What does everyone think about the AP Top 25?
I was surprised that there were 4 ACC Schools* in with FSU and Clemson at 9 and 10. *Notre Dame is at 13 and North Carolina at 21.
Kind of interesting how many PAC-12 schools are in with how they are disintegrating. They have 5 in.
Otherwise kind of business as usual.
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
With respect to the PAC12 schools' rankings: none of the changes have really hit yet, right? The shakeups may affect recruiting classes, but that won't change this season, especially a pre-season poll. Also, you may see a rash of transfers, but that's also unlikely to kick in yet. It's still status quo for them. I expect the turmoil to start making significant waves as we pass the halfway mark of the season.
Right, and in the case of USC, Oregon, UW -- these are the teams that moved up to B1G in the future and wouldn't be negatively affected by the realignment. Would expect Utah to stay relative stable and Oregon St to fall off, but not immediately
I think this may be the last consistent season for the schools going to the B1G. Once they get into the churn there, I can see them having an occasional big season but be more like Nebraska since it's move there, especially if the other B1G schools start recruiting better on West Coast due to exposure.
yeah that or USC gets even more money than they already had and they push the national brand aspect of it even more. play your home games in LA and your road games near Chicago and NY! get paid paid to do it!
I haven't been paying (any) attention to CFB outside of the conference re-alignment/expansion/implosion. That said, the top 6 looks about accurate (although I think Michigan is going to be pressed to stay in the top 10 throughout the year). A little surprised to see a lack of non-power 5 teams.
I don't know how much UM's murderers row of a non-conference schedule will affect them in the long run. East Carolina, UNLV, Bowling Green I mean will they be able to escape alive. They also drew such powerhouse schools from the B1G including Rutgers, Nebraska, Minnesota, Indiana, Purdue and Maryland...
The only non-speedbump teams on their schedule are Michigan State (Depends on the year), Penn State, and Ohio State.
I've been saying this for the better part of 2 decades. Ohio State and Michigan really don't play any tough games other than each other and occasionally Penn State/Michigan State. It is unreal.
The preseason is often light on G5 teams, they get ranked once they start to win. Troy and Fresno State are the only two G5 that ended last season ranked and are not ranked in the preseason polls. UTSA ended up 27th last season. So unless some on thinks those schools will be better this year they won't be ranked.
Hoping to see the annual fall flat on their face from Texas and UNC. Will see what happens.
Surprised Miami is not up there. Have people in the press figured out that "DA U IS (not) BAK"?
They are ranking Drake Maye so highly that he can overcome his coaching to win, they must have a lot of faith in him.
The top 15 is as blue blood heavy as I remember it being in a long time. Not just P5, but true blue bloods.
Those who I consider "Blue Bloods" bolded below. I'm sure we could quibble over some on the margins, but yeah, this is a nice safe preseason poll: just slap all the blue bloods on there and sprinkle a couple regional powerhouses and hit submit.
Are there any Blue Bloods (historical or otherwise) that you are surprised are not on the top 25?
I mean... Miami...
Ole Miss is not a blue blood by any stretch of the definition. The most generous definitions of the term have around 15 teams... Ole Miss has had one top 10 AP finish since integration (2015). Since 2000, they've had three 10 win seasons and eight seasons where they didn't qualify for a bowl. From 1970-2000 they've had just 10 bowl bids.
Edit to add: So this guy on reddit is doing a really good deep dive on the best programs over the last 40 years (here's a TKP post about VT, and here's the master thread). He has Ole Miss as the 49th best team of the last 40 years. Anyways, at risk of using 'some guy on reddit' as evidence, I highly recommend reading a few of pieces, which use an algorithm he created to rank teams.
Anyways, an excerpt from his piece on Ole Miss:
I dunno man, I saw this movie called "The Blind Side"...
Yea, I read the book. Having a movie made about you doesn't make you a blue blood.
Funny you should mention "The Blind Side".....
Michael Oher of 'The Blind Side' says he wasn't adopted, but put in a conservatorship
This just came out in the last day or 2.
Edit: I'm late to the game. I'm still not deleting the comment though....
You dont have to delete the comment if you drink
Done
Expect my full compliance this evening
I was only referring to the top 15, but fair point as to Ole Miss. I would not think of them as a blue blood, so much as a solid P5 program that I would not be confident we could beat on any given occasion/regular basis.
They may not technically be but they will get support from the Networks, NCAA, playoff committee, refs, etc as if they were, because they're wrapped into that SEC TV deal
That's not what it means to be a blueblood.
If you haven't won a conference championship, much less a natty, since integration, you're not a blueblood.
Didn't say it was
I really think there's enough uncertainty up top right now that media is just hedging with the big names. Michigan is the only top 4 team returning their starting QB (and he's fine, but not an elite guy yet). Everyone below that has at least a few big questions.
There's a chance this year gets chaotic. Except for Georgia. Their schedule is easy and they have the most talent.
Clemson isn't a blue blood they nouveau rich.
The 80's is new? They rose in the late 70s, were a mainstay in the 80s. From, '78 to '91 they won 7 ACC championships, won 10 games in 4 seasons, and the national championship in 1981. They were good, then became Klempson and then they were good again.
I would argue if you won the ACC title in football pre-1992 expansion when FSU joined, basically no one cared. It was a small basketball league, and probably a big reason why almost no one remembers Clemson's 1981 title and them having a good run then.
Shoot, GT won a share of the national title in 1990 and few remember/care to this day.
They also finished in the top 25 in at least one poll for 11 different seasons in that frame. Care/don't care, ACC/not ACC, whatever, they were good.
And we had 12 top 25 finishes from '99 to '11. Doesn't make us a blue blood.
you really want to compare Clemson's full resume to VT's? And to be sure, it doesn't really matter if anyone considers Clemson a blue blood or not, but they were good in two eras, won National championships in two eras. They are not nouveau riche.
Different people define 'blue blood' differently. My three favorite definitions:
100% agree with your categories. So many want to put the Florida schools in the blue blood category, but they really didn't emerge on the national scene until the 80s and 90s under Schnellenberger/Johnson, Bowden, and Spurrier respectively. Bama is the only current SEC school that I see as being a true blue blood of the sport for multiple decades, with Tennessee and Georgia behind them, then UF, LSU, Auburn.
Nebraska may or may not be capable of ever reclaiming their past glory, but their history speaks for itself. Totally agree with your group at the very top - it's pretty small. Those schools, regardless of coach, generally have the resources and resume to truly recruit on a national level and compete for a natty perpetually.
Yep - The craziest is LSU IMO. They had a 9/10 win ceiling until Saban went there. Since he arrived, every coach has (or is now expected to) win at least one natty. Many coaches and media members consider it the best job in country.
Tennessee is also interesting to me. They were a really strong program in the early poll era, fell off for a long time, had another really strong era in the 90s/early 2000s under Fulmer and got another natty, then were dreadful and really lost as a program for the better part of two decades. Seem to have things going again now under Heupel, but they have been really boom or bust.
When Les Miles can win a Natty, you know that's a great job.
Look at the ACC records in the 80s, they were terrible, most years Clemson would beat 1-2 teams with winning records. They were lucky to play UGA most years to make their schedule look okay.
More to your point; The ACC were always bringing up the rear as far as football power conferences go.
Until the 1980's no team consistently ranked (since Duke pre WWII). In the early 80's, NC State was the ACC champ, didn't get a bowl. Every other power conference had an auto bid. ACC kinda got invited to the Peach Bowl a lot, but no official bowl tie.
Clemson won a national championship around the same time as BYU and Georgia Tech. Neither of those are old money (blue blood) either.
Would also argue FSU is not a blue blood. They are definitely one of the more accomplished football programs of the last 30 or so years, but they really didn't do squat before Bobby Bowden and it took him a while to really get going there. When I think blue blood, I think all time historic programs (Michigan, ND, OSU, USC, Bama, etc) that have sustained a championship level of play through most of the poll era.
"When I think blue blood, I think all time historic programs (Michigan, ND, OSU, USC, Bama, etc)."
Hey, you are forgetting the ultimate blue - and I do mean BLUE - blood!
Still #7 in total # of wins and almost 70% wins.
Win Rank - 7
# Wins - 929
Win ratio - .698
National Titles - more than fans at the UVa Football Festival
And the quibbling commenced...
You completely redefined a term that already has a fairly standard definition (i.e. old money programs) and a consensus of 8 teams (OU, Texas, ND, USC, Nebraska, tOSU, UM, Alabama).
This is not "quibbling" on "margins". You've completely missed the mark on your terminology.
We're talking about a game with a ball. Got it.
Now define margins. Better yet, Blue Blood.
Ole Miss is not in the vicinity of a blue blood. You meant something else entirely, like "Poll regulars", or "Recent strong programs", or "The top half of Power 5".
Just own it and move on.
Surprisingly, pretty good IMO. Wisconsin, Oklahoma, and North Carolina are the only ones that I disagree with
Edit to add: If you're going to take 3 teams out, you need to put three more in:
We will finish the season with more wins than UNC.
Bold take, but far from unfathomable.
I haven't looked at their schedule but I'm sure it's easy. I'd be surprised if VT finishes with more wins but definitely not outside the realm of possibility
Edit: So I just went and took a quick look at uncs schedule. It's not easy.
Unc @ SCAR
App St @ unc
Minn @ unc
Unc @ pitt
Cuse @ unc
Miami @ unc
Uva @ unc
Unc @ gt
Campbell @ unc
Duke @ unc
Unc @ clemson
Unc @ nc state
I think unc could legitimately finish 4-8
Anae
~Mahatma Gandhi
An eye for a knee? Half the world is blind, the other walks with a limp
I think Gandhi's real message was that equal retaliation doesn't end conflict. So the proper response to someone taking your eye is to take their head. Then they can't take your other eye and nobody else will fuck with you.
Yeah I don't know how NC state gets left off as they basically didn't have a qb last year and still were like 9-3. They should be decent.
This can't be right! The U is back! They should be at least #15! haha
I miss the days when I could casually scan this list until I saw the VT logo
You have to wait until next year.
And then any time we were lower than about 15, we would all say to ourselves "oh, good. We play better when we're the underdogs."
VT not in the top 25 (or even others receiving votes?
This hurts a bit though it could be them voting for themselves or each other....
AP poll is sports journalists, not coaches. Is there such thing as a Liberty beat writer?
Yes, he is now the VT beat writer for Roanoke paper.
I think he is just beating it in the corner while he watches others vote?
Pretty sure that kind of behavior will get you a hefty fine at Liberty, unless you're in high level administration
All I really want for this college football season (that isn't VT related) is for one of the PAC schools getting shafted to win the conference.
Oregon State is really the only option of the 4, but they're looking pretty good.
I actually like when FSU and Miami are good and it seems like a good FSU team might help speed up the inevitable heat-death of the ACC, but I sorta want to see FSU implode after all their saber rattling these past few months.