Western Carolina coach Mark Speir calls out Buckeroo Herbie

[Bandwagonbo2]

speaking on treadwell i always raised my eye brow at that signing. at the time ole miss was unknown. just someone for other sec teams to beat up on. found it questionable that a top 20 recruit would want to play there. now that ole miss is under investigation where theres smoke..... maybe just good recruiting. but generally for most part there isn't a ton of out of area talent in SEC country. here and there yeah. kids from illinois.

I know Saban pulls talent from all over the country, so i cant fault a player from another state going to Ole Miss. From what I have heard freeze is a pretty good salesman and can recruit. Saban got talent from something like 12 states in one of his recent classes, which shows he can recruit well as well. I hate it for Treadwell, he is a class act and made that team what it was on offense. With him the might only lose one game out of those three they lost...well maybe two as Arky was a team possessed on Saturday.

 

[trojanfight]

All of what you said amounted to what? That Bama didnt deserve a top 10 ranking in the preseason? Yet UCLA with three losses did? or Oklahoma who is nowhere in the picture now deserved a top ranking? Or Oregon who lost two games deserved a top spot? Please just say what you mean and stop with the log post that says nothing of note. Bama was as deserving of a top spot as any team that i mentioned and more so than UCLA, yet where's your hate for them getting that top 10 spot with three losses?

Oh and so you know, Bama did have one of the worst defenses of its past 6 years last year and that is not even close to debatable.

i would have been fine with ucla in usc spot. and usc more around 22. bottom line your probably going to see me complain till things change. part of life i guess. hypothetically should alabama lose to auburn i would say again they shouldn't be ranked north of 10th spot in preseason. what you have done recently on field should matter more than what you do on signing day. but its not so much an argument about bama then it is the entire sec.you can make an argument that several of the sec teams shouldn't be ranked to open season. or if they are definitely not near top 10. id say currently only deserving are alabama and georgia. but even if that happens ...the first sec team to beat uab and troy will be vaulted into top 25

 

[Bandwagonbo2]

i would have been fine with ucla in usc spot. and usc more around 22. bottom line your probably going to see me complain till things change. part of life i guess. hypothetically should alabama lose to auburn i would say again they shouldn't be ranked north of 10th spot in preseason. what you have done recently on field should matter more than what you do on signing day. but its not so much an argument about bama then it is the entire sec.you can make an argument that several of the sec teams shouldn't be ranked to open season. or if they are definitely not near top 10. id say currently only deserving are alabama and georgia. but even if that happens ...the first sec team to beat uab and troy will be vaulted into top 25

I get what you're saying.

Tell you what, do some research and take the last three years of each teams records. then rank those teams based on that three year stretch on the field and i bet you find teams like Bama, Oklahoma, Oregon and so on in the top 10 overall. Thats why those teams get the benefit of the doubt when they get ranked highly to start a year. Whats funny is Bama is in the top 2 spots in both polls now based on what they've done on the field and even if ranked lower to start, they would be in the top 5 most likely for certain. Hard to keep the best team in the SEC out of a top 5 spot.

 

[WestEndVol]

that list just doesn't compare washington might as well just throw them out considering they were barely on bubble anyway. USC your right 4 losses. ill give you stanford...but the thing that it doesn't do like the sec is give stepping stones to other teams climbing the rankings. you can say they were overrated by polls sure..but how did that effect the future rankings..what team is higher ranked now because of playing those teams? you can argue it significantly helped out miss st and ole miss having a&m, LSU and south carolina ranked. think theres a big difference in overranking someone at 15...and at 7 or 8.

#11 Stanford
#15 USC
#25 Washington

#9 South Carolina
#13 LSU
#21 Texas A&M

Very similar ranking to start the year. USC got bumped from 14th to 9th, for beating #13 Stanford (currently 6-5 and unranked). Arizona St. moved from 14th to 9th, for beating then #17 Utah (currently 7-4 and unranked). LSU was 3-0 at the time, with a win over #14 Wisconsin. Sure LSU is 7-4 right now, but at the time it looked like a very good road win for Mississippi State. Mississippi St. went from unranked to #16 for beating #8 LSU. VT went from unranked to #17 for beating #8 Ohio State. Do you think a 5-6 team deserves to be ranked 17th? A 3-1 ECU team mostly likely doesn't crack the top 25 either, had VT not been ranked #17 at the time when they beat them. You have to reward teams for what they accomplished at the time, no one can predict the future...just how it is.

 

[ralphiewvu]

His comment was they are shifting them alll to later in the year and that is false. I showed teams that started the first game against divisional opponents. Its not hard to see the NFL schedules games randomly, not in one set pattern as he suggested.

Ahh NO. And I quote, "even the NFL has now structured to play divisional games at the end of the year." The Cowboys along with a host of other NFL teams play division opponents and have been for a while. He never said "all." The fact that you are defending your squad from playing and FCS team is laughable. (I won't defended wvu for playing Towson because that's a joke). But come on, you pulling this outa your ass is funny. But like most of the roles bama bandwagon cocksuckers on here, you are not surprising.

 

[trojanfan12]

So then you are essentially saying its ok to start the year being pussies and playing no one meaningful until week 3 or 4, but not ok to play a good team fromm week one, start conference play on week two or three and spead out your weaker opponents.

look i get the arguments you guys are making, but if a team is willing to start its year bolder than othrrs, why should they be frowned upon for playing their weaker teams at other times of the year just because thats how its always been done in the past. Frankly it would be boring as hell not having good games to watch until the 1/4 mark of the season if we didnt have a few tea,s man enough to schedule a bit tougher games to start a season than Idaho, or Northwest Polytechnic school for the blind. I am happy my team plays a better team to start the year and dont feel spreading its weaker teams is an issue. When the nine game ICS happens, this will hopefully change this practice, till the be happy someone is man enough to play week one against a P5 opponent.

No, I'm saying that scheduling FCS schools at this point in the season is done to reduce the possibility of a late season loss. Why am I not surprised that you don't get it?

It's common knowledge that an early loss can be recovered from, but a late season loss often can't. SEC teams schedule FCS and low level middies late in the season, thus reducing the risk of a late season loss. When UCLA is ending their season with USC and Stanford, while Alabama is ending theirs with Western Carolina and Auburn, UCLA is at a much greater risk of suffering a late season loss that would cripple their shot at the playoff than 'Bama is. It's really not that difficult to understand.

And yes I'm glad Oregon was man enough to play week one against a P5 opponent while still ending their season with a conference opponent and their rivalry game. Just as USC has done several times. I'm also glad that UCLA was man enough to schedule 2 P5 opponents in their first 3 games and end their season playing a rivalry game and a conference opponent.

Too bad the same can't be said for Alabama.

 

[nddulac]

Scheduling these games late in the season is nothing more than an attempt to avoid a late season loss that most other teams are risking.

We have a bingo. In any kind of system where humans are making decisions (such as polls and playoff committees) late losses hurt more than early losses. Fact.