 |
| |
|
 |
 |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Familiar flaws Preseason pollsters make same mistakes every yearPosted: Monday August 04, 2003 12:11 PMUpdated: Monday August 04, 2003 1:43 PM
Well, folks, the calendar has turned to August, and that can only mean one thing -- time for those annual errors of judgment by the preseason poll voters. In fairness, none of us are able to predict the future. However, the standard lazy pollster method -- look at last year’s final rankings and move teams up and down based on number of returning starters -- produces the same mistakes year after year, most of which will be exposed almost as soon as the season begins. To show you what I mean, let’s take a look at a few teams I feel were overrated or underrated in the first coaches' poll that came out last week and why just a little more research could have avoided potential embarrassment:
OverratedUSC (8): Presumably the Trojans were deemed top 10 material because they went 11-2 last year and return 14 starters. Hello, was Carson Palmer some sort of bystander in 2002? Look at what happened to Florida State in 2001 and Nebraska last year after both lost Heisman quarterbacks and then tell me USC won’t suffer at least a little fall-off. Georgia (9): When you have two glamour quarterbacks like David Greene and D.J. Shockley, it’s easy to see why the Bulldogs look appealing to the casual pollster. But the fact is, any time you lose three or more starters on the offensive line, you’re going to struggle a bit early on. In Georgia's case, they lost all five. Their stay in the top 10 may not last long. Florida (21): Let’s see, the Gators ended last season 24th. So you’re saying that by losing Rex Grossman, Taylor Jacobs and eight defensive starters they’ve moved up three spots? No real secret to which flaw is being exposed here -- voters giving Florida the classic “big name benefit of the doubt.” It’s a wonder they didn’t do the same thing for Nebraska.
UnderratedVirginia Tech (10): Here, the voters see a team that went 3-4 in the Big East last season and figure they’re being generous. They forget that the Hokies were playing at a national championship level last season before a rash of injuries, and that their quarterback, Bryan Randall, followed his breakout performance against Miami with a dazzling spring. North Carolina State (14): The situation here is the antithesis of the one with Florida. The loaded Wolfpack (Philip Rivers, T.A. McLendon, Jerricho Cotchery) have all the makings of a top 10 team but for whatever reason the voters can’t accept the notion of N.C. State as a football power. In fact, the Wolfpack somehow dropped three places from last year’s season-ending 11th ranking. Oregon State (NR): The only logical explanation here is East Coast bias (yes, even the coaches have it). How else to explain how an 8-5 team returning Pac-10 record-setting running back Steven Jackson and 14 other starters is nowhere to be found, while Penn State loses Larry Johnson and five other first- or second-round picks from a 9-4 team yet comes in 25th? That’s my rant for this week. On to your questions …
Hey, Stewart, which players do you think are most likely to come out of nowhere and contend for the Heisman, a la Carson Palmer? I would say John Navarre of Michigan and/or Brock Berlin of Miami. What do you think?
An excellent and very timely question, considering four of last year’s top five finishers -- Palmer, Johnson, Brad Banks and Willis McGahee -- were nowhere to be found on anyone’s preseason lists. Your two are good suggestions, though I’d go with Frank Gore over Berlin in terms of Hurricanes. As for some truly obscure possibilities, I’ll go ahead and blindly throw out West Virginia running back Quincy Wilson (overshadowed by Avon Cobourne last year), Illinois quarterback Jon Beutjer (team will be much improved), Iowa running back Fred Russell (Hawkeyes will lean on him heavily with a new quarterback), Boston College running back Derrick Knight (quietly put up 1,432 yards last year), Connecticut running back Terry Caulley (you’ll hear about him soon enough) and New Mexico running back DonTrell Moore (ditto).
Do you think Oregon has a legitimate chance to rebound after a disastrous second half of last season and challenge for the Pac-10 title again this season?
Absolutely. Mike Bellotti has built that program into one that will always compete at a high level; it just happened to have a down year last season. The offensive and defensive lines will be very strong and Samie Parker is a game-breaker. The Ducks’ biggest problem last year was growing pains with a young secondary. It should be much improved, as should QB Jason Fife, who is being pushed for his job this fall.
I was looking at the preseason rankings and see that Kansas State is ranked No. 5. After looking at their non-conference schedule, how is it they missed scheduling "Rome School for the Blind?" It's amazing how a team with such a "powder puff" schedule outside their conference can be ranked so high.
To quote ‘Bag reader Gerry Swider of Sherman Oaks, Calif., “A cupcake out-of-conference schedule and bad media relations, and Kansas State wonders why it doesn't get invited to a BCS bowl?” The Wildcats’ ranking seems about right in terms of pure strength of the team and what they have coming back, but don’t think that schedule -– Troy State, McNeese State, Massachusetts, no Oklahoma or Texas A&M -- won’t come back to haunt them. Remember last year when N.C. State started 9-0 but, with two I-AA opponents, could barely crack the BCS top 10? K-State has to play 14 games to reach the national championship, and while running the table would more than likely get them there, just one loss could prove fatal.
Seeing how I'm stuck on the Duke campus this semester, I was hoping you could give me a reason to go to a game this year ... specifically, do the Blue Devils have a shot in any way of competing in the ACC this year? Please tell me Duke will at least break its ACC losing streak.
Good news, Jesse. I absolutely, positively guarantee Duke will win an ACC game this season. Part of it is the Blue Devils have virtually their entire two-deep back from a season in which they finally became at least somewhat competitive, losing three games in the final seconds. But part of it also is that there could be some really awful teams in the league this year, mainly Georgia Tech, which comes to Durham on Nov. 8, and North Carolina. A couple of conference wins may be in order, but competing for the title? I’m afraid not under Carl Franks. Got an outpouring of responses last week regarding the question of which school’s students had the best four-year football run, besides Oklahoma’s 47-game win streak and Nebraska 1994-97. The most common nominees -- and for sanity’s sake, I’m limiting it to Division I and post-World War II -- were: Notre Dame, 1946-49 (36-0-2, three national titles, two Heisman winners); Texas, 1968-71 (30 straight wins, two national titles); Nebraska, 1969-72 (42-4-2, two national titles); Oklahoma, 1972-75 (43-2-1, two national titles); Alabama, 1977-80 (44-4, two national titles); Georgia, 1980-83 (43-4-1; three SEC titles); Miami 1986-89 (45-3, two national titles) and Florida State, 1997-00 (45-5, three national title games). Depending on how this season turns out, we could potentially be adding 2000-03 for Miami (35-2, two national title games so far) or Oklahoma (36-4, one national title). For next week, I think we should take up this suggestion from Ben of Luling, La. , who writes: In response to your "best four years" topic, how about flipping it around to find out the "worst four years" someone experienced as a student. In order to qualify, the school has to have some decently high football expectations (the Vanderbilts, Baylors, and Dukes don't count). You heard the man. Please, no research -- first-hand experiences only. This should be amusing. Stewart Mandel covers college sports for SI.com. To send a question or comment for Stewart's Mailbag, click here.
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
