(09-04-2017 10:14 PM)AusTxPony Wrote:  Did I miss it or was there no mention of SMU and Tulane? ECU and UConn both mentioned. Are they rated above SMU and Tulane? All in all, Fair is the rating I give the AAC in the week 0 and 1. Last year we had Houston's big win in Week 1 to brag about. Tulsa and Temple failed big time, along with USF. SUPPOSED to be three of our better teams. See Western Michigan v. USC. No excuses.

The preview podcast that comes out days before the corresponding week's games only covers "intriguing games" and top 65 Massey composite games. Tulane and SMU both did not fall under that category for week 1. Neither did UConn but their game was news filled so they were mentioned today. I DID preview the ECU game because it was intriguing in the facet that they no longer have Zay Jones and that JMU is the returning National Champs at the FCS level.

I did not talk about Akron or Kent State or Hawaii or ULL or a bunch of non news worthy teams. It happens.

When Tulane or SMU face a P5 that I feel could be competitive, play another G5er in the top 65 or land in the top65 themselves they will get air time. I think SMU will have a nice season this year. They were talked about briefly in the 1st podcast of the season.

For my part, the oxygen is now switched off.

SMU would get absolutely smoked at Oklahoma State. Puffing your chest over beating a D2 or whatever? Get real.

I hardly have a puffed chest, but winning is fun no matter who it is. And most fans like to hear about it. My question was only about the rules of the podcast, which were answered (though I wonder why they exist, how much more time would it take to mention a few more schools?). Last year, I got a puffed chest after the Houston game, hope to have another one after the TCU game this year. Sorry you guys got smoked (I had high hopes for you and Temple, but..) and you are right, we would have also.

@American_FB 4m4 minutes ago
More
The Amway Coaches Poll:
20. @USFFootball
RV Memphis
RV Navy
RV UCF
RV Houston

USF out of the Top 25 as expected....oh wait.

(09-04-2017 07:06 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(09-04-2017 06:54 PM)pesik Wrote:  i dont get whats shoddy bout it...

tulsa losing to okstate was predicated by everyone, temple losing to nd was predicted by everyone, jmu beating ecu was no surpise by anyone....

we had no real upsets against us..some game were closer than expected but all that matters is winning..usc barely beat wmu, no one will say usc is shoddy...usc won and will still be top 7 next week

i say it was a good week.

+SMU and Tulane for doing what they should against their FCS teams.
+UCF and Navy looked outstanding, although against bottom G5 opponents.

=Memphis had a chance to make a statement...did not. I understand it was a monsoon, but they didn't cover.

- Temple. ND is a good I think? But they still were a 4 win team last season. We've seen Temple be competitive in this spot before.

- Tulsa played a very good Oklahoma State but didn't come close to covering.

-- UConn looked terrible.
-- ECU looked terrible (predicted it... but lost by 20???)
- UC played to their competition.
- USF maybe played themselves out of the top 25

Tell me again about USF playing itself out of top 25

USF was jumped by 3 teams in the AP, moved back 2. 2 teams behind them lost and fell out of the top 25. If those two teams would have won, USF would be 23rd. They still didn't play well enough to move up... WSU moved ahead and did nothing versus Montana State. If USF wins those games in convincing fashion, they are 19th at the worst... Maybe moving up and filling Florida's spot.

(09-05-2017 02:19 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  USF was jumped by 3 teams in the AP, moved back 2. 2 teams behind them lost and fell out of the top 25. If those two teams would have won, USF would be 23rd. They still didn't play well enough to move up... WSU moved ahead and did nothing versus Montana State. If USF wins those games in convincing fashion, they are 19th at the worst... Maybe moving up and filling Florida's spot.

LOL. Keep digging.

(09-05-2017 02:19 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  USF was jumped by 3 teams in the AP, moved back 2. 2 teams behind them lost and fell out of the top 25. If those two teams would have won, USF would be 23rd. They still didn't play well enough to move up... WSU moved ahead and did nothing versus Montana State. If USF wins those games in convincing fashion, they are 19th at the worst... Maybe moving up and filling Florida's spot.

You suck at this

(09-05-2017 02:25 PM)M1T4 Wrote:  

(09-05-2017 02:19 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  USF was jumped by 3 teams in the AP, moved back 2. 2 teams behind them lost and fell out of the top 25. If those two teams would have won, USF would be 23rd. They still didn't play well enough to move up... WSU moved ahead and did nothing versus Montana State. If USF wins those games in convincing fashion, they are 19th at the worst... Maybe moving up and filling Florida's spot.

You suck at this

Not sure why people are impressed with their outcomes thus far, that's all.
Last season everyone on here hated that WMU was ranked after a certain amount of weeks for their "weak" schedule. Which it was... weak. USF's will be worse.

I picked them to be the Access Bowl rep. I'm looking for more out of them in future weeks.

(09-05-2017 02:28 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(09-05-2017 02:25 PM)M1T4 Wrote:  

(09-05-2017 02:19 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  USF was jumped by 3 teams in the AP, moved back 2. 2 teams behind them lost and fell out of the top 25. If those two teams would have won, USF would be 23rd. They still didn't play well enough to move up... WSU moved ahead and did nothing versus Montana State. If USF wins those games in convincing fashion, they are 19th at the worst... Maybe moving up and filling Florida's spot.

You suck at this

Not sure why people are impressed with their outcomes thus far, that's all.
Last season everyone on here hated that WMU was ranked after a certain amount of weeks for their "weak" schedule. Which it was... weak. USF's will be worse.

I picked them to be the Access Bowl rep. I'm looking for more out of them in future weeks.

You're likely incorrect here. WMU's schedule was certainly weak best win was against Northwestern, #44 in final Massey Composite; second Big10 win Illinois was #99; best MAC opponent was Toledo at #48.

The link below details CFP Committee chairman Kirby Hocutt discussing the rankings on the Tuesday between Thanksgiving and conference championship games.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...some-help/
Hocutt talks about the WMU schedule weakness being a concern and details why 9-2 Navy has gotten so close. Two-loss Navy had three quality wins that WMU did not. The quality wins that got the AAC team near the finish line were all AAC wins. Wasn't Notre Dame, 4-8 and below the median line. Navy had wins against Houston, Tulsa, and Memphis all three above Northwestern and Toledo after the games of 26 November 2016.

It's a pretty safe bet that any AAC champ will have AAC wins that look stronger than any of WMU's 2016 wins.

(09-04-2017 07:06 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  - USF maybe played themselves out of the top 25

LOL

Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app

(09-05-2017 02:19 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  USF was jumped by 3 teams in the AP, moved back 2. 2 teams behind them lost and fell out of the top 25. If those two teams would have won, USF would be 23rd. They still didn't play well enough to move up... WSU moved ahead and did nothing versus Montana State. If USF wins those games in convincing fashion, they are 19th at the worst... Maybe moving up and filling Florida's spot.

G4 Toledo Podcast Guy be like...

(09-05-2017 04:20 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(09-05-2017 02:28 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(09-05-2017 02:25 PM)M1T4 Wrote:  

(09-05-2017 02:19 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  USF was jumped by 3 teams in the AP, moved back 2. 2 teams behind them lost and fell out of the top 25. If those two teams would have won, USF would be 23rd. They still didn't play well enough to move up... WSU moved ahead and did nothing versus Montana State. If USF wins those games in convincing fashion, they are 19th at the worst... Maybe moving up and filling Florida's spot.

You suck at this

Not sure why people are impressed with their outcomes thus far, that's all.
Last season everyone on here hated that WMU was ranked after a certain amount of weeks for their "weak" schedule. Which it was... weak. USF's will be worse.

I picked them to be the Access Bowl rep. I'm looking for more out of them in future weeks.

You're likely incorrect here. WMU's schedule was certainly weak best win was against Northwestern, #44 in final Massey Composite; second Big10 win Illinois was #99; best MAC opponent was Toledo at #48.

The link below details CFP Committee chairman Kirby Hocutt discussing the rankings on the Tuesday between Thanksgiving and conference championship games.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...some-help/
Hocutt talks about the WMU schedule weakness being a concern and details why 9-2 Navy has gotten so close. Two-loss Navy had three quality wins that WMU did not. The quality wins that got the AAC team near the finish line were all AAC wins. Wasn't Notre Dame, 4-8 and below the median line. Navy had wins against Houston, Tulsa, and Memphis all three above Northwestern and Toledo after the games of 26 November 2016.

It's a pretty safe bet that any AAC champ will have AAC wins that look stronger than any of WMU's 2016 wins.

Wrong. Especially when Houston is the sole big win for USF to have, barring a good possible UCF win. Seriously... Temple blew its chance at being a highly regarded win already. WMU's 2016 SOS will beat USF's 2017 SOS. That's been stated since before the season unless a team comes from the depths and really surprises in the AAC. The AAC is a better league, but USF doesn't play those better teams. They just don't.

(09-05-2017 09:40 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(09-05-2017 04:20 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(09-05-2017 02:28 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(09-05-2017 02:25 PM)M1T4 Wrote:  

(09-05-2017 02:19 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  USF was jumped by 3 teams in the AP, moved back 2. 2 teams behind them lost and fell out of the top 25. If those two teams would have won, USF would be 23rd. They still didn't play well enough to move up... WSU moved ahead and did nothing versus Montana State. If USF wins those games in convincing fashion, they are 19th at the worst... Maybe moving up and filling Florida's spot.

You suck at this

Not sure why people are impressed with their outcomes thus far, that's all.
Last season everyone on here hated that WMU was ranked after a certain amount of weeks for their "weak" schedule. Which it was... weak. USF's will be worse.

I picked them to be the Access Bowl rep. I'm looking for more out of them in future weeks.

You're likely incorrect here. WMU's schedule was certainly weak best win was against Northwestern, #44 in final Massey Composite; second Big10 win Illinois was #99; best MAC opponent was Toledo at #48.

The link below details CFP Committee chairman Kirby Hocutt discussing the rankings on the Tuesday between Thanksgiving and conference championship games.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...some-help/
Hocutt talks about the WMU schedule weakness being a concern and details why 9-2 Navy has gotten so close. Two-loss Navy had three quality wins that WMU did not. The quality wins that got the AAC team near the finish line were all AAC wins. Wasn't Notre Dame, 4-8 and below the median line. Navy had wins against Houston, Tulsa, and Memphis all three above Northwestern and Toledo after the games of 26 November 2016.

It's a pretty safe bet that any AAC champ will have AAC wins that look stronger than any of WMU's 2016 wins.

Wrong. Especially when Houston is the sole big win for USF to have, barring a good possible UCF win. Seriously... Temple blew its chance at being a highly regarded win already. WMU's 2016 SOS will beat USF's 2017 SOS. That's been stated since before the season unless a team comes from the depths and really surprises in the AAC. The AAC is a better league, but USF doesn't play those better teams. They just don't.

Houston is currently better than WMU's best '16 win.
You highlighted UCF possibly climbing 15 or so spots to be there also.
Tulsa is on USF's schedule - currently above the midline at #64 and could climb.
CCG matchup could be Memphis/Navy instead of a rematch w Houston or Tulsa. A division champ Memphis/Navy is easily ranked #44 or higher.
Heck, you write off Temple too quickly - only need to climb 25 spots to be a better win than Northwestern was last year (their schedule is weak so they might not be able to).

That's five chances to have wins better than WMU's last year all VERY reasonable. If we were stretching we could talk about longer shots like Cincinnati or Tulane going on a tear. But we don't have to -- AAC schedule will give USF multiple opportunities for quality wins better than anything WMU had ooc last year.

(09-05-2017 02:19 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  USF was jumped by 3 teams in the AP, moved back 2. 2 teams behind them lost and fell out of the top 25. If those two teams would have won, USF would be 23rd. They still didn't play well enough to move up... WSU moved ahead and did nothing versus Montana State. If USF wins those games in convincing fashion, they are 19th at the worst... Maybe moving up and filling Florida's spot.

buuuut at the end of the day, USF is still ranked

and citing WMU for any type of comparison vs and AAC team is silly because any AAC team has a tougher schedule automatically vs any MAC team simply because the AAC is a lot tougher of a conference than the MAC top to bottom any given year and it isn't even close.

(09-05-2017 09:40 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(09-05-2017 04:20 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(09-05-2017 02:28 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(09-05-2017 02:25 PM)M1T4 Wrote:  

(09-05-2017 02:19 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  USF was jumped by 3 teams in the AP, moved back 2. 2 teams behind them lost and fell out of the top 25. If those two teams would have won, USF would be 23rd. They still didn't play well enough to move up... WSU moved ahead and did nothing versus Montana State. If USF wins those games in convincing fashion, they are 19th at the worst... Maybe moving up and filling Florida's spot.

You suck at this

Not sure why people are impressed with their outcomes thus far, that's all.
Last season everyone on here hated that WMU was ranked after a certain amount of weeks for their "weak" schedule. Which it was... weak. USF's will be worse.

I picked them to be the Access Bowl rep. I'm looking for more out of them in future weeks.

You're likely incorrect here. WMU's schedule was certainly weak best win was against Northwestern, #44 in final Massey Composite; second Big10 win Illinois was #99; best MAC opponent was Toledo at #48.

The link below details CFP Committee chairman Kirby Hocutt discussing the rankings on the Tuesday between Thanksgiving and conference championship games.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...some-help/
Hocutt talks about the WMU schedule weakness being a concern and details why 9-2 Navy has gotten so close. Two-loss Navy had three quality wins that WMU did not. The quality wins that got the AAC team near the finish line were all AAC wins. Wasn't Notre Dame, 4-8 and below the median line. Navy had wins against Houston, Tulsa, and Memphis all three above Northwestern and Toledo after the games of 26 November 2016.

It's a pretty safe bet that any AAC champ will have AAC wins that look stronger than any of WMU's 2016 wins.

Wrong. Especially when Houston is the sole big win for USF to have, barring a good possible UCF win. Seriously... Temple blew its chance at being a highly regarded win already. WMU's 2016 SOS will beat USF's 2017 SOS. That's been stated since before the season unless a team comes from the depths and really surprises in the AAC. The AAC is a better league, but USF doesn't play those better teams. They just don't.

Don't give up your day job.

USF's schedule may end up being better than WMU's but not by much. WMU went undefeated against their easy schedule, USF will have to also. And standing here today I would not bet on that.