Keep in mind we haven't played anybody yet. Don't want to put too much on the 'associative property of college football,' but:
Hawaii zeroed again by Wisconsin
Umass rocked by ND
CSU almost lost to UTSA today
Umass is probably our best win so far. I guess we faced a pair of good receivers in Sharpe and Higgins...but we haven't seen teams with any speed.
Huge touchdown for them just now!
But I still think we'll be looking at their coaching staff this year to see if they have any assistants to poach. Results have sucked, but the recruiting has been really good.
hot mess in tempe
As much as London sucks as a head coach, he was effective as a DL coach. Virginia had solid DLines under him.
Virginia's best recruiter is Chip West. He's in charge of CB's. However, the deal with this staff is the recruiting success has largely come from the "757" area (Hampton, Newport News and Virginia Beach). Knowing that area the way I know it, it would be difficult for CU to get kids out of there. The ACC, SEC and B1G are always in on those kids.
The guys on the staff with connections to CO and the West are Dave Borbely (who you'll recall coaching OL from the Barnett days) and of course, there's Steve Fairchild (nothing needs to be said). Larry Lewis coaches ST and TE. He was with Mike Price for a while at Wazzu. Came to UVA from Nevada under Chris Ault. Before that he was at CSU as Fairchild's associate HC. Also was HC at Idaho State for a while. DL coach Joppy Oliver was at Air Force for a while under DeBerry.
DC John Tenuta
Mike Archer coaches LB's. Failed LSU HC from a while back.
Chris Beatty coaches RB's. Was previously coaching WR's at Wisconsin.
Their 2016 class has Dillon Reinkensmeyer from Highlands Ranch. That was Borbely. 9 VA guys, 4 FL, 3 GA, 3 NJ, 2 PA, 1 NC, 1 MD, 1 IN, 1 CO. Pretty standard, although a bit lighter on VA than normal. To show their recruiting ability, they received a commit from a solid 3 star LB out of Florida who had 11 P5 offers a mere 24 hours after losing at home to Boise State by 42.
Larry Lewis would be interesting.
Meh. Texas only has themselves to blame, refuse to feel any sort of pity for that program.
Mizzery is still in the AP top 25.
And Utah is only ranked 18th.
Do the idots who vote these polls even watch football?
Mizzery is still in the AP top 25.
And Utah is only ranked 18th.
Do the idots who vote these polls even watch football?
AP is absolutely horrible about hanging onto their preseason rankings. They move teams a bit based on wins/losses, but don't usually make radical shifts for big wins.
Not the new poll. Old poll with this week's results.
Okay ... the AP rankings for this week just came out:
Much better .... Utah at #10, and Mizzery is finally out!
And Meechigan cracks the Top 25 for the first time in recent memory.
Looks good, aside from USC ahead of Stanford. The top ten is pretty interchangeable, will make for a fun playoff push.
I know there is a ton of Texas hate on this board but it is really sad to see how far they have fallen. I hate that TCU and Baylor have outperformed them. Outside of the buffs I root for big time college football programs (Texas, Ohio state, Michigan, Florida, USC, Norte dame) because they provide the best environments for college football to watch and be at. Watching Texas play usc in the rose bowl will more than likely be the best game I have ever watched and there need to be more like it. I am a huge Charlie strong fan and I am really hoping the administration gives him time to turn it around because he had a ton to clean up. Just sad to see from an unbiased view of the program.
This is such a false statement. Big time college football programs are only big because they have won a lot. If they falter, then another will take their place in the inevitable vacuum. The ones that take their place will create new "best environments" for fans to enjoy great college football. Your type of reasoning is that the pantheon in college football is essentially set and there really isn't a whole lot that can be changed now because we have the "best" college programs. Why even compete to win in college football if you aren't an established big time program?
That's not really true. Schools like TCU will never have the fan base a Texas or Michigan has. They don't have as many resources or as cool of a city. Big time college football programs are "big" for a number of reasons, not just winning and losing. Some schools will never be able to replicate an environment like Michigan or Ohio state.
Factors include:
4. Have a huge TV market. Not as much as an issue before, but back in the early 80s weren't only like 5 games televised nationally?
Actually one, sometimes two if the network, usually ABC, decided along with the NCAA (who had a monopoly on broadcast rights nationally) to have a "doubleheader." That's what used to make New Years Day so special back then ... four bowl games (Cotton, Sugar, Rose, and Orange). That was a day of orgasmic viewing pleasure for those codgers among us that remember those times of deprivation.
Of course, that all changed in 1984 when OU and Georgia brought an anti-trust action against the NCAA, and prevailed at the SCOTUS.