AP Top 25 poll

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » September 13, 2004, 12:02 pm

Man.. I don't understand this poll. Those casting the votes must be on crack! Miami up to #4? They have ONE win and not a very impressive one. Florida State #8? Ahead of teams like Ohio St, California and Auburn? Auburn #14?? Purdue #18, Fresno St. 19 and Boise St. #23?? Wow.. simply wow..

Aevian Dreaklear · September 13, 2004, 12:55 pm

I don't think Ohio State's win was very impressive.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » September 13, 2004, 1:34 pm

No but they won. Florida State lost.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » September 13, 2004, 1:43 pm

LOL you have no idea what you are talking about comparing a OSU v. MARSHALL game to the game of the year for the most of the last 15 years.

Miami v. FSU is a huge game, and just becasue the offenses didnt put up tons of points doesnt mean it was a bad football game. Those defenses were stout, and Miami's is frankly dominating.

but polls are bullshit this early in the season as it is.

The real people who should be complaining are Fresno St and Boise St. They deserve quality rankings considering the rankings of the teams they beat.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » September 13, 2004, 2:05 pm

Voronwë wrote:LOL you have no idea what you are talking about comparing a OSU v. MARSHALL game to the game of the year for the most of the last 15 years.

Voro's been inhaling too much baby powder lately! Arizona State vs Arizona is always the game of the year!

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » September 13, 2004, 2:34 pm

Pft OSU vs Michigan is always the game of the year. The Miami Criminals vs Florida State Fags is just a teaser.

But yeah, the defenses were dominant. But a win is a win. And teams who are 2-0 are WAY behind FSU who is 0-1 and who frankly played horribly. That is silly. Oh and btw, more teams than OSU will struggle with Marshall.

The real people who should be complaining are Fresno St and Boise St. They deserve quality rankings considering the rankings of the teams they beat.

Hey I said that! Along with Purdue, Auburn and a couple of others.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » September 13, 2004, 2:57 pm

well let's compare Miami v. FSU and OSU v. Michigan based on the numbers. If we go all-time, then Michigan and OSU is going to look great by comparison. Let's focus the attention on events that have transpired since the players on the teams we like were actually born.

in the last 20 years, Miami and Florida State have a combined 6 (AP until 1998, then BCS) national championships.

Since the inception of the BCS championship game one of the two teams has played in 5 of the 6 championship games winning two (one apiece). Last year's LSU v. USC game is the only BCS championship game ever to not feature one of Miami or FSU.

as opposed for 2 championships for OSU and Michigan combined over the last 20 years (one apiece), and only one trip to the BCS title game (OSU's win in 2002).

its a new era of football and Miami and FSU and similar teams have lead that charge for many years now. Pro-style offenses, defenses that emphasize speed over size, etc. Strength and conditioning coaches, etc.

anyway have fun tuning into the Rose Bowl parade

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » September 13, 2004, 3:12 pm

eh weeeeell now.. OSU's defense has been considered one of the best for at least the last several years. Along with Miami's yes. Both teams spit out pros from their defenses. Only difference is that OSU isn't full of criminals! HAH! I hope Ivan turns and wipes out UoM completely!

There is a reason why even ESPN used the Michigan vs OSU theme for a commercial!

But you still fail to realize that I never said OSU should be above Miami (however should be above FSU). I still think Miami is rated too high. And the other teams I mentioned are rated way too low.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » September 13, 2004, 3:44 pm

Oh...and lets not forget that head to head that OSU beat Miami and sent their highly overrated asses home without that number 1 ranking just a year and a half ago.

Cheers!

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » September 13, 2004, 3:55 pm

Miami/FSU is absolutely the biggest game of the year. Voronwe did a fine job of explaining why, but the key part is this:

Voronwe wrote:Since the inception of the BCS championship game one of the two teams has played in 5 of the 6 championship games winning two (one apiece). Last year's LSU v. USC game is the only BCS championship game ever to not feature one of Miami or FSU.

as opposed for 2 championships for OSU and Michigan combined over the last 20 years (one apiece), and only one trip to the BCS title game (OSU's win in 2002).

That's 5/6 versus 1/6. There is simply no question.

Kelshara wrote: Man.. I don't understand this poll. Those casting the votes must be on crack! Miami up to #4? They have ONE win and not a very impressive one. Florida State #8? Ahead of teams like Ohio St, California and Auburn? Auburn #14?? Purdue #18, Fresno St. 19 and Boise St. #23?? Wow.. simply wow..

I don't know where you're coming from claiming that Miami's win is "not a very impressive one." I don't give a shit how incompetent their offense looked, they beat Florida State, and Florida State is a good team. Why is Florida State still ranked higher than teams like Auburn and Boise State? Well, largely because they have better personnel and better coaching. They may not be a better team, but at this point that's a pretty difficult statement to make.

Kelshara wrote:Oh and btw, more teams than OSU will struggle with Marshall.

Well sure. But this is still 0 and 2 Marshall. This is still the Marshall program whose claim to fame is some pretty good NFL players and a few MAC titles. And that other team is still the Ohio State team that won the national championship two years ago.

Purdue sure does look impressive, but they have been playing against Syracuse and Ball State. Auburn does look good, but they've beaten Louisiana-Monroe and Mississipi State. Do you think that FSU would have swept Syracuse and Ball State? Do you think that FSU would have swept Louisiana-Monroe and Mississipi State? I do. I also think that there's a damn good chance that Purdue and Auburn would have lost to Miami. The polls are supposed to rank teams by the strength of the teams, not by their records. That's what standings are for.

I'll definitely agree that Fresno State and Boise State (especially Fresno State) deserve some props.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » September 13, 2004, 4:16 pm

I also think that there's a damn good chance that Purdue and Auburn would have lost to Miami.

Possibly, but I believe they would have beat FSU!

Kluden · Post by **Kluden** » September 13, 2004, 4:26 pm

Lets not forget how weak the conferences are for certain teams mentioned...and how unbelievably football strong the other conference being compared is.

The reason (well, before this season of course) that OSU vs. Michigan is a bigger game, is because the conference title is usually being played for by these two teams.

The Big East has been a complete yawn (as in, the best team in the conference will just end up losing a game to some high school after being hyped beyond belief) for that last umpteen years, and the ACC is a football joke. Since the teams went wholesale over to the ACC, this is changing of course, but we are talking about the last 20 years or so.

Well, that's my take. Sure, I'm slanted to the Big10 because of my alma mater...but still...its obvious that in the past 20 years, the Big10 has the more of the best football programs, and unfortunately, they have to beat each other up all year long, giving each other loses, and NOT playign soft ball schedules to stay undefeated.

I'm sorry, but one big game a year is not a tough schedule. Once again, this changes now with the ACC football realignment...but historically speaking...and supposedly the BCS takes care of strength of schedule (yeah right).

Post by **Sylvus** » September 13, 2004, 4:38 pm

Sure Voro, just count the last 6 years. Michigan won the Nat'l title the last year before the BCS, and had the BCS been in effect we would have undeniably been in that title game. So give us at least 2/7!

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » September 13, 2004, 4:40 pm

That is a pretty good point. If you had taken Michigan or Ohio State and put them in the ACC for the last 10 years, Miami and FSU would most likely not have as many titles...and Mich or OSU would have a few more.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » September 13, 2004, 4:44 pm

sure Big 10 is a deeper conference than the Big East was. It is not much - if any - deeper than the ACC is now.

Georgia Tech, Virginia, NC State, Virginia Tech are all programs that are certainly as good as middle tier programs in the Big 10 like Purdue, Michigan State, Illinois, and Minnesota.

I would argue that Miami and FSU are better than any teams in the Big 10.

In fact Boston College (ACC next year, Big East currently) just dropped a 21-7 score on Penn St this past weekend. BC is hardly going to come in as a top tier ACC school. They will be middle of the pack, but they consistently perform in bowl games year after year against teams from top conferences like the SEC.

The facts i initially posted speak for themselves. The Big 10 is going to have an increasingly harder time fielding teams that can compete with the consistently elite programs in today's modern college football landscape.

let me know who wins the Rose Bowl Parade this year.

edit: i did count Michigan's 1 title in 1997(?) as one of the two for that pairing of big 10 schools in the last 25 years. I didnt go through and count the number of title games that FSU or Miami was in pre-1998 either because frankly there weren't often title games, and there is no objective criteria by which to call any particular bowl the national championship game with any regularity.

Post by **Sylvus** » September 13, 2004, 4:45 pm

UofM and OSU also always meet their last game of the year. One of them having their last game of the season be a loss has historically had a greater effect on final standings than a loss at the beginning of the season would.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » September 13, 2004, 4:48 pm

Sylvus wrote:UofM and OSU also always meet their last game of the year. One of them having their last game of the season be a loss has historically had a greater effect on final standings than a loss at the beginning of the season would.

Miami and FSU usually play in October. This is the first time they've ever led off the year against each other. But starting next year, they will be playing their last game of the season against each other in most circumstances in the conference title game. i believe it was the NCAA who wanted them to play on Labor Day to showcase the matchup and put a marquee game before the NFL kickoff to get a huge ratings number.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » September 13, 2004, 5:05 pm

Dude.. you used Penn State as part of your argument.. that is an automatic loss!

Post by **Sylvus** » September 13, 2004, 5:39 pm

Voronwë wrote:I would argue that Miami and FSU are better than any teams in the Big 10.

What, this year specifically? Hard to say after they've both played only the one game. If you're speaking more generally, I'm going to have to disagree with you there.

In fact Boston College (ACC next year, Big East currently) just dropped a 21-7 score on Penn St this past weekend. BC is hardly going to come in as a top tier ACC school. They will be middle of the pack, but they consistently perform in bowl games year after year against teams from top conferences like the SEC.

I'm not sure if you've been following any football outside of the confederate states lately, but PSU has been shit for a couple years now. They're basically bottom of the barrel Big 10. In fact, they're not really even a Big 10 team.

The facts i initially posted speak for themselves. The Big 10 is going to have an increasingly harder time fielding teams that can compete with the consistently elite programs in today's modern college football landscape.

That's a load of shit right there.

Final 1998 BCS Rankings

1. Tennessee (3.47)
2. Florida State (4.91)
3. Kansas State (9.96)
4. Ohio State (10.37)
5. UCLA (10.90)
6. Texas A&M (15.70)
7. Arizona (16.49)
8. Florida (19.95)
9. Wisconsin (21.61)
10. Tulane (26.67)
11. Nebraska (29.06)
12. Virginia (32.22)
13. Arkansas (32.28)
14. Georgia Tech (32.76)
15. Syracuse (34.80)

Final 1999 BCS Rankings

1. Florida State (2.24)
2. Virginia Tech (6.12)
3. Nebraska (7.42)
4. Alabama (12.11)
5. Tennessee (13.71)
6. Kansas State (15.23)
7. Wisconsin (16.71)
8. Michigan (18.08)
9. Michigan State (19.11)
10. Florida (23.06)
11. Penn State (28.75)
12. Marshall (31.15)
13. Minnesota (33.61)
14. Texas A&M (34.76)
15. Texas (34.81)

Final 2000 BCS Rankings

1. Oklahoma (3.30)
2. Florida State (5.37)
3. Miami-FL (5.69)
4. Washington (10.67)
5. Virginia Tech (12.20)
6. Oregon State (14.68)
7. Florida (14.75)
8. Nebraska (18.22)
9. Kansas State (24.30)
10. Oregon (24.32)
11. Notre Dame (25.07)
12. Texas (27.22)
13. Georgia Tech (29.62)
14. TCU (33.01)
15. Clemson (33.17)

Final 2001 BCS Rankings
1. Miami 2.62
2. Nebraska 7.23
3. Colorado 7.28
4. Oregon 8.67
5. Florida 13.09
6. Tennessee 14.69
7. Texas 17.79
8. Illinois 19.31
9. Stanford 20.41
10. Maryland 21.29
11. Oklahoma 21.54
12. Washington St 26.91
13. LSU 27.73
14. South Carolina 37.77
15. Washington 38.17

Final 2002 BCS Rankings
1 Miami (FL) 2.93
2 Ohio State 3.97
3 Georgia 8.37
4 Southern Cal 10.51
5 Iowa 10.79
6 Washington State 16.14
7 Oklahoma 16.79
8 Kansas State 20.13
9 Notre Dame 20.93
10 Texas 21.08
11 Michigan 23.91
12 Penn State 26.97
13 Colorado 33.27
14 Florida State 33.95
15 West Virginia 35.97

Final 2003 BCS Rankings
1 Oklahoma 5.11
2 Louisiana State 5.99
3 Southern California 6.15
4 Michigan 10.63
5 Ohio State 14.28
6 Texas 14.53
7 Florida State 17.93
8 Tennessee 19.64
9 Miami (Fla.) 19.79
10 Kansas State 22.73
11 Miami (Ohio) 24.22
12 Georgia 24.59
13 Iowa 28.94
14 Purdue 32.93
15 Florida 36.8

Take a look at every year of the BCS' existance. In most years the Big 10 has more teams ranked higher than any other conference. I think the reason that you don't see more Big 10 teams at the very top of that list because of the depth and strength of our conference, and for no other reason than that. The Big 10 has historically been the toughest conference. It's possible that may change with the realignment down in your neck of the woods, but it hasn't changed yet.

Raistin · Post by **Raistin** » September 13, 2004, 5:52 pm

Dont use penn state to argue shit. they would argue with themselves and still lose. Im tired of this shit. Start playing the fucking freshmen and bench the Sr. who throw 5 ints.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » September 13, 2004, 6:11 pm

Is it true that "paterno" is Italian for "8 losses"?

Fat · Post by **Fat** » September 13, 2004, 6:16 pm

The Buckeyes were screwed out of possible national champion status a few times by the Wolverines over the early - mid '90s.

1993 - Buckeyes 10-1-1 loss to Michigan
1996 - Buckeyes 11-1 loss to Michigan (Fuck Biakabatuka)
1998 - Buckeyes 11-1 loss to that "other" Michigan school

I doubt we ever screwed Michigan as the series was very lopsided during the Cooper era, but as you can see they hurt us a few times. And, it has already been said, but it is impossible to recover from a late November loss and remain atop the polls.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » September 13, 2004, 6:30 pm

you post some compelling refutations. i have highlighted the current members of the realigned ACC to indicate how that group of teams has performed in the BCS rankings (which are horseshit in their own way...2000 Miami beat FSU , but FSU was ranked higher than them and played for the crystal ball).

black = big 10
blue = teams that will comprise the ACC this year

Sylvus wrote:That's a load of shit right there.

Final 1998 BCS Rankings

1. Tennessee (3.47)
2. Florida State (4.91)
3. Kansas State (9.96)
4. Ohio State (10.37)
5. UCLA (10.90)
6. Texas A&M (15.70)
7. Arizona (16.49)
8. Florida (19.95)
9. Wisconsin (21.61)
10. Tulane (26.67)
11. Nebraska (29.06)
12. Virginia (32.22)
13. Arkansas (32.28)
14. Georgia Tech (32.76)
15. Syracuse (34.80)

Final 1999 BCS Rankings

1. Florida State (2.24)
2. Virginia Tech (6.12)
3. Nebraska (7.42)
4. Alabama (12.11)
5. Tennessee (13.71)
6. Kansas State (15.23)
7. Wisconsin (16.71)
8. Michigan (18.08)
9. Michigan State (19.11)
10. Florida (23.06)
11. Penn State (28.75)
12. Marshall (31.15)
13. Minnesota (33.61)
14. Texas A&M (34.76)
15. Texas (34.81)

Final 2000 BCS Rankings

1. Oklahoma (3.30)
2. Florida State (5.37)
3. Miami-FL (5.69)
4. Washington (10.67)
5. Virginia Tech (12.20)
6. Oregon State (14.68)
7. Florida (14.75)
8. Nebraska (18.22)
9. Kansas State (24.30)
10. Oregon (24.32)
11. Notre Dame (25.07)
12. Texas (27.22)
13. Georgia Tech (29.62)
14. TCU (33.01)
15. Clemson (33.17)

Final 2001 BCS Rankings
1. Miami 2.62 2. Nebraska 7.23
3. Colorado 7.28
4. Oregon 8.67
5. Florida 13.09
6. Tennessee 14.69
7. Texas 17.79
8. Illinois 19.31
9. Stanford 20.41
10. Maryland 21.2911. Oklahoma 21.54
12. Washington St 26.91
13. LSU 27.73
14. South Carolina 37.77
15. Washington 38.17

Final 2002 BCS Rankings
1 Miami (FL) 2.932 Ohio State 3.97
3 Georgia 8.37
4 Southern Cal 10.51
5 Iowa 10.79
6 Washington State 16.14
7 Oklahoma 16.79
8 Kansas State 20.13
9 Notre Dame 20.93
10 Texas 21.08
11 Michigan 23.91
12 Penn State 26.97
13 Colorado 33.27
14 Florida State 33.9515 West Virginia 35.97

Final 2003 BCS Rankings
1 Oklahoma 5.11
2 Louisiana State 5.99
3 Southern California 6.15
4 Michigan 10.63
5 Ohio State 14.28
6 Texas 14.53
7 Florida State 17.93
8 Tennessee 19.64
9 Miami (Fla.) 19.79
10 Kansas State 22.73
11 Miami (Ohio) 24.22
12 Georgia 24.59
13 Iowa 28.94
14 Purdue 32.93
15 Florida 36.8
Take a look at every year of the BCS' existance. In most years the Big 10 has more teams ranked higher than any other conference. I think the reason that you don't see more Big 10 teams at the very top of that list because of the depth and strength of our conference, and for no other reason than that. The Big 10 has historically been the toughest conference. It's possible that may change with the realignment down in your neck of the woods, but it hasn't changed yet.

i'm not trying to say the ACC is a better football conference than the Big 10. But i am saying that Miami and FSU are better football programs TODAY and over the last 25 years than ****ANY*** Big 10 school. or any other school for that matter except perhaps Nebraska.

I will say that the ACC looks pretty good though by comparison to any conference in its current incarnation.

and yes i know Penn State had a bad 2003, but they were one of the top 15 teams in 2002. And they are obviously a Big 10 team or you wouldn't have bolded them

. I was going to get around to the fallacy of comparing a conference's strength based on its weakest members (common criticism of ACC), but i got sidetracked.

I bet if we highlighted SEC or PAC-10 schools it would look just as impressive as the Big 10 or ACCs performance in the BCS. the Big 12 looks to me to be the best conference by this criteria quite honestly, and people always talk shit about Texas and Oklahoma's schedules.

Fact is all major conferences have fielded many competitive teams for many years now, and the paradigm of thinking that playing in the Big 10 somehow differentiates you from other schools is growing increasingly outdated.

It may or may not be why the Big 10 has failed to win that many national titles in the past 25 years, but the fact is that Miami v. FSU is *THE* marquee matchup in today's football landscape.

The numbers speak for themselves.

Post by **Sylvus** » September 13, 2004, 6:38 pm

Voronwë wrote:i'm not trying to say the ACC is a better football conference than the Big 10. But i am saying that Miami and FSU are better football programs TODAY and over the last 25 years than ****ANY*** Big 10 school. or any other school for that matter except perhaps Nebraska.

And I disagree with that, particularly because over the last 25 years the polls were subjective and the Big 10 had so many strong teams throughout, and Michigan and Ohio State always meeting their last game of the year, kept more Big 10 teams out of those subjective rankings and made teams from less-strong (I hesitate to use the word "weaker") conferences look better.

As far as present day goes, it appears that at least the last 2 years, Big 10 teams have ended up higher than any ACC teams after bowl games were played out, what do you think about that?! I think you're going to see less of your ACC teams toward the top of the list now that they are improving the quality of the conference and people are going to have tougher overall schedules. But I guess we will have to wait and see!

How many of those blue teams on those lists have had to play all of those other blue teams every year for the last 25 years?

*** I would actually find it very interesting if other people would color the teams from other conferences. I know the Big 10 the best, which is why I only bolded those teams. Voro has done the ACC, anyone else up for helping out with some of the other conferences?

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » September 13, 2004, 6:43 pm

1996-97 Final Rankings:

Fucking Ohio State Cost Arizona State a national title that year in the Rose bowl. That was a rough year for Michigan and Miami!

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » September 13, 2004, 6:45 pm

i will also disclaim that Miami was on self-imposed sanctions in the 2 years on that list that we didn't finish in the top 10! which is of course the only reason FSU has a title in that span.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » September 13, 2004, 6:50 pm

They should be on a constant ban from playing football!

Crav · Post by **Crav** » September 13, 2004, 6:54 pm

orange = big 12
black = big 10
blue = teams that will comprise the ACC this year

Sylvus wrote:That's a load of shit right there.

Final 1998 BCS Rankings

1. Tennessee (3.47)
2. Florida State (4.91)
3. Kansas State (9.96)
4. Ohio State (10.37)
5. UCLA (10.90)
6. Texas A&M (15.70)
7. Arizona (16.49)
8. Florida (19.95)
9. Wisconsin (21.61)
10. Tulane (26.67)
11. Nebraska (29.06)
12. Virginia (32.22)
13. Arkansas (32.28)
14. Georgia Tech (32.76)
15. Syracuse (34.80)

Final 1999 BCS Rankings

1. Florida State (2.24)
2. Virginia Tech (6.12)
3. Nebraska (7.42)
4. Alabama (12.11)
5. Tennessee (13.71)
6. Kansas State (15.23)
7. Wisconsin (16.71)
8. Michigan (18.08)
9. Michigan State (19.11)
10. Florida (23.06)
11. Penn State (28.75)
12. Marshall (31.15)
13. Minnesota (33.61)
14. Texas A&M (34.76)
15. Texas (34.81)

Final 2000 BCS Rankings

1. Oklahoma (3.30)
2. Florida State (5.37)
3. Miami-FL (5.69)
4. Washington (10.67)
5. Virginia Tech (12.20)
6. Oregon State (14.68)
7. Florida (14.75)
8. Nebraska (18.22)
9. Kansas State (24.30)
10. Oregon (24.32)
11. Notre Dame (25.07)
12. Texas (27.22)
13. Georgia Tech (29.62)
14. TCU (33.01)
15. Clemson (33.17)

Final 2001 BCS Rankings
1. Miami 2.62
2. Nebraska 7.23
3. Colorado 7.28
4. Oregon 8.67
5. Florida 13.09
6. Tennessee 14.69
7. Texas 17.79
8. Illinois 19.31
9. Stanford 20.41
10. Maryland 21.29
11. Oklahoma 21.54
12. Washington St 26.91
13. LSU 27.73
14. South Carolina 37.77
15. Washington 38.17

Final 2002 BCS Rankings
1 Miami (FL) 2.93
2 Ohio State 3.97
3 Georgia 8.37
4 Southern Cal 10.51
5 Iowa 10.79
6 Washington State 16.14
7 Oklahoma 16.79
8 Kansas State 20.13
9 Notre Dame 20.93
10 Texas 21.08
11 Michigan 23.91
12 Penn State 26.97
13 Colorado 33.27
14 Florida State 33.9515 West Virginia 35.97

Final 2003 BCS Rankings
1 Oklahoma 5.11
2 Louisiana State 5.99
3 Southern California 6.15
4 Michigan 10.63
5 Ohio State 14.28
6 Texas 14.53
7 Florida State 17.93
8 Tennessee 19.64
9 Miami (Fla.) 19.79
10 Kansas State 22.73
11 Miami (Ohio) 24.22
12 Georgia 24.59
13 Iowa 28.94
14 Purdue 32.93
15 Florida 36.8

There's the Big 12 in orange. We may have had a bad week, but still a pretty strong conference. I'm just happy Texas has been able to actually run the ball when they want to this year and not get upset the first two weeks.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » September 13, 2004, 6:57 pm

Yah I got my hopes up for Texas this year.. although they will probably self destruct again

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » September 13, 2004, 7:02 pm

ASU 1996 Football Results:

September 7: Arizona State 45, Washington 42
September 14: Arizona State 52, North Texas 7
September 21: Arizona State 19, Nebraska 0
September 28: Arizona State 48, Oregon 27
October 5: Arizona State 56, Boise State 7
October 12: Arizona State 42, UCLA 34
October 19: Arizona State 48, USC 35 (2 OT)
October 26: Arizona State 41, Stanford 9
November 2: Arizona State 29, Oregon State 14
November 9: Arizona State 35, California 7
November 23: Arizona State 56, Arizona 14

I think Nebraska was ranked #1 and ASU was unranked the third week of the season. ASU went into Nebraska and shut them out which launched us way up into the top 25. ASU worked all the way up to #1 or #3 and was assured the National Championship with a win over OSU. Jake the Snake Plummer scrambled in to the end zone to take the lead with less than 2 minutes left but OSU abused our defensive backs and walked right down the field and scored.

ASU's glory years are few and far between (Rose Bowl Champs 1987, hello ASU 22 Michigan 15!) so I must temporarily hijack the thread. Carry on!

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » September 13, 2004, 7:02 pm

Big 12 is clearly better than the Big 10 over the past several years apparently.

let's add SEC and PAC-10

PAC-10 = green
SEC = red
orange = big 12
black = big 10
blue = teams that will comprise the ACC this year

Sylvus wrote:That's a load of shit right there.

Final 1998 BCS Rankings

1. Tennessee (3.47)
2. Florida State (4.91)
3. Kansas State (9.96)
4. Ohio State (10.37)
5. UCLA (10.90)
6. Texas A&M (15.70)
7. Arizona (16.49)
8. Florida (19.95)
9. Wisconsin (21.61)
10. Tulane (26.67)
11. Nebraska (29.06)
12. Virginia (32.22)
13. Arkansas (32.28)
14. Georgia Tech (32.76)
15. Syracuse (34.80)

Final 1999 BCS Rankings

1. Florida State (2.24)
2. Virginia Tech (6.12)
3. Nebraska (7.42)
4. Alabama (12.11)
5. Tennessee (13.71)
6. Kansas State (15.23)
7. Wisconsin (16.71)
8. Michigan (18.08)
9. Michigan State (19.11)
10. Florida (23.06)
11. Penn State (28.75)
12. Marshall (31.15)
13. Minnesota (33.61)
14. Texas A&M (34.76)
15. Texas (34.81)

Final 2000 BCS Rankings

1. Oklahoma (3.30)
2. Florida State (5.37)
3. Miami-FL (5.69)
4. Washington (10.67)
5. Virginia Tech (12.20)
6. Oregon State (14.68)
7. Florida (14.75)
8. Nebraska (18.22)
9. Kansas State (24.30)
10. Oregon (24.32)
11. Notre Dame (25.07)
12. Texas (27.22)
13. Georgia Tech (29.62)
14. TCU (33.01)
15. Clemson (33.17)

Final 2001 BCS Rankings
1. Miami 2.62
2. Nebraska 7.23
3. Colorado 7.28
4. Oregon 8.67
5. Florida 13.09
6. Tennessee 14.69
7. Texas 17.79
8. Illinois 19.31
9. Stanford 20.41
10. Maryland 21.29
11. Oklahoma 21.54
12. Washington St 26.91
13. LSU 27.73
14. South Carolina 37.77
15. Washington 38.17

Final 2002 BCS Rankings
1 Miami (FL) 2.93
2 Ohio State 3.97
3 Georgia 8.37
4 Southern Cal 10.51
5 Iowa 10.79
6 Washington State 16.14
7 Oklahoma 16.79
8 Kansas State 20.13
9 Notre Dame 20.93
10 Texas 21.08
11 Michigan 23.91
12 Penn State 26.97
13 Colorado 33.27
14 Florida State 33.9515 West Virginia 35.97

Final 2003 BCS Rankings
1 Oklahoma 5.11
2 Louisiana State 5.99
3 Southern California 6.15
4 Michigan 10.63
5 Ohio State 14.28
6 Texas 14.53
7 Florida State 17.93
8 Tennessee 19.64
9 Miami (Fla.) 19.79
10 Kansas State 22.73
11 Miami (Ohio) 24.22
12 Georgia 24.59
13 Iowa 28.94
14 Purdue 32.93
15 Florida 36.8

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » September 13, 2004, 7:15 pm

What's USC doing at #3 in 2003? Don't they share #1 with LSU as co champions?

Crav · Post by **Crav** » September 13, 2004, 7:31 pm

I don't think the BCS does a poll after the bowl games, the BCS national champion is decided by the winner of the National Championship bowl game. I believe USC finished first in the AP poll, which has it's own national championship that usually goes to the BCS champ, unless something happens like last year. I might be wrong between the AP and coaches poll.

Shanter · Post by **Shanter** » September 13, 2004, 10:02 pm

SEC is now the strongest conference in college football.

RESPECT THE GATORS!

btw: Florida is on that list every year but once, I don't think any other team has done that (I'm not gonna check either)

Spang · Post by **Spang** » September 13, 2004, 11:26 pm

FSU is up there every year but once, also.

Raistin · Post by **Raistin** » September 14, 2004, 12:10 am

Here is the thing. You can say the big 12 is the best and hardest confrence. Yet they only have 3 good teams, that clean up the other 9, thus having a higher record at the end of the season. Then comes in my WHO HAVE THEY PLAYED TO EVEN BE RANKED THAT HIGH.

Big 10
When you play Mich., Iowa, Penn State , Wisc, Minn, Purdue, hell even INDIANA this year its hard to counter. (I add in Penn State, since even if they are having a loseing record, they push all games to the end pretty much)All asides Penn State and Indiana the past 2 years, all other teams have FAUGHT for the big 10 champ spot.

Big 12
Oklahoma, Texas , Kanasa State.
These 3 teams have been the only 3 teams the past 5 years to even compeat for the championship.

SEC
Florida, Georgia, Lsu ,Tennessee, Auburn.

2-3 confrence games that can be tough, and throw in teams like Vanderbilt the Mississippis' Kentucky Alabama and Arkansas then it just pads your record with easy wins.

ACC

Florida State , Miami and Virginia .

All other ACC teams end up losing about 4 or 5 of their last games to semi quality out of confrence teams that arnt named VMI.

Over all, the big 10 always has more losses due to the fact of how a majorty of the teams being good/hard. You can be ranked 10th, lose to 12th ranked Iowa in the last 2 weeks of the season, and end up in the 20s. It isnt cool, but thats how these homos running the AP do it with everyone.

Hands down the big 10 has the hardest confrence. They might not beat other confrence champions. But they have to play 5 top quality teams to even just win their confrence.

masteen · Post by **masteen** » September 14, 2004, 12:26 am

[quote="Voronwë"]i'm not trying to say the ACC is a better football conference than the Big 10. But i am saying that Miami and FSU are better football programs TODAY and over the last 25 years than ****ANY*** Big 10 school. or any other school for that matter except perhaps Nebraska.

And the number of former "student" athletes from these three schools now attending State Penitentiary U?

Crav · Post by **Crav** » September 14, 2004, 1:06 am

Raistin wrote:Here is the thing. You can say the big 12 is the best and hardest confrence. Yet they only have 3 good teams, that clean up the other 9, thus having a higher record at the end of the season. Then comes in my WHO HAVE THEY PLAYED TO EVEN BE RANKED THAT HIGH.

Big 10
When you play Mich., Iowa, Penn State , Wisc, Minn, Purdue, hell even INDIANA this year its hard to counter. (I add in Penn State, since even if they are having a loseing record, they push all games to the end pretty much)All asides Penn State and Indiana the past 2 years, all other teams have FAUGHT for the big 10 champ spot.

Big 12
Oklahoma, Texas , Kanasa State.
These 3 teams have been the only 3 teams the past 5 years to even compeat for the championship.

Actually in the last five years Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Kansas St., Nebraska, and Colorado have played in the Big 12 championship game. There is also teams like Oklahoma St., Misouri, and Texas Tech that have been pretty tough over those years. Like I said the Big 12 had a bad week, but the season is only two games old.

Final BCS poll for 2003: Link

It seems that the strength of schedule for teams in the Big 10 and Big 12 were pretty much even.

Gamei · Post by **Gamei** » September 14, 2004, 1:52 am

and throw in teams like Vanderbilt the Mississippis' Kentucky Alabama and Arkansas then it just pads your record with easy wins.

Alabama is rarely an easy win in the conference, last year notwithstanding. =p

Xatrei · Post by **Xatrei** » September 14, 2004, 1:58 am

Alabama got hammered hard by NCAA sanctions, and a myriad of other things (Francione bailed, they hired Mike Price then fired him 5 months later (after a night of binge drinking and whoring), and hired Baby Shula who had to put together a staff and pull the team together *after* spring practice). They may have been down the last couple of years, but that's certainly not the norm. It's still too early to tell for sure, but they definitely seem to be in a lot better shape than they were last year, although it would be hard not to be, I suppose.

Crav · Post by **Crav** » September 14, 2004, 2:04 am

and throw in teams like Vanderbilt the Mississippis' Kentucky Alabama and Arkansas then it just pads your record with easy wins.

I think most people who watch SEC football can tell you that Arkansas is not a soft team, especially if you play them at home. I hate them because well I'm at Texas grad, but putting them on the same list as Vanderbilt and Kentucky is a bit much.

Tyek · Post by **Tyek** » September 14, 2004, 2:12 am

And, it has already been said, but it is impossible to recover from a late November loss and remain atop the polls.

Unless you are from the Big 12. Then you just sit and wait for your shot at the national championship RIGHT after losing your final game. Right Oklahoma and Nebraska???

As for the Florida Schools, it helps to be a media darling. I mean what about last season makes anyone place Florida in the top 10 to start the season. FSU and Miami are guaranteed top 5 before every season starts. I also know FSU should not have been champion over a Notre Dame that beat them soundly one year, but once again the media helped them out. If memory serves me right I think Miami got into the national title one year instead of Washington, who had kicked their asses, but had the same record and got screwed out of the title game(I am getting old so I forget some of the particulars).

FSU, Miami and Florida are good teams, sometimes great, but they have gotten lots of help from the media and poor conference opponents. I do give them credit for maximizing those advantages though.

masteen · Post by **masteen** » September 14, 2004, 11:51 am

Arkansas always has a tough defense, and if they could ever get an consistent offense going, they'd be dangerous. Lets not forget that Bama won a national title just over ten years ago, but has been languishing under sanctions caused by their idiot boosters for the most part ever since.