Athlon Sports Top 25 For 2017
Notable teams:
#20: Notre Dame (???)
#16: Florida
#12: Wisconsin
#10: Michigan (to high...yea or nay?)
#6 Penn St. (slightly overrated imo)
#2: Ohio St
#1: Alabama
https://athlonsports.com/college-football/very-early-college-football-t…
Michigan is too high at 10. How is Ohio State at # 2?
Urban has never won less than 11 games at OSU. Even with some lost contributors, I really don't see much issue with putting them at #2
They had a lot of close (luck) wins last year. They are beatable. The secondary is not anywhere near as good as last year. Samuel is gone. I am happy with Michigan at ten. I do love the confidence Penn state has because they are a 8-4 team.
The only team they were truly lucky to beat was Michigan. Granted, MSU and Wisconsin were also games they very easily could've lost, but they got pretty unlucky against PSU.
2016 OSU was a team that, combining all those close games, probably "should've" gone 10-2 and they went 11-1. Not extreme luck.
Um, you said they "beat" Michigan last year. Not so.
We beat them, we all saw that, that ball did NOT get past the 1st down line. Instead, the referees took the game from us.
Your bias is showing, and it's not cute.
All fans are bias...yours leans towards Sparty, Buckeyes, or PSU levels.
For one, it's damn near impossible for anyone IN the playoffs to "obviously" not belong. If it was obvious...they wouldn't have been in. Did Michigan obviously not belong in the Orange Bowl? Or are you using the outcome of the game versus the national champion as the reason?
It is more than reasonable to think a team which overachieved with a young roster, that returns it's starting QB for his senior year is going to be good. We'd be FLIPPING OUT if we weren't picked high.
Hell, look at Michigan LAST YEAR. We returned everyone from a super young team that blew the doors off UF and just had a QB to replace. OSU lost more, but they have top 2 recruiting classes behind those guys and return JT Barrett.
If you don't think that's enough, then Michigan should be lower and there's no reason to believe guys like our WRs, or Gary, or Bush, or Kinnel are just going to step right in where the guys in front of them left off. But no, we feel pretty damn good about those positions - and for good reason. We don't need a full year of Gary or Bush or Kinnel to know they can matchup with 2016 Wormley, Gedeon and Thomas. OSU can do the exact same thing at multiple positions.
who does the S&P+ projections every spring --- he has Notre Dame projected #17 for 2017.
He'd argue Athlon has Notre Dame too low!
http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2017/2/3/14496224/2017-college…
Same with Texas at #13.
Texas is back folks!
I remember watching Texas beat #10 ND in overtime and I was tempted to think "Wow. Texas might be good again". Later we all realized they just both sucked
And at the end of the game the commentators were creaming their pants over Texas
I think we should be right around 12 or 13. Penn State is over rated, but I think the top two are correct. No earthly idea how ND cracked the top 20 though. 4-8 last year with a new QB this year does not scream marked improvement to me.
OSU as a number 2 seems right.
I imagine we'll start around 15-18 and move up during the season.
GO BLUE!!
I think FSU lost a bit less, which is why I'd put them #2 over OSU personally, but obviously both teams are going to be very strong, deep, and talented.
I think PSU is a bit too high because their defense is trash and their offense is too reliant on the deep ball; I think they will have trouble against teams with good defenses.
I think Wisconsin, having the easy cross over games (Missing PSU and OSU) should really be winning most of their games, returning a fair chunk of their starters. Really all of it relies on whether or not they have the offense to win games against Michigan and Nebraska, who they should be able to limit points wise.
ND being 20 makes no sense, that ws like when MIchigan would get ranked under Rich Rod, just the brand, not the team
Florida is a bit too high; I think a lot of people on this board saying this game as a toss up are incorrect, I think we will find a way to score enough and luckily they don't have the QB to really challenge us at the position of most uncertainty on defense, DB.
Texas is WAYY too high. They are getting too much respect for having a good coach, and like one good linebacker; that'd be like if Mich were ranked when we hired Harbaugh since we had Jake Butt and Willie Henry, they just don't deserve it yet. (Not saying they won't prove me wrong over the course of the season)
I think USC should be ranked above of UW, just because UW lost their entire secondary and with USC getting Darnold back they are are going to be a real threat for the title.
My dark horse for the year is Kansas St. I think they will make a fair amount of noise in a weak year in the Big 12. They return a great core of players and especially their most skilled offensive players.
Wisconsin will be a classic case of where their record will put them ranking-wise vs. how good they actually are. Looking at how easy Wisconsin's schedule is, I see 10 or 11 wins. Maybe 12-0 if they beat us. Now, if they played in the East and had a good non-conference opponent I could see them bein 8-4. Given how easy the schedule is, it's hard not to see Wisconsin rolling into the B1G title game 11-1 but ultimately getting blasted either by the East winner or by someone in the CFP.
I don't think they're that good, but their schedule will get them to a lofty bowl where they will likely be humbled
why they play the games.
It's good to get a top ten win on the road.
I might even put Southern Cal ahead of OSU
I'd put Michigan a tad lower...as far as Texas is concerned, ask me again after the Red River Rivalry...
Notre Dame's second game of the year is a home nght game against Georgia...which is usually the type of game that Georgia loses...I think 20 is about right for them, actually.
I hate preseason rankings. No official polls should be released until the first playoff poll. Too much bias and skewing. Practice mindfulness, live in the momement.
We should be #1.
However, if the secondary play / the offensive line play are not up to par, I think it's much more likely that this team could be ranked 22-30. Speight gets rattled easy when facing constant pressure / getting hit, and the secondary / team in general is so young, that I can't imagine a scenario where the playoffs, or a big ten title are even in the cards for us.
I'm not worried at all about WR, or the left side of the OL, or the starting DL, or the LBs, or special teams. I think we're going to see some guys develop this year into absolute studs. I am just slightly worried Kugler or starting a freshman at center, and possibly an inexperienced right tackle. I'm worried that Harbaugh taking two QB's in such a small class suggests that he hasn't found his guy yet. I'm worried about our corners. I'm worried about our lack of experienced depth on the D-Line.
I have great faith in this staffs ability to develop players, so I can definitely envision a scenario where we're much much better by seasons end, still don't know about top ten though. I guess our final ranking will have a lot to do with the improvement / production of Wilton Speight.
I think the taking of 2 QBs in this class is just to increase the pool of that ever-crucial position from which "his guy" can emerge. In 2-3 seasons the team will have entered the full Harbaugh recruit strength era (annual quality depth) where the difference maker between 2+ loss, and championship seasons will be the quality of play at QB.
Having coached the OL under Wilson, he should be able to give Brown some insight into how Wilson plans to attack. Should be an interesting chess match.
I wouldn't. Many voters use inertia as a significant component in their rankings - that is, if a team wins, they "deserve" to move up a few spots, and vice versa if they lose. So it's better to start relatively high in the rankings. If you start out of the top 25, sometimes it's impossible to break into the top of the rankings until November or so.
I hate these preseason rankings lists. It's shocking how often the writers put teams in an almost identical position to the way they finished last year and then move around or add a few others so it's not a complete copy.
Out of last year's final AP top 25 rankings, Western Michigan, Colorado, West Virginia, Utah, and San Diego State are the only one's to not make Athlon's Top 25. Fine, a year without much shakeup. Guess it's not too crazy.
More damning, only one of last year's AP top 10 is predicted out of the top ten....that's Wisconsin who they dropped from finishing 9th last year to 12th this season.
Compare that with how teams fared in the last ten year to year rankings. How many teams failed to make the AP top 10 rankings in consecutive years?
Year 2015 to year 2016 the AP top 10 had six different teams in it.
2014 to 2015 the AP top 10 again had six different teams in its final rankings.
2013 to 2014. Six different teams in top 10
2012 to 2013. Six again.
2011 to 2012. Six.
2010 to 2011. Four.
2009 to 2010. Six.
2008 to 2009. Four (though to be fair Oregon was #10 in 2008 and #11 in 2009 so it's nearly three)
2007 to 2008. Six or Seven. (Boston College and Texas tied for #10 so if you count it as Boston College it's seven if you count it as Texas it is six)
2006 to 2007. Six.
So, in the last ten years of polling, only one season produced less than six different teams appearing in the AP top 10 from the previous year. Yet, every preseason ranking list every damn year will always predict more of the same from the end of last year.
It's just not how college football goes. These list writers always underestimate the player losses for the great teams from last year and the growth of teams with a lot of returning talent who were not amazing last year.
There's loss of team chemistry, changes in schedule, and the statistical variation of year-to-year behavior inherent in any group of 18-21 year old males. I, for one, am glad my job performance wasn't based on my ability to herd college-aged men. Trying to predict performance isn't easy with pro teams, let alone college programs. Also, these are sports writers we're talking about,,,
Pre-season poll fever!! Catch it!!
"Jim Harbaugh has a major rebuilding project on his hands for 2017. However, thanks to back-to-back top-five recruiting classes, the Wolverines won’t be down for long."Quarterback Wilton Speight is back after a promising first year as the team’s starter. The receiving corps must be revamped, with incoming freshmen Donovan Peoples-Jones and Tarik Black likely to play a huge role in the passing game this season."The strength of the offense should be the ground game. Sophomore Chris Evans leads a talented group of running backs, with Ty Isaac, Kareem Walker and Karan Higdon providing support. The left side of the line should be anchored by Mason Cole and Ben Bredeson, but this unit did not perform well late in the 2016 campaign and remained a concern exiting spring ball."The Wolverines return only one starter – linebacker Mike McCray – on defense. But don’t expect this unit to slip on the stat sheet. Sophomore lineman Rashan Gary is a rising star, senior tackle Maurice Hurst is a candidate for All-America honors and the recent recruiting efforts should produce starting talent in the back seven."Matchups against Wisconsin and Penn State come on the road this year, but rival Ohio State visits Ann Arbor on Nov. 25."