T1B

Houston hasn't made a list all year. Hopefully they'll convince you if they beat Florida State.

Papa Willie wrote:1. Clemson. It wasn't as close as the score indicated. Clemson got a bit too preventie at the end.

2. Oklahoma. Still probably the best, IMO.

3. Michigan State. Helluva win.

4. Alabama. Still not sold on them.

5. Iowa. Definitely a damned good team. No doubt about that now.

6. Stanford. Kings of the meat-grinder.

7. Ohio State

8. Notre Dame

9. Florida State

10. North Carolina



Anybody notice how there's 3 ACC teams in there?

And a defacto 4th with ND in there. More interesting to me is seeing 3 Big1G teams. Bill Snyder was considered by some as the best coach in the country based on his results vs. recruiting rankings. Mark Dantonio may have taken that crown. Yes, Urbs and Nicky are great coaches, but they always have superior talent. MSU's classes consistently rank in the mid-20's for recruiting. He's a damn, damn good coach.

Stanford ahead of MSU? 2-loss Stanford ahead of a team whose only loss was a gift from the zebras? I will really relish Sparty taking out the trash December 31.

Sudden Sam wrote:1 - Clemson
2 - Oklahoma
3 - Alabama
4 - Stanford
5 - Michigan State
6 - Iowa
7 - Notre Dame
8 - Ohio State
9 - North Carolina
10 - Florida State

Killian wrote:And a defacto 4th with ND in there. More interesting to me is seeing 3 Big1G teams. Bill Snyder was considered by some as the. best coach in the country based on his results vs. recruiting rankings. Mark Dantonio may have taken that crown. Yes, Urbs and Nicky are great coaches, but they always have superior talent. MSU's classes consistently rank in the mid-20's for recruiting. He's a damn, damn good coach.

I totally agree on Dantonio being a great coach and doing more with less than the Ohio States and Alabamas of college football. Saban and Meyer would have a difficult time going 12-1 with the kids on the MSU roster. It's like they used to say about Eddie Robinson, he'd take his players and beat yours, or take yours and beat his. Dantonio strikes me as that kind of coach. Nick and Urban, not so much. They've grown too used to having the 5 star kids in the lineup that are football ready when they show up on campus. That's not to disrespect either of them, because they're both great coaches, but they're great recruiters and in a totally different environment.

Go Coogs' wrote:Houston hasn't made a list all year. Hopefully they'll convince you if they beat Florida State.

Hell, I'll put Houston in the top 10 right now. 12-1, a conference champion, and they have two wins over currently ranked teams which is one more than FSU, and as much or more than several other teams in the top 25 from the Power 5. Also beat a pretty good Memphis team that we know would finish no worse than second in the SEC West ( ). They play some defense too to compliment their offense.

-------------------------------------

1 Clemson
2 Oklahoma
3 Michigan St.
4 Alabama
5 Stanford
6 Iowa
7 Ohio St.
8 Notre Dame
9 North Carolina
10 Houston

Mace wrote:Saban and Meyer would have a difficult time going 12-1 with the kids on the MSU roster.

Saban had his crack at MSU and bolted the first chance he got because he didn't think he could compete with Michigan and Ohio State. He's a good coach obviously but he needs boatloads of 5-stars to win.

I think Meyer could do it. He was able to recruit and develop talent at Utah and BGSU. Dude has won everywhere he's been.

Sudden Sam wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:Stanford ahead of MSU? 2-loss Stanford ahead of a team whose only loss was a gift from the zebras? I will really relish Sparty taking out the trash December 31.

My first 8 teams are pretty much interchangeable. I could rank Alabama 8th easily among that bunch.

Yeah, I think Stanford may be one of the top teams in the country. Considering their schedule compared to other teams in my top ten, they're probably the best in the country.

You forget that MSU struggled to beat Purdue and Rutgers?

I do remember them beating both of those teams. Don't recall Stanford beating Northwestern or Oregon.

Sudden Sam wrote:Yeah, I think Stanford may be one of the top teams in the country. Considering their schedule compared to other teams in my top ten, they're probably the best in the country.

You forget that MSU struggled to beat Purdue and Rutgers?

If you want to talk schedule, MSU has wins over #15 Oregon, road wins at #14 Michigan and #7 Ohio State, and a neutral site win over #5 Iowa. You'd be better off trying to make some sort of "eye test" argument rather than resume.

Purdue and Rutgers were ugly wins, but MSU was battling a ton of injuries at that time. They didn't really get healthy until the Maryland game.

Sudden Sam wrote:

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:

Sudden Sam wrote:Yeah, I think Stanford may be one of the top teams in the country. Considering their schedule compared to other teams in my top ten, they're probably the best in the country.

You forget that MSU struggled to beat Purdue and Rutgers?

If you want to talk schedule, MSU has wins over #15 Oregon, road wins at #14 Michigan and #7 Ohio State, and a neutral site win over #5 Iowa. You'd be better off trying to make some sort of "eye test" argument rather than resume.

Purdue and Rutgers were ugly wins, but MSU was battling a ton of injuries at that time. They didn't really get healthy until the Maryland game.

Don't misunderstand. I know MSU is a very good team. I was trying to justify my placing Stanford above them...it seemed to really upset ol' Goobs.

I could have put Stanford at #1 and been comfortable with it.

Of course you could. You're an idiot and apparently quite proud of it. I would no sooner be upset by a post of yours than I would one from Sirgulpaload. I just consider the source.

OK, that was bit harsh. Totally accurate, but a bit harsh.

Sudden Sam wrote: Plus Stanford has beaten better teams than MSU has.

The fuck? Who? Notre Dame? For the sake of argument, let's say that ND is better than anyone on MSU's schedule. Fine. Stanford has that on victory. MSU has Oregon (Stanford loss), Ohio State, Michigan and Iowa. That blows the doors off of the next few victories for Stanford.

Killian wrote:

Sudden Sam wrote: Plus Stanford has beaten better teams than MSU has.

The fuck? Who? Notre Dame? For the sake of argument, let's say that ND is better than anyone on MSU's schedule. Fine. Stanford has that on victory. MSU has Oregon (Stanford loss), Ohio State, Michigan and Iowa. That blows the doors off of the next few victories for Stanford.

Don't forget...Adams had a hurt finger when MSU played Oregon. With him at full strength Oregon is the best team in the country by at least two touchdowns, except against Stanford. And the only reason that game was close is because Stanford got like 15 blown calls from the refs, and Oregon didn't get any. Just ask any Duck fan.

Seriously, though, I'd put SC, UCLA and Washington State (with a healthy QB) against Michigan, tOSU and Iowa and give them a 50% chance of winning. And MSUs four big wins were by a total of what, 13 points? Not saying Stanford deserves to be ranked above MSU, but to say that MSUs best victories blow the doors off Stanford's is myopic flyover bullshit.

Mikey wrote:

Killian wrote:

Sudden Sam wrote: Plus Stanford has beaten better teams than MSU has.

The fuck? Who? Notre Dame? For the sake of argument, let's say that ND is better than anyone on MSU's schedule. Fine. Stanford has that on victory. MSU has Oregon (Stanford loss), Ohio State, Michigan and Iowa. That blows the doors off of the next few victories for Stanford.

Don't forget...Adams had a hurt finger when MSU played Oregon. With him at full strength Oregon is the best team in the country by at least two touchdowns, except against Stanford. And the only reason that game was close is because Stanford got like 15 blown calls from the refs, and Oregon didn't get any. Just ask any Duck fan.

Seriously, though, I'd put SC, UCLA and Washington State (with a healthy QB) against Michigan, tOSU and Iowa and give them a 50% chance of winning. And MSUs four big wins were by a total of what, 13 points? Not saying Stanford deserves to be ranked above MSU, but to say that MSUs best victories blow the doors off Stanford's is myopic flyover bullshit.

#25 USC (5 losses), unranked UCLA (4 losses) and unranked Washington State (4 losses) against #14 Michigan, #7 tOSU and #5 Iowa (5 losses among all three) and you think that's an even matchup? And you're calling Killian myopic? You might be dumber than Sam.

Goober McTuber wrote:
#25 USC (5 losses), unranked UCLA (4 losses) and unranked Washington State (4 losses) against #14 Michigan, #7 tOSU and #5 Iowa (5 losses among all three) and you think that's an even matchup? And you're calling Killian myopic? You might be dumber than Sam.

You obviously haven't actually watched very many games.

I've watched a ton of games. You are a fucking moron.

You're quickly going full SECFAN in this post. I didn't realize the Pac12 took the TM or is paying royalties for "MEATGRINDER!!!"

Sudden Sam wrote:I was trying to justify my placing Stanford above them...

You're better off trying to justify Stanford above Bama, since Bama's quality wins don't compare to MSU's.

Mikey wrote:Seriously, though, I'd put SC, UCLA and Washington State (with a healthy QB) against Michigan, tOSU and Iowa and give them a 50% chance of winning.

Myopic bullshit, indeed.

Sudden Sam wrote:How so? Michigan has ONE good win. They beat Northwestern. That's it. Otherwise there's nothing there.

Ohio State played ONE good game all year. And that was against the aforementioned Michigan. BWAHAHAHA!

Iowa's schedule has been panned by everyone all year.

They're decent teams, but check their schedules.

If you really think a team like Washington State is an even match-up with OSU, then you're as dumb as Mikey is myopic. OSU and Michigan have talent and elite coaches. Iowa has only 1 loss and looked very tough on Saturday night. I didn't say these teams are juggernauts, but they are top 15 squads according to the CFP Poll which is an objective way to view things. Otherwise if we're left to our own biases, we're not going to get anywhere in here. Not like we do anyway.

I read an awful lot of egg-spurts who said the B1G was the toughest conference of all this year.

And there's many a good reason why Bammer fan is one of the most widely despised fanbases in college football.

Killian wrote:You're quickly going full SECFAN in this post. I didn't realize the Pac12 took the TM or is paying royalties for "MEATGRINDER!!!"

Seriously, KCKillian? I never claimed that the PAC 12 is the superior conference. I was responding to your claim:

For the sake of argument, let's say that ND is better than anyone on MSU's schedule. Fine. Stanford has that on victory. MSU has Oregon (Stanford loss), Ohio State, Michigan and Iowa. That blows the doors off of the next few victories for Stanford.

My argument was that the top few teams in the PAC 12 (I left Utah out because Stanford didn't play them) would have a 50% chance of beating the equivalent teams from B1G. You're the one saying the B1G blows the doors off the PAC 12.

I'm sorry, but I just don't buy into the assumption that all those stellar one loss records make the B1G the meatgrinder you seem to think it is. You might as well call them Big 12 North. What kind of "quality" wins do the top teams have, besides beating each other?

tOSU beat Michigan and...nobody
Michigan beat Northwestern and...nobody (lost to Utah)
MSU beat tOSU, Michigan, Iowa and Oregon (the only quality non-conference win of any of these teams)
Iowa beat Northwestern and...nobody

Do you see a pattern here?

Stanford beat ND, lost to NW
SC lost to ND
Oregon lost to MSU
Utah beat Michigan

Not stellar but at least a little more ambitious in OOC scheduling.

The awesome B1G records were built by beating up on a very weak lower half in their conference, as well as playing one fewer conference game. The PAC 12 is a lot more competitive outside the top few teams, and played an extra conference game each, resulting in more losses. The B1G teams certainly deserve their rankings, based on their records but, team for team, the top level in the PAC 12 is definitely equal to the B1G.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:

Mikey wrote:Seriously, though, I'd put SC, UCLA and Washington State (with a healthy QB) against Michigan, tOSU and Iowa and give them a 50% chance of winning.

Myopic bullshit, indeed.

Not really.

Goober McTuber wrote:I've watched a ton of games. You are a fucking moron.

A ton of games? That must be a lot.

How much does a game weigh, BTW?

Sudden Sam wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote: And there's many a good reason why Bammer fan is one of the most widely despised fanbases in college football.

Why do you think that is?

Mikey wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:I've watched a ton of games. You are a fucking moron.

A ton of games? That must be a lot.

How much does a game weigh, BTW?

So you're obese and obtuse. Nice combo.

Mikey is right. MSU, Iowa, Michigan, and Ohio State did not dominate this year. They grinded out most of their wins with some close calls. I guess if USC played MSU 10 times on a neutral site, I'd give the Trojans four wins against Sparty's six. Washington State with a healthy QB could beat Iowa. 50% of the time? Probably not, but I'd give them a puncher's chance in all the games.

Goober McTuber wrote:

Mikey wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:I've watched a ton of games. You are a fucking moron.

A ton of games? That must be a lot.

How much does a game weigh, BTW?

So you're obese and obtuse. Nice combo.

So you're old and stupid. Must feel good.

Sudden Sam wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:I read an awful lot of egg-spurts who said the B1G was the toughest conference of all this year.

Penn State, Indiana, Rutgers, Maryland, Nebraska, Illinois, Minnesota, and Purdue were really tough this year.

4 of those teams are going to bowls.

Watch what you say about Northwestern. They took out your number 1 team this year.

Sudden Sam wrote:
Hey, I'll be the first to admit I step all over my own dick in here all the time.

Goobs loves looking at dicks, so you should be fine.

Mikey wrote:

Sudden Sam wrote:
Hey, I'll be the first to admit I step all over my own dick in here all the time.

Goobs loves looking at dicks, so you should be fine.

And Mikey loves suckling on them, Sam, so you've got that going for you.

Mikey wrote:

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:

Mikey wrote:Seriously, though, I'd put SC, UCLA and Washington State (with a healthy QB) against Michigan, tOSU and Iowa and give them a 50% chance of winning.

Myopic bullshit, indeed.

Not really.

Yes, really. USC, UCLA, and Wash St would all be underdogs in those games. Doesn't mean one or more couldn't win, but saying those games would all be coin flips is absolutely a homer statement.

In any event, it's pointless trying to debate hypothetical match ups, so that's why I prefer to reference the CFP Poll. It may not be perfect but at least it's an objective barometer to judge these teams created by people who supposedly watch the games and pour over various metrics.

Goober McTuber wrote:Watch what you say about Northwestern. They took out your number 1 team this year.

Actual head to head results don't matter as much as hypothetical results. Come on man, get it together.

Sudden Sam wrote:So you expect Alabama to beat your Spartans?

Not sure what to expect. I would give Bama the edge though due to their experience on this stage.

Wasn't McElroy the QB for Bama when they trounced MSU in 2010? I can see why he might think that.

I can see scenarios in which Bama wins a close game, MSU wins a close game, or Bama wins in a blowout. I don't see a scenario in which MSU wins in a blowout. MSU is pretty resilient though and doesn't get rattled if down a couple scores.

It's interesting though, who would have guessed where the two QBs from that Capital One Bowl would be today? One is a starter in the NFL and the other holding a microphone for the SEC Network. I seem to remember you were pretty high on one of them when he got drafted. :wink:

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:Watch what you say about Northwestern. They took out your number 1 team this year.

Actual head to head results don't matter as much as hypothetical results. Come on man, get it together.

I don't put a lot of stock in early season matchups. It's the best time for major upsets because those smaller schools get up for that game because it's sort of their super bowl. It was the same for Boise St catching power schools in the first game of the season. Northwestern taking down Stanford week 1 is not a good example of the B1G being hands down a better conference than the PAC. Then again, if Stanford wants to belong, they can't let week 1 trap games sink their season.

They are good, but not great. Herman had those boys playing very disciplined football except for the UConn game. Four turnovers and a couple of drive killing penalties equates to a loss on the road. Houston is an opportunistic football team. They are very aggressive on defense and they take a lot of chances and the results have been very positive for that defense.

On offense, they go where Greg Ward wants to take them. He's amazing to watch when he tucks it and runs, but he is inaccurate with his throws especially on the run. He's been overthrowing receivers all season and it's cost the offense a lot of points.

When Ward is on with his throws and the defense gets their usual 2-3 turnovers, Houston is fringe top ten team.

Sudden Sam wrote: Stanford could beat any team in the country right now. I'm not sure there's any other team I could say that about.

Did they improve radically in the last 3 weeks?

Because I can name a team they couldn't beat -- not based on speculation, either. Then again, with a healthy QB, that team could beat anybody right now, even with a mediocre-on-its-best-day defense.

Dinsdale wrote:

Sudden Sam wrote: Stanford could beat any team in the country right now. I'm not sure there's any other team I could say that about.

Did they improve radically in the last 3 weeks?

Because I can name a team they couldn't beat -- not based on speculation, either. Then again, with a healthy QB, that team could beat anybody right now, even with a mediocre-on-its-best-day defense.

Not exactly a blowout, was it?

It's not really that they couldn't beat them, more like didn't beat them.