B/R's post signing day preseason Top 25

[Across The Field]

They will be. And I already stated it.

Still unlikely.

So you think it proved your point because you found one poll that didn't have Nebraska ranked? Find a poll that has Arizona, USC, Wake Forest, or Texas Tech ranked. I bet I can find more polls that have Nebraska ranked than those 4 combined.

 

[ericd7633]

Still unlikely.

So you think it proved your point because you found one poll that didn't have Nebraska ranked? Find a poll that has Arizona, USC, Wake Forest, or Texas Tech ranked. I bet I can find more polls that have Nebraska ranked than those 4 combined.

There might not be, doesn't mean they can't/won't at some point during the year like you proclaimed with half of osu's schedule. Which doesn't mean anything anyway because USC, Texas Tech and Wisconsin were all ranked at some point last year and all sucked.

 

[BamaDude]

First one I pulled up:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.si...way-too-early-top-25-rankings-clemson-alabama

S.I.'s Way-too-early poll seems to be even further off-base than Bleacher Report's. I think it will be a toss-up between Oregon & Washington as to which of those teams deserves top billing in the Pac-12, but I can't see either one of the in the top 10. 12th is about the highest I would rank any Pac team at the start of the season. Utah shouldn't be in the top 15 - maybe not even in the top 25.

I don't think Missouri or Virginia Tech deserve a rating at this point, either.

 

[Across The Field]

There might not be, doesn't mean they can't/won't at some point during the year like you proclaimed with half of osu's schedule. Which doesn't mean anything anyway because USC, Texas Tech and Wisconsin were all ranked at some point last year and all sucked.

No reason why North Texas and Ball State can't be ranked, by your logic. The conversation was about teams likely to be ranked. Nebraska is very likely to be ranked, while your examples aren't.

Also, why are you comparing an 8-win Wisconsin team to a 5-win TT and 5-win USC team? Very stupid comparison.

 

[ericd7633]

No reason why North Texas and Ball State can't be ranked, by your logic. The conversation was about teams likely to be ranked. Nebraska is very likely to be ranked, while your examples aren't.

Also, why are you comparing an 8-win Wisconsin team to a 5-win TT and 5-win USC team? Very stupid comparison.

Any team that has a shitty schedule at the beginning of the year has a chance, so I would expect Nebraska probably will. Not every fringe top 25 team can open with South Alabama, Colorado, Northern Illinois and Illinois. Hell USC plays 4 teams better than Nebraska's best team.

And I lumped them all together, because they were all ranked and all sucked.

 

[ericd7633]

S.I.'s Way-too-early poll seems to be even further off-base than Bleacher Report's. I think it will be a toss-up between Oregon & Washington as to which of those teams deserves top billing in the Pac-12, but I can't see either one of the in the top 10. 12th is about the highest I would rank any Pac team at the start of the season. Utah shouldn't be in the top 15 - maybe not even in the top 25.

I don't think Missouri or Virginia Tech deserve a rating at this point, either.

No early season poll is going to be good.

 

[BamaDude]

No early season poll is going to be good.

True. But you can usually get about 40-50% of the top 10 to 15 teams.

 

[Across The Field]

Any team that has a shitty schedule at the beginning of the year has a chance, so I would expect Nebraska probably will. Not every fringe top 25 team can open with South Alabama, Colorado, Northern Illinois and Illinois. Hell USC plays 4 teams better than Nebraska's best team.

And I lumped them all together, because they were all ranked and all sucked.

So you just don't think Nebraska is any good then, is that what I'm gathering?

 

[ericd7633]

So you just don't think Nebraska is any good then, is that what I'm gathering?

I said I think they are a 7/8 win team next year. I'd have them above average. They have a really favorable schedule.

 

[ralphiewvu]

But probably not though.

So what was your point in posting that ranking?

ISU will most likely be favored over Iowa because of them playing at Jack Trice.

 

[Across The Field]

I said I think they are a 7/8 win team next year. I'd have them above average. They have a really favorable schedule.

Are you projecting that kind of season for Texas Tech, Wake Forest, Arizona, and USC? I could see it with Wake, considering they have probably one ranked team on their schedule right now. Kinda hard with the other 3.

 

[Across The Field]

ISU will most likely be favored over Iowa because of them playing at Jack Trice.

I honestly think that'll probably be a push, if not maybe .5-1.5 to Iowa, considering Iowa has won 4 of their last 5 games there.

 

[ralphiewvu]

I honestly think that'll probably be a push, if not maybe .5-1.5 to Iowa, considering Iowa has won 4 of their last 5 games there.

Could be, but my guess if they’ll give the home team the edge because of how ISU finished and because Matt Campbell is a good coach. But I think it’s mostly because they are at home.

Ethier way I think Iowa wins lol.

 

[ericd7633]

Are you projecting that kind of season for Texas Tech, Wake Forest, Arizona, and USC? I could see it with Wake, considering they have probably one ranked team on their schedule right now. Kinda hard with the other 3.

USC's schedule is really hard, so I'd guess they won get to 8 wins. But even them finishing 6-6 is probably going to rate better than an 8 win Nebraska. I can see Zona/Wake get to 7.

 

[Across The Field]

Could be, but my guess if they’ll give the home team the edge because of how ISU finished and because Matt Campbell is a good coach. But I think it’s mostly because they are at home.

Ethier way I think Iowa wins lol.

They looked like crap to finish the year though. Lost their bowl game, soundly beaten by Texas, barely beat a bad KSU and barely beat FCS Drake. If anything, if we're going by how they finished, it'd go to Iowa, as they won their bowl over a then-top 20 Miss St and beat a Nebraska team that won 4 of their last 6.

But yeah, I think Iowa wins too

 

[Across The Field]

USC's schedule is really hard, so I'd guess they won get to 8 wins. But even them finishing 6-6 is probably going to rate better than an 8 win Nebraska. I can see Zona/Wake get to 7.

USC is gonna need all the help in the world to get to 6 games. They looked like crap for most of the year and things have not started well this offseason for them. Not a lot of momentum there going into the season.

Zona could, not a hard schedule, and Wake's is a cakewalk other than Clemson and NC State.

 

[ralphiewvu]

They looked like crap to finish the year though. Lost their bowl game, soundly beaten by Texas, barely beat a bad KSU and barely beat FCS Drake. If anything, if we're going by how they finished, it'd go to Iowa, as they won their bowl over a then-top 20 Miss St and beat a Nebraska team that won 4 of their last 6.

But yeah, I think Iowa wins too

No, no it wouldn’t.

Dude Iowa state won 7 of their last 8 regular season games and lost to a once top 10 WSU team by 2 in their bowl game.

Iowa lost 3 of their last 5 games regular season games. While yes they had a 5 point bowl win over top 20 MSU.

If you are going to argue this, atleast try to be fair when comparing the teams.

 

[Across The Field]

No, no it wouldn’t.

Dude Iowa state won 7 of their last 8 regular season games and lost to a once top 10 WSU team by 2 in their bowl game.

Iowa lost 3 of their last 5 games regular season games. While yes they had a 5 point bowl win over top 20 MSU.

If you are going to argue this, atleast try to be fair when comparing the teams.

You said "how Iowa State finished". They "finished" by looking like crap for 4 straight games. Fortunately one of those games was against an FCS team (one they were extremely lucky to beat) and 5-7 KSU (ISU needed 21 4th quarter points to escape by 4).

You tell me to be fair, yet you're counting games from the beginning of October as an indication of how a team finished their year.

 

[ralphiewvu]

You said "how Iowa State finished". They "finished" by looking like crap for 4 straight games. Fortunately one of those games was against an FCS team (one they were extremely lucky to beat) and 5-7 KSU (ISU needed 21 4th quarter points to escape by 4).

You tell me to be fair, yet you're counting games from the beginning of October as an indication of how a team finished their year.

They won 7 of their last 8. That’s impressive for a team that started the year 1-3. Iowa lost 3 of their last 5. You are giving Iowa state shit for barely beating teams yet Iowa is losing to teams (a 6-7 Purdue team included in that) or barely beating them and you are thinking this is some how better?

 

[Across The Field]

They won 7 of their last 8. That’s impressive for a team that started the year 1-3. Iowa lost 3 of their last 5. You are giving Iowa state shit for barely beating teams yet Iowa is losing to teams (a 6-7 Purdue team included in that) or barely beating them and you are thinking this is some how better?

They had 1 regular season win that was by less than 10 points, and that was Nebraska when they were playing fantastic football. That's a lot better than beating Drake by 3, and they weren't even a very good FCS team. Iowa lost 4 games, and only one of them was by more than 6 points. ISU lost 5 games, and 3 were by 10+ points.

ISU won 7 of the final 9 games, true. Only one of those wins was against a team with fewer than 6 losses, so it puts it into perspective a bit. Again, the fact is over the final portion of their schedule, they didn't look good.