CGB Top 25 - Preseason
by ragnarok on Aug 20, 2009 1:31 PM PDT
in California Golden Bears Football
Email
PrintTwo weeks from now, college football will kick off on a highly anticipated Thursday night. Most of the preseason polls are already out...but where's the BlogPoll? Well, our ballots are due Monday, so here's our rough draft; as always, please let us know if you think we're totally off-base anywhere.
In fact, starting this season, you can do more than that; royrules22 has come up with a simple script to allow the denizens of CGB to submit their own Top 25. As explained in his FanPost here, he'll be collecting weekly ballots all season long, tabulating and analyzing the results in a weekly FanPost. We'll find out who is the biggest homer, who's crying 'the sky is falling', and all manner of other interesting tidbits. So go on over and submit your own ballot.
Anyway, when I normally do the Top 25 rundown, I'll go through and include some short blurbs on most of the teams, providing some justification for why they were ranked where they are. However, it's the preseason, and there's not much justification for ranking anyone anywhere; it's pretty much uninformed speculation at this point. Frankly, I happen to agree with the pundits who claim that we shouldn't even bother to have preseason polls, as before about week 5, my ballot will be filled with guesswork and preseason prejudice. While this poll is an average of those submitted by Avinash, Yellow Fever and myself, I will say that my contribution is a lazy-man's protest vote; since no games have been played between last January and now, I simply resubmitted the same Top 25 I turned in at the end of last season. Utah at #2? You betcha, baby! My vote helped drag them up to #13.
Anyway, presented without further comment, here is CGB's preseason Top 25:
 |
||
| Rank | Team | |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Florida | |
| 2 | Texas | |
| 3 | Southern Cal | |
| 4 | Oklahoma | |
| 5 | Alabama | |
| 6 | Ohio State | |
| 7 | Penn State | |
| 8 | Mississippi | |
| 9 | Virginia Tech | |
| 10 | Oregon | |
| 11 | Oklahoma State | |
| 12 | California | |
| 13 | Utah | |
| 14 | LSU | |
| 15 | TCU | |
| 16 | Georgia | |
| 17 | Georgia Tech | |
| 18 | Oregon State | |
| 19 | Boise State | |
| 20 | Texas Tech | |
| 21 | Brigham Young | |
| 22 | Florida State | |
| 23 | North Carolina | |
| 24 | Nebraska | |
| 25 | Iowa | |
75 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
People are voting Oregon ahead of Cal? I thought this was a Cal blog, what’s going on here. I’m disappointed in the community. I had Cal #1. :)
Also, I think my alma mater as a D-1AA powerhouse should be included as an option. Can we make that happen?
I, too, don’t understand the Oregon love. Sure they’re good…but # 10? SI was drooling over them too. No, Masoli isn’t Tebow of the West.
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
Whoa…
Have you even SEEN that guy pass?
"It’s spelled S-H-U-F-E-L-T-M-E-U-P"
by JShufelt on Aug 20, 2009 6:22 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Didn’t his last notable pass cost his team their only potential win of the season?
All aboard the Jahvid Best rickshaw!
by rollonubears on Aug 20, 2009 6:34 PM PDT up reply actions
You mean the one that went in the air?
I support Takimoto in his effort to support Roger Kieschnick in his quest to becoming the best Kieschnick ever to play professional baseball.
by The VD Special on Aug 20, 2009 6:43 PM PDT up reply actions
Super duper rec’d….because he has never shown one iota of talent through the air.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
I’ll take a Ducks fans opinion with a grain of salt…
Locker is a baller, his team is terrible, obviously he hasn’t proved he can pass, but I don’t think he’s had a fair chance to prove anything yet. I’m expecting big things.
by Missing Barry on Aug 20, 2009 9:35 PM PDT up reply actions
47.3 completion rate in ’07…
53.8 completion rate in ’08…
I don’t care who’s opinion you take with what seasoning…
The dude hasn’t shown he can throw more than 10 yards, and he’s less than 70% on hitting the broadside of a barn from 15 yards away. He’s had way more of a chance to prove himself than Masoli has, and he’s done jack squat through the air. I’d rather take Kevin Craft when it comes to passing.
"It’s spelled S-H-U-F-E-L-T-M-E-U-P"
And what’s your take on the talent issue?
by Missing Barry on Aug 21, 2009 5:31 AM PDT up reply actions
Locker is a very gifted athlete, for sure, but he’s not someone I want in at QB.
Your offense will struggle of you cant at least show the defense that you’re a deep threat.
"It’s spelled S-H-U-F-E-L-T-M-E-U-P"
I mean more along the lines of the talent around him. Maybe he’s a better passer than you give him credit for and the terrible offense he’s surrounded by significantly hurts his stats. So that’s the theory, I’d like to know your thoughts.
by Missing Barry on Aug 21, 2009 7:36 AM PDT up reply actions
Last year, I did see a fair amount of drops from the WR, but I also saw Locker miss receivers down field by about 20 yards – overthrown, underthrown, or just off target.
I’m not saying this as another way to express my hatred of the huskies. Actually – I rather like Locker. He brings a tenacity and determination to the team. I’ll even say that if he was healthy last season, Washington gets 3 wins against Stanford, WSU, and UCLA.
But as a passer, I thought Fouch out performed him (Outside of the decision making department).
As long as he’s healthy, Locker will have his best season this year, and he’s hopefully improved his passing. He’s shown flashes of brilliance with some nice throws, but at the rate I’ve seen, that’s been more of an exception, not the norm. He’s been more consistently off than he has inconsistent.
He’s now in an offense that will force him to make plays in the pocket. It’s do-or-die time for him now.
"It’s spelled S-H-U-F-E-L-T-M-E-U-P"
Well, hopefully he’s improved his passing long enough to stun LSU, and then goes back to getting beaten down by the rest of the Pac-10…
by Missing Barry on Aug 21, 2009 12:11 PM PDT up reply actions
not even in the ‘also receiving votes’ category.
So, basically, you gotta Go Bears!
by ragnarok on Aug 20, 2009 1:47 PM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
Here here
Seeing ND in this poll would have been excruciating
Yeah, well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
I think it’s funny how you guys respect Oregon, and how we over at ATQ respect Cal. Not only did our season previews come to the opposite conclusion, but our blogpoll ballots essentially have our teams switched (I have Cal 9th—my ballot will be posted tomorrow).
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
We respect Cal. Definitely not you.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Aug 20, 2009 2:18 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
wow. i shouldn’t go over there and start running my mouth…i really shouldn’t…
So, basically, you gotta Go Bears!
They’re SEC fans, what do you expect.
“Never argue with an idiot, they drag you down to their level then beat you with experience”.
Just something to keep in mind…
by Missing Barry on Aug 20, 2009 2:48 PM PDT up reply actions
Let’s send carp.
Actually strike that.
Some say his powerade gives you infrared vision...and that his sweat towels wipe away sin. All we know is he's called giantfan5.
by Spazzy Mcgee on Aug 22, 2009 2:56 PM PDT up reply actions
It's About Home Games
Cal plays at Oregon. Oregon will probably be favored unless things really go poorly for them during their tough non-con schedule (at Boise, Utah at home). Since Oregon will be favored to beat Cal, they should be ranked ahead of Cal. It doesn’t matter what would happen on a neutral field because they don’t play on a neutral field.
by Fair Weather Cal Fan on Aug 20, 2009 2:38 PM PDT reply actions
That’s a very…weird way to look at the polls. I’m all about voting based on actual results, but now you’re voting based on what you project the results will be based on factors like schedule? Strange…
by Missing Barry on Aug 20, 2009 2:49 PM PDT up reply actions
To reply to both of you – I think it’s weird to try to rely on predicting results game by game at all to make a preseason poll. @JSchufelt, obviously you don’t vote on actual results, my point was only during the season my preference is to heavily weight actual results. As for a preseason poll, I basically don’t put much thought into it (since I’m going to be very wrong no matter how much thought I put into it) and go with my gut over who I feel is the better team. Obviously that involves weighting returning talent, coaching, recruiting success, recent success the last couple years and other factors like that…I just don’t see the point of trying to predict results game by game. So much unnecessary effort. Plus shouldn’t you just rank the teams you think are best and then adjust it in season by what you see?
by Missing Barry on Aug 20, 2009 6:11 PM PDT up reply actions
I think the top 4 is about right…from there on who knows.
I’m wondering if we’ll see Sofele on fly sweeps much like OSU uses James Rogers. It’s an interesting dimension to the offense.
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
I think the top 4 is about right…from there on who knows.
This is pretty much how I feel, which is why I winged it and just submitted my final ballot from last year. Incidentally, that’s the reason that Cal appears on our ballot below Oregon — I had Oregon at No. 11 and Cal at No. 18 to end last year.
So, basically, you gotta Go Bears!
by ragnarok on Aug 20, 2009 3:32 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
I had Cal at 9, I believe. I also tried to single-handedly get a few Big East teams in there, but apparently I didn’t try hard enough. Next time I’m putting Cal at 1 and Rutgers at 2.
No longer wanting an interview with Ryan Anderson.
Rutgers is in New Jersey. I will never vote for anything in New Jersey. :(
by Missing Barry on Aug 20, 2009 6:12 PM PDT up reply actions
The Sopranos? Wasn’t Jason Kidd in Jersey for six years?
Contact me: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Aug 21, 2009 11:17 AM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, I feel bad for Kidd. I was stuck there for about 8 months, I can’t imagine being there for any period of time longer than that. Talk about hell on earth, or the armpit of America, or whatever other cliche you want to use….the point is all the cliches understate just how bad it is. God I hate that place.
by Missing Barry on Aug 21, 2009 12:12 PM PDT up reply actions
Looks good. Couple thoughts (not that anyone cares)
1. Texas Tech is way too high. They will be 5th place in the Big 12 South, and with all those key loses look for them to struggle this year.
2. Iowa might be a tad too low. Its too early to say top 12, but they are definitely a top 18 team. This a team that not only knocked off Penn State last year, but was in a lot of close games. 5 loses by a combined 11 points. They do lose Shon Greene but they return the 2nd best QB in the Big 10. I think by the end of the year this team will be AT LEAST 9-3
3. Cal and Oregon State are both too high (right now). I think both rankings are indicitive of best case scenarios for both the two teams, but with so many question marks and ifs that both could be looking at 7-5, 8-4 years, which don’t end with 12th and 18th place rankings.
I support Takimoto in his effort to support Roger Kieschnick in his quest to becoming the best Kieschnick ever to play professional baseball.
They will be 5th place in the Big 12 South
Really? Behind both A&M and Baylor? Is Baylor supposed to be greatly improved this year? I don’t follow the Big 12 enough to know, but that strikes me as a bold prediction.
The #1 greatest threat to America: BEARS
both could be looking at 7-5, 8-4 years, which don’t end with 12th and 18th place rankings.
Well shit, USC could go 6-6 if Memorial Stadium collapses on them.
by AERose on Aug 20, 2009 9:02 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
What question marks are you referring to with Cal, exactly? They’re returning most of their team, were good last year, and have another year of experience for most of their players. The offense basically lost nothing, and the defense lost the linebackers but given how good the front 3 and back 4 are, and how athletic/deep the linebacking unit is, how relatively easy it is to replace linebackers in general, as well as experienced with Young, Mohamed and even Kendricks a bit….I just don’t see many question marks at all, and less questions than most teams ahead of them.
by Missing Barry on Aug 20, 2009 9:40 PM PDT up reply actions
Just the question about QB play
They haven’t had the best QB play the last couple of years.
I’ve been a big fan of Cal this year IF they get quality QB play.
I support Takimoto in his effort to support Roger Kieschnick in his quest to becoming the best Kieschnick ever to play professional baseball.
by The VD Special on Aug 21, 2009 4:40 PM PDT up reply actions
5 loses is a worst case, catastrophic scenario
But if the QB play is suffering, like it has in the past, is it really THAT far off to think they could lose to USC, Oregon, Stanford, OSU and say a team like Minnesota (given the early morning time issue again, which I’m going to get in to).
I think Jahvid Best himself will beat UCLA, Arizona, UW and WSU. The rest of the conference games are toss ups, in my opinion, and almost completely dependent up QB play.
I support Takimoto in his effort to support Roger Kieschnick in his quest to becoming the best Kieschnick ever to play professional baseball.
by The VD Special on Aug 21, 2009 5:46 PM PDT up reply actions
Not* going to get in to
I support Takimoto in his effort to support Roger Kieschnick in his quest to becoming the best Kieschnick ever to play professional baseball.
by The VD Special on Aug 21, 2009 5:48 PM PDT up reply actions
I agree with this, too. Cal’s success is hugely dependant on QB play. Everywhere else, though, we have very few question marks. We’re a ranked team even without good QB play this year – and good QB play gives us a chance to challenge for a BCS bowl.
by Missing Barry on Aug 21, 2009 5:48 PM PDT up reply actions
On Iowa
Not that I have any sense of what Rags or any of the other pollsters were thinking when they compiled this, but 25 is about right given the team they’re likely to field on opening day.
Shonn Greene is gone and the prized back-up, Jewel Hampton, is having serious knee issues. They don’t have anyone reliable or proven behind Hampton. Add to that Iowa’s QB Ricky Stanzi is basically as average as they come (here is Dr. Saturday on Stanzi) and you have a formula for 7-9 wins, which is just enough to put you on the outskirts of the Top 25.
Even though I don’t think Penn St is THAT good, they have the easiest schedule in the land…by far…and could go undefeated. Therefore, I think they merit cracking the top 4. Could a major program go undefeated and really be at # 5 or lower?
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
Same with Florida
At least PSU leaves the state for a non-conference game (I think…). UF can’t even say that.
Nope, all four non conference games are at Penn State.
Also, Florida is locked into at least one BCS non conference game per year for the forseeable future, and can add other credible BCS non-cons without leaving the state because of Miami and South Florida. So while it is pretty lame that Florida won’t travel outside their own state for anything other than conference and bowl dates, at least they aren’t completely ducking competition.
So because they have an easy schedule we should rank them higher? I just don’t follow that logic at all. If anything, they should be punished for playing a weak schedule and not proving themselves. Plus, are we not trying to speculate on who the best teams are? And doesn’t ranking someone high because you expect them to cruise through their easy schedule kind of create somewhat of a self-fulfilling prophecy? That is, the justification for putting them high later will be they were ranked high and winning games…but they were ranked high because you expected them to win those games….very circular logic….
by Missing Barry on Aug 20, 2009 9:43 PM PDT up reply actions
I don’t believe Penn St is that good.
What are we trying to accomplish in this post? Come up with our own Top25 power rankings, or predicting the actual AP finish of these teams?
I thought this was the latter and, if it is, I can see the AP (and Coaches Poll for that matter) LOVING an undefeated Penn St – irregardless of competition. It happens time and again.
I was actually more interested in seeing if a storied, undefeated college program could be ranked 5 or lower.
Of course teams should be punished for fluff schedules. In reality, they are not and there are numerous examples.
Undefeated Penn St will want to be in the MNC game…but should they over a 1 loss team from the Big12S or SEC?
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
Flammable and inflammable mean the same thing?!? What a country!
The #1 greatest threat to America: BEARS
I guess it’s probably up to interpretation, I just don’t see the reasoning behind making rankings an attempt to predict where the rankings will be in the future. What are the future rankings based on, then? What are the rankings supposed to mean at all if they’re just a predction of…themselves? It really does become self-fulfilling if that’s the mentality. I really need this explained to me, because I really cannot wrap my head around this concept at all.
“Of course teams should be punished for fluff schedules. In reality, they are not and there are numerous examples.
Undefeated Penn St will want to be in the MNC game…but should they over a 1 loss team from the Big12S or SEC?"
And you’re right, the reality is voters look at shiny records. Considering the SEC and Big-12 are garbage conferences, I’d say sure, but over a 1 loss Pac-10 team? No way.
by Missing Barry on Aug 21, 2009 9:16 AM PDT up reply actions
Boise
Boise is favored by 51/2 over Oregon last I checked, so it could be argued that Boise should be ahead of Oregon.
This is an AP poll prediciton, not a power ranking. Use the facts at hand to aid in that prediciton. I don’t have enough time to do all of the comparisons, but as between Pac-10 teams and between Oregon and Boise, the analysis is easy.
by Fair Weather Cal Fan on Aug 21, 2009 2:44 PM PDT reply actions
interesting…5 1/2 implies that Boise St. would be favored over Oregon in Autzen by 2 1/2 (if they’re giving Boise St. the standard 3 points for being at home, at least) which strikes me as off.
The #1 greatest threat to America: BEARS
I think your math is off
Doesn’t that mean Oregon would be favored by 1/2 a point at home? 2.5 on a neutral field, 5.5 for Boise St. in Boise, .5 for Oregon in Eugene
One thing to remember is that the line changes, based on the amount of money
I don’t know what it opened at, and I don’t really care to look, but it could very well have opened up at BSU -2.5, giving Oregon the edge at home and neutral field, rightfully so, meaning that they are better than Boise State.
Just because the line is now at BSU -5.5, doesn’t mean that Vegas set it there. If Duke was playing USC, and the line started at USC -45, and somebody threw a ton of money on Duke to cover, and the line moved into Duke’s favor, it doesn’t mean that Duke should be ranked higher than SC
I support Takimoto in his effort to support Roger Kieschnick in his quest to becoming the best Kieschnick ever to play professional baseball.
by The VD Special on Aug 21, 2009 5:18 PM PDT up reply actions
Vegas doesn’t set their lines based on who they think will win. They set their lines based on what they think gamblers will bet on – the goal is to get an equal amount of money on both sides.
by Missing Barry on Aug 21, 2009 5:50 PM PDT up reply actions
Whoops, missed that. You explained it more concisely than me.
Contact me: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Aug 22, 2009 9:23 AM PDT up reply actions
Right, that's why the line moves
So if they think that the general public will think that Boise State will win by 2.5, then they will set the line at -2.5
I support Takimoto in his effort to support Roger Kieschnick in his quest to becoming the best Kieschnick ever to play professional baseball.
by The VD Special on Aug 22, 2009 11:36 AM PDT up reply actions
In less than a week, the line has already moved to +4.5 for Oregon, at least according to Sportsbook.com. I had checked that site earlier this week, and it was 5.5. That’s a lot of movement…
Also, I don’t think this is an AP poll prediction. As a voter, my poll didn’t rank this way, and rags simply submitted last year’s ballot….
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
Lines relatively have little to do with how good Vegas thinks each team is. They’re trying to optimize cash flow on both sides so that either (a) the majority of money goes on a team Vegas expects to lose the spread, (b) it gets split both ways and they profit off the margins from the extra few dollars and cents paid to cash the bet.
Contact me: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Aug 22, 2009 9:23 AM PDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
GoldenBlogs' FAQ and Community Guidelines
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
I recorded the entire last out as Cal clinches the first ever PAC12 Softball Title! It was also a...
Pac-12 On SBN
Pacific Takes (Pac-12) NORTH AddictedToQuack: (Oregon)
UW Dawg Pound: (Washington)
CougCenter: (Washington State)
BuildingTheDam: (Oregon State)
Rule Of Tree: (Stanford)
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: (Cal)
SOUTH
BruinsNation: (UCLA)
ConquestChronicles: (USC)
HouseOfSparky: (ASU)
Arizona Desert Swarm: (Arizona)
TheRalphieReport: (Colorado)
Block U: (Utah)
Golden Bears Football Schedule
| Fresno St. | Sat 09/03 | W 36 - 21 |
@
Colorado
|
Sat 09/10 | W 36 - 33 |
| Presbyterian | Sat 09/17 | W 63 - 12 |
|
@
Washington
|
Sat 09/24 | L 23 - 31 |
|
@
Oregon
|
Thu 10/06 | L 15 - 43 |
|
USC
|
Thu 10/13 | L 9 - 30 |
|
Utah
|
Sat 10/22 | W 34 - 10 |
|
@
UCLA
|
Sat 10/29 | L 14 - 31 |
|
Washington St.
|
Sat 11/05 | W 30 - 7 |
|
Oregon St.
|
Sat 11/12 | W 23 - 6 |
|
@
Stanford
|
Sat 11/19 | L 28 - 31 |
|
@
Arizona St.
|
Fri 11/25 | W 47 - 38 |
|
@
Texas
|
Wed 12/28 | L 10 - 21 |
