https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...021-season

Tier 1: Alabama, Clemson, Georgia, Ohio State, Oklahoma

Tier 2: Florida, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Oregon, Penn State, Texas, Texas A&M

Tier 3: Cincinnati, Iowa, Iowa State, Miami, Oklahoma State, USC, Washington, Wisconsin

Tier 4: Arizona State, Auburn, Louisville, LSU, Michigan, Ole Miss, UCF, UCLA

Tier 5: Boise State, Coastal Carolina, Indiana, Kentucky, NC State, Northwestern, TCU, Utah, West Virginia

Tier 6: Florida State, Maryland, Michigan State, Nebraska, Tennessee

Tier 7: Air Force, Appalachian State, Arkansas, Ball State, Baylor, Boston College, BYU, Cal, Colorado, Houston, Kansas State, Kent State, Liberty, Louisiana, Marshall, Memphis, Minnesota, Missouri, Oregon State, Pitt, San Diego State, San Jose State, SMU, Stanford, Tulane, Tulsa, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest

Tier 8: Army, Central Michigan, Florida Atlantic, Mississippi State, Nevada, Ohio, Purdue, Rutgers, Texas Tech, UAB, UTSA, Virginia, Washington State, Western Michigan, Wyoming

Tier 9: Arizona, Duke, Georgia Tech, Illinois, South Carolina, Syracuse, Vanderbilt and nearly all the rest of the non-Power 5

Tier 10: UConn, Kansas


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We are now two coaches removed from Chris Peterson. I have reservations about future success.

It's much simpler than that [right now].

Tier 1: Bama, Ohio State, Clemson

Tier 2: Everyone Else

Tier 10 is too high for Kansas and UConn

(01-28-2021 11:57 AM)Hokie4Skins Wrote:  https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...021-season

Tier 1: Alabama, Clemson, Georgia, Ohio State, Oklahoma

Tier 2: Florida, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Oregon, Penn State, Texas, Texas A&M

Tier 3: Cincinnati, Iowa, Iowa State, Miami, Oklahoma State, USC, Washington, Wisconsin

Tier 4: Arizona State, Auburn, Louisville, LSU, Michigan, Ole Miss, UCF, UCLA

Tier 5: Boise State, Coastal Carolina, Indiana, Kentucky, NC State, Northwestern, TCU, Utah, West Virginia

Tier 6: Florida State, Maryland, Michigan State, Nebraska, Tennessee

Tier 7: Air Force, Appalachian State, Arkansas, Ball State, Baylor, Boston College, BYU, Cal, Colorado, Houston, Kansas State, Kent State, Liberty, Louisiana, Marshall, Memphis, Minnesota, Missouri, Oregon State, Pitt, San Diego State, San Jose State, SMU, Stanford, Tulane, Tulsa, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest

Tier 8: Army, Central Michigan, Florida Atlantic, Mississippi State, Nevada, Ohio, Purdue, Rutgers, Texas Tech, UAB, UTSA, Virginia, Washington State, Western Michigan, Wyoming

Tier 9: Arizona, Duke, Georgia Tech, Illinois, South Carolina, Syracuse, Vanderbilt and nearly all the rest of the non-Power 5

Tier 10: UConn, Kansas


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think Tier 4 is likely to be stronger than Tier 3. Or maybe even Tier 2.

Some observations pertaining to realignment:

A&M 2
Utah 5
Nebraska 6
Colorado 7

Out of this grouping, A&M has raised its program while the rest has either fallen some or stayed the same. Utah was a borderline tier 2/tier 3 program when at the MWC. Nebraska was probably a tier 5 when they left the B12 but they've fallen off since the days of the Big 8 and their option attack. Colorado is probably the same tier as they was before joining the PAC 12.

Big East or Big Least

Cincinnati 3
Miami 3
Louisville 4
WVU 5
Pitt 7
Boston College 7
Virginia Tech 7
Rutgers 8
Syracuse 9
Temple 9 or 10 (didn't see them listed)
South Florida 9 or 10 (didn't see them listed)
UConn 10

Louisville, WVU, Virginia Tech and UConn has really fallen off. Can argue that the first 3 were solid 2s or 3s during their time in the Big East. And it's not like those programs were overrated either. Big East was respectable in both BCS Bowl games as well as bowl standings and OOC. Cincinnati seems solid at 3. Miami is so hard to read. I wanna say they're top 15 but then they tend to disappoint ala Tennessee in the early/mid 00s. But, like Nebraska, they are a long way away from the days of Portis and McGahee in the backfield.

I won't attribute the lack of success for these schools to realignment. They all made coaching changes, so these schools falling off may have happened anyways, especially Virginia Tech in losing Beamer. There was a stretch where Pitt had 4 or 5 HCs in a calendar year. Temple and Rutgers are Temple and Rutgers. Both traditionally been meh, although Rutgers under Schiano had some success in the 00s. UConn suffered tremendously by being left behind. They had some success in the Big East and as did South Florida. Both USF and UConn were ranked at various times during their stay in the Big East; however, not sure if either finished ranked or not in any given season.

(01-28-2021 07:56 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  It's much simpler than that [right now].

Tier 1: Bama, Ohio State, Clemson

Tier 2: Everyone Else

The OP is about this year only, but I think you have it about right in general.

Tier 1: Alabama, Clemson (6 CFP appearances)
Tier 2: Ohio State, Oklahoma (4 CFP appearances)
Tier 3: Notre Dame, LSU, Georgia, Washington, Michigan State, Oregon, Florida State (1 CFP appearance for all except ND who has 2)
Tier 4: everyone else.

The Tier 2 group has teams with the positive recruiting press. With all the talent, several of those teams should be in the hunt for a CFP spot. It would be nice if some of these teams broke the strangleholds of the usual CFP participants.

(01-29-2021 08:56 AM)ClairtonPanther Wrote:  Some observations pertaining to realignment:

A&M 2
Utah 5
Nebraska 6
Colorado 7

Out of this grouping, A&M has raised its program while the rest has either fallen some or stayed the same. Utah was a borderline tier 2/tier 3 program when at the MWC. Nebraska was probably a tier 5 when they left the B12 but they've fallen off since the days of the Big 8 and their option attack. Colorado is probably the same tier as they was before joining the PAC 12.

Big East or Big Least

Cincinnati 3
Miami 3
Louisville 4
WVU 5
Pitt 7
Boston College 7
Virginia Tech 7
Rutgers 8
Syracuse 9
Temple 9 or 10 (didn't see them listed)
South Florida 9 or 10 (didn't see them listed)
UConn 10

Louisville, WVU, Virginia Tech and UConn has really fallen off. Can argue that the first 3 were solid 2s or 3s during their time in the Big East. And it's not like those programs were overrated either. Big East was respectable in both BCS Bowl games as well as bowl standings and OOC. Cincinnati seems solid at 3. Miami is so hard to read. I wanna say they're top 15 but then they tend to disappoint ala Tennessee in the early/mid 00s. But, like Nebraska, they are a long way away from the days of Portis and McGahee in the backfield.

I won't attribute the lack of success for these schools to realignment. They all made coaching changes, so these schools falling off may have happened anyways, especially Virginia Tech in losing Beamer. There was a stretch where Pitt had 4 or 5 HCs in a calendar year. Temple and Rutgers are Temple and Rutgers. Both traditionally been meh, although Rutgers under Schiano had some success in the 00s. UConn suffered tremendously by being left behind. They had some success in the Big East and as did South Florida. Both USF and UConn were ranked at various times during their stay in the Big East; however, not sure if either finished ranked or not in any given season.

UConn had several years of 8-4 type seasons in the Big East, but also had several 5-7 type seasons as well. In retrospect I have to wonder if the better seasons were a jolt of optimism from moving up from the FCS to a BSC AQ Conference. There is just not a lot of homegrown talent for them to work with to have sustained success and recruiting kids from Georgia and Florida consistently to Storrs seems a tall task. I look at those 8-4 years that had as the absolute ceiling for their program.

We’ve heard claims that USF is a sleeping giant go on for 20 years+. There best teams were that three year run under Willie Taggert. During the Big East years the would roll out with 7-8 wins to start the season and fail to win a game in the last 4-6 weeks of the season. It was like clockwork. I have a soft spot for the Bulls because we shared those years in the BE but UCF is the superior program and has a higher ceiling.

Louisville will turn it around eventually. I don’t think Satterfield was the right hire for them.

The Coastal love by the writer is ... curious.

(01-29-2021 12:06 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(01-29-2021 08:56 AM)ClairtonPanther Wrote:  Some observations pertaining to realignment:

A&M 2
Utah 5
Nebraska 6
Colorado 7

Out of this grouping, A&M has raised its program while the rest has either fallen some or stayed the same. Utah was a borderline tier 2/tier 3 program when at the MWC. Nebraska was probably a tier 5 when they left the B12 but they've fallen off since the days of the Big 8 and their option attack. Colorado is probably the same tier as they was before joining the PAC 12.

Big East or Big Least

Cincinnati 3
Miami 3
Louisville 4
WVU 5
Pitt 7
Boston College 7
Virginia Tech 7
Rutgers 8
Syracuse 9
Temple 9 or 10 (didn't see them listed)
South Florida 9 or 10 (didn't see them listed)
UConn 10

Louisville, WVU, Virginia Tech and UConn has really fallen off. Can argue that the first 3 were solid 2s or 3s during their time in the Big East. And it's not like those programs were overrated either. Big East was respectable in both BCS Bowl games as well as bowl standings and OOC. Cincinnati seems solid at 3. Miami is so hard to read. I wanna say they're top 15 but then they tend to disappoint ala Tennessee in the early/mid 00s. But, like Nebraska, they are a long way away from the days of Portis and McGahee in the backfield.

I won't attribute the lack of success for these schools to realignment. They all made coaching changes, so these schools falling off may have happened anyways, especially Virginia Tech in losing Beamer. There was a stretch where Pitt had 4 or 5 HCs in a calendar year. Temple and Rutgers are Temple and Rutgers. Both traditionally been meh, although Rutgers under Schiano had some success in the 00s. UConn suffered tremendously by being left behind. They had some success in the Big East and as did South Florida. Both USF and UConn were ranked at various times during their stay in the Big East; however, not sure if either finished ranked or not in any given season.

UConn had several years of 8-4 type seasons in the Big East, but also had several 5-7 type seasons as well. In retrospect I have to wonder if the better seasons were a jolt of optimism from moving up from the FCS to a BSC AQ Conference. There is just not a lot of homegrown talent for them to work with to have sustained success and recruiting kids from Georgia and Florida consistently to Storrs seems a tall task. I look at those 8-4 years that had as the absolute ceiling for their program.

We’ve heard claims that USF is a sleeping giant go on for 20 years+. There best teams were that three year run under Willie Taggert. During the Big East years the would roll out with 7-8 wins to start the season and fail to win a game in the last 4-6 weeks of the season. It was like clockwork. I have a soft spot for the Bulls because we shared those years in the BE but UCF is the superior program and has a higher ceiling.

Louisville will turn it around eventually. I don’t think Satterfield was the right hire for them.

UConn's rise also coincided with Syracuse and Boston College dropping off. Maybe one effected the other or purely coincidence. They tend to recruit the same area. But now that Rutgers is in the B10, the Jersey & Philly recruiting footprint has gone to the B1G making it harder for BC & Cuse to get croots.

I'm going to take my school's absence from this list as feedback

Accurate feedback, but feedback nonetheless

Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk

(01-29-2021 10:05 PM)Stay Cool Wrote:  I'm going to take my school's absence from this list as feedback

Accurate feedback, but feedback nonetheless

Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk

You and I may be looking for a different, but related thread called “2021 CFB Tears”

(01-29-2021 08:56 AM)ClairtonPanther Wrote:  Some observations pertaining to realignment:

A&M 2
Utah 5
Nebraska 6
Colorado 7

Out of this grouping, A&M has raised its program while the rest has either fallen some or stayed the same. Utah was a borderline tier 2/tier 3 program when at the MWC. Nebraska was probably a tier 5 when they left the B12 but they've fallen off since the days of the Big 8 and their option attack. Colorado is probably the same tier as they was before joining the PAC 12.

Big East or Big Least

Cincinnati 3
Miami 3
Louisville 4
WVU 5
Pitt 7
Boston College 7
Virginia Tech 7
Rutgers 8
Syracuse 9
Temple 9 or 10 (didn't see them listed)
South Florida 9 or 10 (didn't see them listed)
UConn 10

Louisville, WVU, Virginia Tech and UConn has really fallen off. Can argue that the first 3 were solid 2s or 3s during their time in the Big East. And it's not like those programs were overrated either. Big East was respectable in both BCS Bowl games as well as bowl standings and OOC. Cincinnati seems solid at 3. Miami is so hard to read. I wanna say they're top 15 but then they tend to disappoint ala Tennessee in the early/mid 00s. But, like Nebraska, they are a long way away from the days of Portis and McGahee in the backfield.

I won't attribute the lack of success for these schools to realignment. They all made coaching changes, so these schools falling off may have happened anyways, especially Virginia Tech in losing Beamer. There was a stretch where Pitt had 4 or 5 HCs in a calendar year. Temple and Rutgers are Temple and Rutgers. Both traditionally been meh, although Rutgers under Schiano had some success in the 00s. UConn suffered tremendously by being left behind. They had some success in the Big East and as did South Florida. Both USF and UConn were ranked at various times during their stay in the Big East; however, not sure if either finished ranked or not in any given season.

Utah, Nebraska and Colorado are in 5,6, and 7 because the OP is from the east and significantly underrated these western teams.

Nebraska has declined. Utah is doing fine. Colorado declined towards the end of their Big 12 period and are just now recovering. They did finish 2nd in the Pac 12 South.

As for A&M, they had a good year and look to be good next year. Get back to me when they finish better than 2nd in a division. This is their only clear 2nd place division finish in the SEC. They've tied for 2nd twice. They had a 3rd place tiebreak finish in a 3 way tie in the Big 12 South in 2010. Other than that they finished 3rd or lower every season this century.

I can see how those western teams are underrated. Im ready to the the PAC with a full season under it's belt. The PAC in general needs to schedule SEC, ACC and B1G schools to get more eyes from the east looking at them.