CSNbbs

http://cfn.scout.com/2/620170.html

Quote:14. Which conference will be the best in 2006?
11. Sun Belt - It showed last year that it's not a total pushover with UL Monroe giving Kentucky a serious run and Troy almost shocking Florida State, but it's still on the low end of the nation's totem pole. Even so, it should be among the most exciting conference races with everyone, everyone, improved from last year.
The best team should be ... Middle Tennessee
10. MAC - The league has taken a bit of a step back overall after spending last year reloading. Miami, Toledo and Bowling Green, three MAC powers struggled way too much through the youth and inconsistencies and have to be back to previous form for the conference to be any better. Central Michigan, even without head coach Brian Kelly, should still be the class of the conference, but Toledo is due for a big rebound and Ohio, Northern Illinois and Western Michigan should all be excellent. Even so, don't expect the MAC to scare the big boys too much.
The best team should be ... Central Michigan
9. Mountain West - After being on the verge of challenging the Big East for a spot in the top six, the Mountain West took an overall step back with average seasons from Utah, Colorado State, and Wyoming. BYU might take a little while to reload while TCU is going to be BCS worthy and Utah will be much better. However, the rest of the league has to show up to provide more than just an easy target for the big three.
The best team should be ... TCU
8. WAC - It might be the most fun conference in America loaded with big time offenses and plenty of intrigue. Boise State and Hawaii will get the national press, but San Jose State, Fresno State and Nevada are all going to be good enough to win the conference. New Mexico State will average 35 points and 400 passing yards per game.
The best team should be ... Hawaii
7. Conference USA - The league simply hasn't recovered from the loss of Louisville, Cincinnati and South Florida. It's good enough from top to bottom to barely get the nod ahead of the WAC, but the expected top teams, Houston, Tulsa and Southern Miss, would all have major problems with the WAC's best.
The best team should be ... Southern Miss
6. ACC - Call this a prove-it year for the ACC after a disastrous 2006. Miami and Florida State still aren't quite up to past snuff making the league look a little more down than it actually is. Georgia Tech, Boston College, Clemson, Maryland, and yes, Wake Forest, are going to be fantastic, while Virginia Tech should be good enough to be in the mix for the national title. If Virginia and North Carolina can improve, the league will move up the overall conference rankings. So why is the league sixth? The others got better, too.
The best team should be ... Virginia Tech
5. Big Ten - After one of the league's worst years in a long, long time, with Ohio State, Michigan, Wisconsin, Penn State, and a bunch of garbage, things should bounce back. Wisconsin is loaded with one of its best teams since the Rose Bowl years, Michigan's offense will be unstoppable, and Ohio State's defense should be phenomenal. Penn State will be in the mix for the Big Ten title if all the holes can be filled and if QB Anthony Morelli can improve. Just about everyone else should be improved with Iowa certain to bounce back, Purdue, Michigan State and Minnesota good enough to go to bowls, and the projected also-rans, Illinois, Indiana and Northwestern, all appearing to be far, far better.
The best team should be ... Wisconsin
4. Pac 10 - It's not just USC and a bunch of other teams. While the Trojans will likely be the preseason No. 1, Cal has its best team yet under Jeff Tedford, UCLA is loaded and has the potential to be a top-ten team, Oregon should be more consistent, Oregon State has its best team since the Fiesta Bowl winner of 2000, Arizona State should be better under Dennis Erickson, and the rest of the league is full of improving, pesky teams, most notably Arizona.
The best team should be ... USC
3. Big East - While the Big East might not be the best conference in the country, it's loaded with more good teams than ever. West Virginia, Louisville and Rutgers will all be in the national title chase, Pitt, after a few years of great recruiting, should finally be the team Dave Wannstedt wants, South Florida is good enough to shock the top teams and win the conference title, Cincinnati will be more than fine with Brian Kelly at the helm, Connecticut is older and better, and Syracuse, well, Syracuse should be a little better. This should be a fascinating race.
The best team should be ... West Virginia
2. Big 12 - Yes, the conference is back as long as the North holds up its end of the bargain. Kansas State, Kansas and Iowa State should be better, and Colorado can't be any worse, but the real stars will be Missouri and Nebraska with the Huskers possibly in the national title chase. The South should be a killer with Oklahoma State, Texas Tech and Texas A&M each standing a puncher's chance of knocking off Texas or Oklahoma for the title.
The best team should be ... Texas
1. SEC - And it's not even close. You could flip around the other five BCS conferences in any way and it'd be hard to argue against the order, but there's no way anyone but the SEC can be named on top. Florida, LSU, Tennessee, Georgia, Arkansas and Auburn would be among the favorites to win any other conference in the country, while South Carolina isn't far behind. Kentucky is good enough to go back to a bowl, while Vanderbilt has the experience to finally get back to the post-season. Alabama will be a nasty out with Nick Saban coaching. You could do a lot worse than Ole Miss and Mississippi State for the bottom feeders.
The best team should be ... LSU

They rank CUSA ahead of all the non-BCS conferences. This is the same league that lost to a Sun Belt team in their bowl game (and had a losing regular season record vs. Sun Belt teams) and went 1-4 overall in bowl games. I would rate the MWC as the best non-BCS conference. TCU, Utah, and BYU would destroy most of the teams in CUSA.

And I'll copy and paste my response to your same topic from the main board........

Well, I think the MAC write up is very accurate and we don't deserve to be higher than 10th until we prove otherwise.

Sure, I think the MWC and Big Ten should be higher, but you can make arguments for the way they have it too.

So why doesn't CFN know anything?

niubrad00 Wrote:And I'll copy and paste my response to your same topic from the main board........

Well, I think the MAC write up is very accurate and we don't deserve to be higher than 10th until we prove otherwise.

Sure, I think the MWC and Big Ten should be higher, but you can make arguments for the way they have it too.

So why doesn't CFN know anything?

The Big Ten was absolutely horrible last season. So if you think the MAC should have to prove we are better than 10th then i think the Big Ten has to prove they are better than 5th. MWC proved they were one of the best, if not the best, non-BCS conference when Utah, BYU, and TCU easily took care of their opponents.

epasnoopy Wrote:

niubrad00 Wrote:And I'll copy and paste my response to your same topic from the main board........

Well, I think the MAC write up is very accurate and we don't deserve to be higher than 10th until we prove otherwise.

Sure, I think the MWC and Big Ten should be higher, but you can make arguments for the way they have it too.

So why doesn't CFN know anything?

The Big Ten was absolutely horrible last season. So if you think the MAC should have to prove we are better than 10th then i think the Big Ten has to prove they are better than 5th. MWC proved they were one of the best, if not the best, non-BCS conference when Utah, BYU, and TCU easily took care of their opponents.

OK, so the MWC proved they are one of the best non-BCS conferences. I would agree with that. They might even be the best. CFN has them ranked 3rd out of the 5.

Again, what exactly are you arguing about? That you think the MWC is one or two spots too low?? Is that really why you think CFN is clueless??

For the record, CFN is pretty clueless from time to time. This article does nothing to make them look that way though.

niubrad00 Wrote:

epasnoopy Wrote:

niubrad00 Wrote:And I'll copy and paste my response to your same topic from the main board........

Well, I think the MAC write up is very accurate and we don't deserve to be higher than 10th until we prove otherwise.

Sure, I think the MWC and Big Ten should be higher, but you can make arguments for the way they have it too.

So why doesn't CFN know anything?

The Big Ten was absolutely horrible last season. So if you think the MAC should have to prove we are better than 10th then i think the Big Ten has to prove they are better than 5th. MWC proved they were one of the best, if not the best, non-BCS conference when Utah, BYU, and TCU easily took care of their opponents.

OK, so the MWC proved they are one of the best non-BCS conferences. I would agree with that. They might even be the best. CFN has them ranked 3rd out of the 5.

Again, what exactly are you arguing about? That you think the MWC is one or two spots too low?? Is that really why you think CFN is clueless??

For the record, CFN is pretty clueless from time to time. This article does nothing to make them look that way though.

Not just that they have the MWC underranked but they have CUSA overranked. CUSA has shown me nothing since Louisville, USF, etc. left that would indicate that they are the best non-BCS conference, especially that significantly better than the MAC.

95% of the time CFN gives NIU big props.

epasnoopy Wrote:So if you think the MAC should have to prove we are better than 10th then i think the Big Ten has to prove they are better than 5th.

What exactly are you talking about? What is your point? Or you arguing just to argue?