Spring college football practices are starting...

[Edwin MacPhisto 0]

The AP poll is bunk. Cal is not better than any of the teams ranked 10-14, and Tennessee is way low. Virginia Tech isn't or doesn't appear to be very good.

Tennessee doesn't deserve to be any higher since it's essential the same team that ate ass last season. I certainly don't expect anything like that again and they'll probably win 9 games but I completely understand why they're at the far end of the top 25. Virginia Tech is solid everywhere but QB, which is a question mark. This team looks a lot like Bryan Randall's 2004 team, minus of course the super-player that was Randall (which will likely be the difference between that superb year and 8-4). The VT o-line is also thin, but that starting 5 is good. I'd have them hovering around #20 myself if forced to rank 'em.

[Bored 0]

Interesting bit of news this week at ASU as after naming Sam Keller as the starting quarterback Dirk Koetter changed his mind two days later and named Rudy Carpenter the starter. Keller might jump ship now and transfer.

[Damaramu 0]

Apparently OU wants a piece of Keller. They're guaranteeing him a starting job next season(since he'd sit out next year) and a chance to play in big games.

I think it's just a desperation move by OU b/c Miami is coming in at the beginning of next season with a senior QB(if Wright hangs around) and if OU doesn't get ahold of Keller then they're stuck firing out Bradford(who'll be a sophomore or most likely a redshirt freshman) or Joey Halzle(JUCO transfer that SUCKS) against a Miami defense. Man Bomar screwed OU in the long run too.

[Bored 0]

ESPN is reporting he's going to enroll at Nebraska.

[Edwin MacPhisto 0]

That'd be a huge get for Nebraska if he had more than one year of eligibility left. I'm not sure how useful he'll be if Nebraska's trying to develop someone younger, but it can't hurt to have him.

[Damaramu 0]

All the Big 12 North fans are calling into the local radio shows now complaining that the North gets no respect and saying this is the year that the North strikes back.

 

Then the radio show host brings them back to reality by informing them that they are playing for a(as he put it) big league spanking from Texas or OU.

 

A lot of them bring up KSU beating OU 3 years ago but then the host points out the whipping CU took the past 2 years and on top of that OU was playing with an injured QB and KSU really shouldn't have lost 3 games that year b/c they 3 they lost were with Roberson injured.

 

I think Nebraska will be better than people think and could win the Big XII title game but if it's anyone else I think they'll fall to the south again. Last year was the first year the north and south hadn't alternated wins though or the first time in a long time or something like that.

[Damaramu 0]

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2559135

 

Looks like Booty will be calling the signals at USC.

[Spicy McHaggis 0]

Maybe someone should forward that story to Sam Keller.

[nogoodnick 0]

Sam Keller is a really good quarterback but after seeing Carpenter in the bowl game I think ASU made the right choice. He seemed so determined to win that game that I'm not surprised the team rallied around him.

[Damaramu 0]

I don't know a lot about the PAC 10 so I had a question that I was thinking of the other day.

Historically in each conference there has been a team that always sucks. I can think of them in just about every conference except the PAC 10. Who historically is the worst/always at the bottom of the barrell team in the PAC?

[Spicy McHaggis 0]

If I had to choose, I would pick Washington State. But I can remember a year for each team being at the bottom of the conference, and a year for them being at the top. There are definitely trends, though.

[Urban Warfare 0]

Funny Top 25

[iggymcfly 0]

Washington State was really good until a couple years ago. They had 3 ten-win seasons in a row. Doba's slowly destroying the program, but I certainly wouldn't call them the team that "always sucks".

 

If I were going to pick a Pac-Ten team for that designation, it would have to be Arizona. They haven't really showed any potential in the last five or ten years.

[Guest Princess Leena]

I concur about Arizona being the weakest. I think they're the one Pac 10 team that's never been in the Rose Bowl.

 

It ebbs and flows in every conference, though. Except for Vanderbilt.

[teke184 0]

I concur about Arizona being the weakest. I think they're the one Pac 10 team that's never been in the Rose Bowl.

 

It ebbs and flows in every conference, though. Except for Vanderbilt.

Indiana has been a perennial bottom-dwellar in the Big Ten as far back as I can remember.

 

Same deal with Baylor in the Big 12.

[Damaramu 0]

Hey Baylor is getting ready to make their big push this year!

I'd just like them to beat A&M since that's developing into a nice rivalry and I hate A&M.

[Guest Princess Leena]

Baylor was a good team back in like the 60s. And again in the 80s for a bit. Although, I guess you could count them since they were around since like 1850 and never won anything.

 

Indiana was a bowl team for a while in the 80s and 90s, also.

[nogoodnick 0]

Oregon State gets my vote for worst Pac 10 program historically. They went like 30 years without a bowl then Dennis Erickson came along and won 7 or 8 games before taking them to an 11-1 season and Fiesta Bowl win in 2000. They won 8 games I believe in 2002 or whenever Stephen Jackson was a junior. Thats pretty much their history. Wazzu has been to a few Rose Bowls recently so I wouldn't call them the worst. I don't know much about Arizona but weren't they good in the mid 90's?

[Bored 0]

nogoodnick is right, Oregon State has historically been the worst team. They had an NCAA record 28 straight losing season from '71 to '98. I would be remiss in not mention Cal's futility over the years and that they haven't been to the Rose Bowl since 1959. Here are the overall records since the conference added the Arizona schools in 1978, from the Pac-10 media guide.

 

(Conference, Overall)

 

1. USC (150-62-5, 228-103-8)

2. Washington (142-75-3, 217-109-3)

3. UCLA (133-82-5, 207-114-7)

4. Arizona State (110-98-4, 190-129-4)

5. Oregon (111-105-2, 178-142-4)

6. Arizona (105-109-6, 171-143-8)

7. Stanford (98-120-3, 146-166-5)

8. Washington State (92-125-4, 158-156-5)

9. California (83-137-5, 141-174-2)

10. Oregon State (52-163-5, 98-211-6)

[Damaramu 0]

Wow USC ain't much better than Washington....but didn't USC suck in the 90's?

[USC Wuz Robbed! 0]

Wow USC ain't much better than Washington....but didn't USC suck in the 90's?

 

You know the answer to that one.

[Spicy McHaggis 0]

The Oregon State people get the credit. But in my defense I was trying to decide between Washington State and Oregon State. I figured Cal wouldn't count because of their recent success and their projections for this year. Aside from that stretch a few years ago the cougars have been HORRIBLE historically.

[Damaramu 0]

Wow USC ain't much better than Washington....but didn't USC suck in the 90's?

 

You know the answer to that one.

 

Yeah but weren't they basically good in every other decade?

 

Hey OU sucked in the 90's too.

[Damaramu 0]

I was watching some of the college gameday special today and they were talking about how OU will have to ride AD and how Thompson's job will basically become "Don't screw up."

I think it's more complicated than that. AD will be facing 8-9 man fronts and Thompson will have to prove he's some sort of threat. Especially b/c Stoops said he would be giving Peterson 25-30 rushes a game.

Last season he wasn't getting that many and they killed him b/c he was running at 9 guys each time. This season will be no different. If Thompson doesn't step up then expect Peterson to be out with an injury before midseason.