I think t.u. will clearly be worse than next year. The rankings are a joke. What teams deserve to be higher than them?

1. Alabama
2. Boise State
3. Ohio State
4. Florida
5. Virginia Tech
6. TCU
7. Iowa
8. Nebraska
9. Oklahoma
10. Texas

Yes, I think they're the third best team in the Big 12. Shipley gone, Cart gone, some very important defensive pieces gone and still not much semblance of a running game until they prove us wrong. I think the top three speak for themselves, Florida will reload with an amazing recruiting class and a QB who's a much better passer/actual QB than Tebow, the next three have excellent defenses and veteran quarterbacks, Nebraska's D will be excellent again and their O has to at least be improved, OU has a lot of returning talent, and then t.u.

Is this how I project the season turning out? Not really; I think Boise will go undefeated and I think Bama and Florida will have great seasons, but below that it's murky. This is how I rank them right now, just looking at how they appear in the preseason. Which is what preseason rankings are about. And Texas does not deserve a spot better than #8 at most in my opinion with all those question marks.

5.Virginia Tech
6. TCU
7. Iowa
8. Nebraska
9. Oklahoma
=====================

Hah! All of those teams have just as many questions if not more than Texas. Have you seen the losses OU had to graduation? And Nebraska still has a lot to prove on offense going smashmouth again - AND they lost Suh.

TCU? Iowa? Really?

I'll decline comment on VA Tech. We shall see if they leave up to expections this season. If so, it will be the first time in a handful of years.

Yes, TCU and Iowa, really. Both have experienced and athletic defenses, especially TCU, and veteran quarterbacks. TCU went undefeated until running into the Boise buzzsaw last year because they play great defense, they have a wildly diverse and successful rushing attack and they have a great leader in Dalton. He'll be a senior this year. Same with Stanzi, minus the interceptions.

I know you love your sips, but they're not one of the best six teams in the country as this year begins. That's all.

I haven't read a single post, but was hoping for more inputs from JOHN DAVID STUTTS.

quote:

---

Yes, TCU and Iowa, really

---

TCU loses their best LB, best DE, and both starting CBs.

Iowa loses 4 of 5 starting OLinemen


As pointed out earlier, both teams have question marks heading into the season just as Texas does. The difference is that Texas will reload with much more talented players.

And I know you're wearing your maroon glasses, Lou, but Texas would beat both TCU and Iowa straight up. Unleashing a Muschamp defense on both of those teams would result in pure ugliness for the other guys. You overrate Dalton by a good margin.

Whatever though. If you put Texas at #10, it's not like there's a significant difference between that and #6 in a preseason poll. You're essentially saying they're on the same level.









[This message has been edited by AlexNguyen (edited 4/13/2010 10:44a).]

[This message has been edited by AlexNguyen (edited 4/13/2010 10:46a).]

It wouldn't be the offseason without the obligatory posts about how Texas is going to take a huge step back and not be able to overcome the losses of (insert names of players here).

You mean the same muschamp whose defense got lit up on thanksgiving? or the defense that got ran all over in the MNC?

the guy is fiery and good, but a tad overrated by you sips, Alex.

Josh, give your offense some credit - they have talent and they're always inspired to play Texas. Just like Tech is generally 'up' to play both A&M and UT.

I don't think it's outlandish to say that Muschamp is the best DC in the Big 12 right now. He might be the best ever in the Big 12, although you have to put Mike Stoops and Gene Chizik in the discussion too.

And by the way, neither TCU nor Iowa are as dynamic on offense as A&M can be. And neither do they have two Heisman caliber running backs like Alabama does.

Just saying...

The defense actually played really well against Bama, particularly when you factor in how much they were on the field due to the offense struggles.

They only gave up 263 total yards for the game.

Yes the very same Muschamp that had his bad games like every other DC out there. The very same Muschamp that has been 26-2 since he got here, took defensive recruiting to a new level, and has current players raving about him.

You're citing a DC's record now? As an Ag, I'll admit that there's really not much to go on for preseason rankings other than past success and returning starters, so I'm fine with sticking t.u. in the preseason top 10, but you're giving me a DC's win/loss record???? You don't think that could be slightly skewed by the performance of the offense and special teams? That's like saying A&M's offense last year was awful because we only won 6 games. You fail.

Muschamp has made an undeniable difference as DC. Look at what he did in his first season compared to the tandem of MacDuff and Akina with largely the same players. Look at how the Texas defensive recruiting has hit a new level, and the reason is him and his system.

Muschamp is a huge multiplier for UT. The solidness of his unit allows Texas to play more risky ball in offense and ST.

Wow, Boise St. is ranked so high...Higher than I thought they would be. I guess they are here to stay for a while. I hate that Boise St. is ranked top 5 while we aren't even ranked.

Okay, seriously....

1) Of course he gives recruiting a bump, because he has so much freakin hype from the sip hype machine, and he's BY FAR the highest paid assistant anywhere. Then, his "successful recruiting" just adds to his hype. This is a chicken and egg issue and you can't disentangle the effects that the two have on eachother. This is referred to in statistical circles as multicolinearity.

2) Recruiting rankings suffer from the same problem outlined above - that is that recruits are often ranked largely based on who is giving them offers. If t.u. offered me a scholy I would instantly jump to 3 stars despite never playing a down of high school ball and needing a calendar to record my 40 time. (I exaggerate for effect.)

The point is, all of your "indicators" are highly influenced by the very factor that you are trying to disprove - hype. The horns have hype, and they'll have it until they start losing. Even then they'll have some just because of how much money they have.

texas does belong in the top 10, i hate to say it but they will always be good as long as they reload a top ten defense - AND they always finish in the top 10 so they are going to start there -

that is also why TCU, Boise State and Ohio State are ranked - because they finish ranked every year and they just so happen to return decent QB's.

and preseason polls are complete crap for the most part but they do matter for allot of reasons

quote:

---

1) Of course he gives recruiting a bump, because he has so much freakin hype from the sip hype machine, and he's BY FAR the highest paid assistant anywhere. Then, his "successful recruiting" just adds to his hype. This is a chicken and egg issue and you can't disentangle the effects that the two have on eachother. This is referred to in statistical circles as multicolinearity.

---

Wrong. Gene Chizik came into Texas with a #1 defensive unit ranking and an undefeated record from Auburn. He left UT with a NC but he never recruited to the sames heights that Muschamp has now achieved. The difference is that Muschamp's defenses are VISIBLY aggressive and players want to play in that system. Muschamp has also proven to be a dynamic recruiter, not surprising for someone with his personality.

If it was just about the hype machine Texas can marshal, then please explain why Carl Reese never had the type of haul that Muschamp just reeled in. Reese after all worked for Mack for a long time before being retired.

By the way, I don't think Muschamp is the highest paid assistant. That honor probably goes to Monte Kiffin (it was known that he was a million dollar man at Tennessee and he probably makes at least that much as USC) and maybe 1 other guy who I can't remember. Muschamp is like #3 or #4.

quote:

---

2) Recruiting rankings suffer from the same problem outlined above - that is that recruits are often ranked largely based on who is giving them offers. If t.u. offered me a scholy I would instantly jump to 3 stars despite never playing a down of high school ball and needing a calendar to record my 40 time. (I exaggerate for effect.)

---

A tired argument really. Everyone wants a top national player like Jackson Jeffcoat or Jordan Hicks. They get lots of offers from top schools precisely because the recruiting staffs think they can play ball. And they're ranked highly accordingly.

It's been shown time and again on this board that there's a correlation between the Rivals team rankings and the final football team rankings. You WANT to get those players that are ranked highly.

As for the Texas offer effect, there's no solid evidence to show that Texas players are raised on an unseemly level compared to other top schools. In fact, many Texas commits actually are dropped in the rankings after they verbal.

[This message has been edited by AlexNguyen (edited 4/13/2010 11:36a).]

Good Lord he's persistent. I'm done here.

Stasco....its a sip postin on an Aggie board...need you anymore evidence that the guy has little to do with his life besides worship all that is sip?

<shrugs> I can't help if you guys take some ridiculously extreme positions. Easy enough to refute arguments that are frankly stupid.

Nebraska's too high. They're good, but too many questions to be top 10 yet. Like Ole Miss or Okie State last year. They'll probably finish 15-20, maybe even 10-15 depending on the breaks.

quote:

---

Amazing Moves

Im sorry, but Florida would destroy TCU. TCU does not belong any where near the top 10. Any year. The BCS really has destroyed the rankings.

---

Ridiculous post.

I just don't understand why so many on here refuse to give TCU their due. They have built a very good program in Ft. Worth. How can you give Boise credit and have no issue with thier ranking and turn around and hammer TCU. TCU was tied with Boise going into the 4th and lost by one score this past season and the previous season actually beat Boise in the bowl game.

Macarthur-

Boise has beaten the likes of Oklahoma in a BCS and they've been a BCS-buster for years now. At this point, it's obvious that Chris Petersen is the real genius and not Hawkins his former boss and he coaches great offense and great special teams.

While TCU has a few good upsets like a pre-Pete Carroll USC and a Bomar-led OU team, they just don't have the skins on the wall that Boise State has.

Just my opinion. I need a little more out of Patterson and his Frogs before I count them among the big boys. Right now, they've got a nice thing going in the MWC, but they fell flat on their faces on their first big stage opportunity.

They say that Earl Thomas probably had the most productive career in tu history given the fact that he only started 2 years, yet he will be easily replaced???? Another player who will be hard to replace is Muckelroy!!

double post....

[This message has been edited by cords12 (edited 4/13/2010 1:25p).]

TruAggie,

Ohio State looked pretty solid in the Rose Bowl this past year and gave a much higher regarded Texas team all they could handle the year before that in the Fiesta Bowl. I have to admit that if anything at this point the Big XII is more overrated at this point than the Big 10. Look at OU's track record in title games/BCS bowls. Texas lost to Alabama (with McCoy out, but a loss is still a loss) and barely beat the worst Ohio State team of the last decade.

With Iowa and Ohio State both winning their BCS bowl games and Penn State knocking of LSU, the Big 10 was pretty respectable last year and was at least one of the top 3 BCS conferences.

quote:

---

They say that Earl Thomas probably had the most productive career in tu history given the fact that he only started 2 years, yet he will be easily replaced???? Another player who will be hard to replace is Muckelroy!!

---

Actually I said the secondary will be even better which is different from replacing Thomas.

Aaron Williams, Christian Scott, Curtis Brown/Chykie Brown, Kenny Vacarro should make an excellent unit. Williams is the best CB in the country. And that's without considering guys like Blake Gideon or Nolan Brewster who have lots of snaps (Gideon is a 2 year starter).

Muckelroy was a productive player for Texas. But we have Emanuel Acho, Keenan Robinson and Jared Norton coming back. Dustin Earnest and Ryan Roberson have played some solid minutes in relief. On paper, we've got plenty of young linebackers to help fill the gap. Tariq Allen and Jordan Hicks are the names that come to mind.

I might be wrong, but I think both units will be better.

Yeah, anyone ragging on the Big 10 in lieu of the Big 12 last year & going into this fall hasn't been paying attention. The Big 12 was very average last year & will be worse this year without a MNC contender. And for the 100th time this offseason, Nebraska is not a top 10 team. It was the same shat with Okie St last year. They have way too many holes. Of course Jake Locker will take care of them in their 3rd game.

[This message has been edited by Syd_X_Barrett (edited 4/13/2010 1:47p).]

You just named a ton of talent no doubt, but not much experience. That will only come with time and playing some of the better Big 12 offenses.

We've got Texas Tech early again followed immediately by UCLA. I'm more worried about Tech than the Bruins. I think Muschamp will have his players ready, especially for Tech. He hasn't forgotten 2008.

Nguyen - your more worried about Tech than ucla next year? thats just stupid

Tech will struggle to find an identity all season in 2010 - new coaching staff, divided fan base, etc - they might even lose to SMU to start the season and maybe even Baylor - this could be a really embarassing year for them.....

No, the only teams texas needs to worry about are ou, nebraska, and us - that's 3 games

quote:

---

Nguyen - your more worried about Tech than ucla next year? thats just stupid

---

Says you. The Tech game is in Lubbock. The UCLA game is in Austin. This will be the first opportunity that Tuberville will have to impress and win over the Raider faithful. You can bet he will pull out every trick in the book to win this one.

'Bama is ranked #1 solely because they are defending champs. Unfortunately, I really don't see them finishing top 5. Maybe top 10.

Losing 9 starters on defense is bad and can be overcome. The LB and DL will be fine since all they rotated out pretty heavily last year. The secondary, however, was gutted. Not only did they lose 3 starters but the primary nickel and dime backs. Add to that the suspension for the year for a player who was expected to win the open starting safety job and things look grim.

Then there is the problem of the schedule. Six of Bama's eight conference opponents get a bye week before playing Bama and it's hard to imagine winning the West, much less going undefeated in regular season conference games again.

just my 2 cents but tu will win 6 games next year and here is why.

quarterback - dude played one game, threw 4 pics. extrapolate that over 13 games, you get 52 interceptions next year. not very good sips

running backs - if they aren't too busy getting blazed in a car, texting their girlfriends (or boyfriends), and running into walls, they will be too busy tripping over their offensive linemen since they are a bunch of no talent a$$ clowns

O-line - Have you seen these scrubs? my 97 year old grandpa could blitz on these dudes.

Wide Receivers - they lost shipley. nuff said. but i'll say more. these guys suck. it's been confirmed that a couple of these guys have taken it upon themselves to use stick'em after watching little giants. great for catching toilet paper. worthless for catching the ducks gilbert will be heaving

DL - bunch of over weight turds that get tired reaching for their Twinkies. sure it's hard to get past a 350 d-line man. but we have michael. dude could spin out of a stray jacket

Linebackers - imagine bobby bushay..... not think of the exact opposite.

secondary - i lump this group together like you would lump a mound of manure. the only difference, this group stinks even worse and manure could cover a wr better.


[This message has been edited by TrueAgg13 (edited 4/13/2010 2:39p).]