Forget NFL, it's college football time!!!!!!!!

Texas already hired Strong which IMO, will be a good hire. I would love to see Texas become a powerhouse.

 

yeah, gotcha on the Strong hire. Point being... UCF has a good coach, that's why they were successful. But if he has another successful year this year, then there will be a big money program that will snatch him up. UCF got lucky with hiring OBrian due to the Notre dame fiasco. They won't get lucky again and will end up with a mid-teir coach

 

That is my question. I love how people classify the noles this year as an "SEC style defense", I got news for folks, its not. its old school Florida pro style defense, a la Schnellenberger, Bowden, and so forth. FSU just went back to its roots.

 

UCF has gone from being division III when they first fielded a team in 1979 to winning a BCS bowl in 2014. That is unreal. They school's administration, boosters, and local community are committed to becoming a powerhouse program and as one of the largest schools in the nation they have the financial resources to do so.

- - - Updated - - -

There are successful because they are the 2nd largest school in the nation and have an administration committed to creating a powerhouse program.

 

how committed is my question.....that term is subjective. UM used to be committed too, but new admin won't come off the wallet to hire the best coaches (or keep them) anymore, and the program sits stagnant.


The true test is when a powerhouse $$ program tries to steal their current coach, because I agree, he's doing great down there. That's going to make him attractive to big name teams like Florida Gaytors, (who may be very interested in him this time next year).... Will UCF be committed to keeping their coach if UF offers a big contract? If they are as committed as you say they are, UCF will renegotiate with Obrian.... if they feel they shouldn't have to up his contract, he'll leave, then they have to hire another coach at the mediocre rate. what kind of coach do you think that will attract? It won't attract an SEC or ACC or BIG 12 coach from a program that's doing well and paying well.


UCF's "committment to winning" level hasn't been tested yet. One more successful season, it will be tested. Then we'll know for sure just how committed to winning they really are.

 

They have pored tens of millions of dollars into new athletics facilities over the past few years. I'm sure they will pay for coaches.

 

I am not doubting you.... but just because you are committed to getting better, doesn't mean you will make the all the right decisions. For the program's sake, lets hope you're right and they do. or they don't change philosophies or direction like UM did when they got a new President in the around 2005

 

agree on all points

I heard that when the Gamecocks came to town that you couldn't get near the place. And, UCF gave Spurrier all he could handle.

The Bulls (USF) were set to be the #3 team in FL behind FSU and UF and to jump "the U" but then slap-gate occurred and they have spiraled downward. When Muskrat came into UF you could see that the program was going to head downward because he is not head coach material. Storm came from the U and gave UCF a ground game, Bortles matured as a QB and the defense stepped up.

The victory over Baylor was no fluke and UCF is working with HS coaches.

 

I looked up UCF schedule and record when they beat Oregon to see who their one loss was against. South Carolina.... 28-25.

Yeah, he just about pulled off beating one of the self-proclaimed "SEC Elite" teams and one has to wonder.... would UCF been the #2 team playing FSU in the title game HAD they pulled that game out.


I figure, an undefeated UCF would have been ranked right below undefeated OSU going into championship week. Or would they have bumped 1 loss AU above them and had 1 loss bama stay above them anyways.

it's fun to wonder.


it's also fun to be KING right now, too.....

- - - Updated - - -

 

They better start paying soon, because being in a football recruiting rich environment and hauling in bad recruiting classes doesn't fly at major programs. 247sports has them ranked in the 70's. They had a great season, but they're not going beat major programs on a regular basis unless they step up their recruiting efforts.

 

Here's a link to the final Jeff Sagarin computer rankings:

I couldn't help but put in another plug for my alma mater NDSU, which made it to #17 in all of Div. 1 Football. Not bad for an FCS level team.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/ncaaf/sagarin/

1 Florida State
2 Oregon
3 Alabama
4 Auburn
5 Stanford
6 Michigan State
7 Missouri
8 UCLA
9 Baylor
10 South Carolina
11 Washington
12 Oklahoma
13 Oklahoma State
14 Clemson
15 LSU
16 Ohio State
17 North Dakota State
18 Wisconsin
19 Arizona State
20 Louisville

 

Didn't college game day go there 1 week? I think it was there and that was awesome.

"Top" Teams in rebuilding mode for 2014= A+M, Oregon lost a coach or is it coaches, Bama, Georgia, South Carolina, LSU, Louisville is done losing QB and coach

Teams which will surprise people in 2014, not necessarily make it to the playoff or big show but surprise people

Mizzou- will show that they were not a flash in the pan
USC (pride is going to drive them after all the drama)
Arkansas ( 7 or 8 wins at least)
Florida- in a negative way. I don't see Muskrat making it through the season
North Carolina

 

Yeah game day was pretty awesome for Fargo, and even for ESPN, which said it was one of their best game days of the year.

For what its worth, NDSU's head coach and most of his staff are going to Wyoming next year, plus NDSU loses a lot of seniors as well. So next year NDSU will likely be down quite a few notches on the ladder. Still pretty impressive though, for an FCS school to be ranked at the same level as Ohio State and Wisconsin.

 

I think Game Day should go to a FCS school each year. What a great event it was for NDSU.

 

I wouldn't get ahead of yourself, as we know those rankings are nonsense. Wisconsin or OSU would run the ball for a mile on NDSU. They had a good season, but to put them in the same catagory as teams like that is silly.

 

Yeah, there's a lot of nonsense to football rankings, but that's what I like about the computer ranking systems, it takes out most of the nonsense, and just relies upon the raw data. Take #23 Kansas State for instance, they ran for only 41 yards against NDSU in their season opener, quite a bit less than a mile; and lost 24-21. The Bison ran for 215 yards. No hype, just raw numbers.

But that being said, it was a banner year for NDSU (15-0, with a 24 game win streak), so you probably won't see an FCS team that high in the rankings for some time to come.

 

Not sure if you're serious or not, but the spread on a OSU or Wisconsin vs NDSU would be 30+ points.

The computer ranking are the biggest problem with the BCS. We've a 3 loss Stanford team ahead of a 1 loss MSU team that beat them. A Baylor team ahead of a UCF team that's not in the top 20. Alabama ahead of Auburn, and Oregon at #2. It's like a bad joke. Any wonder why people laugh at the computer rankings?

 

The computer rankings rank the relative strength of each team. So sometimes a team will still be ranked slightly higher than a team that had previously beat them in a close upset.

Oregon was ranked #2 because they crushed most of their opponents. Were it left to winning and losing only, they would have been ranked #11.

The reason Stanford was ranked so high, in spite of their 3 losses, was their strength of schedule, the toughest schedule in all of college football; and because they beat a very good Oregon team. So even though they lost to MSU by 4 points, the computer is still "predicting" Stanford as a 1 point better team, were there ever to be a follow-up game.

Alabama and Auburn are also ranked right next to each other, within 2 points; so its not like the computer is getting it all wrong. There must be something in the system that still gave Alabama a slight edge overall.

Of the top 25 teams, UCF had the 3rd weakest schedule, and even with that, had 5 wins of 3 points or less. So their #25 ranking justifiably makes them a 4 point underdog to the 2013 North Dakota State team.

 

too many SEC fans bishing about it "why not go to Vanderbilt vs Alabama" (or whatever other meaningless SEC matchup there was that weekend) I can't remember which week, but there were a ton of SEC circle-jerking going on about how Gameday should be somewhere in the SEC.

I do remember the most spectacular thing about ESPN going to Fargo was other than that, there were really no spectacular games going on at all that weekend.

now with that said... NDSU could not hang with the good to elite programs in FBS. I do remember opening weekend one year, #2 Mich opened with the 1-aa national champs and they were beat. It ended up costing Lloyd Carr his job. Mich didn't have a terrible season that year, but when you drop your opening weekend to a "creampuff"... especially one you PAID to come.... lol

 

A+M wasn't good for the past two years.... they just had Manziel.... so "rebuilding" is a stretch with them. But i agree, they will show it minus Johnny Football
Oregon is on a slide down towards middle of the pack again. They just can't seem to punch through and that hurts recruitment... especially if USC starts getting good again.
Bama.... They will be back, just as strong next season.
Georgia.... I tend to agree. Injuries killed a good team this year. I don't think they win a national title as Clemson beat them when they were still healthy.... but GA could have won the SEC East to face AU in a rematch.... But new qb .... new team. Richt has been on the hot seat before for under performing. He may have gotten a pass this year for underperforming... (much like Muskratt at UF did, too) but if he doesn't perform next season.... both Richt and Muskratt will be gone.

Muschamp at UF getting canned during the season next year.... only if they are winless. It could happen, though. Should be interesting. UF is suffering from the mess they got left with from Urban Meyer. Hope those two titles they sold their souls for by hiring Urban was worth the two losing seasons left in the wake of his departure. As an FSU fan... I laugh.

[/quote]
I'm not sure.... they aren't a bad team, but they aren't elite. Sure, they beat OSU on a great play..... but they faced AU and south Carolina this season.... that's it... and lost. They were on the weak side of the division, and still got beat
USC - should start to make noise again soon
Arkansas - I agree with you.
FL - yeah, they will do horrible.
NC - no, nononononononononononononono.... no team from the ACC is allowed to be thought of as good. That goes against the "Sec is the best" philosophy that they tell ESPN to promote.

 

Probably so in most years, but for the last three years NDSU has been a top tier FBS team playing at the FCS level. Of their last three FBS opponents, Kansas State was no slouch (ranked #23 this year and last years Big-12 champ). And for the other two, both CSU and U of M got manhandled by NDSU; in their home stadiums no-less.

2013: NDSU 24, Kansas State 21
2012: NDSU 22, Colorado State 7
2011: NDSU 37, Minnesota 24

Computer ranking systems aren't perfect either, but I think the ones done by Jeff Sagarin are pretty reliably accurate.

 

I'm not feeling the hiring of Kiffin by Saban.

 

I hope it implodes on him. Lane Kiffen is a cancer wherever he goes.

 

I can't wait for the playoff system next year, but, and I can't believe I am saying this, I hope we have controversy when it comes to picking 4 teams and they expand it to more. Granted, I have a feeling if that happens it will just be used to get out of the playoff system, but hey, one can hope.

 

oh there will be controversy... no question, which is why ESPN/SEC bias is so important.

For example... the same reason a 1 loss Bama in 2012-2013 got the nod to play Notre Dame over 1 loss Oregon and debate over #2-#3.... it could easily happen at #4-#5 position between two, 1 loss teams.

or a 2 loss team gets the nod over a 1 loss team.

I still like 4 teams, currently. a season only has 3 or 4 quality teams at most, anyways.