I mean this is really a fucking joke isn't it?

http://www.espn.com/college-football/te ... e/_/id/228

This is the easiest Georgia schedule of my lifetime and I would trade it for their schedule every single day of the week...

What I want to know is how they did not fall from 2nd after a close game with an unranked team that quite frankly if the refs didn't fuck up they would have lost.

Their schedule sucks and they have not looked good so far, if this was Ohio State starting 2nd they would be ranked 5th by now.

Top 4 should be something like.

1. Alabama
2. Georgia
3. Ohio State
4. Oklahoma

CraigKressel wrote:What I want to know is how they did not fall from 2nd after a close game with an unranked team that quite frankly if the refs didn't fuck up they would have lost.

Their schedule sucks and they have not looked good so far, if this was Ohio State starting 2nd they would be ranked 5th by now.

They did on the Reddit cfb poll. UGa jumped to 2nd

You tell me:

CLEMSON

2018 opponents with 2017 losing record = 3
2018 opponents with 2017 winning record = 9
OOC: USC, A&M, Furman, Georgia Southern - 1 team with losing record last year - one FCS team

https://www.cbssports.com/college-footb ... ing-roads/

GEORGIA

2018 opponents with 2017 losing record = 5
2018 opponents with 2017 winning record = 7
OOC: Austin Peay, Middle Tennessee, UMASS, GT - 2 OOC teams with losing record last year - one FCS team

https://www.cbssports.com/college-footb ... hallenges/


OHIO STATE

2018 opponents with 2017 losing record = 7
2018 opponents with 2017 winning record = 5
OOC: Oregon State, TCU, Tulane, Maryland (likely scheduled prior to entry into BIG 10)- 3 OOC teams with losing record last year - no FCS teams

https://www.cbssports.com/college-footb ... vely-easy/


Rank them hardest to easiest:

1) Ohio State
2) Clemson
3) UGA

Ohio State - 7 teams that had losing records last year. OOC includes one good team - TCU. Don't really care how you classify Maryland conference they suck and had losing record last year. Rest of OOC sucks even if no FCS. You are basically hanging hat on PSU, Michigan, Michigan State, TCU

Clemson - Face 3 teams with a losing record last year. Their OOC includes 2 SEC schools (Big deal except that those 2 had winning records last year).

UGA - 1). SEC EAST 2) Austin Peay, Midd Tennessee, UMASS, GT - (losing record last year) Your East schedule hurt you. I am not sold on LSU as a tough ass team but let's see. You should roll into Atlanta undefeated. Auburn is major difference maker.

JMO

CraigKressel wrote:What I want to know is how they did not fall from 2nd after a close game with an unranked team that quite frankly if the refs didn't fuck up they would have lost.

Their schedule sucks and they have not looked good so far, if this was Ohio State starting 2nd they would be ranked 5th by now.

Why is Miami, Michigan State, Michigan and USC ranked but not A&M? A&M blew out their cupcake just like everyone else did?

I hate Jimbo but I'd day A&M > Michigan State and = USC

Perspective, it's whatever fits your argument.

FSUKW wrote:You tell me:

CLEMSON

2018 opponents with 2017 losing record = 3
2018 opponents with 2017 winning record = 9
OOC: USC, A&M, Furman, Georgia Southern - 1 team with losing record last year - one FCS team

https://www.cbssports.com/college-footb ... ing-roads/

GEORGIA

2018 opponents with 2017 losing record = 5
2018 opponents with 2017 winning record = 7
OOC: Austin Peay, Middle Tennessee, UMASS, GT - 2 OOC teams with losing record last year - one FCS team

https://www.cbssports.com/college-footb ... hallenges/


OHIO STATE

2018 opponents with 2017 losing record = 7
2018 opponents with 2017 winning record = 5
OOC: Oregon State, TCU, Tulane, Maryland (likely scheduled prior to entry into BIG 10)- 3 OOC teams with losing record last year - no FCS teams

https://www.cbssports.com/college-footb ... vely-easy/


Rank them hardest to easiest:

1) Ohio State
2) Clemson
3) UGA

Ohio State - 7 teams that had losing records last year. OOC includes one good team - TCU. Don't really care how you classify Maryland conference they suck and had losing record last year. Rest of OOC sucks even if no FCS. You are basically hanging hat on PSU, Michigan, Michigan State, TCU

Clemson - Face 3 teams with a losing record last year. Their OOC includes 2 SEC schools (Big deal except that those 2 had winning records last year).

UGA - 1). SEC EAST 2) Austin Peay, Midd Tennessee, UMASS, GT - (losing record last year) Your East schedule hurt you. I am not sold on LSU as a tough ass team but let's see. You should roll into Atlanta undefeated. Auburn is major difference maker.

JMO

When is losing and winning record the bar for how tough a schedule is? Of course you are going to have more teams with a winning record when everyone you play is mediocre and none of them give a bunch of your conference opponents a bunch of losses. Also why are you counting Furman in that, like Rutgers, Oregon State and teams like that wouldn't have a winning record playing Furman's schedule?

They play 0 top 25 teams if you are a playoff contender you should be able to easily beat most unranked teams.

FSUKW wrote:

CraigKressel wrote:What I want to know is how they did not fall from 2nd after a close game with an unranked team that quite frankly if the refs didn't fuck up they would have lost.

Their schedule sucks and they have not looked good so far, if this was Ohio State starting 2nd they would be ranked 5th by now.

Why is Miami, Michigan State, Michigan and USC ranked but not A&M? A&M blew out their cupcake just like everyone else did?

I hate Jimbo but I'd day A&M > Michigan State and = USC

Perspective, it's whatever fits your argument.

Because they had a much better year last year than Texas AM, sure Texas AM could be better but we don't have much to go by other than last year.

CraigKressel wrote:

FSUKW wrote:You tell me:

CLEMSON

2018 opponents with 2017 losing record = 3
2018 opponents with 2017 winning record = 9
OOC: USC, A&M, Furman, Georgia Southern - 1 team with losing record last year - one FCS team

https://www.cbssports.com/college-footb ... ing-roads/

GEORGIA

2018 opponents with 2017 losing record = 5
2018 opponents with 2017 winning record = 7
OOC: Austin Peay, Middle Tennessee, UMASS, GT - 2 OOC teams with losing record last year - one FCS team

https://www.cbssports.com/college-footb ... hallenges/


OHIO STATE

2018 opponents with 2017 losing record = 7
2018 opponents with 2017 winning record = 5
OOC: Oregon State, TCU, Tulane, Maryland (likely scheduled prior to entry into BIG 10)- 3 OOC teams with losing record last year - no FCS teams

https://www.cbssports.com/college-footb ... vely-easy/


Rank them hardest to easiest:

1) Ohio State
2) Clemson
3) UGA

Ohio State - 7 teams that had losing records last year. OOC includes one good team - TCU. Don't really care how you classify Maryland conference they suck and had losing record last year. Rest of OOC sucks even if no FCS. You are basically hanging hat on PSU, Michigan, Michigan State, TCU

Clemson - Face 3 teams with a losing record last year. Their OOC includes 2 SEC schools (Big deal except that those 2 had winning records last year).

UGA - 1). SEC EAST 2) Austin Peay, Midd Tennessee, UMASS, GT - (losing record last year) Your East schedule hurt you. I am not sold on LSU as a tough ass team but let's see. You should roll into Atlanta undefeated. Auburn is major difference maker.

JMO

When is losing and winning record the bar for how tough a schedule is? Of course you are going to have more teams with a winning record when everyone you play is mediocre and none of them give a bunch of your conference opponents a bunch of losses. Also why are you counting Furman in that, like Rutgers, Oregon State and teams like that wouldn't have a winning record playing Furman's schedule?

They play 0 top 25 teams if you are a playoff contender you should be able to easily beat most unranked teams.

It's big picture.

If Furman can win in a shitty conference, why can't Rutgers or Oregon State. Also, if that matters to you, why can't the shitty OOC teams UGA plays win in their shitty leagues.

rankings mean absolute shit to any smart person in Week 2. You play 2 ranked teams that are 1-1. Stupid theory...... :2thumbs

CraigKressel wrote:

FSUKW wrote:

CraigKressel wrote:What I want to know is how they did not fall from 2nd after a close game with an unranked team that quite frankly if the refs didn't fuck up they would have lost.

Their schedule sucks and they have not looked good so far, if this was Ohio State starting 2nd they would be ranked 5th by now.

Why is Miami, Michigan State, Michigan and USC ranked but not A&M? A&M blew out their cupcake just like everyone else did?

I hate Jimbo but I'd day A&M > Michigan State and = USC

Perspective, it's whatever fits your argument.

Because they had a much better year last year than Texas AM, sure Texas AM could be better but we don't have much to go by other than last year.

That's entirely your perspective.

Michigan lost to South Carolina
A&M beat South Carolina

They are both 1-1 but one is ranked. I don't care, just making a point.

:ROFL2

FSUKW wrote:

CraigKressel wrote:

FSUKW wrote:

CraigKressel wrote:What I want to know is how they did not fall from 2nd after a close game with an unranked team that quite frankly if the refs didn't fuck up they would have lost.

Their schedule sucks and they have not looked good so far, if this was Ohio State starting 2nd they would be ranked 5th by now.

Why is Miami, Michigan State, Michigan and USC ranked but not A&M? A&M blew out their cupcake just like everyone else did?

I hate Jimbo but I'd day A&M > Michigan State and = USC

Perspective, it's whatever fits your argument.

Because they had a much better year last year than Texas AM, sure Texas AM could be better but we don't have much to go by other than last year.

That's entirely your perspective.

Michigan lost to South Carolina
A&M beat South Carolina

They are both 1-1 but one is ranked. I don't care, just making a point.

:ROFL2

1 returned 20 starters and added a 5 star experienced QB and the other got a completely new coaching staff.

CraigKressel wrote:

FSUKW wrote:

CraigKressel wrote:

FSUKW wrote:

CraigKressel wrote:What I want to know is how they did not fall from 2nd after a close game with an unranked team that quite frankly if the refs didn't fuck up they would have lost.

Their schedule sucks and they have not looked good so far, if this was Ohio State starting 2nd they would be ranked 5th by now.

Why is Miami, Michigan State, Michigan and USC ranked but not A&M? A&M blew out their cupcake just like everyone else did?

I hate Jimbo but I'd day A&M > Michigan State and = USC

Perspective, it's whatever fits your argument.

Because they had a much better year last year than Texas AM, sure Texas AM could be better but we don't have much to go by other than last year.

That's entirely your perspective.

Michigan lost to South Carolina
A&M beat South Carolina

They are both 1-1 but one is ranked. I don't care, just making a point.

:ROFL2

1 returned 20 starters and added a 5 star experienced QB and the other got a completely new coaching staff.

1 coach has a NC while the other has just proven to be an overrated overpaid libtarded moron

CraigKressel wrote:

FSUKW wrote:

CraigKressel wrote:

FSUKW wrote:

CraigKressel wrote:What I want to know is how they did not fall from 2nd after a close game with an unranked team that quite frankly if the refs didn't fuck up they would have lost.

Their schedule sucks and they have not looked good so far, if this was Ohio State starting 2nd they would be ranked 5th by now.

Why is Miami, Michigan State, Michigan and USC ranked but not A&M? A&M blew out their cupcake just like everyone else did?

I hate Jimbo but I'd day A&M > Michigan State and = USC

Perspective, it's whatever fits your argument.

Because they had a much better year last year than Texas AM, sure Texas AM could be better but we don't have much to go by other than last year.

That's entirely your perspective.

Michigan lost to South Carolina
A&M beat South Carolina

They are both 1-1 but one is ranked. I don't care, just making a point.

:ROFL2

1 returned 20 starters and added a 5 star experienced QB and the other got a completely new coaching staff.

Well, I stand corrected.

Michigan / Notre Dame. Score 24-17

Well Notre Dame is ranked you say?

Ball State / Notre Dame. Score 24-16

Ball state gained 349 yards against Notre Dame. Michigan gained 307. Michigan has 20 returning starters and a 5 star QB..... :dog Come to think of it, why is Ball State not ranked since they are 1-1? :ROFL2

A&M>Ball State>Michigan>Michigan State

Perspective!!!!

and fuck Jimbo!!!!

FSUKW wrote:A&M>Ball State>Michigan>Michigan State

Perspective!!!!

and fuck Jimbo!!!!

I have no problem with Michigan being unranked and they should be for now. So should Texas AM though.

CraigKressel wrote:

FSUKW wrote:A&M>Ball State>Michigan>Michigan State

Perspective!!!!

and fuck Jimbo!!!!

I have no problem with Michigan being unranked and they should be for now. So should Texas AM though.

Let's not rank anyone until they have a winning record and keep a winning record.

Sounds fine to me.