USA Today - College Power Rankings Top 25

[BS Miscreant]

College power rankings - Week 9 (updated Mondays)

Current Rank Last Week Team W-L-T Schedule Rating Power Rating

1 1 Ohio State 8-0 0.000 -14.70

2 2 Louisiana State 7-1 0.000 -14.10

3 3 Boston College 7-0 0.000 -12.00

4 5 Oklahoma 7-1 0.000 -11.40

5 7 Oregon 6-1 0.000 -10.70

6 8 Florida 5-2 0.000 -8.69

7 9 Southern California 6-1 0.000 -8.21

8 4 South Florida 6-1 0.000 -7.97

9 10 Missouri 6-1 0.000 -7.67

10 12 Arizona State 7-0 0.000 -7.22

11 14 Kansas 7-0 0.000 -6.89

12 16 Virginia Tech 6-1 0.000 -6.68

13 6 California 5-2 0.000 -6.38

14 15 West Virginia 6-1 0.000 -6.29

15 13 Kentucky 6-2 0.000 -5.37

16 18 Auburn 5-3 0.000 -5.18

17 11 South Carolina 6-2 0.000 -4.25

18 19 Texas 6-2 0.000 -4.02

19 23 Alabama 6-2 0.000 -3.95

20 21 Georgia 5-2 0.000 -3.56

21 25 Michigan 6-2 0.000 -3.34

22 31 Wake Forest 5-2 0.000 -3.21

23 24 Rutgers 5-2 0.000 -2.65

24 26 Purdue 6-2 0.000 -2.63

25 28 Hawaii 7-0 0.000 -2.60

[GWPFFL BrianW]

I got a problem with USC being ranked over any team that is still undefeated.

[theprofessor]

I got a problem with USC being ranked over any team that is still undefeated.

 

Why? They would beat each team that is undefeated.

[GWPFFL BrianW]

Why? They would beat each team that is undefeated.

 

Maybe so, but they lost to Stanford, who would lose to 75% of division 1 teams. Look, this system, we call the BCS, is the most EXclusive system every created. Here you have all of these teams, and only TWO teams, can play for a National Title. Sorry, but if you want to say the regular season is some sort of playoff, then make it that way, and if you lose, then you drop, and if you lose to FREAKING STANFORD AT HOME AS FORTY point favorites, then you should drop further. LSU gets a pass, because they lost on the road to a ranked team. What has USC done to warrant being ranked higher AT THIS POINT in the season anyway? Beat Nebraska on the road. As I said before, that win is becoming less impressive every time Nebraska runs a play. Now they play a very hard schedule down the stretch here, and if they win ALL of those games, then yes, maybe then they should warrant being ranked higher, but all they've done so far is lose to Stanford. THATS IT! The only reason they are ranked as high as they are, is because they are USC. Nothing more, nothing less. All of these big name schools, live and die on PERCEPTION. They say, hey, look at all of these army all americans we have, we look so good on paper. Well, in this current system, that is just wrong to do. You got a lot of small problems (like preseason polls) that combine to make one big problem. You're relying on coaches who don't give a flying fucc about any team other than there own team and there next opponent, voting on who plays for the National Title, and not only do they not CARE, they don't have a CLUE. You think Bob Stoops stays up Saturday night, watching USC? No, he's studying film on his next opponent. Same goes for any other coach. USC looks good on paper, but where are the results THIS YEAR. 2002-2006 are OVER with. They have nothing to do with 2007, and shouldn't factor in to anything to do with 2007. USC may very well be better than those teams, but they haven't proven it thus far. And that's the bottom line.

[theprofessor]

Maybe so, but they lost to Stanford, who would lose to 75% of division 1 teams. Look, this system, we call the BCS, is the most EXclusive system every created. Here you have all of these teams, and only TWO teams, can play for a National Title. Sorry, but if you want to say the regular season is some sort of playoff, then make it that way, and if you lose, then you drop, and if you lose to FREAKING STANFORD AT HOME AS FORTY point favorites, then you should drop further. LSU gets a pass, because they lost on the road to a ranked team. What has USC done to warrant being ranked higher AT THIS POINT in the season anyway? Beat Nebraska on the road. As I said before, that win is becoming less impressive every time Nebraska runs a play. Now they play a very hard schedule down the stretch here, and if they win ALL of those games, then yes, maybe then they should warrant being ranked higher, but all they've done so far is lose to Stanford. THATS IT! The only reason they are ranked as high as they are, is because they are USC. Nothing more, nothing less. All of these big name schools, live and die on PERCEPTION. They say, hey, look at all of these army all americans we have, we look so good on paper. Well, in this current system, that is just wrong to do. You got a lot of small problems (like preseason polls) that combine to make one big problem. You're relying on coaches who don't give a flying fucc about any team other than there own team and there next opponent, voting on who plays for the National Title, and not only do they not CARE, they don't have a CLUE. You think Bob Stoops stays up Saturday night, watching USC? No, he's studying film on his next opponent. Same goes for any other coach. USC looks good on paper, but where are the results THIS YEAR. 2002-2006 are OVER with. They have nothing to do with 2007, and shouldn't factor in to anything to do with 2007. USC may very well be better than those teams, but they haven't proven it thus far. And that's the bottom line.

 

I'm sorry but losing one game, that on paper, you should never lose doesn't mean you're a bad team or that you should fall off of the first page of the rankings. It's happened to almost every Top 10 team this year and it will happen again to the few remaining undefeated teams before the end of the regular season. I simply base my opinions on what I see when I watch the games and I have seen SC play, I know their talent and I know how "special" their coaching staff is, especially when they prepare for a big game. I believe that they are a Top 5 team regardless if they lost to Stanford. Do I think less of Oklahoma's crew because they let Colorado destroy them for 1 quarter or they struggle against lowly Iowa State? No. I think that the reason were seeing a lot of upsets this year is that there are NO completely dominant teams like in the years past. There is some parity and this game of college football sometimes comes down to heart, emotion and the momentum that it creates. That's why this is the greatest sport we have. I personally love that we have "real" potential for big upsets every weekend. Is there 7-10 teams better than USC this year? Come on ...... even a "hater" like you knows better than that.

[GWPFFL BrianW]

Hater? Other than coffee, there haven't been many bigger USC defenders on this board other than me, so don't go there. Again, it doesn't have anything to do with perception. It has to do with with fairness. If you're gonna have a system that only allows 2 teams at the end of the regular season, that isn't inclusive at all. You're basically saying, because of USC's reputation, and history, (instead of what really matters, which is on the field in 2007) that they should get as many shots as they want. That'd be like... Duke having to be defeated twice if they reach the NCAA Tournament, but Memphis only needs to get beat once to be eliminated in basketball. Or New England or Indianapolis will get 2 shots in the playoffs, but the other teams get only 1 shot, because Indy and NE are better on paper. When only 2 teams at the end get a shot at something, out of 119 or however many... you can't on one hand make the argument that the regular season is the playoff, and on the other hand basically say, the regular season and bad losses matter, but only if it's the right team losing. That's the problem with the BCS... it is an uneven playing field from the word go. You can sit here and speculate, and predict who would win games, but until those games take place, who knows? I think you take a bad loss to a team like Stanford, you get punished until you prove something, other than being good on paper.

[wildcat2334]

I don't really have a problem with these rankings- they are pretty spot on. BC will correct itself, probably thur vs. VTech. FLA is probably a bit high with 2 losses, and I think Mizzou is a bit underrated.

 

Still don't think there is any way OSU is the best team in the country, but soft NC+ soft Big 10 + BCS conference= easy road, so not much can be done under this system.

[theprofessor]

Hater? Other than coffee, there haven't been many bigger USC defenders on this board other than me, so don't go there. Again, it doesn't have anything to do with perception. It has to do with with fairness. If you're gonna have a system that only allows 2 teams at the end of the regular season, that isn't inclusive at all. You're basically saying, because of USC's reputation, and history, (instead of what really matters, which is on the field in 2007) that they should get as many shots as they want. That'd be like... Duke having to be defeated twice if they reach the NCAA Tournament, but Memphis only needs to get beat once to be eliminated in basketball. Or New England or Indianapolis will get 2 shots in the playoffs, but the other teams get only 1 shot, because Indy and NE are better on paper. When only 2 teams at the end get a shot at something, out of 119 or however many... you can't on one hand make the argument that the regular season is the playoff, and on the other hand basically say, the regular season and bad losses matter, but only if it's the right team losing. That's the problem with the BCS... it is an uneven playing field from the word go. You can sit here and speculate, and predict who would win games, but until those games take place, who knows? I think you take a bad loss to a team like Stanford, you get punished until you prove something, other than being good on paper.

 

Brian-

 

I agree with you for the most part but I think you, and some others, are missing my point. I am only speaking MY opinion on who I THINK are the best teams in the country. Am I sold that USC is the best college football team in the country? No, at this point I don't think they are. Do I believe they would probably beat ANY team in the country in a Title game? Yes, I do. Does my opinion have something to do with reputation? No. Does my opinion have something to do with history. Of course. I've seen USC over the last 4 years destroy teams in big games year after year. Some of that domination can be attributed to talent but the majority of their success in big games I attribute to Pete Carrol and his staff. If it wasn't for a mental mistake by Bush down the stretch and an incredible performance by Vince Young the Trojans record in big games would be unmatched. I understand that the BCS system is flawed. We need a playoff system where there are 4 or 8 teams involved but I don't thing we'll see it in the near future.

 

The best team, IMO, in the country is the Oregon Ducks. I feel that their chance at a NC rests on this weekends game with SC. If they can win that game I see them winning out and IMO you can't keep them out of the NC game. If SC beats Oregon, in Oregon, and wins out they have a legitimate shot at being in the NC game too. If I was to rank the teams with the best shot at being in the NC game it would look like this ..........

 

Oregon

Oklahoma ( I think they win out)

LSU

USC (If they win @ Oregon)

Ohio St (I think they lose 1, possibly 2)

[Rockerbraves]

I can attest Brian is not a USC hater. As he has always come to the defense of USC whenever anyone post anything negative about the Trojans mythical AP championship. Glad to see him preaching fairness now. For that I applaud him , but not totally convinced he really means it. I still think Brian believes USC got slighted when Oklahoma earned the right to play LSU for the BCS NC back then.

[wildcat2334]

Brian-

 

 

The best team, IMO, in the country is the Oregon Ducks. I feel that their chance at a NC rests on this weekends game with SC. If they can win that game I see them winning out and IMO you can't keep them out of the NC game. If SC beats Oregon, in Oregon, and wins out they have a legitimate shot at being in the NC game too. If I was to rank the teams with the best shot at being in the NC game it would look like this ..........

 

Oregon

Oklahoma ( I think they win out)

LSU

USC (If they win @ Oregon)

Ohio St (I think they lose 1, possibly 2)

 

 

Oregon may well be the best team in America- but their remaining schedule is tough. USC/ASU/UCLA - not sure they can get thru unscathed.

[Caveman_Nick]

I don't really have a problem with these rankings- they are pretty spot on. BC will correct itself,

 

 

Just curious.....

 

If BC Thrashes VT, and wins out with a string of impressive wins, does this song change?

 

I dunno if they will or won't, I just wonder what a team needs to do to 'deserve' being highly ranked....?

[Coffeeman]

I have to agree with GWPFFL - USC shouldn't be ranked over any undefeated team at this point. Now, do I think this could be a decent prediction for the standings on 12/1? Maybe, but I'm guessing - ok, hoping - USC wins out over OR and AZSt.

 

Then we'll be back in the Rose Bowl, baby, where we belong and an unprecedented 6th straight BCS bowl. Stanford loss boots us from the NC picture, unfortunately, as it counts like 1.5 losses, as has been said here before. Fairly or not....

[wildcat2334]

Just curious.....

 

If BC Thrashes VT, and wins out with a string of impressive wins, does this song change?

 

I dunno if they will or won't, I just wonder what a team needs to do to 'deserve' being highly ranked....?

 

 

Yeah- I think a W @ Va Tech would be a huge win.

 

They certainly have played a tougher schedule than OSU, and have more quality wins.

[Rockerbraves]

Just curious.....

 

If BC Thrashes VT, and wins out with a string of impressive wins, does this song change?

 

I dunno if they will or won't, I just wonder what a team needs to do to 'deserve' being highly ranked....?

 

Couldn't hurt since BC has yet to beat a currently ranked team. Win out and BC has a very good chance of playing for the NC.

[Rockerbraves]

Let's be fair guys. IF LSU wins out then wins the SEC Championship game against yet another ranked team and only one BCS team remains undefeated, LSU will play for the BCS NC. IMO no other team's resume could match LSU's, especially if Virginia Tech continues to win since their only loss this season came against the Tigers.

Edited October 24, 2007 by Rockerbraves

[BS Miscreant]

What has USC done to warrant being ranked higher AT THIS POINT in the season anyway? Beat Nebraska on the road. As I said before, that win is becoming less impressive every time Nebraska runs a play. ...all they've done so far is lose to Stanford. THATS IT!

Actually that's not all they've done. They beat the pants off of 1-7 Idaho. They hung on, in a real gut check game, to beat 2-5 Washington and they showed what they were made of when they came from behind to beat 2-6 Arizona. Oh, and let's not forget how they dominated mighty Notre Dame. Give'em some credit man.

[GWPFFL BrianW]

I guess if this is the system that we have, then make the regular season the playoff that it seems to be. I want to be very clear, I don't believe that an undefeated team should be automatically ahead of a 1 loss team. While I don't think LSU is a GREAT team, they are just as good, if not better than any school in the country despite the 1 loss, AND they've proven more on the field THUS FAR. I think if USC or Oregon runs the table at this point, THEN I'll be able to put them in that category (even though I DO THINK Oregon is already there just because the Michigan win is getting more impressive by the week) particularly USC, who, I think is a very good football team (and hey if they win it all, i win a lot of money), but they have to prove it. They will have their chance. I just wish that the pollsters would make them earn it because any way you slice it, the loss to Stanford was absolutely inexcusable by anyones standards, and I don't feel they were punished enough, especially when you see a team like South Florida getting dropped further, for losing on the road to a tougher opponent, AND already proving more on the field.

[theprofessor]

Actually that's not all they've done. They beat the pants off of 1-7 Idaho. They hung on, in a real gut check game, to beat 2-5 Washington and they showed what they were made of when they came from behind to beat 2-6 Arizona. Oh, and let's not forget how they dominated mighty Notre Dame. Give'em some credit man.

 

[theprofessor]

I guess if this is the system that we have, then make the regular season the playoff that it seems to be. I want to be very clear, I don't believe that an undefeated team should be automatically ahead of a 1 loss team. While I don't think LSU is a GREAT team, they are just as good, if not better than any school in the country despite the 1 loss, AND they've proven more on the field THUS FAR. I think if USC or Oregon runs the table at this point, THEN I'll be able to put them in that category (even though I DO THINK Oregon is already there just because the Michigan win is getting more impressive by the week) particularly USC, who, I think is a very good football team (and hey if they win it all, i win a lot of money), but they have to prove it. They will have their chance. I just wish that the pollsters would make them earn it because any way you slice it, the loss to Stanford was absolutely inexcusable by anyones standards, and I don't feel they were punished enough, especially when you see a team like South Florida getting dropped further, for losing on the road to a tougher opponent, AND already proving more on the field.

 

 

Lets be real ..... what do you think would happen if USC played South Florida on a neutral field?

[BS Miscreant]

Actually that's not all they've done. They beat the pants off of 1-7 Idaho. They hung on, in a real gut check game, to beat 2-5 Washington and they showed what they were made of when they came from behind to beat 2-6 Arizona. Oh, and let's not forget how they dominated mighty Notre Dame. Give'em some credit man.

You know, now that you point it out, you're right. USC's schedule has been pretty ridiculous and uneventful. I guess I was giving them too much credit. Thanks for setting me straight.

[GWPFFL BrianW]

Lets be real ..... what do you think would happen if USC played South Florida on a neutral field?

 

Being that it hasn't happened, we can only speculate. Again that's the problem. Speculation/Perception vs Reality. Who has the more impressive resume this year? The answer hands down is USF. And that's the bottom line. Same point last season, you would have asked who would win on a neutral field, Oklahoma or Boise State. Hmmmmm. Wonder what the answer would have been?

Edited October 25, 2007 by GWPFFL BrianW

[theprofessor]

You know, now that you point it out, you're right. USC's schedule has been pretty ridiculous and uneventful. I guess I was giving them too much credit. Thanks for setting me straight.

 

Your welcome.

[neilfish2]