday.
20 – Penn State (3-0)
The idea they merit a top five ranking after their lackluster performances against three of the nation's most prominent palookas is an absolute joke. Play someone out-of-conference, will you?
21 – Texas Christian (2-0)
Not sure about them yet.
22 – Oregon (2-1)
That win over Utah's worth something, I suppose.
23 – Oklahoma State (2-1)
I'm not particularly surprised the hype got to them. They're very much like Cal: They'll find a way to lose the big game.
24 – Georgia (2-1)
My wife loves this team, for the best of reasons: She thinks the little bones on their helmets are cute.
25 (tie) – Iowa (3-0)
At least I can get rid of either them or the Lions next weekend.
25 (tie) – Ohio State (2-1)
And hopefully they won't be too far behind.
(Scarlet) KnightWatch: Weeks after the blowout loss to Cincinnati—a game I attended (and left early in the third quarter)—one is tempted to say that the Knights have remounted their charger with a couple of victories, but ... that would be premature. Wins over FCS/1-AA Howard and the improving-but-by-no-means-formidable Florida International don't mean much in the greater scheme of things. RU will reappear on the national radar, and in my top twenty-five, if they reach 5-1 with victories over Maryland, Texas Southern and Pittsburgh. Until then, they're the Scarlet Gnats.
1 – Florida (3-0)
That win over Tennessee was not at all impressive, in light of having vowed to annihilate the Vols.
2 – Texas (3-0)
Didn't mean as much as last year's game, but that had to have been sweet.
3 – Miami, Florida (2-0)
One can say it's premature, but those victories over Georgia Tech and Florida State are the best pair of wins for any team thus far this year.
4 – Cincinnati (3-0)
At this point, I'm not sure blowing out Rutgers means anything, but taking out the Beavers in Corvallis is quite a feat.
5 – Louisiana State (3-0)
Who would've thought even two weeks ago that the Tigers could proudly point to a victory in Seattle as a high-quality win?
6 – Alabama (3-0)
They really didn't look a lot better than Rutgers did against FIU.
7 – Auburn (3-0)
You've got to start worrying once the War Eagles begin dropping 41—on anybody.
8 – Boise State (3-0)
So what happens if just about everyone has two losses at year's end? Do you match an unbeaten BSU (and it's entirely possible they're going to be unbeaten) against UF for the national title?
9 – Houston (2-0)
This may be the briefest top ten stay ever, but ... they won at Oklahoma State, which merits them a spot herein.
10 – Mississippi (2-0)
Due credit for surviving the swine flu unbeaten.
11 – California (3-0)
So ... when do they shit the bird, as they invariably do?
12 – Florida State (2-1)
They should have beaten Miami.
13 – Oklahoma (2-1)
BYU's blowout loss to Florida State reflects badly on the Sooners.
14 – UCLA (3-0)
I have a feeling they're gonna do some damage.
15 – Washington (2-1)
Laugh all you want: They also gave LSU quite the tussle.
16 – Michigan (3-0)
So they took a year off. So what?
17 – Pittsburgh (3-0)
They certainly looked better against Navy than the Buckeyes did.
18 – North Carolina (3-0)
Wins over East Carolina and UConn don't seem like much to brag about—now.
19 – Southern California (2-1)
I think they lose at least three games this year ... and said this long before Saturday.
20 – Penn State (3-0)
The idea they merit a top five ranking after their lackluster performances against three of the nation's most prominent palookas is an absolute joke. Play someone out-of-conference, will you?
21 – Texas Christian (2-0)
Not sure about them yet.
22 – Oregon (2-1)
That win over Utah's worth something, I suppose.
23 – Oklahoma State (2-1)
I'm not particularly surprised the hype got to them. They're very much like Cal: They'll find a way to lose the big game.
24 – Georgia (2-1)
My wife loves this team, for the best of reasons: She thinks the little bones on their helmets are cute.
25 (tie) – Iowa (3-0)
At least I can get rid of either them or the Lions next weekend.
25 (tie) – Ohio State (2-1)
And hopefully they won't be too far behind.
(Scarlet) KnightWatch: Weeks after the blowout loss to Cincinnati—a game I attended (and left early in the third quarter)—one is tempted to say that the Knights have remounted their charger with a couple of victories, but ... that would be premature. Wins over FCS/1-AA Howard and the improving-but-by-no-means-formidable Florida International don't mean much in the greater scheme of things. RU will reappear on the national radar, and in my top twenty-five, if they reach 5-1 with victories over Maryland, Texas Southern and Pittsburgh. Until then, they're the Scarlet Gnats.
If it was apparent, there wouldn't be a need for clarification.
I'm still not seeing consistency. Air Force is good because they've been good in years past, but Michigan is good this year in spite of last year. It's more like you rank teams based on your personal opinion, and then fill in the reasoning later.
Which is fine, but there are other points of view. I'm not one who buys into much continuity between seasons.
Last edited:
If it was apparent, there wouldn't be a need for clarification.
I'm still not seeing consistency. Air Force is good because they've been good in years past, but Michigan is good this year in spite of last year.
It is an entirely consistent perspective. Michigan's 3-9 performance last year was an aberration caused by a difficult transition between one coach's philosophy and that of his successor (along with a dearth of critical personnel able to implement said philosophy), while Air Force's toughness and never-say-die attitude is a by-product of a discipline and steel only Army and Navy, in FBS, can match. [You can make other teams 'go away,' for lack of a better term. It's much more difficult to do so with those three. This, coupled with consistent success on the gridiron over the last few decades, is a solid foundation for my assertion that defeating Air Force (and, right now, Navy) is a quality win.] I haven't said either is an elite squad, only that one (UM) is good and the other (AF) consistently a tough foe—neither of which puts me on a particularly shaky limb.
I understand that each team need be evaluated weighing different criteria more heavily.
And every person who rates teams, Commander Vaughn, is basing it on his personal opinion—that is, the manner in which he evaluates the available statistics, results (and, for some, history) to draw a conclusion.
And I find the idea that seasons are entities unto themselves laughably absurd. Such would only be the case if schools were fielding entirely new squads each year. Is recent history the definitive criterion? Of course not. Does it influence a school's performance? I say yes, and my rankings reflect that.
Last edited:
I guess my point is more along these lines.
Everyone else comes in here and talks about how much fun it is to watch college football. You come in here, lay down paragraphs of analysis, but don't talk much about enjoying the games for what they are. Analysis is well and good, and has its place. But you act as though your opinion is the only correct one. We're not here to debate college football, we're here to enjoy it. And hitting everyone with "X is better than Y but not as good as Z because of my personal opinion" sucks the fun right out of here.
I do like seeing how you rank the teams, it is interesting. But the barbs are unnecessary, and disagreeing with someone doesn't need a paragraph's worth of explanation thats essentially just subjective thought. No one here needs to be right or wrong, we just need to have fun.
Just a thought.
Everyone else comes in here and talks about how much fun it is to watch college football. You come in here, lay down paragraphs of analysis, but don't talk much about enjoying the games for what they are. Analysis is well and good, and has its place. But you act as though your opinion is the only correct one. We're not here to debate college football, we're here to enjoy it. And hitting everyone with "X is better than Y but not as good as Z because of my personal opinion" sucks the fun right out of here.
I do like seeing how you rank the teams, it is interesting. But the barbs are unnecessary, and disagreeing with someone doesn't need a paragraph's worth of explanation thats essentially just subjective thought. No one here needs to be right or wrong, we just need to have fun.
Just a thought.
I have to wonder, Cal won, in impressive fashion too, USC lost, and you have Cal at #11? Will you promise to raise them up at least to the top 6 if they beat Oregon and USC or will the disrespect continue?
Then let me make it clearer: I freakin' love college football. If it were a choice between watching it and pro, I'd never see my Arizona Cardinals play again. Fortunately, I don't have to make that kind of decision.
I love the hoopla. I love the enthusiasm of kids who will never do this on Sunday—the ones who play to play. I love the Cinderella stories like those of Rutgers three years ago, and whatver school puts on the slipper this year. I love arguing about this stuff, because I differentiate between real hate and what I call "football hate," which is simply an affectation that adds spice to the recipe. I love the polls. I love the bowl system, and hope we never see a playoff.
I must say that I'm astounded you (and, I assume, others) find me so irritating ... and, perversely, pleased you find me so irritating—mostly because I'm more than a bit of a noodge.
And, actually, no, I don't think my "opinion is the only correct one" (despite my post of some days ago, which I thought anyone of intelligence would have taken for the silly it was).
I just don't feel the need to preface everything I say with, "In my opinion," when it's patently obvious that it is only my opinion. You're certainly welcome to quote this in your mind's eye for each of my subsequent posts, since it's perpetually germane.
An aside: I wasn't aware you established policy on why people are here.
If you don't like my posts, you're certainly welcome to block them. What's not welcome is your attempt to suck all my fun away by telling me that my posts are sucking all your fun away. Then, again, you're just expressing your opinion, which is your right.
And the fact that it is just that, subjective thought, should enable you to either shine on my comments or dismiss them as rhetoric meant to amuse or persuade, without resorting to, "You take my all my fun away!"
If that's the case, I'm sorry. I have no intention of altering my posting style one iota, mind you, but I can sympathize: There are posters who grate on my nerves as well.
Thought noted and given its just due.
Again, in short:
- Love the game
- Have no intention of sucking the life out of this place
- Don't think my take is anything more than that
- Hope you accept my response and we can move on
I guess, to me—oh, and note, Commander Vaughn, my use of "to me," which is synonymous with "in my opinion"—Cal hasn't quite proven themselves. They seem loaded with talent, but are prone to stumble just enough that I couldn't quite see them in the top ten yet. I must concede, though, that a win over Minnesota out there in the Gophers' shiny new stadium is, in my opinion, noteworthy. One can even argue that it was a trap game and the Bears handled the atmosphere extremely well. [Actually, I think I did just make that argument.]
If they beat Oregon and USC, my opinion of them will certainly be amended upward. [And, frankly, I don't think my opinion of them right now is so bad: They're in the top twelve, after all.] I can't guarantee a top six ranking, but ... I'm inclined to think it'd be just that.
For the record, I'd wouldn't at all mind seeing the Bears prove me wrong, and get it done ... but negotiating a full Pac-10 schedule ain't easy. Just ask USC.
[You know what matchup I'd pay to see right now? Cincinnati vs. Cal.]
Late....
My Trojans found a way to keep their streak alive. Every year, we have to lose some horrible game.
Good grief....
I guess we learned one thing: Pete made the right decision with Barkley. Corps looked terrible!
If we play like that at Cal, it's going to be very ugly.
My Trojans found a way to keep their streak alive. Every year, we have to lose some horrible game.
Good grief....
I guess we learned one thing: Pete made the right decision with Barkley. Corps looked terrible!
If we play like that at Cal, it's going to be very ugly.
You know what? I pretty much agree. Penn State does not look like a top 5 team AT ALL, granted I don't have a good read on who does deserve that ranking, since everyone keeps losing (I was pretty sure BYU was decent and then they did that against FSU, for example). Several players did play with the flu against Temple but there isn't much of an excuse for sucking against Syracuse or Akron.
It should be noted that several years ago when PSU scheduled Syracuse they were actually good. Paterno wants to play regional teams but NOT Pitt because he has some weird grudge against the Panthers. Playing Temple is pretty much a favor to his former assistant coach Al Golden. And Alabama will be on the schedule for the next few years. Rutgers, too, but they'll probably fit nicely in the palooka category when they come around in 2014.
I have no explanation or defense for why are we bothering with Eastern Illinois. I had to pay $$ for that game and yeah I'll go, but frankly it's a rip-off. The only decent home games this year are Iowa and Ohio State and OSU isn't even a night game because of the Big Ten's stupid rule.
Quite true. Their plummet has been rapid.
[Chuckles.]
You go right on thinking that. We're looking forward to a nice lion pelt, which we'll fit next to the bull carcass (#2 USF) and stuffed birdie (#3 Louisville) we've hung from the rafters in Piscataway over the last few years.
Joking aside ... Rutgers as future palooka is highly unlikely—not with the recruiting classes Schiano's been luring to the Banks of the Ol' Raritan.
Then, again, if they play like they did against UC, you may have a point.
I put the over/under for Southern Cal losses at three this year before the season began (and, admittedly, were I a betting man, I'd probably still go "under" or "push").
You're more familiar with them than I am. Think I've underestimated them at 10-3 and, say, number nine in the final poll?
