HawkeyeMike23
Banned
They went undefeated last year and didn't play for the title. Do you not realize this?
First Coaches Poll of 2010 Released
- Thread starter JonDMiller
- Start date
They went undefeated last year and didn't play for the title. Do you not realize this?
hawkeyescott
Well-Known Member
This is what you said, I don't think my reading skills are failing on this one:
Now I'm trying to show you they are important along with others, but your stubborn *** doesn't want to be proven wrong AGAIN so you continue to look like a fool.
Edit: You are right in preseason rankings don't mean ****, only the one's that come out in the magazines, but this is the coaches poll, a component of the BCS that gets calculated later in the season.
Last edited:
rdubbs
Banned
They weren't one of the two best teams in the nation, what's your point?
rdubbs
Banned
WTF are you trying to do today Scotty? I said preseason rankings aren't important (because they are not) Sure it helps to have a high preseason ranking but it also helps to WIN ALL YOUR GAMES. Now STFU and stop trolling.
HawkeyeMike23
Banned
And we know this because they lost to Texas and Alabama? Oh wait they didn't, they didn't get the chance to play them because they started too low in the preseason polls. You keep contradicting yourself so much in your arguments.
PawkHawk1
Well-Known Member
Ive never understood why you would be upset to be ranked high. If you go undefeated and start out at 7. Chances are most of the teams are going to have 1 loss. That automatically puts you at the lead pack for the NC game. That is what you SHOULD be chasing. If your overrated you take your lumps and go on down the line. Do i think nebraska should be ranked 9, no but ill take it. When you can consistantly stay in the top 25 and keep putting up results. Thats when you get the recognition and the recruts. Very important when your just a couple of farming communities looking for out of state players.
This. +1
whammer33024
Well-Known Member
and he just pointed out that boise state started out at a lower ranking, went undefeated and didn't play for the national title.
THEY DID WIN ALL THEIR GAMES and still didn't play for a national title. they would have being ranked 5th to start the season.
now STFU and stop trolling.
THEY DID WIN ALL THEIR GAMES and still didn't play for a national title. they would have being ranked 5th to start the season.
now STFU and stop trolling.
rdubbs
Banned
They weren't taken seriously as a contender Mikey, that is what was their biggest downfall. It wouldn't have mattered if they started #1 in the "preseason polls" Alabama and Texas were playing the best football at the end of the season and both would have jumped them. (Because nobody wanted Boise State in the title game)
rdubbs
Banned
Read post #68 Whammy
Exactly, funny thing is that Auburn might be getting a trophy for that year in the next few months. The AP isn't going to do it, but whispers are that other bodies are strongly considering the move.
hawkeyescott
Well-Known Member
LMAO, first you say preseason rankings aren't important, then in this same post you say it helps to have a high preseason ranking, if there not important then what difference does it matter?
I'm not trolling, I'm just using common sense and if you had any you would see it isn't trolling.
whammer33024
Well-Known Member
read this and tell me you're not an idiot...or extremely high right now
1977Hawkeye
Well-Known Member
I think you're right on this, that Boise didn't get a shot because they weren't in a BCS conference. Those teams always have that strike against them right out of the gates, no matter their ranking. Their only shot is to run the table when it's a year when everyone else lose 1+ games. Even then, you had a 2-Loss LSU team in the title game a couple years back.
But otherwise, since the title-game is based on rankings, it's important to be as ranked as highly as you can. Otherwise you need to pray that everyone ahead of you loses, and the pollsters don't give you the shaft the last week so they can get the 2 teams they want playing for the title.
HawkeyeMike23
Banned
Yeah, Texas was really on a roll coming in to that. Squeeking by a three loss Nebraska team on a last second field goal, really shows what a great football team you are. If Boise St started out at number one in the preseason polls, they would have played for the title. It's that simple, I don't know why you don't get it.
rdubbs
Banned
First Scotty it's "they're" (it's tough to read when you can't seem to use the correct wording) #2, preseason rankings aren't important but I can't see a team saying "yeah, we don't want to be preseason #1, please revote" Go back the last 10 years and look where teams started the season and where they finished. Preseason #1's don't have a great track record. I am happy Iowa is #10 but would also have no problem with them being #14 or #15 to start the season and if they take care of business on the field, they'll be playing in a great bowl game in 2011.
1977Hawkeye
Well-Known Member
Not to mention that if you are preseason #1 or #2, you can still possibily survive an early season loss and still have time to climb back up in the rankings. You could lose a game and drop to maybe 5th. If you start lower, you really MUST win out.
rdubbs
Banned
There is NO way, Boise State would have played for the title because NOBODY wanted them in the title game. LMAO at you if you think anyone cares about the smurf turf.
whammer33024
Well-Known Member
i dont remember anyone saying they WOULD have a problem with being 14 or 15...you said you'd RATHER start lower. that's where you lost everyone
