http://www.jhowell.net/cf/cf2006.htm
1.. Notre Dame is at #21
2..Most conferences look fairly close in # of tough teams....except Big East
Top 25...................................Top 35
Big Ten.....5 teams....................6 teams
Big 12.......3 teams....................4 teams
ACC..........4 teams...................7 teams
Pac 10.......4 teams...................5 teams
SEC..........5 teams....................6 teams
Big East.....2 teams...................2 teams
Howell's 2006 Preseason Power rankings
Forum rules
NOTICE: Please be sure to check the CFP Message Board Rules and Regulations and the Read Me page before posting.
NOTICE: Please be sure to check the CFP Message Board Rules and Regulations and the Read Me page before posting.
Howell's 2006 Preseason Power rankings
“If short hair and good manners won football games, Army and Navy would play for the national championship every year.”
YEah. Slim pickins in the Big East...WVU has a cake walk in my opinion...But I still think we might have to add them to the thread "Weakest Schedule for a WIre service champ" 
They’re either going to run the ball here or their going to pass it.
The fewer rules a coach has, the fewer rules there are for players to break.
See, well ya see, the thing is, he should have caught that ball. But the ball is bigger than his hands.
- John Madden
The fewer rules a coach has, the fewer rules there are for players to break.
See, well ya see, the thing is, he should have caught that ball. But the ball is bigger than his hands.
- John Madden
-
Dossenator
- Moderator
- Posts: 5294
- Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 8:00 pm
- Location: Back in NW Arkansas!!!!
- Contact:
Being ranked #14 and #15 isn't low....
I suspect if you rank on pure power (rather than on schedule and predicted end of year results)...I think the ranking is pretty close.
I only may have a quibble with Texas Tech being ranked above Louisville, WVU. Eer fans may have a problem with Georgia being ranked ahead, I don't. Other than Texas Tech, I don't see a team that I wouldn't take straight up in a match with WVU or Louisville.
1.Southern California,
2 Texas
3 Oklahoma
4 Ohio State
5.Virgina Tech
6 Miami (Florida)
7 Louisiana State .
8 Georgia
9 Auburn .
10 Michigan
11 Florida State
12 Texas Tech
13 Florida
I suspect if you rank on pure power (rather than on schedule and predicted end of year results)...I think the ranking is pretty close.
I only may have a quibble with Texas Tech being ranked above Louisville, WVU. Eer fans may have a problem with Georgia being ranked ahead, I don't. Other than Texas Tech, I don't see a team that I wouldn't take straight up in a match with WVU or Louisville.
1.Southern California,
2 Texas
3 Oklahoma
4 Ohio State
5.Virgina Tech
6 Miami (Florida)
7 Louisiana State .
8 Georgia
9 Auburn .
10 Michigan
11 Florida State
12 Texas Tech
13 Florida
“If short hair and good manners won football games, Army and Navy would play for the national championship every year.”
-
colorado_loves_football
I think your power ranking (doesn't matter which one you apply) is a joke, myself. First you list one that has Oklahoma #1, then conveniently find one that more 'appropriately' lists Texas #1, so what?
TCU is still listed outside the Top-25, that's probably why you are listing this drivel, and trying to pass it off as some kind of 'reliable' ranking, even suggesting it's 'mathematical'.
I'll assess it a lot more simply, and easily. I'ts crap, plain & simple.
TCU is still listed outside the Top-25, that's probably why you are listing this drivel, and trying to pass it off as some kind of 'reliable' ranking, even suggesting it's 'mathematical'.
I'll assess it a lot more simply, and easily. I'ts crap, plain & simple.
Oh..complain to James Howell, the author.
LOL...EVERYTHING ISN"T ABOUT TCU!
You don't like any of the computer rankings that don't have TCU listed...but the folks like Steele and Howell who do this for a living think that TCU isn't that powerful a team. I'd thought you might like Howell since his end of year 2005 power ranking had TCU #9...but I agree with you...it's crap, plain and simple.
TCU is still listed outside the Top-25, that's probably why you are listing this drivel, and trying to pass it off as some kind of 'reliable' ranking, even suggesting it's 'mathematical'.
I'll assess it a lot more simply, and easily. I'ts crap, plain & simple.
LOL...EVERYTHING ISN"T ABOUT TCU!
You don't like any of the computer rankings that don't have TCU listed...but the folks like Steele and Howell who do this for a living think that TCU isn't that powerful a team. I'd thought you might like Howell since his end of year 2005 power ranking had TCU #9...but I agree with you...it's crap, plain and simple.
“If short hair and good manners won football games, Army and Navy would play for the national championship every year.”
-
colorado_loves_football
Eric, I don't have a problem with a 'power' ranking.Eric wrote:It's just the guys perspective. Cool down a little bit.
Actually, I'm pretty sure someone else posted one, from ESPN Zone.
That one, I thought was stupid, myself, but at least it had some 'variety' to it, (teams were represented 'proportionally' to their talent level)
He can call it 'some other guy's' ranking, it's BillyBud's power ranking posted for us all to enjoy. Give me a break.
TCU #26? Weird how they 'just' didn't make it. Too bad for them. Better luck next year, when they go 13-0. I'm surprised FSU wasn't listed #1. That at least would have been 'true' to BillyBud's ranking criteria.
I also thought a little about Boise St. They aren't top-25 material. But that's not a sufficient reason to deride them for an otherwise remarkable season (2004 in particular). I rest my case for now. But, I'm not going to let him 'classify' good programs as 'bad' just becasue he thinks so.
LOL..I am not saying that Boise is a bad program...they just aren't as good as most upper tier BCS programs. The facts have born that out...Boise is 2-16 against the BCS schools.
It's not personal...it's what is. Boise has a bad record against BCS teams.
It's not personal...it's what is. Boise has a bad record against BCS teams.
“If short hair and good manners won football games, Army and Navy would play for the national championship every year.”
-
Spence
- Administrator
- Posts: 21056
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 11:52 pm
- Location: Chillicothe, Ohio (Ohio's First Capital)
- Contact:
billybud wrote:LOL..I am not saying that Boise is a bad program...they just aren't as good as most upper tier BCS programs. The facts have born that out...Boise is 2-16 against the BCS schools.
It's not personal...it's what is. Boise has a bad record against BCS teams.
I agree. Boise St. doesn't have a good prgram, they have had some average to good teams. The good programs are the ones who consistantly play and beat the other top teams in the country. the fact that they may beat one or two top tier teams doesn't make them a good program. It says they had a good game against a good program, big difference.
"History doesn't always repeat itself but it often rhymes." - Mark Twain
I kind of agree. I think they have a good program going on. They have been consistently winning. I think that there is a gap from good to great. Michigan, Ohio State, Florida State, Miami, USC, Notre Dame, those are great programs. Boise State is still building a program foundation, but they are a good team.
Running bowl/MSU/OSU record '05-present: 11-32
"Good BCS Programs"
ACC... North Carolina, Virginia, Clemson, Georgia Tech, BC, NC State (ACC examples)...I don't have Boise being competitive on their level.
....{great programs, Miami, FSU, VT}
ACC... North Carolina, Virginia, Clemson, Georgia Tech, BC, NC State (ACC examples)...I don't have Boise being competitive on their level.
....{great programs, Miami, FSU, VT}
“If short hair and good manners won football games, Army and Navy would play for the national championship every year.”
Return to “General Discussion”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests