Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
ESPN.com Rates the Football Conferences
Author Message
Maize Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 21,350
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 558
I Root For: Athletes First
Location:
Post: #1
ESPN.com Rates the Football Conferences
SEC tops conference listposted: Wednesday, May 17, 2006

Iknow there's no sure way to determine the pecking order of all the I-A conferences, especially as there are always so many changes from what we expect to what actually transpires during the season. Case in point: Last season, Tennessee and Texas A&M stunk and West Virginia and Central Florida shined. Regardless, I'm sticking to my proverbial guns for this week's list: Best conferences.
My ranking system: I've projected every team in the conference as heavyweight (a top-15 type team); cruiserweights (15-25); light heavyweights (25-40); middleweights (40-75); lightweights (75-100) or flyweights (beyond 100). Heavyweights count for six points, cruiserweights get five, light heavies get four and so on. Again, this is based on my expectations for 2006, not strictly off '05. For instance, Wisconsin beat Auburn in the Capital One Bowl, 24-10, but I'm much more enthusiastic about the Tigers' prospects this season than I am the Badgers'.

1. SEC (Team Rating Average: 4.17): Four heavyweights (LSU, Auburn, Georgia and Florida), and that doesn't account for Tennessee, which I have as a cruiserweight, along with Alabama -- although I have a hard time believing the Vols still don't have the stuff of a heavyweight. (Note to my legion of Anti-Fulmer readers: That was not an invitation for you to chime in to the mailbag with your best one-liner. Honest.) Anyhow, I also bumped Arkansas up to a light heavyweight thanks to all the young talent that started to emerge late last season. Sidney Rice's presence notwithstanding, I'm not totally sold on South Carolina this season and decided against putting it as a cruiserweight.

The good: The league is loaded with a handful of tailbacks with first-round talent, led by Auburn's Kenny Irons.

The bad: The SEC still gets dogged for soft out-of-conference scheduling, but the league does have games against Michigan, Cal, USC, WV and FSU. Also, anyone who's critical of the scheduling needs to look at what the Gators have ahead of them. They play Tennessee, Auburn and Florida State on the road, Georgia in Jacksonville, and Alabama, LSU and South Carolina in Gainesville. I don't care if they also had games against Brown and Marist worked in there, that's a brutal slate.

2. Big Ten (Team Rating Average: 4.09): The resurgence of Penn State gives the league four bona fide powerhouses (with OSU, Michigan and Iowa). I think Wisconsin might take a little step back this season, and Purdue should be a little better. Michigan State (I'm giving the Spartans light heavyweight status this season primarily because Drew Stanton is so tough) might be the only program more inconsistent than NC State.

The good: Forget the 3-yards-and-a-cloud-of-dust. This is a quarterbacks league now. The Big Ten returns five QBs among the nation's top 22 in passing efficiency: OSU's Troy Smith (fourth); MSU's Stanton (10th); Wisky's John Stocco (14th); Iowa's Drew Tate (21st) and Minnesota's Bryan Cupito (22nd). And don't forget Michigan's Chad Henne, a guy who started the '05 season touted as an eventual No. 1 pick. I'm expecting Henne to shine in '06. QBs who are that good in their first year as starters, especially as true freshmen, don't stink.

The bad: Expect even more points because the league lost a ton of stars on defense. Ron Zook and Terry Hoeppner are just beginning to wrestle with major rebuilding projects.

3. ACC (Team Rating Average: 4.00): Yes, the league cranked out way more first-rounders than any other league -- and that's emblematic of the ACC's profile right now: More potential than production. NC State had three first-rounders and won six games. FSU had four (although CB Antonio Cromartie didn't play in '05), and the Noles lost five games. The perception is that most people just don't fear the league's heavyweights (Miami, FSU and Virginia Tech) anymore, and there's some merit to that. All three are still very dangerous and, when they get motivated, could thump anyone, but all of them -- especially Miami and FSU -- have gotten pretty used to losing to average teams. Georgia Tech's blistering at the hands of the Mountain West's Utah, by four TDs in the bowl game, wasn't a great thing for the league, either.

The good: Led by Clemson's Gaines Adams, the ACC still has a lot of defenders who have NFL scouts salivating.

The bad: Maybe all the stud defenders have scared off all the big-play guys because once again, the league has very little star power on offense. The closest to established top quarterbacks are Miami's Kyle Wright and FSU's Drew Weatherford, both of whom are looking for breakout years, and the league's marquee guy is Georgia Tech's Calvin Johnson, who is coming off a disastrous bowl loss in which he was completely stifled by Utah's Eric Weddle, the MWC's best defender. Maybe that's why the league's heavyweights don't seem that, well, heavy anymore.

4. Big 12 (Team Rating Average: 3.83): The Big 12 is coming off a great bowl season. Texas knocked off USC. Young OU beat a one-loss Oregon team, and Nebraska beat Michigan. All good stuff. I think OU is poised for a big bounce-back, and Texas, even without Vince Young, is still loaded. If A&M hadn't taken two steps back last season, I think you would've been able to make a case for the Big 12 as the second-best league, but the Aggies' D was a complete mess. Maybe the 4-2-5 will be the answer. I have them as a light heavyweight -- the same as Iowa State, which I hear many people are high on. I don't feel that way because the Cyclones' road schedule is nasty. I wouldn't be shocked if they went 0-for-5, losing at Texas, OU, Iowa, K-State and Colorado. At best, I think they will come out of that at 2-3.

The good: Looking for big, athletic receivers? Try this conference. The Big 12 has five supersized wideouts who could be first-day picks: Iowa State's Todd Blythe; Texas Tech's Jarrett Hicks and Joel Filani; Texas' Limas Sweed; and OU's rising star Malcolm Kelly. Also, the Mike Leach offense is coming to Baylor. That should be interesting to watch, although I still have the Bears as a lightweight.

The bad: Almost everywhere you look, you have teams breaking in new starting QBs. Most notably: Texas; plus A&M, Tech, Mizzou and CU.

5. Pac-10 (Team Rating Average: 3.80): Turbulence or not, USC still has enough All-American talent to consistently be a top-five program. I'm high on ASU and bumped the Sun Devils up to heavyweight status. It came down to either them or Cal, and I like the ASU QB situation much better. I like 'Zona too, but there are too many lightweights in the mix right now with Washington, Washington State, Oregon State and Stanford all struggling.

The biggest thing hurting the perception of the Pac-10 nationally is that the top dog, USC, always seems to be flying solo. A couple of years ago, Cal was a very good one-loss team. People out west felt as though Cal got screwed when Texas got the BCS bid over the Bears, who promptly went out and gave up a ton of points to Texas Tech and lost. A similar situation happened last season to one-loss Oregon, which lost to Oklahoma in a low-scoring game. It almost invalidates those teams the next year -- and the conference to a certain extent --because most people need to see it to believe it. The thinking is "Oh, that's just another puffed-up Pac-10 team." I'm not sure it's fair, but it is what it is. The Ducks do get another big shot to give the conference a major boost if they can beat OU at Autzen Stadium on Sept. 16.

The good: The Pac-10 teams have no qualms about playing anyone, it seems. Also, the league has a ton of talented young defensive players who played a lot last year.

The bad: The two most polished QBs in the league play for the same team (ASU). Everywhere else, except perhaps Arizona and Washington State, has pretty big questions at QB. (And I know guys such as Oregon's Dennis Dixon, USC's J.D. Booty and a handful of others are considered elite prospects, but if you haven't established yourself as a starter and won consistently, you can be considered an issue.)

6. Big East (Team Rating Average: 3.38): Thanks to the rapid rise of West Virginia and Louisville, you can't call this league a laughingstock. Those two are legit heavyweights right now. The feisty Mountaineers got everyone's attention when they slammed UGA in the Sugar Bowl. Louisville is likely to be favored when the Cards host former Big East icon Miami in September. How ironic is that? Plus, Rutgers added some respectability, hanging with ASU in the Sun Devils' backyard in a shootout, and South Florida continues to get better.

The good: Laugh all you want, but only the Big Ten might have as good a top trio of quarterbacks as this supposed basketball conference, with WVU's Pat White, Louisville's Brian Brohm and Pitt's Tyler Palko all deserving praise.

The bad: Syracuse and Pitt, two programs that had been very good in recent years, are mediocre right now. And that's actually being kind. Truth be told, at this juncture, 'Cuse can't see mediocre with a telescope.

7. MWC (Team Rating Average: 3.22): I think this is the most underrated league in the country. TCU added a lot to the conference, and my hunch is that BYU is starting to come back. If Chuck Long can awaken SD State (lightweight) and all those transfers can boost UNLV (flyweight), then those two programs should be much better.

The good: The upstart Horned Frogs (11-1 in 2005) are not only talented but young and experienced and talented. They can make a big statement for the league early when they go to Baylor and get Texas Tech in Fort Worth in September.

The bad: Two of the league's top coaches, Colorado State's Sonny Lubick and Air Force's Fisher DeBerry are getting up in age.

8. WAC (Team Rating Average: 2.89): I have Fresno as a cruiserweight, with Boise, Nevada and Hawaii as light heavies. The league's top half has reshuffled nicely, but ? the bottom of the league is downright Sun Belt-esque, though.

The good:
With the recent additions of Dennis Erickson and Hal Mumme, even the bad WAC teams will be entertaining.

The bad: Boise's horrible start and Fresno's horrible finish last season torpedoed a lot of the credibility the league's top teams had built up.

9. MAC (Team Rating Average: 2.67): I gave Miami (Ohio), NIU and Toledo light heavyweight tags, but overall, it seemed like a lot of flyweights and lightweights.

The good: Northern Illinois' Garrett Wolfe is as good as it gets pound-for-pound and will have a shot to prove it when NIU opens at Ohio State. Last year, he dazzled in road games at Michigan and Northwestern by rushing for 393 yards while averaging 8 yards per rush.

The bad: The league's run of stud QBs appears to have hit a bit of a dry spell this year.

10. Conference USA (Team Rating Average: 2.50): Central Florida is a rising star, and gritty George O'Leary is a great fit there and can make this program the league's centerpiece. The departure of DeAngelo Williams drops Memphis from light heavyweight to lightweight.

The good: Old hands O'Leary and Mike Price infused the league with some big-time style points.

The bad: The league's best offensive talent, Marshall TB Ahmad Bradshaw, is coming off a rocky offseason.

11. Sun Belt (Team Rating Average: 1.38): With the smallest budgets and the toughest recruiting situations, the Sun Belt probably doesn't have one team that would be considered among the top 100 in I-A. To be fair, there is some talent in the league, it's just that there is such a dramatic drop-off in the depth at each program, compared with the other conferences, that it's virtually impossible for these guys to compete with the rest of major college football on even a semiconsistent basis.

The good: It's the most unpredictable league race in I-A college football, and North Texas RB Jamario Thomas, the 2004 rushing king, is back and healthy.

The bad: The league might be an underdog in every out-of-conference game its teams have against I-A competition. Best shot to avoid the 0-for-the-season: East Michigan at UL-Lafayette, SMU at North Texas or Army at Arkansas State.

http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog/ind...ateChanged
05-18-2006 08:06 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


cuseroc Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 15,293
Joined: Mar 2005
Reputation: 555
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: Rochester/Sarasota

Donators
Post: #2
 
That was a very fair of the BE and.... Cuse 03-weeping 03-weeping .

As we all predicted. The BE bashing will really start to go away this season.
05-18-2006 08:38 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TopCoog Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,940
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation: 19
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #3
 
Right now the Big East is a bad league with two good teams. As the article noted others have to step up.
05-18-2006 08:42 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
cuseroc Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 15,293
Joined: Mar 2005
Reputation: 555
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: Rochester/Sarasota

Donators
Post: #4
 
TopCoog Wrote:Right now the Big East is a bad league with two good teams. As the article noted others have to step up.

Coming from you Coog, that means that the BE is a good league. Everything that you say ends up with the exact opposite happening. Thanks. 01-wingedeagle
05-18-2006 09:11 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
cuseroc Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 15,293
Joined: Mar 2005
Reputation: 555
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: Rochester/Sarasota

Donators
Post: #5
 
TopCoog Wrote:Right now the Big East is a bad league with two good teams. As the article noted others have to step up.

Besides Louisville and WV, there are at least 2 other BE teams that could win cusa; USF(who destroyed the cusa east champion, Rutgers, and I ll throw Pitt in there too.
05-18-2006 09:14 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
3601 Offline
HoopDreams' Daddy
*

Posts: 26,909
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 371
I Root For: Omar Sneed
Location: Mempho
Post: #6
 
cuseroc Wrote:
TopCoog Wrote:Right now the Big East is a bad league with two good teams. As the article noted others have to step up.

Besides Louisville and WV, there are at least 2 other BE teams that could win cusa; USF(who destroyed the cusa east champion, Rutgers, and I ll throw Pitt in there too.

USF couldn't win C-USA when they were in it. Rutgers could not win C-USA. The Big East is a better conference than C-USA, but don't be absurd.
05-18-2006 09:23 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


TopCoog Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,940
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation: 19
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #7
 
Neither USF or Rutgers would have a shot at the team we'll have in Houston next season. CFN predicted we would win 10 games.
05-18-2006 09:54 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
cuseroc Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 15,293
Joined: Mar 2005
Reputation: 555
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: Rochester/Sarasota

Donators
Post: #8
 
3601 Wrote:
cuseroc Wrote:
TopCoog Wrote:Right now the Big East is a bad league with two good teams. As the article noted others have to step up.

Besides Louisville and WV, there are at least 2 other BE teams that could win cusa; USF(who destroyed the cusa east champion, Rutgers, and I ll throw Pitt in there too.

USF couldn't win C-USA when they were in it. Rutgers could not win C-USA. The Big East is a better conference than C-USA, but don't be absurd.

Things change from year to year. USF was not even bowl eligible in cusa the one year they were there. But they were bowl eligible in the BE last year, a tougher league, and beat the cusa east champs. Rutgers could absolutely win cusa. Not your fathers Rutgers, but the new and improved Rutgers that went toe to toe and almost beat a Pac10 "heavyweight" in a bowl. That Rutgers could win cusa, no doubt about it. Not saying they would, but could definitly win it, and they would probably be an underdog to maybe only 2 teams. At tthe very least be in the top 3 teams.

Whats absurd is to say that neither of these teams coul win cusa, when evidence clearly shows that they could.
05-18-2006 10:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
cuseroc Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 15,293
Joined: Mar 2005
Reputation: 555
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: Rochester/Sarasota

Donators
Post: #9
 
TopCoog Wrote:Neither USF or Rutgers would have a shot at the team we'll have in Houston next season. CFN predicted we would win 10 games.

If you play the following teams, they will beat you: UCF, Memphis, Utep and USM. You will also lose to Miami.

lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao
05-18-2006 10:22 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
3601 Offline
HoopDreams' Daddy
*

Posts: 26,909
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 371
I Root For: Omar Sneed
Location: Mempho
Post: #10
 
cuseroc Wrote:
3601 Wrote:
cuseroc Wrote:
TopCoog Wrote:Right now the Big East is a bad league with two good teams. As the article noted others have to step up.

Besides Louisville and WV, there are at least 2 other BE teams that could win cusa; USF(who destroyed the cusa east champion, Rutgers, and I ll throw Pitt in there too.

USF couldn't win C-USA when they were in it. Rutgers could not win C-USA. The Big East is a better conference than C-USA, but don't be absurd.

Things change from year to year. USF was not even bowl eligible in cusa the one year they were there. But they were bowl eligible in the BE last year, a tougher league, and beat the cusa east champs. Rutgers could absolutely win cusa. Not your fathers Rutgers, but the new and improved Rutgers that went toe to toe and almost beat a Pac10 "heavyweight" in a bowl. That Rutgers could win cusa, no doubt about it. Not saying they would, but could definitly win it, and they would probably be an underdog to maybe only 2 teams. At tthe very least be in the top 3 teams.

Whats absurd is to say that neither of these teams coul win cusa, when evidence clearly shows that they could.

What evidence?
05-18-2006 10:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
cuseroc Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 15,293
Joined: Mar 2005
Reputation: 555
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: Rochester/Sarasota

Donators
Post: #11
 
3601 Wrote:
cuseroc Wrote:
3601 Wrote:
cuseroc Wrote:
TopCoog Wrote:Right now the Big East is a bad league with two good teams. As the article noted others have to step up.

Besides Louisville and WV, there are at least 2 other BE teams that could win cusa; USF(who destroyed the cusa east champion, Rutgers, and I ll throw Pitt in there too.

USF couldn't win C-USA when they were in it. Rutgers could not win C-USA. The Big East is a better conference than C-USA, but don't be absurd.

Things change from year to year. USF was not even bowl eligible in cusa the one year they were there. But they were bowl eligible in the BE last year, a tougher league, and beat the cusa east champs. Rutgers could absolutely win cusa. Not your fathers Rutgers, but the new and improved Rutgers that went toe to toe and almost beat a Pac10 "heavyweight" in a bowl. That Rutgers could win cusa, no doubt about it. Not saying they would, but could definitly win it, and they would probably be an underdog to maybe only 2 teams. At tthe very least be in the top 3 teams.

Whats absurd is to say that neither of these teams coul win cusa, when evidence clearly shows that they could.

What evidence?

The evidence that they played a tougher schedule in the BE and still won 7 games. Only 3 teams in cusa won 8 games. Those 3 teams schedules were not as difficult as Rutgers. Rutgers has out recruited everyone in cusa the last 5 years, which shows that they have as much, if not more talent than anyone in cusa. Their offense was very good and with the terrible defenses in cusa, there is noone there who would stop Brian leonard and the Rutgers offense. Rutgers had a higher rating than everyone in cusa. They had a chance to win every game they played with the Louisville game being the exception, even when they played USF, the team who throttled the cusa east champ. Thats evidence enough that they could win cusa. You cant deny that, and if you do, you are truly delusional, because you cant get over the fact that Rutgers is better than the old Rutgers.

What evidence can you provide that shows its absurd for me to say this? I would really like to know.
05-18-2006 11:08 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


KnightLight Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 27,664
Joined: Sep 2003
Reputation: 700
I Root For: UCF
Location:
Post: #12
 
3601 Wrote:
cuseroc Wrote:
TopCoog Wrote:Right now the Big East is a bad league with two good teams. As the article noted others have to step up.

Besides Louisville and WV, there are at least 2 other BE teams that could win cusa; USF(who destroyed the cusa east champion, Rutgers, and I ll throw Pitt in there too.

USF couldn't win C-USA when they were in it. Rutgers could not win C-USA. The Big East is a better conference than C-USA, but don't be absurd.

FYI...USF was in CUSA Football for 2 years...'03 & '04.

2003 CUSA Record 5-3 (7-4 overall)

2004 CUSA Record 3-5 (4-7 overall)

USF finished with a 8-8 record in CUSA during their 2 years of Football Membership. (FYI...CUSA blew it when it delayed USF's Football Membership for 2 years...and got stuck at 11 Football Members...and couldn't enjoy the benefit of Division races or a CUSA Champ Game. Old Commish blew it in the beginning).

KL
05-18-2006 11:59 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bitcruncher Offline
pepperoni roll psycho...
*

Posts: 61,859
Joined: Jan 2006
Reputation: 526
I Root For: West Virginia
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post: #13
 
3601 Wrote:The Big East is a better conference than C-USA, but don't be absurd.
According to that analysis, every conference except the Sun Belt is better than CUSA. So I wouldn't be too sure about anything as it relates to winning that conference right now. The USF team that left CUSA is not the USF team of today. And the Rutgers team of everyone's perception isn't the Rutgers team of today. Pitt remains an unknown, and will remain so until the season is underway. But needless to say, the BEast is more than just WVU and Louisville.
05-18-2006 12:02 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CatsClaw Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 22,170
Joined: Dec 2005
Reputation: 185
I Root For: Cincinnati
Location: The land of Winning
Post: #14
 
TopCoog Wrote:Right now the Big East is a bad league with two good teams. As the article noted others have to step up.

What a stupid comment, but that's par for the course when you're involved.
05-18-2006 12:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CatsClaw Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 22,170
Joined: Dec 2005
Reputation: 185
I Root For: Cincinnati
Location: The land of Winning
Post: #15
 
Cincinnati had a down year, but we routinely finished in the upper half of C-USA, including winning a conference title.
05-18-2006 12:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TopCoog Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,940
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation: 19
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #16
 
CatsClaw Wrote:
TopCoog Wrote:Right now the Big East is a bad league with two good teams. As the article noted others have to step up.

What a stupid comment, but that's par for the course when you're involved.

The only stpid comment is when a bearcrap fan starts taking about any acomplishments on the football field. When the smoke clear claw the Coogs will have a higher rpi than Cincy (as we did last year) and I'll be back to remind you of it.
05-18-2006 12:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


bitcruncher Offline
pepperoni roll psycho...
*

Posts: 61,859
Joined: Jan 2006
Reputation: 526
I Root For: West Virginia
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post: #17
 
TopCoog Wrote:
CatsClaw Wrote:
TopCoog Wrote:Right now the Big East is a bad league with two good teams. As the article noted others have to step up.

What a stupid comment, but that's par for the course when you're involved.

The only stpid comment is when a bearcrap fan starts taking about any acomplishments on the football field. When the smoke clear claw the Coogs will have a higher rpi than Cincy (as we did last year) and I'll be back to remind you of it.
The Coogs will finish with a higher RPI? We shall see, but I doubt it. Cincy plays WVU and Louisville, and both will finish in the top 10. The Mountaineers will finish higher, of course, but the Cards are no slouch.
05-18-2006 12:37 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
mlb Offline
O' Great One
*

Posts: 20,337
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 542
I Root For: Cincinnati
Location:

Donators
Post: #18
 
TopCoog Wrote:The only stpid comment is when a bearcrap fan starts taking about any acomplishments on the football field. When the smoke clear claw the Coogs will have a higher rpi than Cincy (as we did last year) and I'll be back to remind you of it.

And we'll remind you that we will get a larger check for TV and BCS bowl payouts...
05-18-2006 12:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TopCoog Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,940
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation: 19
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #19
 
Thats because you are sucking at the tit and not contributing to the league coffers by playing in bowls. vandy will get a big check also.
It is true that Louisville and West Va will make you some money.
05-18-2006 12:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Krocker Krapp Offline
Number 1 Starter
*

Posts: 4,701
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 55
I Root For: RU, SJU, UConn
Location: Worldwide
Post: #20
Heads In The Sand
Keep those heads buried in the sand. That will make getting left in the dust easier to take. Some people just don't get it. The Big East is not a bad league with two good schools. We have a great league with two darn strong teams, a bunch of decent teams, and a couple of teams that know what they have to do to improve. Not much different than any other BCS league.

Everyone knows going into the season that West Virginia and Louisville are expected to carry the banner. Time will tell if they are up to the task. Pitt should be the preseason favorite to finish third. Rutgers, Connecticut, and South Florida are probably interchangeable picks at this point. Cincinnati and Syracuse have work to do but will definitely be better than last season.

Jealous haters can keep coming here preening all you want. The reality is that your doom and gloom naysaying has been beaten back in a Big East beatdown. Last year was just the beginning. We are meeting the BCS criteria. We have five, or possibly six, bowl deals. We have the best basketball league in the nation. We have a blockbuster TV contract coming up. See ya.
05-18-2006 12:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.