There are a lot of teams that I think could beat Notre Dame. One of them that didn't also lost to Washington, for chrissakes.
But wait! That was before Kevin "Lights Out" Hogan took over the helm. He of 1,096 passing yards . . . for the SEASON! LOL. 6 Games Started, 1096 passing yards.
I love this. The butthurt duck fans are coming out of the woodwork all huffy and puffy. Did you fanboys take off your Laker jersey's first?
This is classic. Please enlighten us how "they rank college football". Do you know specifically how each coach and AP ranks teams?
they take in the teams whole body of work in the rankings for the most part pretty easy to realize losing to washington doomed any chance to be ranked #2 ahead of a 1 loss team with a similar schedule
Seems pretty obvious, doesn't it? Just last year, Stanford was ranked ahead of Oregon going into the BCS bowl games, yet Oregon beat Stanford 52-31 and won the Pac-12. I must have missed blazerboy's post saying how Oregon should be ranked ahead of Stanford, even though they lost to LSU and USC?? I imagine if Stanford had actually beat Okie State, they would have ended up ranked better than the Ducks, even though the Ducks clobbered them in Palo Alto.
I thought Oregon was better than Stanford at the end of last year. And I don't think it is far fetched to consider that Stanford was the better team at the end of this season. I see that you're making up things to argue against. Maybe you're posting in the wrong thread?
The ones who really know what they're doing most likely had all the teams ranked correctly in the end.
Guy has been a jock ridin troll for awhile now. You know he cant resist a snarky little comeback to this post where he tries to jab me personally with some information he's read about me along the way. I'm no internet message board profiler, but this case points to a guy who never gets any pussy.
I would love to enlighten you, but if you don't understand how there is no case for a team with 2 losses (including a loss to Washington) to be ranked #2 this year . . . there is no one who can enlighten you. You do realize Stanford wasn't even ranked in the top 5. Clearly the whole board knows more about college football ranking than you do. And yes the people who do the rankings understand that Stanford switched quarterbacks, so need need to give that excuse again. You would avoid all this if . . . . . you just learn even the basics of how they rank college football, then post!
I didn't call names. You thought I was talking to you directly? Don't be flattered. You called me "little". My words were general. Reading comprehension. They don't teach this at Stanford?
Zags, you need some Boudreaux? The way this guy rubs up on you, you're surely chafed! He's a bad rash.
back on topic for a second... HOW DARE SOMEONE SAY THAT A BEAUTY PAGEANT WINNER IS BEAUTIFUL!! WHY DOES SOCIETY HAVE TO JUDGE HER BASED ON HER LOOKS??!!?
My opinion: Stanford was better than ND and should have won that game. DAT should have made the block on the Mariota run, and UO should have beaten Stanford. UO should have played Bama in the title game, and probably would have lost. Badly. I'm personally satisfied with the way things turned out, and think the woulda coulda shoulda game is silly. That is all--carry on.
seriously. what a fucked up society we have for having a man commenting on a women's beautiful appearance and it being something controversial. Pussification of Amurrica.
By that logic, Texas A&M should have been ranked ahead of Alabama. The Pac-12 has no margin for error. To be ranked highly, you have to have fewer losses than an SEC team. It sucks, but Stanford shit the bed against UW.
