They looked pretty doggone good to me last year...
I'll believe it...

(06-30-2016 06:46 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  I picked up Steele's magazine today

Predicted Order of Finish (national rank)
1. Arkansas State (60)
1. Appalachian State (66)
3. Georgia Southern (72)
4. ULL (92)
5. Troy (101)
6. Idaho (116)
6. South Alabama (118)
6. Georgia State (119)
9. New Mexico State (124)
10. ULM (127)
11. Texas State (128) (WTF?)

Position Rankings

QB
1. App State
2. Arkansas State
2. Georgia Southern
2. Troy
2. Idaho
6. NMSU
6. Texas State
8. ULM
9. ULL
9. South Alabama


RB
1. Georgia Southern
1. App State
1. NMSU
4. ULL
5. South Alabama
6. Arkansas State
7. Troy
8. ULM
9. Georgia State
9.Idaho
11. Texas State

WR
1. Georgia State
2. Idaho
3. South Alabama
4. NMSU
5. Arkansas State
6. ULM
7. ULL
8. Troy
9. App State
10.Texas State
11. Georgia Southern

OL
1. Arkansas State
2. Georgia Southern
2. App State
4. Idaho
5. Texas State
6. ULL
7. Troy
8. NMSU
9. South Alabama
10. ULM
10. Georgia State

DL
1. Arkansas State
2. Georgia Southern
3. Troy
3. App State
5. ULL
6. Georgia State
7. NMSU
8. ULM
9. Texas State
10. Idaho
10. South Alabama

LB
1. App State
2. Georgia State
3. Arkansas State
3. Georgia Southern
5. ULL
5. Troy
7. South Alabama
7. NMSU
9. ULM
10. Idaho
10. Texas State

DB
1. Arkansas State
1. Appalachian State
3. ULL
3. South Alabama
3. Georgia State
6. Troy
7. Idaho
7. ULM
9. Georgia Southern
10. NMSU
10. Texas State

Most Improved Teams (Nationally)
3. UL Lafayette
7. Troy

I like Phil Steele. The Idaho rankings make sense to me. We might be a little better than that at RB & LB, but we'll see as things play out. DL is a huge concern. I still think we're bowling, partly because we don't play #1 & #3 on this list.

Is there any info on where some of the other top G5 teams are ranked in the 128 team preview?

A-State's WRs will be better than 5th. Speed thrills. Size kills. Paschal, Echols-Luper, Sanders, Murray . . . lookout!
[/quote]

That is an understatement to say the least, but the fact is you would have to combine the talent of the next two best SBC teams too match the talent on A-States roster.

Granted A-State has not shown as well as they should in post season play and that effects preseason rankings by the careless, but you should notice as we get closer to the fall people are beginning to look a little closer and notice the talent A-State has.

While the jury is still out on their HC, who is a little goofy, it is not on their talent, and they are again the cream of the crop in the SBC and it is not as close as many here think.

Quote:A-State's WRs will be better than 5th. Speed thrills. Size kills. Paschal, Echols-Luper, Sanders, Murray . . . lookout!

(07-01-2016 06:46 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  That is an understatement to say the least, but the fact is you would have to combine the talent of the next two best SBC teams too match the talent on A-States roster.

Granted A-State has not shown as well as they should in post season play and that effects preseason rankings by the careless, but you should notice as we get closer to the fall people are beginning to look a little closer and notice the talent A-State has.

While the jury is still out on their HC, who is a little goofy, it is not on their talent, and they are again the cream of the crop in the SBC and it is not as close as many here think.

The La Tech game was fun for a half - it was clear that our speed didn't bother them as much as it did the Sun Belt schools, and it was obvious that they were more physical.

Not making excuses, Tech was a better team than stAte last year, but in the 2nd half our injures and suspensions really hurt our depth. All-SBC Defensive end was suspended, and so was JD McKissic's backup. So when McKissic went down, we had a dude who I don't even think is on scholarship in the A-back/slot. Other defensive injuries in the game made it worse.

I think it was more of a depth than talent issue - and that we were not as physical as we needed to be. Saw similar results vs. Toledo and USC when we couldn't run the ball effectively. Also couldn't move the ball very well vs. Mizzou, but fortunately their offense sucked.

Tech had an NFL dude on that D-Line.

(07-01-2016 07:33 PM)WinstonTheWolf Wrote:  

Quote:A-State's WRs will be better than 5th. Speed thrills. Size kills. Paschal, Echols-Luper, Sanders, Murray . . . lookout!

(07-01-2016 06:46 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  That is an understatement to say the least, but the fact is you would have to combine the talent of the next two best SBC teams too match the talent on A-States roster.

Granted A-State has not shown as well as they should in post season play and that effects preseason rankings by the careless, but you should notice as we get closer to the fall people are beginning to look a little closer and notice the talent A-State has.

While the jury is still out on their HC, who is a little goofy, it is not on their talent, and they are again the cream of the crop in the SBC and it is not as close as many here think.

The La Tech game was fun for a half - it was clear that our speed didn't bother them as much as it did the Sun Belt schools, and it was obvious that they were more physical.

Not making excuses, Tech was a better team than stAte last year, but in the 2nd half our injures and suspensions really hurt our depth. All-SBC Defensive end was suspended, and so was JD McKissic's backup. So when McKissic went down, we had a dude who I don't even think is on scholarship in the A-back/slot. Other defensive injuries in the game made it worse.

I think it was more of a depth than talent issue - and that we were not as physical as we needed to be. Saw similar results vs. Toledo and USC when we couldn't run the ball effectively. Also couldn't move the ball very well vs. Mizzou, but fortunately their offense sucked.

Tech had an NFL dude on that D-Line.

We also lost Gordon on the first play from scrimmage, if memory serves me correctly. I don't know if the overall outcome would have been much different were we healthy (Tech's QB and lead rusher were both among the best we'd faced, and had a great game) but we wouldn't have put more points on the board, for sure.

cant see Apps defensive line the 4th best in the SBC, ya, we lost Blair but, we are really good at the other positions, basically we only have to replace Blair on a line that was the best in the SBC last year. If we are forth best, then the SBC is going to have some great defenses next year.

(07-05-2016 10:01 AM)Paraprosdokian Wrote:  

(07-01-2016 07:33 PM)WinstonTheWolf Wrote:  

Quote:A-State's WRs will be better than 5th. Speed thrills. Size kills. Paschal, Echols-Luper, Sanders, Murray . . . lookout!

(07-01-2016 06:46 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  That is an understatement to say the least, but the fact is you would have to combine the talent of the next two best SBC teams too match the talent on A-States roster.

Granted A-State has not shown as well as they should in post season play and that effects preseason rankings by the careless, but you should notice as we get closer to the fall people are beginning to look a little closer and notice the talent A-State has.

While the jury is still out on their HC, who is a little goofy, it is not on their talent, and they are again the cream of the crop in the SBC and it is not as close as many here think.

The La Tech game was fun for a half - it was clear that our speed didn't bother them as much as it did the Sun Belt schools, and it was obvious that they were more physical.

Not making excuses, Tech was a better team than stAte last year, but in the 2nd half our injures and suspensions really hurt our depth. All-SBC Defensive end was suspended, and so was JD McKissic's backup. So when McKissic went down, we had a dude who I don't even think is on scholarship in the A-back/slot. Other defensive injuries in the game made it worse.

I think it was more of a depth than talent issue - and that we were not as physical as we needed to be. Saw similar results vs. Toledo and USC when we couldn't run the ball effectively. Also couldn't move the ball very well vs. Mizzou, but fortunately their offense sucked.

Tech had an NFL dude on that D-Line.

We also lost Gordon on the first play from scrimmage, if memory serves me correctly. I don't know if the overall outcome would have been much different were we healthy (Tech's QB and lead rusher were both among the best we'd faced, and had a great game) but we wouldn't have put more points on the board, for sure.

Yeah, it wasn't even depth or size. If you took away their RB and QB, the outcome would have been reversed.

(06-30-2016 06:46 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  I picked up Steele's magazine today

Predicted Order of Finish (national rank)
1. Arkansas State (60)
1. Appalachian State (66)
3. Georgia Southern (72)
4. ULL (92)
5. Troy (101)
6. Idaho (116)
6. South Alabama (118)
6. Georgia State (119)
9. New Mexico State (124)
10. ULM (127)
11. Texas State (128) (WTF?)

Position Rankings

QB
1. App State
2. Arkansas State
2. Georgia Southern
2. Troy
2. Idaho
6. NMSU
6. Texas State
8. ULM
9. ULL
9. South Alabama


RB
1. Georgia Southern
1. App State
1. NMSU
4. ULL
5. South Alabama
6. Arkansas State
7. Troy
8. ULM
9. Georgia State
9.Idaho
11. Texas State

WR
1. Georgia State
2. Idaho
3. South Alabama
4. NMSU
5. Arkansas State
6. ULM
7. ULL
8. Troy
9. App State
10.Texas State
11. Georgia Southern

OL
1. Arkansas State
2. Georgia Southern
2. App State
4. Idaho
5. Texas State
6. ULL
7. Troy
8. NMSU
9. South Alabama
10. ULM
10. Georgia State

DL
1. Arkansas State
2. Georgia Southern
3. Troy
3. App State
5. ULL
6. Georgia State
7. NMSU
8. ULM
9. Texas State
10. Idaho
10. South Alabama

LB
1. App State
2. Georgia State
3. Arkansas State
3. Georgia Southern
5. ULL
5. Troy
7. South Alabama
7. NMSU
9. ULM
10. Idaho
10. Texas State

DB
1. Arkansas State
1. Appalachian State
3. ULL
3. South Alabama
3. Georgia State
6. Troy
7. Idaho
7. ULM
9. Georgia Southern
10. NMSU
10. Texas State

Most Improved Teams (Nationally)
3. UL Lafayette
7. Troy

Some Quotes

"[App St] is arguably the most talented team in the Sun Belt"

"[Ark State] could be a surprise contender for the Group of 5 NY Day bowl bid"

"I can tell you this, UL has made my coveted Most Improved list on page 38 and that means a return to their winning ways and a bowl game!"

"You might want to check page 38 and see if [Troy] has made my Most Improved List"

(regarding Texas State) "it will be an accomplishment just to top last year's 3 win total"


My comments

Interesting that he rated Ark. State #2 at the QB position but his top 4 QBs are Lamb, Upshaw, Silvers, and Linehan.

I don't believe that that Texas State is as talent-decrepit as he makes them out to be.

If there are 16 linebackers in the conference better than Georgia Southern's Ironhead Gallon I'm a Victoria's Secret model.

Our secondary may not be overly great but it won't be considered the 9th best by seasons end.

We have two very highly recruited and regarded QBs. As a position, they are very strong on paper.

I can understand TXST being near the bottom of most of those lists but cmon at least let us have QB near the top. Tyler Jones is the man.

(07-05-2016 12:10 PM)moehler Wrote:  cant see Apps defensive line the 4th best in the SBC, ya, we lost Blair but, we are really good at the other positions, basically we only have to replace Blair on a line that was the best in the SBC last year. If we are forth best, then the SBC is going to have some great defenses next year.

It will be neck and neck between GS, APP, TROY, and ARKST, IMO. TROY and APP had the best pass rush last year; GS and ARKST had the best run defenses last year. Troy just hired Jordan Lesley (EMCC's DC) to coach our DTs. He had 149 quarterback sacks and 57 interceptions in his three seasons, including 67 sacks, 30 INTs, and 74.2 rushing yards per game his first year (2013). We should be the mix again with this hire and what we return.

well, I see your point, just happy that we have had the best overall defense the last 2 years, and probably will have the best overall defense this upcoming year.

(07-01-2016 07:33 PM)WinstonTheWolf Wrote:  

Quote:A-State's WRs will be better than 5th. Speed thrills. Size kills. Paschal, Echols-Luper, Sanders, Murray . . . lookout!

(07-01-2016 06:46 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  That is an understatement to say the least, but the fact is you would have to combine the talent of the next two best SBC teams too match the talent on A-States roster.

Granted A-State has not shown as well as they should in post season play and that effects preseason rankings by the careless, but you should notice as we get closer to the fall people are beginning to look a little closer and notice the talent A-State has.

While the jury is still out on their HC, who is a little goofy, it is not on their talent, and they are again the cream of the crop in the SBC and it is not as close as many here think.

The La Tech game was fun for a half - it was clear that our speed didn't bother them as much as it did the Sun Belt schools, and it was obvious that they were more physical.

Not making excuses, Tech was a better team than stAte last year, but in the 2nd half our injures and suspensions really hurt our depth. All-SBC Defensive end was suspended, and so was JD McKissic's backup. So when McKissic went down, we had a dude who I don't even think is on scholarship in the A-back/slot. Other defensive injuries in the game made it worse.

I think it was more of a depth than talent issue - and that we were not as physical as we needed to be. Saw similar results vs. Toledo and USC when we couldn't run the ball effectively. Also couldn't move the ball very well vs. Mizzou, but fortunately their offense sucked.

Tech had an NFL dude on that D-Line.

We seemed to come in with the attitude that we were talented and pretty and the alleged rivalry was for old fogies.

LaTech seemed to come in with the attitude that they were ugly, insulted to be on the field with us, and determined to rip our heads off.

The old fogies expected it. The youngsters were surprised.

(07-05-2016 03:25 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(07-01-2016 07:33 PM)WinstonTheWolf Wrote:  

Quote:A-State's WRs will be better than 5th. Speed thrills. Size kills. Paschal, Echols-Luper, Sanders, Murray . . . lookout!

(07-01-2016 06:46 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  That is an understatement to say the least, but the fact is you would have to combine the talent of the next two best SBC teams too match the talent on A-States roster.

Granted A-State has not shown as well as they should in post season play and that effects preseason rankings by the careless, but you should notice as we get closer to the fall people are beginning to look a little closer and notice the talent A-State has.

While the jury is still out on their HC, who is a little goofy, it is not on their talent, and they are again the cream of the crop in the SBC and it is not as close as many here think.

The La Tech game was fun for a half - it was clear that our speed didn't bother them as much as it did the Sun Belt schools, and it was obvious that they were more physical.

Not making excuses, Tech was a better team than stAte last year, but in the 2nd half our injures and suspensions really hurt our depth. All-SBC Defensive end was suspended, and so was JD McKissic's backup. So when McKissic went down, we had a dude who I don't even think is on scholarship in the A-back/slot. Other defensive injuries in the game made it worse.

I think it was more of a depth than talent issue - and that we were not as physical as we needed to be. Saw similar results vs. Toledo and USC when we couldn't run the ball effectively. Also couldn't move the ball very well vs. Mizzou, but fortunately their offense sucked.

Tech had an NFL dude on that D-Line.

We seemed to come in with the attitude that we were talented and pretty and the alleged rivalry was for old fogies.

LaTech seemed to come in with the attitude that they were ugly, insulted to be on the field with us, and determined to rip our heads off.

The old fogies expected it. The youngsters were surprised.

We've done that multiple times in the last few years, came in to a game underestimating how much another team was motivated for the game.