Top 5 Sleeper teams in 2013. 3 of them are B10
He is the next Chris weinke
Chris Weinke was just an old man playing college football.
Marve has turned into an old man while stille playing college football.
Even Case Keenum thinks Robert Marve has been in CFB forever.
I guess the B1G can't get any lower?
Why is this OT? B10 football on a B10 blog is not OT.
Silly me for thinking the OP actually knew what he was talking about.
Terbush also is gone... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caleb_TerBush
I completely agree on N'Western. They're going to be the real deal (refrained from saying "legit" even that was a proper use of the word).
They've got good young talent from some better than normal recruiting classes mixed in with the typical overachievers.
Coming off a 10-win season, even with the hype...they're more dangerous than ever.
Are they really a 'sleeper' though? They were one of the better teams in the B10 last year and lose almost no one. They will be one of the better teams again.
Every year Purdue is a "sleeper pick" and every year they go 6-6
Iowa will be bad.
Indiana is my sleeper pick... and by sleeper I mean they will max out at 7-5 (3-5) and lose 59-55 to WVU in the Texas whatever bowl.
Isn't NW in the top 25? Doesn't that preclude them from being a sleeper?
They're a "sleeper" because fans who read these kinds of articles as a source of actual information don't pay much attention, so they think "Northwestern? Weren't they really bad once?"
Northwestern certainly will contend. I agree with others in saying they have a solid team and their recruiting will ensure that they are solid for the foreseeable future. Fitzgerald is doing an excellent job building a program that has been below average for some time now. I really do not even view them as being that under the radar anymore. Purdue could upset, but won't. Iowa just is not there yet.
Iowa is only a sleeper bc they get all 11 running backs back from ACL injury last year.
And by October they'll all be gone again.
Did a little kid write this article?
"Last season, Purdue did not have the turn out they wanted. With new head coach, Darrell Hazzel, he will use his running game to help win games.
With returning running back, Akeem Hunt, he will help the coach’s offense because of his great speed. Also, with such a great defensive line, ran by Ryan Russell and defensive backs ran by Ricardo Allen, no team will be able to throw or run the ball on the Purdue defense."
If you want to "Become a writer," you have to fill out a form:
"This is a form you have to complete if you want to write for SportsRanks.net. It would be greatly appreciated if you send this to anyone you feel would be interested and qualified. This will INCREASE the possibility of your acceptance!"
So if you want to write for SportsRank.net, your odds of being accepted are increased if you send the application to other people? That makes no sense whatsoever.
But neither does this statement: "no team will be able to throw or run the ball on the Purdue defense."
He likes that phrasing apparently: "With returning quarterback, Kain Colter and returning running back, Vendric Mark, no team will be able to stop the option."
college football preview article I have read this summer.
I think the writing style is more "North Korean propaganda translated into English by someone whose total experience with the English language is one paperback novel smuggled into the country."
If I were going to make a sleeper pick in the Big Ten, I'd go with the Golden Gophers. They are a couple of years into the Kill regime and they are in the non-Mich/OSU division so, like shit can happen.
Iowa is finishing last in the Legends
Purdue is finishing 5th in the Leaders
Everyone is on Northwestern, so they're not a sleeper.
It's Bleacher Report without the half-hearted attempt at looking professional.
Simply appalling writing and analysis.
Does Purdue even exist?
I know this may sound funny but I'd pick Indiana as a sleeper team over Iowa or Purdue. Past successes, or lack thereof, notwithstanding, Indiana has been building an explosive offense lately and if you sleep on them like the buckeyes did last year they'll sneak up on you.
I think Purdue will give OSU fits. That Drew Brees can sure throw a football.
These sorts of stories are just filler. The problem with "sleeper" teams is that they usually lack depth. They may have great athletes at some of the skill positions and have a depth chart that looks good on paper, but once the season wears on or a couple of guys get boo boos they start to crumble because the three deep isn't as flashy. So a fig for sleeper teams I say! GO BLUE!
Writing a "sleeper" article is the lamest thing ever. Pick a team that no one expects to win anything but that isn't a complete disaster, say they'll be good because of (name their top 3 players) and pick one or two of their tough-ish games as likely upsets and you've got your article. I could do that for Vietnamese cricket teams if you gave me their roster and schedule.
I mean they have two potential conference players of the year on offense in Mark and Colter, plus a great backup qb in Siene who can come in and throw to those guys. And the Cats' have a schedule that will indicate early if they are legit. I mean if the Wildcats beat California week one, then Ohio doesn't get much of a boost playing the Golden Bears two weeks later.
I think Indiana is the only real conference sleeper. Purdue is always an upset threat but has no consistent game to base that judgment on and Iowa only thrives when its starters have been around for awhile.
At this point, I'd be more concerned about Minnesota's rise and whether Penn State will demonstrate the ability to play beyond its seeming capability as it did last year, a very proud and scrappy program.
Northwestern is that good??! It sounds like they could be a sleeper team this year then.
You know, I actually had a good feeling about Purdue this year...until I looked at their schedule. It is brutal, especially considering where the Boilermakers have been in recent years. They get 5 really tough Big Ten games with Wisconsin, MSU, and Penn State on the road and Ohio State and Nebraska at home. Plus, they have to go on the road against Cincinnati and play Notre Dame at home. Even if they just lose the games they're expected to lose, that gives them 7 losses. Then we haven't even added in going and playing Indiana on the road and one of the other "sleeper" teams (Iowa) at home.
Purdue a sleeper? lol.. that article is a joke.. No one can throw on them because of ricardo allen? hmmm.. seems like teams threw all over them last year.. he isn't that good and the team sucks
time that Purdue was picked as the sleeper team was, well, last year. And they sucked. Look, I'm sorry, but Purdue is never good, and this year is going to be no different.
remember Herbie picking them to win the B1G? Because Herbie sure hopes you don't.
Purdue is only a sleeper against OSU
"With returning running back, Akeem Hunt, he will help the coach’s offense because of his great speed. "
I will say, Akeem Hunt was underused by Hope's staff, and I would imagine Hazell might have a larger role in mind for that backfield. Still, this sentence without any sort of thoughtful analysis to back it up disturbs me somehow. Hunt managed 8.0 YPC as an average over 335 yards and 42 carries. Not bad, and it would be interesting to see if the RBs get more action when you're rolling either Rob Henry or Danny Etling (true freshman, I think) behind a young OL, never mind the questions at WR.
As for the praise for Ricardo Allen in the article, Purdue still did give up an average of 416 yards of offense per game last year. I am guessing that Ricardo Allen simply needs to be that much faster, in the view of the person who wrote this. Purdue's pass defense was around the middle of the rankings in Division I.
The popular estimate for Purdue is 5-7 this year, from what I have seen.