PDA

View Full Version : Your Top 25 Teams


Yatta!
05-10-2008, 08:29 AM
Spring practice is over so let the debate begin.

Here's some inspiration if you need it:
ESPN http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/columns/story?columnist=schlabach_mark&id=3388100
SI http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/stewart_mandel/05/01/spring.rankings/index.html
CBS http://www.sportsline.com/collegefootball/story/10813944

My Rankings:
1. Georgia
2. Ohio State
3. USC
4. Oklahoma
5. Missouri
6. Florida
7. Clemson
8. West Virginia
9. LSU
10. Wisconsin
11. Texas Tech
12. Auburn
13. Texas
14. Arizona State
15. BYU
16. Tennessee
17. Virginia Tech
18. Kansas
19. Illinois
20. Wake Forest
21. Oregon
22. Pittsburgh
23. Alabama
24. Michigan State
25. South Florida

holt_bruce81
05-13-2008, 02:13 AM
My Top 25...

1. Georgia
2. Oklahoma
3. Ohio State
4. USC
5. Missouri
6. Florida
7. Texas
8. Illinois
9. Clemson
10. Auburn
11. Arizona State
12. West Virginia
13. Tennessee
14. LSU
15. Kansas
16. Wisconsin
17. BYU
18. Virginia Tech
19. Texas Tech
20. Pittsburgh
21. South Florida
22. Fresno State
23. Connecticut
24. Cincinnati
25. Virginia

DragonFireKai
05-13-2008, 05:38 AM
1. Georgia
2. USC
3. Ohio State
4. Oklahoma
5. Florida
6. Ohio State
7. West Virginia
8. Clemson
9. Texas
10. Missouri
11. Auburn
12. Tennessee
13. Texas Tech
14. Wisconsin
15. Arizona State
16. Cincinatti
17. Oregon State
18. LSU
19. Oregon
20. South Florida
21. Virginia Tech
22. BYU
23. Illinois
24. Kansas
25. Boise State

Michigan
05-13-2008, 06:03 AM
You guys really like Clemson...

DragonFireKai
05-13-2008, 06:11 AM
You guys really like Clemson...

I think they're going to be the top team in a weak ACC.

YAYareaRB
05-13-2008, 10:07 AM
1. USC
2. Georgia
3. Ohio State
4. Oklahoma
5. Florida
6. Mizzou
7. LSU
8. Texas
9. West Virginia
10. Auburn
11. BYU
12. Clemson
13. Texas Tech
14. Arizona State
15. Tennessee
16. Illinois
17. Wisconsin
18. Kansas
19. Virginia Tech
20. Pitt
21. Wake Forest
22. Oregon State
23. Penn State
24. Utah
25. Michigan State
25. Michigan State

soybean
05-13-2008, 11:41 AM
1. Georgia
2. Ohio State
3. Oklahoma
4. Florida
5. Mizzou
6. LSU
7. Texas
8. West Virginia
9. Auburn
10. BYU
11. Clemson
12. Texas Tech
13. Arizona State
14. Tennessee
15. Illinois
16. Wisconsin
17. Kansas
18. Virginia Tech
19. Pitt
20. Wake Forest
21. Oregon State
22. Penn State
23. Utah
24. Fresno State
25. Michigan State

damn USC doesn't even crack your top 25??? brutal.

djp
05-13-2008, 12:35 PM
Clemson will do what they always do... start out by beating crappy teams and then fold when it comes down to it.

1) Ohio State
2) USC
3) Georgia
4) Oklahoma
5) LSU
6) Florida
7) Missouri
8) Texas
9) Auburn
10) Texas Tech
11) Clemson
12) West Virginia
13) Illinois
14) Pitt
15) Virginia Tech
16) Arizona State
17) Tennessee
18) Kansas
19) Wisconsin
20) BYU
21) Conneticut
22) Michigan State
23) Cincinnati
24) Fresno State
25) South Florida

Michigan
05-13-2008, 12:55 PM
uh oh, mine don't look like ESPN's...

1. USC
2. Oklahoma
3. Ohio State
4. Texas
5. LSU
6. Wisconsin
7. Florida
8. Arizona State
9. Georgia
10. Oregon State
11. West Virginia
12. BYU
13. South Carolina
14. Missouri
15. Purdue
16. Florida State
17. Boise State
18. Auburn
19. Clemson
20. South Florida
21. TCU
22. Michigan
23. Virginia Tech
24. Alabama
25. Wake Forest

holt_bruce81
05-13-2008, 01:33 PM
uh oh, mine don't look like ESPN's...

1. USC
2. Oklahoma
3. Ohio State
4. Texas
5. LSU
6. Wisconsin
7. Florida
8. Arizona State
9. Georgia
10. Oregon State
11. West Virginia
12. BYU
13. South Carolina
14. Missouri
15. Purdue
16. Florida State
17. Boise State
18. Auburn
19. Clemson
20. South Florida
21. TCU
22. Michigan
23. Virginia Tech
24. Alabama
25. Wake Forest

Missouri 14th? Their returning 8 starters on defense and pretty much everyone on offense as well from last year.......and they went 12-2 last year and played a tougher schedule.

djp
05-13-2008, 01:48 PM
uh oh, mine don't look like ESPN's...

1. USC
2. Oklahoma
3. Ohio State
4. Texas
5. LSU
6. Wisconsin
7. Florida
8. Arizona State
9. Georgia
10. Oregon State
11. West Virginia
12. BYU
13. South Carolina
14. Missouri
15. Purdue
16. Florida State
17. Boise State
18. Auburn
19. Clemson
20. South Florida
21. TCU
22. Michigan
23. Virginia Tech
24. Alabama
25. Wake Forest

FSU? Michigan? What did these teams do to deserve their ranking? FSU has lost what, 6 starters alone to academic issues last year? Michigan is putting in a completely new offense with a new quarterback... I don't see more than 6-7 wins from them next season.

Yatta!
05-13-2008, 04:07 PM
FSU? Michigan? What did these teams do to deserve their ranking? FSU has lost what, 6 starters alone to academic issues last year? Michigan is putting in a completely new offense with a new quarterback... I don't see more than 6-7 wins from them next season.

And Oregon State at 10, where did that come from...

Michigan
05-13-2008, 04:07 PM
Missouri 14th? Their returning 8 starters on defense and pretty much everyone on offense as well from last year.......and they went 12-2 last year and played a tougher schedule.

I won't argue with you if you say that overall, Missouri is more talented this year than they were last year. A lot of key guys return on both sides of the ball and Chase may be one of the best QB's in the country. However, I'm going to remain skeptical until Pinkel shows he can sustain success. There have been some very talented Missouri teams in the past that have imploded, best example being 2004 when they were ranked to start the year and then lost to Troy and then imploded to 5-6. Missouri can be a contender, but I think they'll lose to Texas and lose 2 games against teams they have no business of losing to (Colorado? Kansas? Illinois?).

Michigan
05-13-2008, 04:32 PM
FSU? Michigan? What did these teams do to deserve their ranking? FSU has lost what, 6 starters alone to academic issues last year? Michigan is putting in a completely new offense with a new quarterback... I don't see more than 6-7 wins from them next season.

I'll admit FSU is a bit of a sleeper pick. There's no team in the ACC that impresses me right now, so I'm going to pick the most talented team, which would be FSU. Clemson's O-line is replacing 4 starters, and VT is replacing a lot on defense. If FSU can find a quarterback and their skill position players play up to their talent, I think they're good enough to go 9-4 with that defense.

I'm picking (my) Michigan to go 8-4 this year, which I think is reasonable. The defense is excellent (5-7 all Big 10 performers), and I think it can carry Michigan through some tough early games (Utah, ND, and Illinois, for example). By mid-season, I expect the young but talented offense to gel and be good enough to resemble a Rich Rodriguez offense and cruise till the final game against OSU. I'm predicting 8-4, with early losses to ND and Wisconsin and close losses to Purdue and OSU.

And Oregon State at 10, where did that come from...

Oregon State is one of my favorite teams year in and year out. They're one of the most physical teams in the Pac 10 and had the NCAA's #1 rushing defense last year. I thought that towards the end of last year, they were playing like one of the top 15 teams in the country (4 straight wins against UW, WSU, Oregon, and Maryland to close out). The schedule is rough this year and they have to replace some very good players, but Mike Riley has the ability to mold a bunch of average players into a tough, competitive team. Putting them at #10 is admittedly a stretch but I do think they'll win at least 8 games this year.

duckseason
05-13-2008, 04:34 PM
And Oregon State at 10, where did that come from...
Many people often get Oregon confused with Oregon State. Not saying we are or should be considered the 10th best team in the country by anybody at this point, but it's the only explanation I could think of. Putting Oregon at 10 isn't a stretch like it is with Oregon St.

Unbiased
05-13-2008, 04:46 PM
I'll admit FSU is a bit of a sleeper pick. There's no team in the ACC that impresses me right now, so I'm going to pick the most talented team, which would be FSU. Clemson's O-line is replacing 4 starters, and VT is replacing a lot on defense. If FSU can find a quarterback and their skill position players play up to their talent, I think they're good enough to go 9-4 with that defense.

I'm picking (my) Michigan to go 8-4 this year, which I think is reasonable. The defense is excellent (5-7 all Big 10 performers), and I think it can carry Michigan through some tough early games (Utah, ND, and Illinois, for example). By mid-season, I expect the young but talented offense to gel and be good enough to resemble a Rich Rodriguez offense and cruise till the final game against OSU. I'm predicting 8-4, with early losses to ND and Wisconsin and close losses to Purdue and OSU.



Oregon State is one of my favorite teams year in and year out. They're one of the most physical teams in the Pac 10 and had the NCAA's #1 rushing defense last year. I thought that towards the end of last year, they were playing like one of the top 15 teams in the country (4 straight wins against UW, WSU, Oregon, and Maryland to close out). The schedule is rough this year and they have to replace some very good players, but Mike Riley has the ability to mold a bunch of average players into a tough, competitive team. Putting them at #10 is admittedly a stretch but I do think they'll win at least 8 games this year.

OSU has never had less than 4 losses under Mike Riley. 4 losses means 20-25 range at best with OSU. You think they'll win at least 8 games. Well even if they win 9, they're not close to the top 10.

duckseason
05-13-2008, 05:14 PM
Well I guess one opinion is just as valid as the next when it comes to these pre-season rankings. For all we know, Oregon State might be playing for a national title this year. They certainly have a favorable schedule when it comes to home/away, and there's no question they are a solid team in the trenches even despite the tremendous loss of experienced talent.

I'd rather see original opinions rather than copy/paste templates, so props for that. But man, all things considered, it does look like one hell of a stretch at this point. It's not like a Hawaii or Kansas last year where it's obvious they will bring in at least 10 wins. Nobody should be surprised if Oregon State finished the season well below .500, when you consider the level of competition they will face. But really, there are too many questions that need to be answered before we as fans can really get a feel for how strong they'll be this year. Same with most of these teams. I can definitely see a scenario where they finish as high as first in the Pac-10. That's what's great about this conference. It's truly competitive from top to bottom.

KCJ58
05-13-2008, 05:17 PM
My Rankings:
1. Ohio State
2. Georgia
3. USC
4. Florida
5. Oklahoma
6. West Virginia
7. Missouri
8. LSU
9. Arizona State
10. Clemson
11. Wisconsin
12. Auburn
13. Texas Tech
14. Kansas
15. Texas
16. Tennessee
17. Virginia Tech
18. BYU
19. Illinois
20. Alabama
21. Pittsburgh
22. Oregon
23. Wake Forest
24. Utah
25. Michigan

BNad
05-13-2008, 06:38 PM
uh oh, mine don't look like ESPN's...

1. USC
2. Oklahoma
3. Ohio State
4. Texas
5. LSU
6. Wisconsin
7. Florida
8. Arizona State
9. Georgia
10. Oregon State
11. West Virginia
12. BYU
13. South Carolina
14. Missouri
15. Purdue
16. Florida State
17. Boise State
18. Auburn
19. Clemson
20. South Florida
21. TCU
22. Michigan
23. Virginia Tech
24. Alabama
25. Wake Forest

What's your reasoning for Georgia that low? Not being combative, just curious.

Michigan
05-13-2008, 08:25 PM
What's your reasoning for Georgia that low? Not being combative, just curious.

9 isn't that low in the first place , but they have a pretty tough schedule including a trip out west to ASU. I'm thinking 9-3 or 10-2, excluding a possible SECCG.

Sniper
05-13-2008, 08:27 PM
9 isn't that low in the first place , but they have a pretty tough schedule including a trip out west to ASU. I'm thinking 9-3 or 10-2, excluding a possible SECCG.

Yeah that schedule is an absolute death trap. If they go undefeated, Matt Stafford can start thinking about the #1 overall pick being a reality.

Sniper
05-13-2008, 08:27 PM
25. Michigan


I <3 you......

Hwoarang
05-13-2008, 08:32 PM
I just spit a little on my computer laughing that LSU was at 18.

Brent
05-13-2008, 08:33 PM
Texas Tech is so overrated.

DragonFireKai
05-13-2008, 08:42 PM
I just spit a little on my computer laughing that LSU was at 18.

What, on mine? I don't see them surviving that schedule. Loss at Florida, Loss at Auburn, loss to Georgia. And I think they'll drop an upset to either Mississippi State or Alabama.

YAYareaRB
05-13-2008, 08:45 PM
damn USC doesn't even crack your top 25??? brutal.

Can't believe I forgot them, edited

holt_bruce81
05-14-2008, 03:41 PM
I won't argue with you if you say that overall, Missouri is more talented this year than they were last year. A lot of key guys return on both sides of the ball and Chase may be one of the best QB's in the country. However, I'm going to remain skeptical until Pinkel shows he can sustain success. There have been some very talented Missouri teams in the past that have imploded, best example being 2004 when they were ranked to start the year and then lost to Troy and then imploded to 5-6. Missouri can be a contender, but I think they'll lose to Texas and lose 2 games against teams they have no business of losing to (Colorado? Kansas? Illinois?).

Fair enough, I don't think your last sentence is going to be true but I agree with you on seeing Pinkel sustain success.

Hwoarang
05-14-2008, 06:03 PM
What, on mine? I don't see them surviving that schedule. Loss at Florida, Loss at Auburn, loss to Georgia. And I think they'll drop an upset to either Mississippi State or Alabama.Then that should be their ranking after the season. This is a pre season poll.

duckseason
05-14-2008, 07:06 PM
Then that should be their ranking after the season. This is a pre season poll.
And the whole point of creating a pre-season ranking is to do what exactly? Right, to express your opinion of how these teams will stack up against each other through the course of the season.

If you foresee a team struggling within their conference this year, your rankings should reflect that. Whether it be May or October.

Hwoarang
05-14-2008, 07:12 PM
And the whole point of creating a pre-season ranking is to do what exactly? To determine the best 25 teams before the season starts. I'm not going to drop a team because they play someone that should beat them in week 5. That's ********.

duckseason
05-14-2008, 07:26 PM
To determine the best 25 teams before the season starts. I'm not going to drop a team because they play someone that should beat them in week 5. That's ********.
Oh, I fully agree that the top 25 should be based on team strength. Which is why if you feel a team will lose multiple conference games, they have no business in your top 10. Looks to me like DFK has LSU right where they should be, according to how strong of a team he perceives them to be at this point. If he thought LSU were better than those teams, he'd likely have them up there in the top 10 somewhere.

It's your opinion that LSU is among the elite teams in the nation right now. DFK disagrees. So what. LSU doesn't have a permanent reservation in everybody's personal top 5.

Hwoarang
05-14-2008, 07:42 PM
Oh, I fully agree that the top 25 should be based on team strength. Which is why if you feel a team will lose multiple conference games, they have no business in your top 10. Looks to me like DFK has LSU right where they should be, according to how strong of a team he perceives them to be at this point. If he thought LSU were better than those teams, he'd likely have them up there in the top 10 somewhere.

It's your opinion that LSU is among the elite teams in the nation right now. DFK disagrees. So what. LSU doesn't have a permanent reservation in everybody's personal top 5.Well then his logic is flawed because UGA will lose 2 maybe 3 games as well. They won't survive their schedule.

LonghornsLegend
05-14-2008, 08:13 PM
Well then his logic is flawed because UGA will lose 2 maybe 3 games as well. They won't survive their schedule.

Who are you to say who UGA will lose what games, yea and I'm sure your not biased or anything:rolleyes:


Take off your homer glasses for a minute, not everyone is gonna feel obliged to suck off LSU the same way you are.

YAYareaRB
05-14-2008, 08:15 PM
We'll never lose to Mississippi St and with Saban putting up bulletin board material, LSU wouldn't dare drop a game to the tide. You can't predict SEC champions in the pre-season for the simple fact that.. **** happens. As a matter of fact, last season should tell you that in college football, **** happens. But this is an opinion thing.. So Hwoarang, lighten up and chill out. Don't pass judgment if you haven't posted one yet.

YAYareaRB
05-14-2008, 08:15 PM
Who are you to say who UGA will lose what games, yea and I'm sure your not biased or anything:rolleyes:


Take off your homer glasses for a minute, not everyone is gonna feel obliged to suck off LSU the same way you are.

At the same time who is DFK to say LSU would lose what games?

iworshipbender
05-15-2008, 02:36 AM
1. Georgia
2. Ohio State
3. Oklahoma
4. Missouri
5. Florida
6. Texas
7. USC
8. WVU
9. LSU
10. ASU
11. Auburn
12. Oregon
13. Clemson
14. Wisconsin
15. Texas Tech
16. Tennessee
17. BYU
18. Illinois
19. VT
20. Kansas
21. Pittsburgh
22. Cincinnati
23. Fresno State
24. Purdue
25. Oregon State

LonghornsLegend
05-15-2008, 12:26 PM
At the same time who is DFK to say LSU would lose what games?

Well for starters he's not a homer and its just his opinion, the other guy is a flaming homer, I'd rather listen to a non subjective POV of how a team will fare instead of a homer.


And for 2, DFK has LSU losing to 3 really good teams in the SEC, and one upset game, seeing how many close games LSU had in their favor last year that usually doesn't carry over unto the next, especially when you have a brand spanking new QB with no experience at all.


It's one thing for somebody who doesn't care either way to have an opinion, but its another to be a complete homer and then in the same sentence knock a rival who is one of the best teams in the nation.

BNad
05-15-2008, 02:40 PM
9 isn't that low in the first place , but they have a pretty tough schedule including a trip out west to ASU. I'm thinking 9-3 or 10-2, excluding a possible SECCG.

It's about 7 slots lower than everyone else seems to have them. Is strength of schedule really dropping them 7 spots? I always assumed preseason rankings would be how good you think a team is.

duckseason
05-15-2008, 03:51 PM
That UGA/ASU matchup is very interesting. I think Georgia will win though.

ASU will spread the field with 4/5 WR sets, but will soon realize that this is a mistake against a Georgia front that will be in Rudy's face all day. ASU's OL will be overmatched, thereby nullifying the slowing effect of the Georgia defense that the spread is intended to bring about.

I look for the UGA defense to force 2-4 turnovers and for their offense to pound it at ASU's soft gut while prudently moving the chains through the air as well.

ASU will struggle to establish a threat on the ground, and will abandon the running game altogether sometime in the 3rd quarter. If the game is still within reach, a few in-game adjustments might spark a comeback push. But ultimately, I just think ASU will be overmatched in too many key areas.

But hey, that spread offense could prove to be very effective if the ASU front wall can give Carpenter enough time to get rid of the ball. That's the biggest matchup of the game. ASU OL vs UGA DL. If ASU adequately keeps the pressure off Carpenter, I think they'll win. They have excellent depth at WR. Give them time, they will carve up any secondary.

Also, that soft gut I mentioned may not be so soft if those JC guys are able to step in early for ASU and prove themselves. As of now, the middle of that D is soft in comparison to the UGA rushing attack. (imo)

With Georgia coming off a trip to Columbia, HFA could be pretty big for ASU as well. Georgia will need to match ASU's inevitable night game high-energy early on or this game could get away from them. They don't seem accustomed to playing from too far behind. I have much more faith in ASU staging a comeback if need be.

I'll predict a final score of UGA 14-7-10-7 = 38 ASU 7-0-3-14 = 24

And now that I said all that, we all know that the exact opposite will happen on all fronts.

619
05-15-2008, 03:54 PM
1. USC
2. Ohio State
3. Georgia
4. Florida
5. Oklahoma
6. Clemson
7. Missouri
8. LSU
9. Texas Tech
10. Wisconsin
11. West Virginia
12. Auburn
13. Tennessee
14. Texas
15. Arizona State
16. BYU
17. Kansas
18. Illinois
19. South Florida
20. Pittsburgh
21. Oregon
22. Penn State
23. Virginia Tech
24. Oregon State
25. Connecticut

YAYareaRB
05-15-2008, 09:37 PM
Well for starters he's not a homer and its just his opinion, the other guy is a flaming homer, I'd rather listen to a non subjective POV of how a team will fare instead of a homer.


And for 2, DFK has LSU losing to 3 really good teams in the SEC, and one upset game, seeing how many close games LSU had in their favor last year that usually doesn't carry over unto the next, especially when you have a brand spanking new QB with no experience at all.


It's one thing for somebody who doesn't care either way to have an opinion, but its another to be a complete homer and then in the same sentence knock a rival who is one of the best teams in the nation.

But you just shunned one guy for predicting that one team loses and praised another for doing the same thing..

Hwoarang
05-15-2008, 10:22 PM
Well for starters he's not a homer and its just his opinion, the other guy is a flaming homer, I'd rather listen to a non subjective POV of how a team will fare instead of a homer.


And for 2, DFK has LSU losing to 3 really good teams in the SEC, and one upset game, seeing how many close games LSU had in their favor last year that usually doesn't carry over unto the next, especially when you have a brand spanking new QB with no experience at all.


It's one thing for somebody who doesn't care either way to have an opinion, but its another to be a complete homer and then in the same sentence knock a rival who is one of the best teams in the nation.A homer wouldn't predict their team to go 8-4. This is preseason and going through the schedule and picking wins and losses and THEN put your rankings together is not how it works.

Oh and UGA is a great team, but they play a harder schedule than LSU and to think they survive it to make it to the NC is almost crazy.

DragonFireKai
05-16-2008, 03:49 AM
A homer wouldn't predict their team to go 8-4. This is preseason and going through the schedule and picking wins and losses and THEN put your rankings together is not how it works.

Says who? What other way would you do it? Would you willingly place a team at number one, knowing that they have no chance at making it through their season? I think LSU is going to be the fifth best team in their conference. Apparently, you agree, because you predicted the same record. I don't see what you're bitching about.

Oh and UGA is a great team, but they play a harder schedule than LSU and to think they survive it to make it to the NC is almost crazy.

I see them losing at Auburn, but that's it.

You know you've got an awful argument when you've got the quacks coming to my defense.

Hwoarang
05-16-2008, 01:31 PM
Says who? What other way would you do it? Would you willingly place a team at number one, knowing that they have no chance at making it through their season? I think LSU is going to be the fifth best team in their conference. Apparently, you agree, because you predicted the same record. I don't see what you're bitching about.

I expect 8-4 but it might not happen. The SEC is not like every other conference. I don't mean speed either.. I mean any team can beat any team on any given day. That means even the games you think LSU will lose they can win. Upsets are more likely in the SEC than any other conference.

Unbiased
05-16-2008, 01:59 PM
I expect 8-4 but it might not happen. The SEC is not like every other conference. I don't mean speed either.. I mean any team can beat any team on any given day. That means even the games you think LSU will lose they can win. Upsets are more likely in the SEC than any other conference.

Do you have some sort of stat for that.

Hwoarang
05-16-2008, 03:01 PM
Do you have some sort of stat for that.Other than the fact that I watch almost every SEC game every year.

Also as far as LSU being 5th best in the SEC, when you add talent plus coaching i'd rank them.

1.) Georgia
2.) Florida
3/tied.) Aubrun/LSU
5.) 'Bama
6.) Tennessee
7.) Miss St.
8.) South Carolina
9.) Arkansas
10.) Ole Miss
11.) Kentucky
12.) Vandy

duckseason
05-16-2008, 03:03 PM
I expect 8-4 but it might not happen. The SEC is not like every other conference. I don't mean speed either.. I mean any team can beat any team on any given day. That means even the games you think LSU will lose they can win. Upsets are more likely in the SEC than any other conference.
The Pac-10 says hello.

It's been decades since anybody other than LSU, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Auburn or Alabama have won the SEC Championship. That's only half the teams in the conference. Kentucky tied with Georgia in '76, and Mississippi won 3 times during the '60s. There are multiple teams in that conference who have never won or even shared the title.

In the Pac-10, 9 of the 10 teams have at least tied for the title in the past 10 years. And all 10 have at least tied for it going back to '93. (Arizona) Oh, and we also play a round-robin schedule. The likelihood of upsets occurring takes a hit when each team misses out on playing 3 conference members each year. What are the chances that Vandy knocks off LSU, Alabama or Arkansas this year? Not nearly as good as Stanford knocking off SC, Cal or OSU. Hell, I'd go as far as to say that's more likely than not.

Any given week, anybody can beat anybody in the Pac-10. It's been that way for a long time, and it's proven season after season. That's true to an extent in the SEC, but not so much as to warrant saying that upsets are more likely there than they are in any other conference. Your post more accurately describes the Pac-10.

Hwoarang
05-16-2008, 03:16 PM
The Pac-10 says hello.

It's been decades since anybody other than LSU, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Auburn or Alabama have won the SEC Championship. That's only half the teams in the conference. Kentucky tied with Georgia in '76, and Mississippi won 3 times during the '60s. There are multiple teams in that conference who have never won or even shared the title.

In the Pac-10, 9 of the 10 teams have at least tied for the title in the past 10 years. And all 10 have at least tied for it going back to '93. (Arizona) Oh, and we also play a round-robin schedule. The likelihood of upsets occurring takes a hit when each team misses out on playing 3 conference members each year. What are the chances that Vandy knocks off LSU, Alabama or Arkansas this year? Not nearly as good as Stanford knocking off SC, Cal or OSU. Hell, I'd go as far as to say that's more likely than not.

Any given week, anybody can beat anybody in the Pac-10. It's been that way for a long time, and it's proven season after season. That's true to an extent in the SEC, but not so much as to warrant saying that upsets are more likely there than they are in any other conference. Your post more accurately describes the Pac-10.
They tie more because they play a round robin schedule. They should Man up and play an actual CC game.

Michigan
05-16-2008, 03:25 PM
They tie more because they play a round robin schedule. They should Man up and play an actual CC game.

Because CC games are a better way of determining conference champions than actually playing everyone. :rolleyes:

Some SEC fans are just...

duckseason
05-16-2008, 03:40 PM
They tie more because they play a round robin schedule. They should Man up and play an actual CC game.

Great response. Although I guess I shouldn't expect any type of legitimate argument in response because, well, there just isn't one to be made. Way to "man up" and recognize your error.

YAYareaRB
05-16-2008, 04:05 PM
For starters I think anyone who thinks LSU will finish 5th in the conference is a nut job.. With that established lets move on.

I wouldn't say SEC is more capable of producing upsets. It IS really top heavy and the teams that are on Top usually (Tenn, Auburn, LSU, Florida, Georgia) are VERY evenly matched so anyone could win on any given day when those teams are playing each other. Then you throw in the usual wild cards like Kentucky, Arkansas, and South Carolina that seem to shake up the conference a bit and you get a very "upset" prone conference.

DragonFireKai
05-16-2008, 04:58 PM
I expect 8-4 but it might not happen. The SEC is not like every other conference. I don't mean speed either.. I mean any team can beat any team on any given day. That means even the games you think LSU will lose they can win. Upsets are more likely in the SEC than any other conference.

You said you predicted them to go 8-4. You expect them to go 8-4. I'm assuming you're thinking those are all going to be conference losses, due to their laughably weak non conference schedule. 4 conference losses means 5th or 6th in the SEC. Where do you think the 5th or 6th ranked team in the SEC should go?

They tie more because they play a round robin schedule. They should Man up and play an actual CC game.

Yes, let's put all our stock in one game, between two teams that played heavily assymetric schedules. Please. The SEC sacrificed competition on the altar of merchandise revenue. they've allowed themselves to be represented by champions that clearly weren't the best team in their conference, all because someone skipped out the tougher teams in the conference, and the divisions are unbalanced.

One game doesn't give you near as good a picture of which team is better than 9 games do. You can have an off night in the Pac 10, because in the end, the rest of the conference will bear out who's the better team. You can have several off nights in the SEC, but if another team has only one off night, during the SEC championship game, a clearly inferior team will be crowned. That's not competition, that's a craps shoot.

For starters I think anyone who thinks LSU will finish 5th in the conference is a nut job.. With that established lets move on.

That's higher than 4 conference losses will probablly put them. Considering that the biggest LSU homer in this thread is also predicting 4 conference losses, I don't see why you're disagreeing.

Hwoarang
05-16-2008, 05:15 PM
You said you predicted them to go 8-4. You expect them to go 8-4. I'm assuming you're thinking those are all going to be conference losses, due to their laughably weak non conference schedule. 4 conference losses means 5th or 6th in the SEC. Where do you think the 5th or 6th ranked team in the SEC should go?



Yes, let's put all our stock in one game, between two teams that played heavily assymetric schedules. Please. The SEC sacrificed competition on the altar of merchandise revenue. they've allowed themselves to be represented by champions that clearly weren't the best team in their conference, all because someone skipped out the tougher teams in the conference, and the divisions are unbalanced.

One game doesn't give you near as good a picture of which team is better than 9 games do. You can have an off night in the Pac 10, because in the end, the rest of the conference will bear out who's the better team. You can have several off nights in the SEC, but if another team has only one off night, during the SEC championship game, a clearly inferior team will be crowned. That's not competition, that's a craps shoot.



That's higher than 4 conference losses will probablly put them. Considering that the biggest LSU homer in this thread is also predicting 4 conference losses, I don't see why you're disagreeing.Well no SEC team has a better combo of RB's, WR's or a better OLine.

I expect 8-4 but won't be surprised if they do go 11-2.

DragonFireKai
05-16-2008, 05:28 PM
Well no SEC team has a better combo of RB's, WR's or a better OLine.

I expect 8-4 but won't be surprised if they do go 11-2.

And I wouldn'be suprised if OSU won the pac 10, but I expect they'll come in 3rd. Hence why they're the third team from the pac 10 in my rankings. You're dodging the question.

Hwoarang
05-16-2008, 05:47 PM
And I wouldn'be suprised if OSU won the pac 10, but I expect they'll come in 3rd. Hence why they're the third team from the pac 10 in my rankings. You're dodging the question.

Other than the fact that I watch almost every SEC game every year.

Also as far as LSU being 5th best in the SEC, when you add talent plus coaching i'd rank them.

1.) Georgia
2.) Florida
3/tied.) Aubrun/LSU
5.) 'Bama
6.) Tennessee
7.) Miss St.
8.) South Carolina
9.) Arkansas
10.) Ole Miss
11.) Kentucky
12.) VandyWhat question was that?

DragonFireKai
05-16-2008, 06:08 PM
What question was that?

Where do you think the 5th or 6th ranked team in the SEC should go?

If you're predicting 4 losses, and 3rd in the SEC, then you have no clue what you're talking about. Last season, 4 losses got a team 6th place. In 06, 4 losses got you 6th place. In 05 4 losses got you 7th place. In 04, 4 losses got you 5th. In 03, it got you 7th. In 02, it got you 8th.

In fact, there are only two scenarios where the 3rd place team in the SEC could have 4 losses. One is that there are two undefeated teams, two winless teams, and 8 4-4 teams. The other is that the whole conference goes 4-4.

BTW, thanks for conceding the point about the Championship Game. I knew you could see reason.

BNad
05-19-2008, 08:20 PM
Well no SEC team has a better combo of RB's, WR's or a better OLine.

I expect 8-4 but won't be surprised if they do go 11-2.

I'm gonna go ahead and disagree with the "no SEC team has a better combo of RB's."

Knowshon and Caleb King? I know I'm a UGA homer, but I don't feel like this is over-the-top homerism.

Hwoarang
05-19-2008, 08:43 PM
I'm gonna go ahead and disagree with the "no SEC team has a better combo of RB's."

Knowshon and Caleb King? I know I'm a UGA homer, but I don't feel like this is over-the-top homerism.Keiland Williams/Charles Scott/Richard Murphy/Trindon Holiday. It's no contest really.

Michigan
05-19-2008, 09:22 PM
Keiland Williams/Charles Scott/Richard Murphy/Trindon Holiday. It's no contest really.

:rolleyes:

DragonFireKai
05-19-2008, 09:52 PM
Everyone knows that Trindon Holliday is just a cheap James Rodgers knock off.

BamaFalcon59
05-19-2008, 11:02 PM
Clemson is so highly rated, but Tommy Bowden is not a great coach. I think Virginia Tech. can take them, but we do not play in the regular season. Also, check out how easy VaTech's schedule is.

East Carolina
Furman
Georgia Tech
@North Carolina
@Nebraska
Western Kentucky
@Boston College
@Florida State
Maryland
@Miami
Duke
Virginia
ACC Championship

If we play to our ability (15-25 ranked team), then we can go undefeated until the ACC Championship/ bowl game barring an upset.

YAYareaRB
05-19-2008, 11:48 PM
Everyone knows that Trindon Holliday is just a cheap James Rodgers knock off.

i went to the emerald bowl and he absolutely BALLED out.. james rodgers is more of a football player anyway.

DragonFireKai
05-20-2008, 12:50 AM
i went to the emerald bowl and he absolutely BALLED out.. james rodgers is more of a football player anyway.

He's gonna be even better this season with Sammie Stroughter drawing attention.

Tha Boss
05-20-2008, 11:59 AM
Florida should be back in prime form this year. The offense will be more dynamik than any other in the NCAA, and they have playmakers at every single position.

On defense, the success will really hinge on the development of the defensive line. Word is that Carlos Dunlap looks like a beast, but not so much for Torrey Davis. But if Dunlap is as good as people are saying, Florida should be as tough a match up as there is.

nfrillman
05-20-2008, 04:44 PM
Clemson is so highly rated, but Tommy Bowden is not a great coach. I think Virginia Tech. can take them, but we do not play in the regular season. Also, check out how easy VaTech's schedule is.

East Carolina
Furman
Georgia Tech
@North Carolina
@Nebraska
Western Kentucky
@Boston College
@Florida State
Maryland
@Miami
Duke
Virginia
ACC Championship

If we play to our ability (15-25 ranked team), then we can go undefeated until the ACC Championship/ bowl game barring an upset.

Yep, it appears VT is still in the ACC, which means a weak schedule indeed.

Hwoarang
05-20-2008, 08:06 PM
:rolleyes:

http://www.grizzoulian.com/Picture%2016.png

Everyone knows that Trindon Holliday is just a cheap James Rodgers knock off.He's only the fastest CFB player right now.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNxQls1JNwI&NR=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TKV2Q7HySc&feature=related

He's not just a track guy. He's a football player, don't fool yourself. He's also been rumored to have been taking snaps from QB in practice.

Michigan
05-20-2008, 08:15 PM
http://www.grizzoulian.com/Picture%2016.png


Wow. That was relevant AND original.

Hwoarang
05-20-2008, 08:49 PM
Wow. That was relevant AND original.Absolutely not but funny nonetheless. It'll be even funnier when they don't even put up 10 on LSU.

YAYareaRB
05-20-2008, 09:28 PM
He's gonna be even better this season with Sammie Stroughter drawing attention.

yeah, even though he had a strong performance, i believe he'll get slept on a bit until he starts taking reverses to the house and carvin dbs up at wr

DragonFireKai
05-20-2008, 09:33 PM
He's only the fastest CFB player right now.

He's not just a track guy. He's a football player, don't fool yourself. He's also been rumored to have been taking snaps from QB in practice.

And Reggie Bush is faster than Brian Westbrook, but Westbrook does just about everything better. Holliday has a similar relationship with Rodgers. Holliday might be a little faster, but Rodgers does just about everything better.

YAYareaRB
05-20-2008, 09:37 PM
And Reggie Bush is faster than Brian Westbrook, but Westbrook does just about everything better. Holliday has a similar relationship with Rodgers. Holliday might be a little faster, but Rodgers does just about everything better.

i don't see how you can compare the two.. rogers is wr and holliday played mostly hb behind williams, scott, and hester last season. as far as speed goes, holliday has him but don't sleep on his football skills either.

Hwoarang
05-20-2008, 09:40 PM
And Reggie Bush is faster than Brian Westbrook, but Westbrook does just about everything better. Holliday has a similar relationship with Rodgers. Holliday might be a little faster, but Rodgers does just about everything better.He also gets more of chances.

DragonFireKai
05-20-2008, 09:45 PM
He also gets more of chances.

Rodgers had 50 carries last season. Holliday had 53. I can see how you think he gets more chances than Holliday though.

Hwoarang
05-20-2008, 09:59 PM
Rodgers had 50 carries last season. Holliday had 53. I can see how you think he gets more chances than Holliday though.Yet Rodgers is a WR no? I never said he gets more chances for rushes. He gets more chances period. LSU is stacked at RB and WR it's damn hard to get on the field. For a WR to get only 19 receptions and 50 carries tells me he's not a good WR.

And you say 53 carries like it's a lot. Lets compare to the rest of the team.

Keiland had 70

Hester had 225

Scott had 45

Murphy had 35

Yeah, try getting enough to make a significant impact.

CashmoneyDrew
05-20-2008, 10:04 PM
I like Tennessee being ranked where they are right now. All the attention in the east is going to be on Georgia and the Florida Tebow's and Fat Phil and the Vols usually have better seasons when they fly under the radar. Not to mention our talent this year is very underrated.

Hwoarang
05-20-2008, 10:06 PM
I like Tennessee being ranked where they are right now. All the attention in the east is going to be on Georgia and the Florida Tebow's and Fat Phil and the Vols usually have better seasons when they fly under the radar. Not to mention our talent this year is very underrated.Who's the QB and RB for them this year?

DragonFireKai
05-20-2008, 10:31 PM
Yet Rodgers is a WR no? I never said he gets more chances for rushes. He gets more chances period. LSU is stacked at RB and WR it's damn hard to get on the field. For a WR to get only 19 receptions and 50 carries tells me he's not a good WR.

Rodgers is listed at WR, but sees significant amounts of time at RB. Just like how Holliday remains listed as a WR. Rodgers was the 4th WR on the roster, and started the season as the 5th until Stroughter went down.

And you say 53 carries like it's a lot. Lets compare to the rest of the team.

Let's do the same with OSU.

Keiland had 70

Matt Sieverson had 85.

Hester had 225

Yvenson Bernard had 275

Scott had 45

Clinton Polk had 34

Murphy had 35

Andy Stewart had 12.

Yeah, try getting enough to make a significant impact.

Holliday got 53 carries against the 375 carries the other RBs got. Rodgers got 50 carries against the 406 carries the other RBs got. Once again, Rodgers got more opportunities, how?

This is what it boils down to. Two players in similar situations. Both are spot WRs, who see more action at RB. Holliday got 53 carries, Rodgers got 50 carries. The sample sizes are equivilent. Rodgers just vastly outproduced Holliday.

CashmoneyDrew
05-20-2008, 10:38 PM
Who's the QB and RB for them this year?

Jonathan Crompton and Arian Foster.

YAYareaRB
05-20-2008, 10:41 PM
well offenses should be taken into account as well.. it seems oregon state runs wrs alot with rodgers getting 50 carries and sieverson getting 85. lsu is more of a spread. in terms of carries, the qb should be counted as well in lsu's offense.. with matt flynn's 100 and perilloux's 50 for positive yards. oregon state is more of a balanced team.

Hwoarang
05-20-2008, 10:49 PM
well offenses should be taken into account as well.. it seems oregon state runs wrs alot with rodgers getting 50 carries and sieverson getting 85. lsu is more of a spread. in terms of carries, the qb should be counted as well in lsu's offense.. with matt ryan's 100 and perilloux's 50 for positive yards. oregon state is more of a balanced team.It's Flynn but who cares ;)

Trindon is listed as a WR becuase we have 6 RB's on scholarship.

RRodgers just vastly outproduced Holliday.Holiday could do quite well against Pac 10 defenses too. If a guy who runs a 4.5 is doing that imagine what a guy who runs a 4.27 would do.

YAYareaRB
05-20-2008, 11:05 PM
It's Flynn but who cares ;)


i meant flynn but that contract news is embedded in my head

DragonFireKai
05-20-2008, 11:08 PM
Trindon is listed as a WR becuase we have 6 RB's on scholarship.

Holiday could do quite well against Pac 10 defenses too. If a guy who runs a 4.5 is doing that imagine what a guy who runs a 4.27 would do.

Rodgers runs in the 4.3s. And the schedule differences isn't enough to account for an extra 4.8 yards per carry. The difference is in the angles. Rodgers takes much smarter angles than Holliday does, and as such, Rodgers maximizes his speed advantage in a way that Holliday fails to.

well offenses should be taken into account as well.. it seems oregon state runs wrs alot with rodgers getting 50 carries and sieverson getting 85. lsu is more of a spread. in terms of carries, the qb should be counted as well in lsu's offense.. with matt ryan's 100 and perilloux's 50 for positive yards. oregon state is more of a balanced team.

Sieverson's carries all came as a RB. (http://www.osubeavers.com/ViewArticle.dbml?SPSID=24795&SPID=1952&DB_OEM_ID=4700&ATCLID=129827&Q_SEASON=2007) He was only officially a WR for 4 days. He was a Safety for the first 3 years, got shifted to WR for a brief period during spring practice, and was the #2 running back when the season started. Rodgers saw a good amount of time at both positions, Sieverson never got split out wide.

YAYareaRB
05-20-2008, 11:22 PM
Rodgers runs in the 4.3s. And the schedule differences isn't enough to account for an extra 4.8 yards per carry. The difference is in the angles. Rodgers takes much smarter angles than Holliday does, and as such, Rodgers maximizes his speed advantage in a way that Holliday fails to.



Sieverson's carries all came as a RB. (http://www.osubeavers.com/ViewArticle.dbml?SPSID=24795&SPID=1952&DB_OEM_ID=4700&ATCLID=129827&Q_SEASON=2007) He was only officially a WR for 4 days. He was a Safety for the first 3 years, got shifted to WR for a brief period during spring practice, and was the #2 running back when the season started. Rodgers saw a good amount of time at both positions, Sieverson never got split out wide.

i wasn't debating the fact that whether he was or wasn't a wr, i just thought it was interesting. i do think strength of schedule should be taken into account but shouldn't be over analyzed. could you elaborate on your smart angle argument.

DragonFireKai
05-20-2008, 11:56 PM
i wasn't debating the fact that whether he was or wasn't a wr, i just thought it was interesting. i do think strength of schedule should be taken into account but shouldn't be over analyzed. could you elaborate on your smart angle argument.

When a player reaches the second level of a defense, there's an optimal angle towards the endzone to take. This takes into account your position, the position of your blockers, and the position of the defenders. Holliday has a habit of gravitating towards the sidelines, and then pushing vertical. Rodgers more often takes the optimal angle, even if it leads him away from the sideline. Rodgers has phenominal vision, and he processes information very quickly. Holliday just runs really fast.

YAYareaRB
05-21-2008, 12:16 AM
When a player reaches the second level of a defense, there's an optimal angle towards the endzone to take. This takes into account your position, the position of your blockers, and the position of the defenders. Holliday has a habit of gravitating towards the sidelines, and then pushing vertical. Rodgers more often takes the optimal angle, even if it leads him away from the sideline. Rodgers has phenominal vision, and he processes information very quickly. Holliday just runs really fast.

james rodgers has a couple inches taller and has about 30 lbs on trindon.. smaller guys are bound to bounce it outside because inside is where the big boys play. however rodgers maximizes his speed, holliday is still hands down faster than him.

DragonFireKai
05-21-2008, 01:21 AM
james rodgers has a couple inches taller and has about 30 lbs on trindon.. smaller guys are bound to bounce it outside because inside is where the big boys play. however rodgers maximizes his speed, holliday is still hands down faster than him.

Holliday pushes to the sideline even when the defender has a better angle on the sideline. It's not a matter of avoiding bigger defenders, because once either of these players hit the second level, the defensive line doesn't have a prayer of catching them. It's a subconscious flaw in his game. And we're talking about the difference between 155 and 185. Neither of them pound it between the tackles. The difference is that given the same positioning, Rodgers will use his blockers, and avoid flatening a defender's angle for them. Holliday will run toward the sideline, until he sees open field, then run straight up.

YAYareaRB
05-21-2008, 09:21 AM
Holliday pushes to the sideline even when the defender has a better angle on the sideline. It's not a matter of avoiding bigger defenders, because once either of these players hit the second level, the defensive line doesn't have a prayer of catching them. It's a subconscious flaw in his game. And we're talking about the difference between 155 and 185. Neither of them pound it between the tackles. The difference is that given the same positioning, Rodgers will use his blockers, and avoid flatening a defender's angle for them. Holliday will run toward the sideline, until he sees open field, then run straight up.

where'd you get all this info from because i doubt you watched every lsu game

DragonFireKai
05-21-2008, 03:27 PM
where'd you get all this info from because i doubt you watched every lsu game

Not all of them, but most of them. I missed the MSU game, the Middle Tennessee State game, the Mississippi game, and the Louisiana Tech game. I don't do much outside of watch football on fall weekends.

Hwoarang
05-21-2008, 06:51 PM
Rodgers runs in the 4.3s.

Only time I can find is a 4.57. Anyway did you not see the videos I posted? he doesn't always just run to the outside.

DragonFireKai
05-21-2008, 07:15 PM
Only time I can find is a 4.57.

He ran a 4.3 in Spring Practice.

Anyway did you not see the videos I posted? he doesn't always just run to the outside.

You showed two plays. Both of which had him pushing to the sidelines.

Hwoarang
05-21-2008, 08:22 PM
He ran a 4.3 in Spring Practice.



You showed two plays. Both of which had him pushing to the sidelines.He ran through the middle to the outside against SC.

DragonFireKai
05-21-2008, 08:48 PM
He ran through the middle to the outside against SC.

That was because he started in the middle, it's kind of hard to get to the sideline from the middle, without passing through the middle. Besides, TD runs aren't very good to analyze flaws, because the play worked as it should. It's better to see a play where they make it to the second level, and then get stopped, because you can actually analyze the angles taken.

Hwoarang
05-21-2008, 09:50 PM
That was because he started in the middle, it's kind of hard to get to the sideline from the middle, without passing through the middle. Besides, TD runs aren't very good to analyze flaws, because the play worked as it should. It's better to see a play where they make it to the second level, and then get stopped, because you can actually analyze the angles taken.
You're trying to add geometry to football. Please stop. I've come to the conclusion that you just hate LSU. And not just from this thread.

DragonFireKai
05-22-2008, 01:00 AM
You're trying to add geometry to football.

You've never heard of pursuit angles? Damn, that was middle school level. Must not have played football before.

Please stop. I've come to the conclusion that you just hate LSU. And not just from this thread.

Everyone comes to the conclusion that I hate every team. LSU's actually my favorite SEC team. I have better memories of my time in New Orleans than my time in Alabama or Georgia. Just because I don't like some players doesn't mean I hate the team. I've disparaged players from OSU, just like any other school.

YAYareaRB
05-23-2008, 01:00 AM
You've never heard of pursuit angles? Damn, that was middle school level. Must not have played football before.



Everyone comes to the conclusion that I hate every team. LSU's actually my favorite SEC team. I have better memories of my time in New Orleans than my time in Alabama or Georgia. Just because I don't like some players doesn't mean I hate the team. I've disparaged players from OSU, just like any other school.

How could you not like trindon holliday..

BNad
05-23-2008, 03:59 AM
Keiland Williams/Charles Scott/Richard Murphy/Trindon Holiday. It's no contest really.

... lol. No contest. Time to check out of this homerific thread. :)

Hwoarang
05-23-2008, 09:13 AM
... lol. No contest. Time to check out of this homerific thread. :)Nah when you have 2 guys USC pushed really really hard for (Williams/Scott) then the best pure RB in the state that year (Murphy) then the fastest guy in the state, then in CFB (Holiday) it really is no contest. LSU has the best stable of RB's in the SEC easy. We're on the same level as USC.

BNad
05-23-2008, 03:10 PM
Nah when you have 2 guys USC pushed really really hard for (Williams/Scott) then the best pure RB in the state that year (Murphy) then the fastest guy in the state, then in CFB (Holiday) it really is no contest. LSU has the best stable of RB's in the SEC easy. We're on the same level as USC.

Yeah, the stable Georgia has isn't even on the same level. :roll:

Knowshon Moreno and Caleb King are enough for me to refute the "no contest" part of your argument. Then add in Richard Samuel (if he doesn't RS, which I think he may), Dontavius Jackson, and Kalvin Daniels who has looked good in spring.

DragonFireKai
05-23-2008, 03:33 PM
How could you not like trindon holliday..

Because there's more to football than being able to run really fast. He's got really poor technique, and really isn't anything beyond a gadget player, and there are much better gadget players out there.

YAYareaRB
05-23-2008, 05:43 PM
Because there's more to football than being able to run really fast. He's got really poor technique, and really isn't anything beyond a gadget player, and there are much better gadget players out there.

but it doesn't really make sense to over analyze a 3/4 string running back.

619
05-23-2008, 05:49 PM
but it doesn't really make sense to over analyze a 3/4 string running back.

especially a return specialist .. we know he's not your ideal RB already. jeez.

DragonFireKai
05-23-2008, 05:59 PM
especially a return specialist .. we know he's not your ideal RB already. jeez.

Then don't ask me what I don't like about a player.

YAYareaRB
05-23-2008, 08:44 PM
Then don't ask me what I don't like about a player.

so you don't like him because he's not an ideal running back?

DragonFireKai
05-23-2008, 08:49 PM
so you don't like him because he's not an ideal running back?

He's a very specialized player, and there are players who do the few things he does at a much higher level than he does, and do other things on top of that. He's overhyped based on the fact that he's a very good track runner.

YAYareaRB
05-23-2008, 09:38 PM
He's overhyped based on the fact that he's a very good track runner.

and the fact that he's 5'5" 160 and he's holding his own against the best competition in college football. im sorry, i just don't see how you COULDN'T like a guy like Trindon.

DragonFireKai
05-24-2008, 04:20 AM
and the fact that he's 5'5" 160 and he's holding his own against the best competition in college football. im sorry, i just don't see how you COULDN'T like a guy like Trindon.

Because I'm being objective about it. It's great that some of the oompa-loompa sized people are making a name for themselves, but when I'm evaluating a player's performance, I don't skew my judgement based on a player's stature.

He's an exciting player to watch, but he's a very limited player, there's no way around that. If we were talking about sprint football, he'd be the ideal running back, but he's not playing sprint football, and I promise you that the other teams aren't going easy on him because of his dwarven stature.

It's kind of like Jim Abbott. Great feel good story, but if I want to win the game, I'm picking someone like Randy Johnson over Abbott every time.