Post in here if your team is in the Top 10 scoring offense & Top 10 scoring defense

[TheDayMan]

Because Wisconsin not only played a ridiculously tough schedule last year, but they won and finished highly ranked. They've also accomplished a lot more than Washington has in recent years, so they have more room to deserve the benefit of the doubt when they have a shitty schedule. Like Wizardhawk said up top, it's hard to say what Washington is this year, but you'll have your chances to prove yourself.

Lol. "They won" my ass. They lost to every tough team on their way through that supposed gauntlet. Then played a G5 team in their bowl. They didn't accomplish shit. They get no benefit of the doubt.

 

[Across The Field]

Lol. "They won" my ass. They lost to every tough team on their way through that supposed gauntlet. Then played a G5 team in their bowl. They didn't accomplish shit. They get no benefit of the doubt.

Wisconsin finished last year with 2 wins over top 15 teams and 3 losses - all against top 10 teams - by a combined margin of 21 points. Washington beat 1 top 15 team with two losses - against top 10 teams - by a combined 30 points. Wisconsin showed up in every game and had two solid wins. Washington beat 3 ranked teams but were destroyed by the only 2 heavy hitters on their schedule.

This is a Wisconsin program that has also won 10+ games in 6 of the last 8 years, while Washington just finally was relevant again last year for the first time in 16 years.

Yes, they get the benefit of the doubt.

 

[TheDayMan]

Wisconsin finished last year with 2 wins over top 15 teams and 3 losses - all against top 10 teams - by a combined margin of 21 points. Washington beat 1 top 15 team with two losses - against top 10 teams - by a combined 30 points. Wisconsin showed up in every game and had two solid wins. Washington beat 3 ranked teams but were destroyed by the only 2 heavy hitters on their schedule.

This is a Wisconsin program that has also won 10+ games in 6 of the last 8 years, while Washington just finally was relevant again last year for the first time in 16 years.

Yes, they get the benefit of the doubt.

You say 2 top 15 teams, I say 8-4 LSU and western Michigan. No benefit of the doubt.

By the way, washington beat two top 15 teams, and lost 2, to top 5 teams...

1 team deserves, and gets, the benefit of the doubt based on recent success, that's Alabama. Fuck off with this trying to make excuses for Wisconsin's shitty schedule bullshit.

 

[Across The Field]

You say 2 top 15 teams, I say 8-4 LSU and western Michigan. No benefit of the doubt.

By the way, washington beat two top 15 teams, and lost 2, to top 5 teams...

1 team deserves, and gets, the benefit of the doubt based on recent success, that's Alabama. Fuck off with this trying to make excuses for Wisconsin's shitty schedule bullshit.

Nope. 1. Stanford at 12, then Colorado at 17 and Utah at 23. And at least Wisconsin was competitive in their losses. Washington was smoked in both of their games.

For the sake of this comparison, yes, Wisconsin gets the benefit of the doubt over Washington. Wisconsin has been one of the most consistently good teams in the nation for most of this century while Washington was largely irrelevant.

 

[TheDayMan]

Nope. 1. Stanford at 12, then Colorado at 17 and Utah at 23. And at least Wisconsin was competitive in their losses. Washington was smoked in both of their games.

For the sake of this comparison, yes, Wisconsin gets the benefit of the doubt over Washington. Wisconsin has been one of the most consistently good teams in the nation for most of this century while Washington was largely irrelevant.

Yep, Stanford at 12, Colorado at 15. As long as we get to rely on meaningless bullshit, like counting lsu and western Michigan as impressive wins, or trying to justify the worst FBS schedule with the previous year, I'll use whatever poll I want. No benefit of the doubt. Teams that can't even win their conference deserve no such thing.

 

[Across The Field]

Yep, Stanford at 12, Colorado at 15. As long as we get to rely on meaningless bullshit, like counting lsu and western Michigan as impressive wins, or trying to justify the worst FBS schedule with the previous year, I'll use whatever poll I want. No benefit of the doubt. Teams that can't even win their conference deserve no such thing.

Whatever you say man. The B1G was head and shoulders better than the Pac12 last year, so I'll give Wisconsin the benefit of the doubt.

 

[socaljim242]

Pretty sure the team that came in 3rd in the PAC beat the team that won the B1G in the bowl game. So the B1G was head and shoulders better?

 

[TheDayMan]

Whatever you say man. The B1G was head and shoulders better than the Pac12 last year, so I'll give Wisconsin the benefit of the doubt.

You do that. The rest of us will continue on knowing that outside the top 3 or 4 teams, the B1G was garbage. Like every year.

 

[WizardHawk]

Jesus, teams change every year. NO ONE deserves some mythical benefit of the doubt for this year based off last year. So much changeover that matters.

Of course it happens anyway because that's all anyone can best guess on early in the season. But it shouldn't have any relevance at all by mid season.

There are always games every year that come down to one play. Doesn't take much turnover on a roster to entirely impact enough to change those close games.

 

[TheDayMan]

Pretty sure the team that came in 3rd in the PAC beat the team that won the B1G in the bowl game. So the B1G was head and shoulders better?

Hey... never mind about that! It was better cuz he said, and Wisconsin beat western Michigan, or something.

 

[Across The Field]

You do that. The rest of us will continue on knowing that outside the top 3 or 4 teams, the B1G was garbage. Like every year.

LOL, and that's different from the Pac 12 last year how? Only difference is the Pac 12 top 4 weren't close to as good as the B1G top 4.

 

[TheDayMan]

LOL, and that's different from the Pac 12 last year how? Only difference is the Pac 12 top 4 weren't close to as good as the B1G top 4.

Clearly, the rose bowl proved that...

 

[Across The Field]

Pretty sure the team that came in 3rd in the PAC beat the team that won the B1G in the bowl game. So the B1G was head and shoulders better?

If you honestly think USC was the 3rd best team in the Pac 12, so be it. Penn State was significantly more competitive against them in what was basically a home game for USC than Pac 12 champ Washington was playing them in Washington.

 

[Across The Field]

Clearly, the rose bowl proved that...

If you think USC was the 3rd best team in the Pac 12, then how do you explain the 4th best B1G team destroying the 2nd place Pac 12 team earlier in the year?

 

[socaljim242]

LOL, and that's different from the Pac 12 last year how? Only difference is the Pac 12 top 4 weren't close to as good as the B1G top 4.

So USC wasn't as close being as good as the B1G top 4? lol. Looked pretty close to me. Who knew I actually saw a blowout in the Rose Bowl.

 

[Across The Field]

So USC wasn't as close being as good as the B1G top 4? lol. Looked pretty close to me. Who knew I actually saw a blowout in the Rose Bowl.

When did I ever say anything about USC being as close? I said the top 4 in the conference weren't. The top 4 B1G teams all finished top 10 while the Pac 12 had two in the top 10.

 

[socaljim242]

If you honestly think USC was the 3rd best team in the Pac 12, so be it. Penn State was significantly more competitive against them in what was basically a home game for USC than Pac 12 champ Washington was playing them in Washington.

I think USC was probably the best or close to the best in the PAC by the end of the season. Penn State won the B1G. They beat Ohio State and Wisconsin in their CCG. But you're saying the B1G was head and shoulders better than the PAC and yet the B1G winner lost to USC who didnt win the PAC or even the south.

 

[AlaskaGuy]

When did I ever say anything about USC being as close? I said the top 4 in the conference weren't. The top 4 B1G teams all finished top 10 while the Pac 12 had two in the top 10.

OSU got beat like a rented mule in their bowl game last year.

Michigan lost their bowl game.

Penn St. lost their bowl game to the team that finished 2nd in the PAC South.

Wiscy did manage to beat football powerhouse Western Michigan in their bowl game.


Tell us more about these top 10 rankings.

 

[TheDayMan]

If you think USC was the 3rd best team in the Pac 12, then how do you explain the 4th best B1G team destroying the 2nd place Pac 12 team earlier in the year?

Destroying? If it were the other way around it would be "barely escaping."

 

[Across The Field]

I think USC was probably the best or close to the best in the PAC by the end of the season. Penn State won the B1G. They beat Ohio State and Wisconsin in their CCG. But you're saying the B1G was head and shoulders better than the PAC and yet the B1G winner lost to USC who didnt win the PAC or even the south.

I think the top 4 in each conference by year's end went:

B1G
1. Ohio State
2. Penn State
3. michigan
4. Wisconsin

Pac 12
1. USC
2. Washington
3. Colorado
4. Stanford

I'm saying that based on how each team ended up looking overall. USC started awful but ended up pulling that bum Browne and obviously made the right choice with Darnold. They played a back and forth brawl with Penn State in Southern California that they ended up winning in the end, but you know that game was a classic where both teams were very evenly matched. Meanwhile, they went up to Washington and manhandled the Huskies.