Memphis, Temple, Houston are all Undefeated and Ranked !
- Thread starter rucook08
- Start date
we are in the big boy league now, smaller conference schools being successful really isn't in our best interest for us or the Big 10
Quite a leap for Memphis from unranked to 18. Houston at 21, Temple at 22, Toledo from the MAC at 19.
One side of the AAC is stronger than the other though. Houston/Memphis/Navy are on one side and Temple is on the other. ECU is probably the next strongest team on Temple's side. I think Temple's toughest game will be Memphis later in the year. I think Memphis has a stretch similar to Baylor (OU/Ok. St/TCU) at the end of the year they'll play Navy/Houston/Temple 3 weeks in a row.
http://collegefootball.ap.org/poll
One side of the AAC is stronger than the other though. Houston/Memphis/Navy are on one side and Temple is on the other. ECU is probably the next strongest team on Temple's side. I think Temple's toughest game will be Memphis later in the year. I think Memphis has a stretch similar to Baylor (OU/Ok. St/TCU) at the end of the year they'll play Navy/Houston/Temple 3 weeks in a row.
http://collegefootball.ap.org/poll
Wins over Penn State, Ole Miss, and Louisville. We're in no position to throw stones.
So what is the excuse for an SEC team losing to Memphis? Playing to the level of the competition? The distraction of too many NFL scouts? Not being able to stay interested?
Fuente has done a nice job this year. I don't know how long he'll be able to do it. They have a very good offense and qb that's he's developed over the last few years but his defense took a lot of hits from last year. Lost the DC to Missouri (8th ranked total defense to date) and I believe 5 starters and 8 backups from last years defense. That's a ton of losses, their defense has gone down to the 100s. They've done good so far but eventually you wonder if it'll catch up to them. They've started so many games like this past weekend going down early and starting slow, got to give credit though they usually shake off the cobwebs show some resilience and fight their way back.
Those are three very good teams this year. I watched a good part of the Memphis - Ole Miss game and Memphis is really good. They have the best QB that no one has heard of ...Paxton Lynch. He reminds me of Rothlesberger when he was in college. He's about 6'7 and 230 lbs ...can move around and has a really fine, accurate arm. He will be playing in the NFL very soon. Ole MIss has some very talented defensive players and he shredded the defense pretty good.
Actually, a lot of people know about him. He's going be drafted by the NFL according to a lot of the pundits out there. I think he's been the starter for about 3 years now and I think was horrendous that first year and the fans and everyone wanted him gone. Fuente stuck with him developed him and last year he did a nice job and this year he's followed it up again. Fuente was the OC for Andy Dalton at TCU. Both were 2 star guys from what I've read. You like seeing stuff like that makes it less likely to be fluke when you can do it with different faces.
Last edited:
Well that's why I'm always big on coaching over recruiting. You'll never see me complain or frankly pay much attention to recruiting. I'm always reading about and trying learn about the up and coming coaches out there. If you got a guy who can do both well great but if I have to choose I'll always go with the coach.
I don't know if I'd say that but a lot of them run the spread so it would be a ton of games like yesterday. The teams you mention plus ECU, Tulsa run by ex Baylor OC Philip Montgomery, Chad Morris at SMU. Navy is probably the only one who doesn't. Houston/Memphis/Tulsa are the top 10 for offense to date.
Are we honestly going to have Rutgers fans congratulate Temple as it looks like after 40 years they are finally getting their act together in football? They already have a decent basketball team, so lets now cheer them along in football. You guys up North do understand that they have about 250+ alumni in the Philly area, and that one of the local network TV stations has puts a little "T" next to the the weather forecast for their Saturday home games, and that the local TV sports news gives them air time when they win, and that Philly.com covers them to a much greater extent than Rutgers, and that they are considering building a stadium, and that Temple is one of the largest employers in Philly, and etc., etc., but let's start threads giving them a high five, job well done, as they try to establish a winning football tradition. If it is not bad enough we have Penn State, Maryland, Pitt, etc. grabbing recruits from this area, now we have a successful local Philly FBS team to compete against for our 2 and 3 star recruits, fantastic.
If any off them remain undefeated at season end, would you give them a playoff spot over a non undefeated P5 team? I would. This is why the playoffs need to be expanded to 8 teams.
And how does Ole miss lose to Memphis and still remain ranked with 2 losses?
We have wins against a B1G team and a Big 12 team! And we went to the wire with a 4-2 PAC 12 team! [banana]
Last edited:
The playoff is heavily weighted towards the P5. I mean at least 1 P5 conference is out every year, there's no way they'd sacrifice another for a G5. It would take an OOC like you've never seen before for them to even enter the conversation and none of them have that.
Yes. If you're worried about losing the recruits that Michigan & Penn State don't want to Temple, your problem definitely isn't because of Temple football.
Perhaps they won over Alabama which is the number 1 team to beat in the last 12 years? Just a guess on my part though.
Agree. Especially for a place like RU. We will NEVER consistently out recruit the "big boys". We need to win with X's and O's. No different form the Baylor/TCU model.
When I say "coaching" I'm not generically referring to all the responsibilities of a coach. I'm specifically highlighting things like x/o's, developing players, maximizing talent, finding players that fit their system who may not have the most talent, etc..
I've said I always viewed recruiting as a tiered pyramid with the tiers getting wider as you go down. Arbitrarily giving numbers say 1-15, 16-45, 46-85, etc...So to me most coaches generally are going to recruit in the same tier for the school they're coaching at with maybe occasional bumps up into the next tier. If they do well enough long enough then maybe that coach will consistently bump up to the next tier but again that's a function of "coaching" well to me. Also if a school hires some "big" name out of the norm who has shown some "coaching" ability you could get that bump as well but again it's still a function of "coaching" ability.
So take us for example again with arbitrary numbers. Say one coach by rankings can recruit in the 30s and another coach recruits in the 40s or maybe even 50s, to me it's not much of a difference even though you say oh man it's "10-20 spots." I consider it pretty much the same tier and it's the guy who can maximize that talent he recruits to his system and schemes the best that makes the difference.
Look at Hoke at Michigan, now see Harbaugh with the same guys and how much better they look. Most coaches at Michigan will recruit well so "coaching" is the difference. How about Miami. Shannon recruited well there and Golden has too now and they're still doing about the same. If they get rid of Golden, I'm sure the next guy will recruit pretty well too, it'll be if he can "coach" better that'll make the difference. Butch Jones has recruited very well an Tenn but so far haven't seen the results. A couple weeks ago I saw a graphic showing a comparison of records between the previous coach Derek Dooley and Jones through 2.25 years and they were almost identical. This was suppose to be the year. The SEC east looks even weaker except for Florida stepping up. Georgia lost their RB, USCe looks bad and Mizzou has gotten worse, Florida has lost their qb so now is a great opportunity. The year isn't over yet but so far it doesn't look good, we'll see.
There are some coaches who are really good recruiters but if they don't have the accompanying coaching chops I'm not interested. That to me is the biggest factor to consistently raise the level of performance. If you perform well enough long enough then maybe you can consistently bump up to that next recruiting tier but it's usually a function of "coaching" ability.
