Sporting News Preseason Top 25

whatshouldicareabout

whatshouldicareabout

Active poster
Washington is 21
http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-fo...oma-oregon-fsu-alabama-auburn-stanford-baylor

Apparently, we need to work on the defense. Didn't realize returning the entire front seven (I know, I know Feeney versus Fuiamono argument here) and our best player from the secondary meant we have work to do.

Other notables are Oregon at 2, Stanford at 6, UCLA at 8, ASU at 13, and USC at 16. I don't see Stanford or ASU being that high, but will welcome it if it boosts the profile of the league, especially if Stanford is Top 5 coming to Husky Stadium when the season starts in late September.
 
I love that Stanford is being overranked, will be a nice "signature" win for Petersen early in his tenure to jump us to hopefully top 10 status possibly?
 
I prefer to be under the radar knowing the coaching staff and players have a chip on their shoulder with something to prove. 21 seems about right to me, beats being ranked 15 with Seven at the helm and his song and dance about this being the best team since he said the same thing last year.
 
Dunno if a Stanford win would be Top 10 status, but it'd certainly help.

It really depends on where we and Stanford start in the polls. I've seen us ranked anywhere from 21-27 in these preseason rankings. If we're 21st like Sporting News predicts, then yeah (provided Stanford beats USC). If we're closer to 27 and Stanford is 12th or 13th, then Top 10 seems a bit out-of-reach.
 
Last edited:
When DJ was coach I cared about ranking because we were in the hunt for the NC at least 3-4 times. At this point I care more about getting some solid wins like furd and ucla at home. At this point I am more concerned getting into top 2 of the north. Asu seems way to high considering all they lost on D. Since we play Stanford, ucla and asu at home I see us going 2-1 vs them. If Petersen is who I think he is we should win 10-12 games this year including Bowl win. Yes we have inexperience in a couple places but I am all in with this staff. If we win 9 regular season games I will be disappointed. I have a good feeling about this season, first in a loooooooonnnnnnnggggggggg time.
 
Last edited:
When DJ was coach I cared about ranking because we were in the hunt for the NC at least 3-4 times. At this point I care more about getting some solid wins like furd and ucla at home. A this point I am more concerned getting into top 2 of the north. Asu seems way to high considering all they lost on D. Since we play Stanford, ucla and asu at home I see us going 2-1 vs them. If Petersen is who I think he is we should win 10-12 games this year including Bowl win. Yes we have inexperience in a couple places but I am all in with this staff. If we win 9 regular season games I will be disappointed. I have a good feeling about this season, first in a loooooooonnnnnnnggggggggg time.
Click to expand...

I support Legion of Stoog. He is like PLSS in that he has rants at the weirdest times. However, unlike PLSSFS he actually has good football posts.

Basically I'm saying STAY!
 
Though my inner quook enjoys Oregon being ranked at 2 here, it looks like another year where everyone will be blowing Mariota's whistle. He hasn't proven he can handle the pressure of that spotlight and personally I hope the media all fucks off a bit and leaves him alone and just lets him work. If he can hover under the radar he stands a good chance of guiding Oregon through to the end of the season. Grave doubts remain about Helfrich's coaching ability and Frost's playcalling. Both have proven to be uncreative and slow to learn. There has also been a changing of the guard at defensive coordinator.

The fact that they put Oklahomo at the top totally destroys any credibility they have. They beat Alabama. So fucking what. Alabama didn't want to be in that game and they played like it. Beating a great, but psychologically beaten down team doesn't reveal much about your program. AZ beating Oregon is a comparable example.
 
He's no Chip Kelly but I think its a bit early for you zeros to believe he needs to DIAFF. MM is the best QB in the PAC but the gap is closing now that we have the better staff between our teams. No pun intended but the north could be a real dog fight those year. We are the underdog but I wouldn't be shocked if UW,SU or uho won the North. If I had to bet $ I would put UO 1. This is our best chance at number 2 in the north having 3 of our 4 toughest games at home. I also have little doubt CP will have UW ready to play on the road unlike our previous dipshit coach.
 
Typically projected #1 picks on national title contenders don't fly under the radar.

Expect a ton of Marriorita heisman talk.
 
Washington is 21
http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-fo...oma-oregon-fsu-alabama-auburn-stanford-baylor

Apparently, we need to work on the defense. Didn't realize returning the entire front seven (I know, I know Feeney versus Fuiamono argument here) and our best player from the secondary meant we have work to do.

Other notables are Oregon at 2, Stanford at 6, UCLA at 8, ASU at 13, and USC at 16. I don't see Stanford or ASU being that high, but will welcome it if it boosts the profile of the league, especially if Stanford is Top 5 coming to Husky Stadium when the season starts in late September.
Click to expand...

Most of these PAC 12 teams are ranked too high. I would be shocke of Stanford is #6 with 4 starting OL gone, an 1800 yard rusher, Murphy, Skov, Reynolds, and Gardner. Those were their best players on defense.

UCLA at 8 isn't terrible, but they have to prove it. I think 15 would be more accurate. They have talent and potential, but some pretty big questions for being a top 10 team.

ASU shouldn't even be ranked. They are a fringe top 25 team at best.

USC isn't winning more than 8 games. I would bet anything they wot finish at 16.

UW at 21 looks good to me. The secondary and QB questions prevent us from being higher. A 10-3 regular season should put us in the top 15. I think we are certainly better than ASU and USC.

 
Obviously no one knows what will happen but there are more than a handful of teams ahead of us we will be better than. I could just be seeing things with purple glasses but I feel we should be a top 10 team. The few holes and questions we have should be filled.

Yes, the secondary will be young but the front 7 should be very good and deep and will mitigate some secondary issues. Also, guys like Kelly, Beaver, Baker were highly recruited. Its not like the new guys are some 3* guy with only UW, WSU and OSU offers.

I like Price but Miles is going to add the run dimension we didn't have. Plus Miles already played @OSU, @UCLA and BYU. He has great experience. After the first 4 joke games, people will talk about him as a dark horse Heisman guy because he will have huge numbers.

Coons is a big loss but with Petersens coaching I think Van Winkle will be an adequate replacement. Punting is a concern though.

I expect Dwayne Washington to be good and they'll fill in with Shaq and Coleman. We'll see how much of a drop off there is after Sankey.

Lastly, Petersen is a damn good coach. If you give Sark credit for the bowl win then he coached a top 13 metrics team yet bungled things frequently. Now you have 17/22 starters returning, an easier schedule, stronger depth and a proven championship coach. Its a recipe for a top 10 team, even w/o String, ASJ & Sankey.
 
Washington is 21
http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-fo...oma-oregon-fsu-alabama-auburn-stanford-baylor

Apparently, we need to work on the defense. Didn't realize returning the entire front seven (I know, I know Feeney versus Fuiamono argument here) and our best player from the secondary meant we have work to do.

Other notables are Oregon at 2, Stanford at 6, UCLA at 8, ASU at 13, and USC at 16. I don't see Stanford or ASU being that high, but will welcome it if it boosts the profile of the league, especially if Stanford is Top 5 coming to Husky Stadium when the season starts in late September.
Click to expand...

Most of these PAC 12 teams are ranked too high. I would be shocke of Stanford is #6 with 4 starting OL gone, an 1800 yard rusher, Murphy, Skov, Reynolds, and Gardner. Those were their best players on defense.

UCLA at 8 isn't terrible, but they have to prove it. I think 15 would be more accurate. They have talent and potential, but some pretty big questions for being a top 10 team.

ASU shouldn't even be ranked. They are a fringe top 25 team at best.

USC isn't winning more than 8 games. I would bet anything they wot finish at 16.

UW at 21 looks good to me. The secondary and QB questions prevent us from being higher. A 10-3 regular season should put us in the top 15. I think we are certainly better than ASU and USC.
Click to expand...

The conference is still a fucking dreckfest until proven otherwise.
 
... How is House Sarkisian at #16...?
Click to expand...

I actually hope Sark starts the year off ranked high. It will illustrate how shitty of a coach he is when they aren't ranked.

Just like Jim Lambright finished the year below his September ranking five of six seasons as Husky Head Coach(1996 with Corey Dillon only exception).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top