USA TODAY Sports’ preseason ranking of the entire Football Bowl Subdivision from No. 1 (Alabama) through No. 128 (not Alabama).

CUSA Teams
#33 La Tech
#41 Western Kentucky
#45 Southern Miss
#50 Marshall
#69 Rice
#73 Middle Tennessee
#88 Florida Atlantic
#91 Old Dominion
#97 Florida International
#107 UTSA
#108 UTEP
#125 North Texas
#128 Charlotte

Link... http://www.clarionledger.com/story/sport.../89537594/

Its wrong, but I will take it.

....just lol at top 128.....

Just another example of a sportswriter who has done no homework. Absolutely no #$%@& way Rice or La Tech should be ranked ahead of MT. No way Western or Marshall should be "significantly" higher than MT, as the USA Today list suggests. Let's re-examine this baby in about Mid-November. Betcha it will be substantially different and Myerberg still won't have a clue.

(08-31-2016 02:47 PM)MoodyBlueRaider Wrote:  Just another example of a sportswriter who has done no homework. Absolutely no #$%@& way Rice or La Tech should be ranked ahead of MT. No way Western or Marshall should be "significantly" higher than MT, as the USA Today list suggests. Let's re-examine this baby in about Mid-November. Betcha it will be substantially different and Myerberg still won't have a clue.

45-16 is a pretty decent precedent for being ranked ahead of MTSU....

(08-31-2016 02:47 PM)MoodyBlueRaider Wrote:  Just another example of a sportswriter who has done no homework. Absolutely no #$%@& way Rice or La Tech should be ranked ahead of MT. No way Western or Marshall should be "significantly" higher than MT, as the USA Today list suggests. Let's re-examine this baby in about Mid-November. Betcha it will be substantially different and Myerberg still won't have a clue.

Don't sleep on the Dawgs yet. When was the last time the MUTS beat us?

Marshall lost twice to MTSU in squeakers @MTSU. But we throttled you in our one game here. Don't know what will happen but I hope the trend continues at least through this year.

(08-31-2016 10:07 AM)pilot172000 Wrote:  Its wrong, but I will take it.

Yeah, I hope he's right, but until we see some solid qb play, I think he's got us over rated.

(08-31-2016 03:25 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(08-31-2016 10:07 AM)pilot172000 Wrote:  Its wrong, but I will take it.

Yeah, I hope he's right, but until we see some solid qb play, I think he's got us over rated.

Oh, I am not arguing that. Just defending the bulldog honor with this Empty Sue fan. See my first post on the thread.

What makes me sad is that Paul USED to be the best at analyzing all the FBS teams. He had his own website and he really drilled down into each team. Now that hes at USA Today he probably just doesn't have time to do it.

(08-31-2016 03:41 PM)OwlFamily Wrote:  What makes me sad is that Paul USED to be the best at analyzing all the FBS teams. He had his own website and he really drilled down into each team. Now that hes at USA Today he probably just doesn't have time to do it.

You are exactly right. He was the end all be all when it came to preseason rankings. Now its no better than the Orlando Sentinel's stuff.

What's odd is that doesn't match, at all, the conference preview he released.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nca.../87902490/

How does the same guy, for the same publication, put out two different sets of numbers a few weeks apart?

(08-31-2016 04:09 PM)banker Wrote:  What's odd is that doesn't match, at all, the conference preview he released.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nca.../87902490/

How does the same guy, for the same publication, put out two different sets of numbers a few weeks apart?

Because we could still win CUSA but be lower ranked than other teams in the conference. If we lost to Pitt and Louisville and a squeaker against Akron and also lose to USM and say MTSU and WKU only losses are to us and one of them loses to each other, then they could be ranked higher but not win the East. Overall ranking and conference finish do not have to coincide. That is also true of that basketball top 140 thread.

CAN WE JUST START PLAYING THE FRICKIN GAMES ALREADY???

(08-31-2016 03:01 PM)pilot172000 Wrote:  

(08-31-2016 02:47 PM)MoodyBlueRaider Wrote:  Just another example of a sportswriter who has done no homework. Absolutely no #$%@& way Rice or La Tech should be ranked ahead of MT. No way Western or Marshall should be "significantly" higher than MT, as the USA Today list suggests. Let's re-examine this baby in about Mid-November. Betcha it will be substantially different and Myerberg still won't have a clue.

Don't sleep on the Dawgs yet. When was the last time the MUTS beat us?

My reason for bashing Myerberg comes as the result of his having totally ignored the fact that you no longer have Dixon or Driskell, so last year's score is irrelevant. We have only played La Tech 5 times. You are up 4 to 1. Last Victory for MT was October 16, 2000 when we beat you 49-21. See you on September 24 in the Boro, when we will win again.

(08-31-2016 04:20 PM)pilot172000 Wrote:  CAN WE JUST START PLAYING THE FRICKIN GAMES ALREADY???

26 more hours...

(08-31-2016 04:50 PM)MoodyBlueRaider Wrote:  

(08-31-2016 03:01 PM)pilot172000 Wrote:  

(08-31-2016 02:47 PM)MoodyBlueRaider Wrote:  Just another example of a sportswriter who has done no homework. Absolutely no #$%@& way Rice or La Tech should be ranked ahead of MT. No way Western or Marshall should be "significantly" higher than MT, as the USA Today list suggests. Let's re-examine this baby in about Mid-November. Betcha it will be substantially different and Myerberg still won't have a clue.

Don't sleep on the Dawgs yet. When was the last time the MUTS beat us?

My reason for bashing Myerberg comes as the result of his having totally ignored the fact that you no longer have Dixon or Driskell, so last year's score is irrelevant. We have only played La Tech 5 times. You are up 4 to 1. Last Victory for MT was October 16, 2000 when we beat you 49-21. See you on September 24 in the Boro, when we will win again.

MTSU better come up with some stud transfers like WKU did last year with the UAB guys. That MTSU defense was pretty porous last year so dont cash the check just yet on the CUSA championship

Do ya'll realize how much higher Myerberg rated CUSA than any other publication. If anything Myerberg does good job on the G5, much better than the P5 media

If we are the 4th best team in CUSA this year, i got some ocean front property in WV to sell you cheap.

(08-31-2016 04:17 PM)MUther Wrote:  

(08-31-2016 04:09 PM)banker Wrote:  What's odd is that doesn't match, at all, the conference preview he released.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nca.../87902490/

How does the same guy, for the same publication, put out two different sets of numbers a few weeks apart?

Because we could still win CUSA but be lower ranked than other teams in the conference. If we lost to Pitt and Louisville and a squeaker against Akron and also lose to USM and say MTSU and WKU only losses are to us and one of them loses to each other, then they could be ranked higher but not win the East. Overall ranking and conference finish do not have to coincide. That is also true of that basketball top 140 thread.

Did you even look at the link I posted? Next to each team in the CUSA preview he has a number. The number represents where he ranks the teams overall among the 128. Then he puts out his full 128 list and those rankings don't match the numbers he assigned in the individual conference previews. USM was the same in both, but everyone else moved around.

I understand what you are saying and agree with you. But that's not the point. As a matter of fact, if you look through all his conference previews, you will see many cases where teams ranked higher in the 128 finish in conference lower than teams with a lower rank in the 128.