My Top 10 in November

[Simon]

For a guy who sweats the Big Ten, you should know that their season is defined by that game. Don't knock a team for winning a bowl game. They try to win 11 others so they have a chance to win that one.

Your arguing that point only pays more of a compliment to USC and their coaching staff. If it is that hard to keep players focused, USC's 3-0 record in BCS games over the past three years speaks volumes about their leadership.

The Big Ten's season is not defined by any single thing, but if it were it would be defined by getting to that game. I promise you that OSU is much more interested in whipping Michigan's ass than they are some West Coast team they might see once every 20 years.

And I'm not knocking anybody for winning a bowl game; I'm just not interested in placing much emphasis on the results of a game which I don't think tell much about either team.

I think USC's fine record in bowl games is mostly a result of the fact that in a game like that, natural talent usually wins out. USC is loaded with talent and this benefits them in a game where one team may have far more interest in the outcome than another.

But being loaded with natural talent isn't the same as being considered a great team.

 

I think if you stopped trying to sh*t on USC so much and actually watched them play, you might enjoy it. They were a better "team" last year, as a lot of starting defenders (seven, I think) graduated. But their offense is something to see, and very fun to watch.

Saying that USC is one of the best 10 teams in the entire country is hardly shlitting on them. I've seen them play enough to give them the credit they deserve.

And I fully agree that they were a much better team last year, as you didn't see me "shlitting on them" until this year. But I don't think they're nearly as good this year as they were last. As for their offense being fun to watch, it certainly is. I also enjoy watching Navy and Air Force's triple option offenses, but it hardly makes them great teams.

 

Here's my problems with USC in a nutshell:

I have serious questions about thier defense. Last year they were just solid enough that even with that very good offense they could still be considered sort of a balanced team. But as you say, they lost a lot of guys this year and it seems to me that what balance they had has completely disappeared. When they have to play a real good team, I have serious doubts about their ability to just simply outscore them.

Which leads me to also having serious questions about how thier offense would respond to playing against a good defense. I haven't seen it asked to do that this year (the highest ranked defense they've faced is ranked 48th)and you have to wonder how they'd respond to being in a real 4qrtr dogfight against a team that can and will D up all day.

 

I'm not saying USC sucks, I think they're very good and that's why I have them in my Top10. But I think there's a few more complete teams out there that USC never seems to have to play. I fully expect them to roll through the rest of their schedule and play a "nat'l championship" game <giggle> against Texas, who should also roll through the rest of their undaunting schedule(Funny how these title tilts always seem to involve a team or two who never had to play anybody ). But I think that there's a distinct possibility that Texas' massive and talented OLine is simply going to grind the USC defense into little bit-sized bits, putting together a bunch of grueling sustained drives that end in scores. And because of this imbalance the very good USC offense is going to find itself limited to a handful of possessions, all of them on a long field against the kind of defense they haven't seen in a very long time.

This is likely to spell trouble for the Trojans and I don't think Texas is the only team in the country that would give them that kind of trouble. Not trying to be a dick, that's just the way I see the field.

Cya

[e-dog]

My new top-10

 

USC

Texas

Miami,Fl.

LSU

N. Dame

Ohio St.

V.Tech

Penn St.

Auburn

Georgia

 

And the top-3 are no brainers.

 

Next -3

 

Alabama

Ucla

Oregon

[/dev/null]

My new top-10

 

USC

Texas

Miami,Fl.

LSU

N. Dame

Ohio St.

V.Tech

Penn St.

Auburn

Georgia

 

And the top-3 are no brainers.

 

Next -3

 

Alabama

Ucla

Oregon

501008[/snapback]

 

how can you rank Ohio State over Penn State.

That ranking was actually decided on the field

 

We ARE Penn State

[smokinandjokin]

1. Southern Cal

2. Texas

3. Miami

4. Penn State

5. LSU

6. Virginia Tech

7. Ohio State

8. Notre Dame

9. Oregon

10. Auburn

 

How bad is the Big 12? Texas is obviously nasty, but not much else going on there. The "second-best team" Texas Tech lost to OK State, who was winless in the conference. Colorado loses to Iowa State, but will probably still make the title game, even with 2 conference losses.

 

The SEC, home teams had a chance to git 'er done and couldn't. Alabama's charade is finally over. Nice D, pathetic O...You knew eventually somebody would score 13 points and beat them. Auburn hands Georgia their second loss with a big road win. Florida's quest for mediocrity continues with another loss, and this was a stinger: to Spurrier at South Carolina.

 

Southern Cal has two games left: home vs. #16 Fresno State, and at Pasadena vs. #12 UCLA. Both teams are used to winning games this year (only 1 loss each) so neither game is a complete gimmee, but I don't see USC having much trouble with either team. Texas will clearly win out, so we should have the matchup everyone wants to see:

 

#1 vs. #2, both undefeated, facing off in a bowl game. Several years ago, it would be USC-Penn State in the Rose Bowl, and Texas-Notre Dame in the Cotton Bowl.

 

The BCS is far from perfect, but it DOES work.

[Simon]

The BCS is far from perfect, but it DOES work.

 

After repeatedly accusing me of being an idiotic moronic clown, you have now made by far the single most ridiculous statement in this thread.

Somebody miraculously went undefeated in one of the country's most pathetic conferences. They must be the best team in the nation! Go BCS!!!

 

How bad is the Big 12? Texas is obviously nasty, but not much else going on there. The "second-best team" Texas Tech lost to OK State, who was winless in the conference......

So how did "second best team" Oregon look against winless 0-7 Washington State this weekend? The way you've been talking them up I assume they must have rolled by 50.

Or wait, is UCLA the "second best team"? How'd they look against 1-5 Arizona last weekend? They're like way awesome and couldn't have possibly lost by 40.

 

we should have the matchup everyone wants to see:

Not everybody. Personally I'd rather see the nation's best teams run in some playoff games. But if you prefer the figure-skating format, well to each his own.

[smokinandjokin]

After repeatedly accusing me of being an idiotic moronic clown, you have now made by far the single most ridiculous statement in this thread.

Somebody miraculously went undefeated in one of the country's most pathetic conferences. They must be the best team in the nation! Go BCS!!!

502911[/snapback]

Come on man, use your head. I said the BCS is not perfect. I, like everyone else, would rather see a playoff. But read this thread over and look at the points you and I have been arguing. We are trying to determine who is good, who plays soft teams, which conferences suck, etc. You say Texas is better than USC. Without the BCS, that argument would continue on into infinity. At least now, those two teams, which are the clear-cut Top 2 to 99.9% of the United States (no matter what you think) will actually play each other. What an amazing concept. You can't tell me that looking back at the way the Bowl system used to be, the BCS is not an improvement. USC would win the Rose Bowl, Texas would win their Bowl game, and you and I would argue all through January about who was better. At least now it can be determined on the field.

 

So how did "second best team" Oregon look against winless 0-7 Washington State this weekend? The way you've been talking them up I assume they must have rolled by 50.

Or wait, is UCLA the "second best team"? How'd they look against 1-5 Arizona last weekend? They're like way awesome and couldn't have possibly lost by 40.

502911[/snapback]

Sick post Simon. Oregon, the 2nd best team in the PAC-10 (#10 in the AP), won 34-31 on the road at Washington State. UCLA, the 3rd best team (#12 in the AP), won by 10 vs. Arizona State.

 

But Texas MUST be awesome. The 2nd best team in the Big 12, Texas Tech (#21), lost 24-17 to Oklahoma State, who was winless in the conference. The 3rd best team, Colorado (unranked), lost at home to Iowa State. Losing is different from winning.

 

1) Texas

2) Georgia

3) Alabama

4) Penn State

5) Miami

6) Ohio State

7) Florida

8) USC

9) LSU

10) Virginia Tech

496660[/snapback]

 

You sure know your college football. Solid work when your #2, #3, and #7 all lose in the same weekend. Your #8 won though.

 

Not everybody. Personally I'd rather see the nation's best teams run in some playoff games. But if you prefer the figure-skating format, well to each his own.

502911[/snapback]

 

They have been playing playoff games. You lose and you're out. Only two teams haven't lost yet. Make all the excuses you want- all that matters is winning.

[Chilly]

But Texas MUST be awesome. 

502993[/snapback]

 

Texas IS awesome.

[Simon]

At least now it can be determined on the field.

And what about the other 6 teams who are just as good as USC and maybe Texas but don't get the opportunity for a playoff game because they play in real conferences? Too bad for them the Soviet judge didn't give them high enough marks.

 

Oregon, the 2nd best team in the PAC-10 (#10 in the AP), won 34-31 on the road at Washington State. UCLA, the 3rd best team (#12 in the AP), won by 10 vs. Arizona State.

Big tough Oregon who you've been howling about beat 0-7 Washington State on a last second field goal. Impressive.

And UCLA who you've been sweating all year lost by 40 points to 1-5 Arizona.

But USC must be awesome.

 

You sure know your college football. Solid work when your #2, #3, and #7 all lose in the same weekend. Your #8 won though.

My #2 lost a close game to a team that was ranked about 10 spots away. Wow, what a huge upset.

My #3 lost a close game to a team that was ranked about 6 spots away. Wow, another huge upset.

But hey, those are the kind of things that happen when teams have to play real schedules instead of 9 games against the Little Sisters of the Poor practice squad.

 

So how did the teams you've been crowing about do this weekend? Northwestern (who you declared the only other worthy team in teh Big10) got predictably slaughtered by Ohio State. Well, it was predictable to those who know what they're talking about.

Oregon (who you've repeatedly told us how great they are) eked out a last second FG win over 0-7 Washington State. Impressive stuff there.

Wow, you sure know your college football.

 

 

They have been playing playoff games. You lose and you're out. Only two teams haven't lost yet. Make all the excuses you want- all that matters is winning.

When teams are playing their "playoff games" (whatever) against the kind of opponents that are even remotely comparable, then winning will be the bottom line. For now the bottom line is that teams in the most pathetic conferences(USC, Texas, Miami, Oklahoma, etc) play for "national championships" <giggle>, while teams in the toughest conferences play real opponents.

[smokinandjokin]

And what about the other 6 teams who are just as good as USC and maybe Texas but don't get the opportunity for a playoff game because they play in real conferences? Too bad for them the Soviet judge didn't give them high enough marks.

503066[/snapback]

Those teams, whoever they are, had the same opportunity to show the Soviet judge what they could do. Actually, using your logic, they had a better opportunity to show what they could do, seeing as they play "real" teams in "real" conferences. Perhaps Miami should have scored more than 7 points vs. Florida St. Maybe Penn State's vaunted defense should have made a 4th down stop with the game on the line. What if LSU didn't blow a 21-0 lead at home against Tennessee? Virginia Tech already had Texas sweating out the #2 spot, as they were gaining ground every week. Then they forgot to show up for a home game. Don't blame the "judges" for rewarding the two teams who have gotten it done week in and week out, home and road, against good teams and bad.

 

Last year, USC was leading #7 Cal 23-17. Cal drives to the 8-yard line at the end of the game, behind Aaron Rodgers' 23 consecutive completions. What happened? The defense tightened on four straight plays to the end zone to preserve the lead and the win. USC loses, they're out. No excuses. But a good team will find a way to win. You have to win games Simon. That concept seems to be lost on you.

 

My #2 lost a close game to a team that was ranked about 10 spots away.

My #3 lost a close game to a team that was ranked about 6 spots away.

503066[/snapback]

You said it all. LOST is the key word, but you also could have included lost at home, or in Georgia's case, my #2 lost for the second time. Try winning your home games before you try winning a national championship.

So how did the teams you've been crowing about do this weekend? Northwestern (who you declared the only other worthy team in teh Big10) got predictably slaughtered by Ohio State. Well, it was predictable to those who know what they're talking about.

503066[/snapback]

Once again, just because you say something doesn't make it true. I said NW plays entertaining games. I like they way QB Basenez plays. But their 52-21 loss to Arizona State (from the soft Pac-10) this year proved that they are not worthy. I respect the Big 10. My rankings have PSU at #4 and OSU at #7. Please don't write my posts for me.

And as far as predictable, I had a large chunk of cheddar on Ohio State giving 19 points to NW. My wallet suggests that I do know what I'm talking about.

 

Oregon (who you've repeatedly told us how great they are) eked out a last second FG win over 0-7 Washington State. Impressive stuff there.

Wow, you sure know your college football.     

503066[/snapback]

Oregon won on the road in the freezing rain. The teams you've been slurping on all lost at home. Nice.

I'm not trying to say WSU is a good team. 0-7 in the conference speaks for itself. But what 0-7 doesn't mention is the scores. Throw out a loss by 11 at Oregon State and a loss by 42 at USC, and they've lost the other 5 Pac-10 games by 3, 3, 4, 3, and 3 points. Winning on the road in a rainstorm against a team who plays everyone tough is nothing to be ashamed of.

teams in the toughest conferences play real opponents.

503066[/snapback]

 

And lose!!! At home!!!!

 

You continue to make it easier and easier to tool on your posts.

 

Simon's mid-November Top 10

 

1. Texas

2. LSU- Simon thinks they played well in the loss at home to Tennessee (goff!)

3. Alabama- Where's the defense? Bama O put up their usual 10 points, D let LSU get 13! The nerve!

4. Ohio State- Simon really thought they were going to win those two they lost

5. Georgia- Second-best two-loss team in the country

6. Penn State- Not fair! Their defense thought UM was going to kick a FG on that 4th down play, down by 4. "But we stopped them on 1st, 2nd, and 3rd down!"

7. U Buffalo- Big win against a powerful Kent State team vaults them into Top 10

8. Florida- Third loss of the year drops them down a spot.

9. USC- Cal sucks this year and Trojans only won by 25. Chumps.

10. Virginia Tech- Simon thought about Miami at #10, but if they played again, Virginia Tech might win.

[Alaska Darin]

Throw out a loss by 11 at Oregon State and a loss by 42 at USC, and they've lost the other 5 Pac-10 games by 3, 3, 4, 3, and 3 points.  Winning on the road in a rainstorm against a team who plays everyone tough is nothing to be ashamed of. 

503560[/snapback]

The only thing this little tidbit proves is Simon's point about how weak the rest of the conference is.

 

Party on.

[LongLiveRalph]

Dang, Simon and Smokin are getting after it! I questioned everything Simon said after reading the first post when he had Southern Cal at 8 and Georgia/Alabama at 2/3. Smokin, you know the Pac10 is not a tough conference. There are some adequate teams, but I see Oregon and UCLA more as pretenders than contenders.

 

That being said, here's my top 10:

 

1. USC

2. Texas

3. Penn State

4. Miami

5. LSU

6. Notre Dame

7. Ohio State

8. Virginia Tech

9. Auburn

10. Oregon

 

Simon you did provide some humor for your case against USC. However, IMO, your case is pretty weak. They take every team's best shot every week and win ballgames. I know it's the Pac10, but their schedule has them play the four other teams (Oregon, UCLA, Cal, and Arizona State) all on the road this season, plus Notre Dame on the road. Those five games right there are tougher than Texas' schedule (I'll call the away games at OSU and ND equally tough, but the rest of the Big12 has nothing.) But even Texas was outplayed for much of the game in Columbus against a team who was having serious QB issues at the time.

 

The way I see it, USC has won 31 in a row. Texas has won 17 in a row. You can't blame all of that on the competition. Until a school puts 11 guys on the field who can beat either one, they are the top 2. USC has beaten the champion of the ACC (VT), Big 12 (OU), and Big 10 (UM) over the past two seasons. Texas took Michigan's best shot last year and won in the Rose Bowl.

 

The Big10 and SEC have solid talent, but every team has been inconsistent at one point or another this season. USC and Texas have been the model of consistency.

[Simon]

You have to win games Simon. That concept seems to be lost on you.

And the concept that teams who have wildly divergent schedule qualitites shouldn't be judged on only wins and losses seems to be lost on you. Just because USC beats my high school alma mater 100 times in a row doesn't mean they are better than Georgia who went 50-50 against Auburn.

 

It's obvious that neither one of us is ever going to be able to consider the others' perspective on this issue. I can't make myself a blind USC alumni who's such a homer that they need to convince themselves that the oft-repeated fallacies of the hype-driven media are truths. And you can't make yourself into a rational, reasonably intelligent football fan who can take an impartial view while looking at the bigger picture and the vagaries which permeate it.

 

And judging from your weak attempt to mock my Top10, I can tell that you're eagerly awaiting my next installment. Unfortunately you'll have to wait for the December Top10, but you'll be glad to know that USC has rocketed toward the Top6 as they looked good in their second toughest game of the year vs. 3-4 Cal.

[Hirly5]

And the concept that teams who have wildly divergent schedule qualitites shouldn't be judged on only wins and losses seems to be lost on you. Just because USC beats my high school alma mater 100 times in a row doesn't mean they are better than Georgia who went 50-50 against Auburn.

 

It's obvious that neither one of us is ever going to be able to consider the others' perspective on this issue. I can't make myself a blind USC alumni who's such a homer that they need to convince themselves that the oft-repeated fallacies of the hype-driven media are truths. And you can't make yourself into a rational, reasonably intelligent football fan who can take an impartial view while looking at the bigger picture and the vagaries which permeate it.

 

And judging from your weak attempt to mock my Top10, I can tell that you're eagerly awaiting my next installment. Unfortunately you'll have to wait for the December Top10, but you'll be glad to know that USC has rocketed toward the Top6 as they looked good in their second toughest game of the year vs. 3-4 Cal.

504656[/snapback]

According to this website http://teamrankings.com/ncf/27powerratings.php3 USC's SOS is 63 while Texas' SOS is 94.

 

If USC is playing high school teams, Texas must be playing midget teams.

[BuckeyeBill]

USC has to be Number 1, until they lose. Not losing for three years, I don't care if they win by the skin of their teeth each week, they deserve to be #1.

 

Texas has to be Number 2, undefeated... and beating my Buckeyes in the shoe is not easy.

 

OSU should also be in the top 5 (losing to Texas BARELY (if one of three plays would have gone differently, Buckeyes win that one), and losing to Penn State (was one play gone wrong), not to mention we were playing on a hostile stadium.

 

Also, the Buckeyes are a much better team now then they were losing those two games... an offense that is on fire... which all the world will see when the Buckeyes destroy Michigan IN Michigan.

 

And Penn State doesn't get its props. They are literally one bounce of the ball away from being undefeated. They deserve a top 5 placement too.

[e-dog]

Where does Miami and LSU belong then. They both lost a couple of fluke games.

 

I would love to see a play-off with the top eight teams. That would become the biggest thing in sports imo. Seed them 1-8 and get a true National Champion.

[smokinandjokin]

And the concept that teams who have wildly divergent schedule qualitites shouldn't be judged on only wins and losses seems to be lost on you. Just because USC beats my high school alma mater 100 times in a row doesn't mean they are better than Georgia who went 50-50 against Auburn.

504656[/snapback]

I fully grasp that concept. But just because the conference as a whole is better does not mean the teams are better. LSU losing to Tennessee is a perfect example. Should we place LSU ahead of USC, when LSU's loss (at home) is to a team who got destroyed by Notre Dame, who USC beat on the road? Penn State, same thing. You have to put yourself in a postition to argue that you have the tougher schedule, and losing is not how you put yourself into position.

And you're right, Georgia and Auburn would probably go 50-50. The fact that USC would go 80-20 against either of them makes USC better.

It's obvious that neither one of us is ever going to be able to consider the others' perspective on this issue. I can't make myself a blind USC alumni who's such a homer that they need to convince themselves that the oft-repeated fallacies of the hype-driven media are truths. And you can't make yourself into a rational, reasonably intelligent football fan who can take an impartial view while looking at the bigger picture and the vagaries which permeate it.

504656[/snapback]

One team in the past 43 games has been able to beat USC, in 3OT at their field, no less. That zaney media must be writing their own scores every week. I've already included some of the teams, which were conference champions, who have lost to USC over the past 43 games. That was irrelevant for you. You call yourself a rational football fan, just take a look at post #1 of this thread. That's as rational a ranking as the judges in your favorite sport, figure skating. I think you have a future. If USC is not the best team, why hasn't somebody stepped up and proven it?

 

I guess as you concede this argument, we'll just have to wait until December's rankings, at which time USC will have won 34 in a row and will be on track to meet Texas in the title game. I can't wait to see which two-loss teams are more deserving than the undefeateds, according to the Polish judge.

[e-dog]

Smokin, whats your take on Virgina Tech at Virginia game this Saturday ?