(09-02-2014 08:55 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-02-2014 08:54 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-02-2014 08:41 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-02-2014 08:07 AM)stever20 Wrote:  I think folks may be putting too much into Rutgers win over Washington St. WSU is hardly a solid program. If you look at Massey's ratings- they are predicted now to finish 3-9- with a FCS win.

I agree that WSU is unlikely to be any good, but with the emphasis on playing OOC against P5, any win seems to count these days. Trust me, four days later, AAC fans still think Temple beating Vanderbilt - likely to finish around 10th in the SEC- is a big win for the AAC.

I think you are wrong in your estimation of Vanderbilt's 2014 finish. I don't see them winning any conference games. Kentucky looked much better.

I'm not so sure its fair to label me 'wrong' for predicting a 10th place finish versus I guess the 14th place finish you are anticipating. Both are in the same basic ballpark to me - we agree they look like a bad team. In any event, it's also risky to make predictions based on a single game so far. So we both could be wrong.

I think it's fair. Show me three teams in the SEC that are worse than Vanderbilt. I don't see any. You are right that it is early, but there was no greater colossal fail with no signs of life than Vanderbilt's.

Kentucky gave up almost 400 yards of offense and 25 first downs to UT-Martin. Their offense looked OK against a bad defense, but their defense certainly didn't look the part. Color me unimpressed with how "improved" UK looked in that game.

(09-02-2014 09:28 AM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  Kentucky gave up almost 400 yards of offense and 25 first downs to UT-Martin. Their offense looked OK against a bad defense, but their defense certainly didn't look the part. Color me unimpressed with how "improved" UK looked in that game.

The comparison is to Kentucky from a year ago and in comparison to Vanderbilt this year. Other than that I don't really care, let alone care how impressed or not you are.

Well, at least UK might beat Vanderbilt. I guess there's that. All that needs to be said about UK football is that you're ducking C-USA WKU and perennial cellar dweller IU for being too difficult. Glad you don't care how impressed I am or am not, 'cause I'm not.

Thanks, Tall Grass.

(09-02-2014 07:28 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-01-2014 10:19 PM)Tallgrass Wrote:  A marvelous win to begin the season and your new conference!

All the best!

On the AAC board, when AAC fanboys talked about how good the AAC was going to be this year, I always pointed out that we were losing Louisville, our best program, and also Rutgers. Fanboys would reply that the newcomers would more than make up for them, especially Rutgers.

Well, Rutgers and UL both beat P5 opponents this week. If they were still in the AAC, that would be two nice feathers in the cap for the AAC, but no.

In contrast, the entire actual AAC won 1 game vs a P5 opponent this past weekend. The AAC is 1-2 vs P5 instead of 3-2, if they still had UL and Rutgers.

The AAC is already missing UL and yes, Rutgers.

Lets wait and see how good they really are. I still think UCF may be better, with the QB change.