...and a few inaccuracies aside (CMU is not on a six losing season skid, see 1998; EMU QB Akina has departed) it seems like a reasonable analysis. CMU is picked 6th in the West. I think we'll finish higher, but we'll obviously have to prove that. NIU and BGSU still seem like the teams to beat in the West, with Toledo, WMU, Ball State, and CMU fighting to move up. This mag picked UT to finish third, and I agree a finish higher than that would be unlikely.

In the East, the writers were very acidic in their reviews of Kent and Ohio. The article seems to say that Kent was a one-year wonder that will lose ground again this season, and the review of OU was MUCH less than kind. The best they would say is that Cribbs is a true talent and OU COULD improve. I have to wonder about UCF's defense, which returns only two starters. UCF fans here have been optimistic that the defense will rock, and all the recruiting reports I've seen show UCF as the MAC's winner in that category, but...with so little returning experience, team chemistry and consistency could be big issues, especially in the face of a very tough schedule. What I read of Akron suggests the Zips will finish in the middle, at best. There are big holes to fill on the offensive line, and last year's defense struggled to say the least. Looks like a three-horse race bewteen Marshall, Miami, and UCF (IMO, in that order).

<small>[ June 09, 2002, 12:18 PM: Message edited by: CMichFan ]</small>

Akina officially left just a few days ago, and the magazine was printed before that.

UCF has some JC transfers to help with that experience, but junior college is nothing like D I-A football so I think you are right about their defense.

Just bought the Big Ten version this morning, and flipped through the national version. The national version has unit rankings for the entire nation. Of note:

Marshall ranked #1 in WR/TE unit.
NIU ranked #9 in DB unit. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="biggrin.gif" />

They only ranked the top 10 at each unit. That was all I saw ranked from the MAC.

Both of your posts are inaccurate ... I guess some of Athlon rubbed off. We don't return only 2 starters. We return 4 starters and only 2 JUCO transfers are starting and another will be in the 2 deep. Here is the <a href="http://www.ucfathletics.com/section_front.asp?arttypeid=350&sportid=151" target="_blank">depth chart</a> from last year ... so you can see for yourself.

We return 3 on the D-Line. The guy that's replacing Josh McKibben (who was a hardworker that got the most out of his body) is a lot bigger and more athletic and also impressed during spring practice. Both freshman safeties played quite a bit last year and Bigby even started a game. The backup linebackers also had quite a bit of playing time. As you can see from the depth chart the starting LB's weren't all that big (except for Tito) anyway. The biggest losses on defense are Travis Fisher (CB), Tito Rodriguez (MLB) and Josh McKibben (DT). When this unit jells (which should be by the time MAC play opens) they'll be a force to be reckoned with.

FYI: historically the JUCO guys that we've signed have been excellent. Our CB that was drafted in the second round was a JUCO transfer. Our #1 WR (and a guy Mel Kiper ranks as the 10th best senior and a projected first rounder) is a JUCO transfer. It all depends on the kind of JUCO guys you sign.

Rocketfootball: I was aware of the time lag due to printing, just thought I'd throw that out there, in case anyone missed it. Still, CMU has has had three, not six, losing seasons in a row; that's just poor research by someone. I'm sure you remember that in '98 our teams squared-off for the West title, and it was a close contest... <img border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" title="" src="graemlins/banghead.gif" />

HuskieDan: I saw that. Your DBs will NEED to be that good, given the QBs in the MAC this season...
<img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" />

Knight Prowler: thanks for the further correction. Team chemistry could still be an issue, though, and with that killer early-season schedule, there may not be enough time to gel before damage is done. You'll notice I'm not saying it can't or won't happen, just food for thought.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Knight Prowler: thanks for the further correction. Team chemistry could still be an issue, though, and with that killer early-season schedule, there may not be enough time to gel before damage is done. You'll notice I'm not saying it can't or won't happen, just food for thought.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Correct. Gelling MAY be an issue, especially if there's injuries during fall practice. As Knight Prowler stated earlier though, we may only return four starters, but we return a decent amount of experience. I don't believe our gelling woes will be any different than most of MAC teams come Game #1.

Fortunately for us, we start the season with a couple OOC games and a bye week before facing our MAC Conference opener (Marshall). By week three, we'll be a unit, no doubt.